The Sun. — London, England, 1848-09-30 00:00:00

IRELAND. THE STATE TRIALS. CLONM EL, THURSDAY, SEPT. 28.—The trial of Mr. ;Sm ith O'Brien, M.P., for high treason, was opened rnis morning. The Judges took their seats at eleven o'clock, and within a few minutes every part of the court was filled. The Countess of Donoughmore sat in the Sher;,ffs' box near the Judges. Lady Osborne and sevetell other ladies were in the Sheriffs' gallery, but neither Lady O'Brien nor Mrs. O'Brien were present. Sir Lucius O'Brien and the Rev. Edward O'Brien, brothers of the prisoner, Lord Hawarden, and Lord Dudley Stuart, and also Mr. Sergeant Shee, of the English bar, were in the body of the court. General I,l`Donald was in the Sheriffs' gallery. The Attorney-General, the Solicitor-General, Mr. Scott, Q.C., Mr. Sausse, and Mr. Lynch were the counsel for the Crown ; Mr. Whiteside, Q.C., are,l Mr. Fraetcis Fitzgerald appeared for the prise-„,, r , Before Mr. O'Brien was called upon to - plead, the prisoners Tyne, Orchard, and O'leonnell were brought up, and Mr. O'Callaghan, was assigned as counsel for each of them. U' t son their retiring Mr. O'Brien came to the front oc the dock, and stood for some minutes leaning as:atnst the rail. He was then accommodated with P e seat. lie was perfectly com posed, and nodded, familiarly to Dr. Gray, who sat near the dock. Sir C. Q'ieoghlen, who, though not engaged as Counsel., was present, and took an active part in the Pr9c'eedings, handed a parchment document to the P'ltsoner, which was forthwith sworn to by him, and, from what afterwards occurred, appeared to be an affidavit that no copy of the panel of the jury or of the list of witnesses had been delivered to him. Mr. WHIT6SIDE, then addressing the Court, said, that that was the proper time fir him to show cause why the trial could not at that time proceed, but must be postponed until their Lordships had decided what was the true construction to be given to certain Acts of Parliament to which he would refer. The question was, whether the prisoner was or was not en titled by Act of Parliament to a copy of the jury panel and a list of the witnesses to be produced against him. Unless there was to be one law for England and another for Ireland, that must be granted to the pri soners. It went to the very root of the defence of a man tried for high treason, that he should have the privilege to prepare for his defence. The statute of William 111., chap. 3, an English Act, gave the party accused a copy of the indictment, and a copy of the panel of the jury must also be delivered to him. By the 7th Anne, chap. 20, also an English Act, the prisoner was further to have delivered to him a list of the wit nesses, with their description, at the same time with the copy of the indictment. It was upon that very point that in the case of " The Queen v. Frost and Others" the lives of the prisoners were spared. The next Act, that of the 36th George 111., an English Act also, made compassing the death of, or levying war against the Sovereign, high treason, and re affirmed the old treasons declared to be such by the statute of Edward 111. Those statutes were all before the union, but the 57th of George 111. was passed since the union, and was the Act upon which the question chiefly arose. After reciting the statute of the 30th George 111., which merely applied to the life of the then King, it enacted that all the recited provisions should rte to the heirs and successors of hi s Ma jesty. heir Lordships were aware that since the union, as there was said to be but one realm and one Parliament, Acts made in relation to the United Kingdom included Ireland, unless that part of the United Kingdom was excluded by a distinct provi sion. Now, this statute of the 57th George 111. having recited that outrages had been offered to the Prince Regent of the United Kingdom, and that it was expedient to extend the general provisions of the 36th George 111. to the heirs and successors of his 'Majesty, enacted by section 2, that any person who should cernpass the death or destruction of the Prince Regent of the United Kingdom, or the heirs or suc cessors of his Majesty, should be deemed traitors, and suffer the punishment of death ; and by section 4 it was provided that all persons arraigned under the statute should be entitled to the benefit of the statutes of \'illiam 111. and Anne, except in the case of high treason, where the overt act of treason should be he assassinaiion or killing of his Majesty or any heir of his Majesty. The question then was, whe ther that Act applied to Ireland ? and if it did there was an end to the discussion. He believed that since the union not a single case had occurred in which it was ever held that a specific provision was requisite to extend a general act of the United Kingdom to Ireland. Dwarris, in his book upon Statutes, laid it down that all Acts extended to Ir e l an d, whether men tioned or not, unless that part of the United Kingdom were expressly excepted. It was so as to Scotland, for there was the decision of the case of ° The King Is. Cole" (2 Burroughes, 853), upon the point ; and, unless there was a difference between England and Scotland and England and Ireland it must be se as to Ireland. The 4th section of the 57th George 111., was a proviso, and must he read as incorporated with section 2, making the compassing of the death of the King or his heirs the same in Ireland as in Eng land. Supposing, however, that their Lordships were of opinion that the Act did not apply to Ire land, because not expressly named, then the second branch of his argument arose, that by the statute of 11th Vict. the provisions of the 57th Geo. 111. which were not thereby repealed, were extended distinctly to Ireland. The only provisions which were so re pealed were those which did not relate to the death of the Sovereign ; and it made the other provisions ap plicable to all parts of the United Kingdom. It was plain, therefore, that every part of the 57th George 111. not so repealed was applicable to Ireland—that anything relating to the compassing of the death of the Sovereign was, by the terms of the antecedent part of the section (2), directly extended to Ireland ; and by the 6th count there could be no doubt that the prisoner was expressly charged with that offence against her Majesty. He might be answered, as he had been in the case of Samuel Gray, that there was in certain cases a different practice in Ireland ; hut that case went to the House of Lords, and was there *versed. Here, however, there was no practice— there "had been no judicial decision on the question he new raised ; and he wished to hear from their Lord ships why it should be the law in a country which bq.gsfed of being governed by the Legislature of the United Kingdom, that there should be one law for a person tried for his life in England and another law for Ireland, Ile relied upon the 57th George 111. for what he asked, and if their Lordships were against him upon that point, then he relied upon the Act of the 11th Victofta to have the same privileges for the prisoner as would have been allowed to him if he hod been tried in England. The ATTORM ET-GENERAL resisted the application on The part of the prisoner, and contended that he was net entitled to a copy of the jury panel and a list of the witnesses against him previous to arraignment. It was conceded by the C ainsel for the prisoner, that at common law no such right existed, and the only question that remained for the Court was, whether or not there was any statute in force in Ireland entitling him to such benefit ? The present indictment was feetned tinder the statute of treasons in the reign of Edward and it remained to be seen whether the Court thought a person arraigned under the provi sione of that statute could claim the advantages ex tended to prisoners arraigned on treasons made by subsequent statutes in the reigns of William 111., Anne, and George 111. The CIITEY JUSTICE observed, that it was by a statute of Qtaven Anne the-right tohave a copy of the jury panel and of the list of witnesses was granted to the prLoner. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—It was not contended that the 36th George 111. extended to Ireland, its object being lo constitute a new class of treasons agaieet the reigning Sovereign of a temporary na ture., Then came the 57th George 111., which made perpetual certain provisions in the preceding Act, and included within the crime of treason offences therein described against the per:on of the Prince Regent. This statute did not extend to Ireland, and the sec tion on which the prisoner's counsel relied, while eniusting that the accused should be entitled to the be. netits of the statute of Anne, excludedhine from those advantages in respect to the new treasons constituted by the statute. There was nothing whatever in the Act to alter the law of Ireland or to entitle a person arraigned under the statute of Edward 111. to benefits created by the subsequent Acts. If he were right in contending that the Act of George 111. applied to the new, not to the old treasons, it followed that the pri soner one rwas not entitled to a d van t ages crea t e d un d er new statute solely, and that there was no ground for complying with the present application. r. WHITESIDE, on bei ng called M upon to reply, submitted that he was entitled to it finally, and that the Solicitor-General should follow the Attorney- General on the part of the Crown. The SOLICITOR GENER AL —I n the case of " The Queen v. O'Connell" the question was discussed and decided against you. Mr. AVIIIT - EslDE—Yes, in the Court in Ireland; but when the case was carried up to the House of Lords the Irish practice was discussed, an d i t was decided that the reply should rest with the counsel for the prisoner. In " Cox's Criminal Cases" (414 p.), a discussion on the very question was fully reported, arid it was most fully settled in Frost's case, at Mon mouth, that the counsel had a right to reply. The Court having consulted for a few moments, The Loup CRIES' JUSTICE said that they would hear the Solicitor-General then on the same side, Without deciding wheth e r or no t Mr. Whiteside was entitled the reply. The SOLICITOR- GENERAL reiterated the arguments ! 1 e sed by the Att orney -G enera l . It was manifest that to 36th George 111. created temporarily a newsitw of treasons in reference to the person of the reigning , monarch, and the 57th George HI. perpetuated the same treasons. In section 4it was enacted that per sons arraigned under the statute should be entitled to all the privileges to which he was ntitled if arraigned under the statute of Anne, with the exception of cases wherein he was accused of com passing the death of the Prince Regent, &c., that be ing the new offence c r ea t e d b y th e A ct. I that ex ception had not been inserted, persons in' cted would be entitled to privileges to which they otherwise would have no right. In 1803 and 1817, it was made matter of complaint in Ireland that the law of evi dence with respect to high treason was different in the two countries, as only one witness was necessary to prove an overt act, while two witnesses were re quisite in England; and the Ist and 2d George IV. was pasted accordingly, assimilating the law in that respect. It was remarkable that that Act made no reference whatever to the provisions of the statute of Anne, and did not extend its provisions to Ireland, far as the copy of the jury panel and the list of wit n 2-des was concerned ; so it was clearly evident the Legislature (lid not intend to give in Ireland the benefit claimed by the prisoner. He relied on those arguments to show there was no ground for the application. Mr. F. FITZGERALD followed on behalf of the pri soner. It could not be pretended that Ireland was expressly excluded from the terms of the Act, and it being the rule of law that all general Acts should ex tend to Ireland unless there was a special exception, the Attorney-General attempted to show that excep tion was made by necessary implication. Such im plication certainly did not exist in the provisions of Victoria 11, because the framers of, remarking that doubts were entertained if the 57th George extended to Ireland, introduced a declaratory section, which, in his opinion set the whole question at rest. Could it be supposed that if, after the passing of that Act, the Prince Regent had come over to Ireland, and had there been assailed in such a way as to constitute the crime of high treason constituted by the Act, that its provisions would not reach him because the offence was committed in Ireland? After consulting together for a few moments, The LORDCIIIEF JUSTICE said this is an application to postpone the trial on the ground that the prisoner has not been furnished either with the names of the wit nesses, or with a copy of the panel of the jury. And it is contended that under the indictment, and accord ing to the statute law, the prisoner is entitled to have lists both of the witnesses and the jury. The indict. ment contains various counts, five, I believe for levying war, and a sixth for compassing the death of the Queen, and the overt acts of compassing the death of the Queen are not one of them directed against the person or the personal safety of the Sove reign. The question is, what is the law of Ireland applicable to that charge ? The charge appears by the indictment to be manifestly founded upon the statute of Edward HI. Both treasons are such as that statute describes and defines. In England, in the reign of Wm. 111., there was a statute by which the party charged was entitled to have counsel assigned to him, to have five days to plead, and to have a copy of the indictment; and by an Act of Parliament in Ire land in all cases of indictments under the statute of 25th Edward 111. the party was entitled to have a copy of the indictment, and five days to plead. An English Act of Parliament, the 7th of Anne, enlarged those privileges to the party so charged, and gave ten days to plead, a list of the witnesses, and a copy of the panel of the jury; and the statute law of England has, in addition to that, entitled the party to have the overt acts charged against him established by wit• nesses. That is generally the state of the law in both countries at this day. An Act was passed (the 36th George III.) by which a variety of treasons was either created or declared, as, for example, the bodily harm or actual personal assassination of the then King. That Act was not the statute of Ireland. Then came the Act of the 57th George 111., by which all the provisions of the 36th George 111., which was only a temperary Act, where made perpetual—that is, it made perpetual the statute of the English Par liament. Then came the Act of the 11th Victoria, which recites that doubts were entertained whether the provisions so made perpetual were by the last-mentioned Act extended to Ireland ; and it becomes immaterial to inquire whether those doubts were well founded or not, for the statute proceeds thus Whereas it is expedient to repeal all such of the provisions made perpetual by the last recited Act as do not relate to offences against the person of the Sovereign ;" and accvdingly every species of treason described in the 36th Gerge 111. or in the 57th George 111. is abolished by that Act, save such as relate to offences againt the person of the Sovereign ; and the plain meaning of offences against the person of the Sove reig❑ Is, acts against the life or liberty of the Mo narch, or tending directly to affect his personal security or safety. Those, and those only, are per petuated by this Act of Parliament ; and it is in re lation to those, and those only, that all the subsidiary provisions of George HI. can be now said to exist ; and this being not a charge of compassing the death of the Sovereign by means of attempts upon her life by assassination, by wounding, or imprisonment, we are of opinion that it does not come within the pro visions of the Act, and that the prisoner is not en titled to have this application granted. The indictment was then read by the Clerk of the Crown ; upon which Mr. WIIITESIDE handed in a parchment purporting to he a plea. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, after perusing the docu ment, stated to the Court that it referred to the indict ment, and after alleging that by the statutes in force the prisoner was entitled to have had delivered to him a copy of the indictment ten days before his trial, and also a list of the witnesses and jurors, it stated that the prisoner had not had the copy of the indictment and such lists so delivered to him. He (the Attorney- General) objected to the document being received as a plea. It was a subject properly for motion only, and had been already disposed of. It was not a plea in abatement. Mr. WurrEsiDE said, there was no other way of putting the objection on record so that it might he argued in the most solemn form. If the Attorney- General objected to it, his proper course would be by demurrer. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE intimated that the do cument could not be received. Mr. WHITESIDE was not aware of any case in which a plea put in by a prisoner who was under trial for his life had been rejected. lie did not say that the plea was good; but he was anxious to have the point reserved. In the case of Frost the same right was insisted on and allowed. Mr. FITZGERALD was informed that in the case of Mitchel a plea in a similar form had been put in and received. In the case of Fitzharris, Bth " State Trials," page 223, a plea to the jurisdiction was put in, and the Court then informei the Attorney-Gene • ral that the question for him to consider was, not whether the plea ought to be received or not, but whether it was a proper plea or not. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said this was not like the case cited by the Learned Counsel. It wa% no answer to the indictment, but an objection to plead because certain preliminaries had not been complied with. Mr. Justice MooRE inquired what was the plea in the case of Mitchel ? Sir C. O'LOGIILEN said it was, as to the commence ment and the conclusion, in the same form as the plea now put in. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—In that case there was no application like the present. The objection then was properly matter of plea, because it stated that the prisoner was not properly called upon to answer the indictment. Chief Justice DOHERTY inquired whether there was any precedent in which an objection by motion having been argued and decided, was afterwards al lowed to be converted into a plea? Mr. WHITESIDE said, that in the case of Frost a plea was allowed to be put in after the objection had been argued. Was he to be told that this point, which he considered of the most serious importance, might not be reserved ? Several objections, stronger, perhaps, than had ever before been taken, were taken by Mr. Justice Moore himself, then counsel in the case of O'Connell, but they were not rejected on that ground- Mr. FITZGERALD admitted that the plea was not put in as an answer to the indictment, but as a reason why it should not be answered. If no copy of the indictment had been furnished, and a motion for it were refused, could the Crown say that the objection could not be put on record ? The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—The whole question is, whether the validity of the plea, or whatever it is, is to be determined on motion or demurrer. The best way is to receive it, and let the Attor ney-General then take such course as he thinks proper. The plea was accordingly put in, upon which The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, I demur to the plea as not heing sufficient. The prisoner was then called upon to say whether he was guilty or not guilty of the charge in the in dictment, to which he replied, in an emphatic manner, "Not guilty." Mr. WHITESIDE said he had to ask, according to the practice established before the statute of William 111., for a copy of the panel of the jury for a few hours. In a case mentioned in the 12th volume of the " State Trials," for an attempt to assassinate King William 111 , the prisoner had had a copy de livered to him as a favour the day before the trial. Mr. Justice MOORE inquired whether a prisoner charged with any capital crime was entitled to it ? Mr. WHITESIDE admitted that he was not, but this was a ca se o f hi g h treason. The ATIORNEY-GENERAL said, the only objection he had t o i t was the delay it would occasion. Ile could not see any distinction between this and an ordinary case. The panel, which contained 288 names, was then read over by the Crown Solicitor. With half-a dozen exceptions, every gentleman upon it was present. Mr. D. FITZGERALD, on behalf of Mr. O'Brien, challenged the array. The affidavit on which the challenge was founded alleged that the panel was not formed in compliance with provisions of the statutable enactments, inasmuch as the Clerk of the Peace did not within one day after the commencement of the general October session of 1847, or at any time after, deliver his precept to the baronial collectors to return the names of all persons qualified to serve as jurors within their respective baronies, and had not returned or impannelled the jurors after the custom of the country previous to the passing of the Act of the 3d and 4th William IV. Mr. O'Brien in his affidavit further challenged the panel, because it had been arrayed by the High-Sheriff with respect to the re ligious professions of the jurors, to the prejudice of the deponent, and because it had hitherto consisted of 380 persons duly qualified by law, of whom one-third were Roman Catholics and the remainder Protestants, while the panel now returned contained only 288 persons, of whom 1-18th only were Roman Catholics, and the remainder Protestants; and this had been done with a view to injure him on his trial. On the grounds of partiality and unindifferency he prayed that the panel might be quashed. The ATTORNEY* GENERAL, on behalf of the Crown, begged the Court to allow him and the law officers of the Crown soma time to consider what course they should take in consequence of the challenge. The COURT accirdingly adjourned for some time, and the audience dispersed in search of such creature comforts as the imperfect staff of vivandieres in the neighbourhood of the Court-house could furnish. The prisoner, who was accommodated with a chair in the dock, appeared to direct his attention to a news paper which was handed to him by a friend outside, while the persons in the court soon engaged in a general and rather noisy conversation. At half-past three o'clock, the judges having taken their seats, the Attorney-General, accompanied by the law advisers of the Crown, entered the court, and handed in his plea in reply to the affidavit of Mr. O'Brien. The plea, which was read aloud by the Clerk of the Crown, averred that the panel was fairly and le gally constituted by the Sheriff, and ought not to be quashed, and that the array was good in law. Mr. Whiteside having obtained leave to retire for a few minutes to prepare Ms plea in issue, left the court for that purpose with Sir C. O'Loghlen, Mr. Fitzgerald, and Mr. Meagher, and returned in a few minutes with a plea reiterating the averments of the affidavit. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thereupon applied to the Court to appoint triers, and after some slight discussion raised on an objection of Mr. Whiteside to :the selec tion of any gentleman from the grand jury for that purpose, The COURT ordered that the Chairman and the second gentleman on the jury should be named as triers of the facts at issue. Viscount Suirdale (the Chairman) observed that he could scarcely be called upon to give judgment in a case wherein:his own acts as Sheriff in 1847 would be directly called in question. The Noble Lord was set aside, and the Hon. Mr. G. J. O'Callaghan, another of the grand jury, and the Hon. A. Prittie having been sworn to try the issue, Mr. WIHTEHDE opened the case against the array. There were two questions for them to try—the first a matter of law on which they would come to a deci sion under the guidance of the Court—the second, a matter of fact in which they would be directed by their own reason and by evidence.' They should first inquire whether the jurors' book, if book there were, had not been framed in compliance with the statut• able enactments, and, in the next place, whether the panel was fairly and impartially arrayed between the Crown and the prisoner. The Act which directed the constitution of the panel was 3 and 4 'William IV., cap. 91, sec. 4. In the plain construction of that Act, the sessions at which the precept should be issued by the Clerk of the Crown for the return of the jurors should be in October. The Learned Gen • tleman proceeded at length to insist on this view by quotations from the Act. It would be proved, however, that the Clerk of the Peace had issued his precept in July, after the Midsummer assizes. Mr. Whiteside was proceeding to the second part of his case when he•was interrupted by the Court, who said they would decide the first question of law before they proceeded to matters of fact. Mr. Prittie, Clerk of the Peace, was called, and on examination deposed that the lists he produced of the jurors had been duly revised by the magistrates at special sessions, and bore date in August, 1847. The special sessions for revision took place in December last, according to the time fixed in the preceding October. The jurors' book had been prepared from the lists so revised. The AITORNEY•GENEAOL said that it was con tended on the other side that no jurors book existed at all, and that no precepts had been issued by the clerk of the peace after the October session of 1847. On the part of the Crown, he was prepared to contend that the jurors' book, prepared in December, was the legitimate result of the revised list returned in Au gust, 1847. The proper time for issuing the precepts was not in October, but in July, immediately after the sessions, as the plain meaning of the Act would prove. Even if the Court were of a different opinion it would remain a question of some moment whether the statutable enactments were not merely directory, and whether there should be a failure in the criminal justice of the country because a mistake had been made in dates by some barony cess-collector, and a certain Act had not been performed at an exact speci fied time. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL followed.—lf the rule laid down by the Learned Gentleman opposite were to be effective, it should operate in all cases indiscri minately, and the result would be that the Midsum mer assizes should hereafter be taken to mean the October assizes. He was almost apprehensive that they might have lit upon an old Act of Parliament to that effect. Mr. Goring, the Under-Sheriff, produced the jurors' book, and stated that he received it the last day of December, 1847, from the Clerk of the Peace. MT. FITZGERALD then argued, with much ability, that the book was not prepared pursuant to the pro visions of the jury laws ; the first jury Act, passed in 1833, having spoken of the Midsummer sessions " hereinafter named," whereas no other than October sessions were so mentioned ; and the precept haring been issued for the revision of the list in July after the Midsummer sessions, instead of after the October sessions. The second jury Act, passed in 1834, also referred to the October sessions. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE having summed up the facts proved, said to the triers that the question for their consideraion was, whether the precept which was issued by the Clerk of the Peace before the Oc tober sessions was issued pursuant to the statutes or not. That question depending upon tha construction of the Act of Parliament, the Court had no difficulty in saying that it was not necessary that the precept should be issued after the October sessions, and the Act of Parliament not containing a single word jus tifying such a construction, the objection was utterly untenable, and, therefore, the triers must find agtinst the objection. The triers found accordingly. Mr. WrirrEsins then said . his second point was this :—The prisoner was to be tried for his life, and if he were not tried by a fair and impartial jury they might as well shoot him on the high road. The question was whether the present panel was fair and impartial, and whether it was re• turned in the ordinary course pursued by the pre decessors of the present sheriff at the assizes and special commissions for the county during the last three years. At the last special commission the jury discharged their duty with honour to them selves and to their country, and the question for the triers to decide would be, whether this panel was fairly arranged between the Crown and the prisoner. They would be told, and it could not be denied, that there must be no artifice for the concoction of a jury panel, and that all men were equal before the law. They had stated upon the challenge the ground upon which it was made, and he believed it to be utterly impossible for the triers to affirm upon oath that this panel was impartial. In all former panels, for the last three years, two-thirds had been invariably Pro testants, and one-third Roman Catholics. That was considered a satisfactory proportion ; but, in the present panel, out of 288 names, 1-18th only consisted of Roman Catholics, and many of those men who were eulogised at the last commission, by the Lord Chief Jastice, for the just performance of their duty, were struck off—purposely struck off—to save his esteemed Friend the Attorney-General the pain of telling them to stand by, as they came to the table to be sworn. lie had the authority of Lord J. Russell for this objection— The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, interrupting the Learned Gentleman, said, that he (the Attorney-General) was the public prosecutor in this case, and not Lord J. Russell, and he must object upon this question to any such allusions as the Learned Counsel was about to make. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE hoped the Learned Counsel would not indulge in any irrelevant obser vations. then it would be better frankly and boldly to re-enact the penal statutes. Mr. Pedder, the Clerk of the Crown, proved that there were 288 names on the panel. Several jurors of the county, Roman Catholics, were then examined, to prove that although they had been summoned, and had served at former assizes and special commissions, they were not summoned upon this occasion. Mr. Campbell deposed that he had acted as sub sheriff for six years, and had been in the habit of placing many of the witnesses whose names had been called on the jury, though some of them were only petty jurors. Being asked by Mr. WHITESIDE what was a fair proportion of Roman Catholics on a panel of 288 names, The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said the question could not be answered ; it was a mere matter of opinion ; and the Learned Gentleman could not lay a matter of opinion before the triers, who were sworn to ex amine facts. Several attempts were made by Mr. Whiteside to put the same question in different forms, but they were overruled by the Court, or resisted by the Attorney and Solicitor-Generals. Mr. Wnrresibs contended that he had a right to ask a question having reference to a matter of fact which constituted the ground of the challenge to the array. Mr. 'WHITESIDE continued—They had struck off 109 names from the panel, and the prisoner's right of challenge was a farce. He therefore appealed to the triers, as gentlemen of honour, to give to the prisoner, a gentleman of their own rank, a fair trial. If there were upon the panel any member of a club with which the prisoner was connected, then they were properly struck off, but if they were not, and they had previously done their duty fairly, then they must have been struck off designedly. He made no charge against the sheriff; he was a stranger to that gentle man, but he wanted justice fur his client. If any jurors were struck off on account of their religion, Mr. Justice DOHERTT—I have had some expe rience in criminal courts, and I never yet heard it laid down that a jury panel was to be selected in any definite proportion as regarded the religious belief of its members. On the contrary, I believe that an honest and conscientious officer, in constituting the panel, would never investigate the religion of any one upon it. Mr. WHITESIDE—I entirely subscribe to what you say, my Lord—every word. What we complain of is that the officer has not acted in this way, but has in vestigated the religion of the jurors. The witness was ordered to take the jury list, and examine it for the purpose of seeing how many Roman Catholics were upon it, and after some time announced that they only amounted to 17 or 18. In 1846, the panels contained 331 persons, of whom 34 were Ro man Catholics. The Cutar JUSTICE—Have you any evidence to connect the sheriff with any corrupt practice with respect to the constitution of the panel ? It is a very serious charge, and should not be lightly made. Mr. WiIITEsIDE—My Lord, I should be sorry to charge any gentleman bearing his name with such an offence, but I must act in compliance with my in structions, and as I think right. Mr. Kirwan re mlled—Compared the jury lists for Tipperary in 1846—found that one contained 192 gentlemen, of whom 61 were Roman Catholics, and that another contained 94 names, of whom 47 were Roman Catholics. There were but 17 or 18 on the present list of 288. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL submitted there was no evidence to go to the triers at all. The replication on the part of the prisoner denied the plea on the part of the Crown, that the panel had been fairly and imp irtially constituted by the sheriff, but they had not produced any evidence of corruption, misconduct, favour, or partiality against him, and he thought, therefore, that the Crown was not called upon to go into evidence in support of their plea. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—The evidence has been received by the Court, and you cannot say then, Mr. Attorney, that there is no evidence for the triers. Mr. islniTcslDE—My Lord, we have proved the rejection of nearly 70 Roman Catholic witnesses, and we have shown that the present is unlike any former panel. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Then, my Lord, we will call the High Sheriff. Mr. R. Pennefather was called, and examined by the Attorney-General. ➢ir. O'Callaghan (one of the triers), to Mr. Kirwan —Has it been the practice of the sheriffs to make any difference in the constitution of the ordinary juries and those at special commissions? Mr. Kirwan—l have always thought that less than the usual number of Roman Catholics has been left on at special com missions. Mr. Pennefather was then called into the box by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, and was examined by him —I am the High Sheriff of the county. I did not take any part in the formation of the jury panel, but received it some time ago from the sheriff. I struck about 25 names off it, because I believed they were persons in such circumstances that it would not be fair to bring them from the North Riding to attend at Clonmel. I did not strike off any of them, nor did I leave on any of them on account of his religious profession. I was not anxious, nor was I inclined, to return a jury unfavourable to the prisoner, and the panel I made was formed in the fair and honest dis charge of my duty. There was no communication between me and any one on the part of the Crown in returning the panel neither directly nor indirectly. The panel was returned according to the best of my judgment as a fit and proper panel. Cross-examined by Mr. WHITESIDE—Had not prepared the panel himself, but considered he was re sponsible for it. It was all the work of the sub sheriff, who drew it up, and who had received no directions from him as to the way in which it should be prepared. Did not know how many Roman Catholics were on the book. Could not say if any person employed in preparing the panel in the sheriff's office had not since gone to Dublin. 'Was surprised to hear there were only eighteen Roman Catholics on the panel. Could not say how many Roman Catho lics of substance and respectability were in the county. Mr. Goring, the Under-Sheriff, said that after receiving the precept he took measures for preparing the panel, and submitted a draught to the High I Sheriff, who then struck off certain persons in a low class of life. He framed the panel from the jurors' book, according to the rank and property of the jurors, and did not leave off any individual whom he thought ought to be on. He received no suggestion or direction from the Crown or otherwise as to the preparation of that panel. Cross-examined by Mt. WurrnsinE—He had re ceived a subpcnna desiring them to produce the draught, but only at seven o'clock that morning, too late to get the draught which he had left at his office some miles distant. A cousin of the witness, now at Balbuggan, had assisted him in the preparation of the draught. That gentleman held no appointment, but sometimes assisted witness in his business. He was now staying at Bulbuggan, having gone there a week since on account of his health. He did not know how many Roman Catholics there were on the gross panel. Could not say whether there were 500 or 5,000, for he had never counted the number. He did not recol lect having had any communication with his cousin or any other person about the politics of any juror. There were upon the panel many whose religion lie did not know. He had prepared a former panel about six years ago. He believed that they could not have got 80 or 100 Roman Catholics from one riding, and upon his oath he had not expressly or designedly omitted from the panel the names of any who had served at former assizes. and who were Ro man Catholics. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICe, in summing up, said there was no evidence to prove any corruption in the formation of the panel, and severely censured the attempt to impute unfair conduct to the sheriff, or any connexion between him and the Crown. He protested against the religion of any individual being made the test of the conduct of any officer. Mr. WHITESIDE wished to explain that he charged no corruption to the Attorney-General, but that names had been omitted from the panel to save his friend the pain of striking them off as the parties came up to be sworn. The triers made some observations to the Judges, hut in a very low tone of voice, upon which the pri soner said, " Will you have the kindness to speak out ?" The observations, however, were not repeated by the triers. The triers declared their verdict in favour of the sheriff's panel. The Court then, at a quarter past seven o'clock, adjourned until ten to,asorrow, the Lord Chief Jus tice at the same time observing that the Court would open at an earlier hour but that many of the jurors resided at a distance, and could not conveniently attend before that time. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—John Kaye, Esq., of Dalton hall, near Huddersfield, does not rest the claim as to the efficacy of the celebrated Kaye's Worsdell's Pills upon mere theory, or speculative opinion, but upon facts sub stantiated by hundreds and thousands. There is scarcely a town, village, or hamlet throughout the kingdom, in which this medicine is not well known. Wives and mothers, husbands and children, are constantly sending in grateful testimonies, and declaring that no medicine ever wrought such astonishing cures, or was so invalu able to a family, as this. The following is a specimen: —Sir,--I have found the Vegetable Restorative Pills a most valuable family medicine. Some time ago my daughter was very much afflicted, and appeared to be gradually sinking. We tried medical aid in vain. I then resorted to your Pills, and to the astonishment of all who knew her, a complete cure was effected. Being myself, greatly afflicted, and having spent many pounds on medical aid in vain, I also commenced taking your Pills, and I began to mend rapidly; and I can truly say that I and my daughter received more benefit from taking one small box, than from all the medicines we had ever taken b e fore.--Andrew Atkinson , Halton, Hol gate; Lincolnshire.—Observe John Ka y e's coat of arms, and a fac-simil e of hi s a ; Price ls. lid., 2s. 91, fur use, wr a pp e d roun d eact:-nature, are on the directions box:. or 4s. 6,1. p er b ox; to b e h a d of all t. 'spectable Chemists . - and Medicine Venders. The letters from Marseilles mention that business was gradually reviving, and that more confidence was appatent among the mercantile community. A decided improvement in the home trade was noticeable, and the discohnt bank had reduced its rate to 43- per cent. for paper on cities where other branches of the national ey tiblishment existed. Mr. WutrEsinn said two hours would be sufficient. The LORD Clinr- JUSTICE- said the Court was of opinion that the application must bo refused. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. OLD COURT. TRIAL OF CUFFEY, LACY, AND FAY. THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 3O, 1849. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Davis, the third approver, was here recalled at the request of Mr. BALLANTINE, and in reply to questions said he had sold guns. Had sold two during the last six months, but. :sad lieither sold pistols nor pikes. Knows a man namset J-shn Staunton, formerly of the R division. Did not persuade him to join the " Wat Tyler" division. Never offered Staunton a pike for 3s. 6d. Had a pair of pistols to sell for fifteen shillings, for which he gave twelve shillings. Might have offered to sell the pistols in his presence. Was a broker and seller of old books, as well as a shoemaker; in fact, he was a general dealer. Did not tell Staunton that he had powder and shot, and that he could supply them. Never said so to any one. Never told Staunton that if he would buy a pike from him, he could pay for it by weekly instalments. At the time he offered the pistols for sale he was attending the meetings of the Chartists. Never said to any one, speaking of the guns, that if they were to practice firing, they (the guns ) would serve out the blue devils. Knows a person named Joseph Munday. Had never said he should like to have the old Duke of Wellington before him to try the guns upon him. Would swear he had never used such an expression. Had de fended the reputation of the Duke of Wellington when any one accu.,ed him of being a bad general.— (Laughter.) Had asked men to come to the Chartist meetings for the benefit of the landlord. Never asked any to join the club. Might have asked 150 to go to the meetings in the course of a month. Would swear he had not asked 500. Overheard a conversation at the public-house at Greenwich between Looney and some other Irish Confederates, who engaged a private room at the house in order to consider the opportunities that existed of forming a Confederate club in Green wich. Communicated the conversation to Mr. Malla lieu, the superintendent, who said " Let the meetings go on; I will send policemen there in private clothes;" and he did so. Never said to a person named Heath that he had brought some guns from London, and that he was going to take them to the Druids' Arms, where the Confederate meetings were to be held. Heath did not say " No sensible man would talk in that way." Never asked him to go to the Druids' Arms, and that he would there be convinced of the truths of Chartism. He did not advise parties to go and hear the speeches, because he was confident they would do nobody any good. The landlord had paid too much for the house, and as there was little cus tom, he (the landlord) asked him to do what he could to get persons to come there to drink. He gave him some times 24, 6d., Gs., or lr. for doing so. Knowing the speeches would do harm to tho parties he asked to go to the Druids' Arms, he nevertheless asked them to go, for the good of the house. Never said to Heath about the 10th August that the Chartists were ready. Heath never went to any of the meetings. Told a person named Parris, on Blackheath-hill, between one and two o'clock on the 16th of August, that the blow was to be struck that night. Told him to wait at the Druids' Arms that evening until he came home from London. Wanted him to wait there to keep him out of mischief. Did not put his hand to his breast and say he was ready, or anything of the kind. Knows a person named Robinson. Proposed to him to hold a Chartist meeting at the Druids' Arms. Carried two loaded pistols about him when he went to the meetings. Spoke of them at these meetings. but did not offer them for sale. Would have sold them if he could. Was a witness at the County Court, Green wich, in an action for an assault, but did not tell Robin son that ho would have sworn any mortal thing to have got the better of the wretches. Knew a person named John Ward, a farmer, and a leader of the Confederates. Never asked him to go to the meetings. Told Ward to be careful what he did for the sake of his wife and family. Did not give the same advice to those he was watching to betray. Never advocated physical force to Ward or any one else. Never got up a radio for arms. The pistols were to be put up at mile, but there were not a sufficient number of members, and he returned the money. Put them up himself ; could only get one member. Put them up for raffle in his own shop. Supposed he told Ward that there was to be an outbreak in London. Told a good many people so ; told them because he wished them to stop at home, because be was convinced neither the Chartists nor the Confederates would gain the day. Told Ward that he should go to London to see what was going on, as he would thereby be the better enabled to get out of danger. Told Robinson once, while he was stripping off the corers of some old books, that he should give them to Mr. Blagden, the landlord of the Druids' Arms, as wadding, for he was in the habit of going out shooting, No doubt he could show nearly the whole of it now, as he had only shot some pigeons lately. Ward and Robinson proposed the abolition of the Chartist association ; but he (witness) opposed it. Did so because he believed it would injure the landlord. Did not say that they were cowards to make such a pro position. Might have done so. At that time something had appeared in the papers about officers of such clubs having been arrested at Manchester. It had been suggested that subscriptions should be received by the officers for Looney. The club was broken up at that time—broken up notwithstanding he opposed it. Did not believe he ever said, "If any one attempted to arrest him that he would blow their brains out." Might have said so, to throw the persons who composed the club off their guard. Played every night at bagatelle or with dominoes at the Druids' Arms for liquor. Cross-examined by the ATTORNNY• GENERAL—Rv ported to Inspector Marks each day what passed at the Druids' Arms the day before. After a short adjournment, John Staunton was called.—He said Davis asked him to join the " Wet Tyler" Club, and to buy a pike from him. He said he should have the head for 2s. 6d. and the staff for Is. 6d., and he could pay him in weekly in stalments. He said he could get one in London. He said he expected the police would shortly arrest all Chartists, and that it would be well for him to have a pike to defend himself. He said if the pike would not suit him (witness), that he had a brace of pistols, and could supply him and any of the Confederates with plenty of powder. He said he wished he had a place to practice shooting in, in order to prac tice shooting the --es, blue devils. Once saw him come out of the station-house on Blackheath, but he ran away from him like a dog with a kettle tied to his tail. Davis was his class-leader, and did not wish to see him leaving the station-house. Cross-examined—Left the police twelve years ago. Was not reported against, and discharged for taking liberties with a fellow-constable's wife, lie resigned because he had a better situation from leaving, He had in the police 21e. a week, and had to pay 2s. a week for clothes. When he left be got 18s. a week on the Green wich Railway. Ho had not so many masters over him there as in the police. Joined the " %Vat Tyler" at the request and on the proposal of Davis. Believed, from the way Davis spoke, that he would have supplied him with powder and shot if he had been destitute. Re-examined—Could earn more money on the Green wich Railway than in the police, sometimes 265. a week; and he had the Sunday to himself. henry John Heath, master brickmaker, said Davis had formerly lived at his house. Six months ago he asked him to join a Chartist club, and showed him some arms, which he said he had brought from London, and intended to take to the Druids' Arms. lie showed two pistols at one time and a gun at another. Witness told him that "no sensible man would talk like that." lle told him to go to the Druids' Arms and ho would be convinced of the truths of Chartism. When the last infant of the Queen was born he used a disreipectul expression, which the witness was not asked to repeat. About the 18th of August, he said, "You will soon see what we shall do— we shall soon go: all ready." Told him he was a Char tist. He (witness) was not a Chartist. The witness had told a man named B.dlows that he was " afraid Mr. Davis, the great Chartist leader of Greenwich, was a spy." For some time he had been suspected of being one. Cross-examined—Had been accused by one of his ap prentices named Wright, of causing his► humped back ; but it was totally untrue. He once pushed him over a heap of coals, wood, and rubbish, because he had robbed him of some nuts; but he did not fall down, because the wall prevented him. lie found him cracking the nuts, and having previously missed some fruit and money, he struck him. No complaint was made by the boy till two years after this, and before that time he had had occa sion often to complain of him. He was a month and four days in the hospital, during which time he was very kind to him. Mr. Joseph Dunn, 128, London-wall, hat manufac turer, said he was a Chartist. Had been a member of the National Chartist Association. Ceased to he a member in August, 1846; but had attended some of the meetings of the body. The witness proved that an admission card, and a printed plan of organization, were similar to those used in IS t 6. Belonged to the associa tion for six years, and had held the office of president and treasurer to the City of L oidon Branch. Crn sidered the plan of the association perfectly legal and constitutional, or he woutu nave taken no part i❑ it. Never witnessed any secret proceedings. There were delegates, but no class•leatlers—the plan was laid down at that time. Mr. Wm. Dickson, of 144, High Holborn, was next called--Ile said he was a collier, but now a director of the National Land Company. He was a Chartist, and corroborated the evidence of the last witness, that the object of the association was to obtain the Charter by peaceable and constitutional means. Mr. George Whitmore Chinnery, clerk to Mr. Roberts, the solicitor to the defendant, was called to show that hefted subpcenaed the persons named in the examination of Davis, but the Court objected to the evidence. This was the termination of the case for the prisoners. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then rose to reply. lie congratulated the jury upon the prospect of being soon liberated from their arduous duties. It was right he should tell them that if they did not believe the prisoners guilty of felony they must acquit them. There was no gradation in the offence, for if they did not believe the witnesses in the indictment for felony, he could not expect them to believe them in an indictment for misdemeanour. He should not pro perly discharge his duty if he were again to submit the same evidence to them in support of a minor charge. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to deal with the natara of tke offence imputed to the prisoners, and said that he was not there as an apologist of the spy system ; but what he said was this, that if such persons existed, and were bold enough to brave public opinion, by communicating to the Government the existence of treasonable or dangerous conspiracy, he considered any - ---rnment would neglect their duty if they that the Go,— T" , d they believe that a rising was did not act upon it. --ehended the circum intended ? If so, and _ be _ evi;. have been' stances left no doubt of the fact, what van.... said of the Government if they had permitted the teen desperate men, under the command of Weide, to 3 .4 have consummated their guilty purpose ? If they were ❑ot to act upon testimony of this description, it would be impossible ever to obtain uncontaminated evidence in such a case until the metropolis was actually in a blarze. In his opinion the Government had done nothing more than their duty; and, as he before said, that they would have shown a want of firmness, and have neglected their duty, if they had not instituted this inquiry. When they received information that a number of desperate persons were assembled for this purpose, what could they do but direct that they should be taken into custody, and, having done this, to submit the matter for consideration by a magistrate, and on his committing the prisoners for trial it was impossible for the Government to shrink from prosecuting a public inquiry into all the circum stances. The Attorney-General then went on to com ment upon the evidence given by Powell, and he said it was part of his case that, having determined to act so as to obtain information, it was necessary he should play a part, and if he had not acted as the others did—if he had not exhibited arms when the others were determined to resort to violence—if he had appeared to be peaceable, they would have suspected him directly, and would have placed no confidence in him, and his mission would have failed. Was it true there was an organization to carry out some object by violence ? Had Powell anything to do with the meeting of the armed men under the command of Richie at the Orange Tree? Had he anything to do with the others who were meeting at the Angel? Mad he engaged the room for the committee meeting at the Black Jack ? Was it proved that he had ever invited either of the prisoners to any acts of violence? No such thing. The evidence showed they were willing enough to carry out the guilty act that was intended. He would now advert to the subject of the National Charter Associa tion, as it was termed; and he would meet the clallenge of Mr. Parry upon that point, and would broadly state, and he wished it would have the effect of disabusing the minds of those people upon the subject, that this associa tion was an illegal association, and every person joining it was liable to punishment. What were the rules of this association? The whole country was divided into districts, placed under leaders. Wardens were appointed, having the command of a certain number of men; there were officers, who had certain duties to perform; an ex ecutive; and other circumstances which, in his opinion, clearly brought the association within the scope of the Combination Act. Mr. PARRY—If this association is illegal, the Anti- Corn-law League was also illegal. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL— lie did not say it was not. What he urged was, that all such associations as the one he had described were illegal, and he hoped this public statement would have the effect of deterring persons from entering a connexion with an association which was clearly illegal, and according to his opinion of the most dangerous character. The question, in the first place, was, did the jury believe there was an intention to rise in insurrection on the night in question? Of that fact he did not think there could be any doubt, and the only question was, whether the prisoners were proved, by competent testimony, to have been concerned in that guilty intention. The Attorney-General then proceeded to go through the whole of the evidence, commenting upon it as he proceeded, and more particularly the cir cumstances which were relied upon as corroborative of the testimony of the accomplice, and concluded by ex pressing a confident opinion that they would do their duty firmly, and decide the important question that would be submitted to them, solely upon the evidence, and that they would not be actuated by any prejudice in favour of the Crown or against the prisoners at the bar. At six o'clock the case was again adjourned. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. LAMBETH. Yesterday, after the night charges had been dis posed of, Spencer Lindfield (against whom a jury on the preceding day had recorded a verdict of " wilful murder," in having caused the death of Eliza Wilson) lifiry Ann Dryden and Richard Orpin, who also stand charged on the coroner's inquisition with being ac cessories before the fact, and also William Lindfield, the reputed son of the first prisoner, were again placed at the bar before Mr. Norton for further exami nation. The Court was crowded to excess, and during the investigation several county magistrates occupied seats on the bench. Mr. Robinson, the superintendent of the P division of police, said, that the greatest possible difficulty was experienced in obtaining any information relative to the female prisoners, particularly amongst sextons, gravediggers, land persons of that class, from their having been so intimately mixed up with them, and the dread on the part of those people that any infor mation they might give would revert on themselves. Since the last examination he had received anonymous communications, which led to an inquiry touching two women—one who had been a servant near St. George's Church, in the Borough, who was traced to the house of Mrs.Lindfield in a state of pregnancy, but from the time she went there no further intelligence could be discovered of herself or her child. Another young woman, who was in a state of pregnancy, and who had received some medicine from Mrs. Lindfield, died. There was an inquest on the body, and in the absence of proof that Mrs. Lindfield had given the medicine herself, or any one procuring it for the un fortunate deceased, the coroner and jury were unable to establish any charge. Mr. Games protested against such statements as those just made being received, as they were cal culated to create a most unfavourable prejudice against his client. Mr. Robinson observed that he had been directed to make a diligent inquiry into the matter, and he felt it to be his duty to state to the magistrate the result of his inquiries. lie would only state, in ad dition to what he had already stated, that there was a person in court who had been in the habit of sup plying Mrs. Lindfield with small shells and boxes, and he would be able to state the number of shells for infants he had so supplied. Mr. NORTON thought the best course would be to take the evidence as far as it went, and (as the ses sions at the Old Bailey;wouldnot be up for some time) remand the prisoners to a future day, to give Mr. Robinson and his officers time to pursue their inquiries. Mr. Games said, that as the three prisoners, Mrs. Lindfield, Dryden, and Orpin, would have to take their trial on the coroner's inquisition, he could have no objection to this course with respect to them, but with respect to the fourth prisoner, William Lind field, he should apply for his release on bail as soon as the examination was over. The evidence of Dr. Flower, divisional surgeon of police, was then taken as to the deleterous nature of the herbs found in the houses of the prisoners ; after whom Henry Wheeler, th© gravedigger to the parish of Newington, was called and deposed that he knew the prisoner, Mrs. Dryden, very well. She had repeat edly come to the churchyard with stillborn children, and on those occasions she produced certificates signed by Mrs. Lindfield, as the midwife who had attended the mothers of the children. In reply to the questions of the Magistrate, the witness said that on such occasions the certificate of the midwife was considered necessary, and there was no account kept, as there was no necessity for re gistration or religious ceremonial over the body, which was buried as a matter of course. The certificates were given to the sexton, but he did not know whether he preserved them or not. Mr. NORTON directed that the sexton, and all other persons who could speak as to the number of stillborn children sent for burial by the prisoners, should be in attendance at the next examination, as this part of the inquiry would be very important. The prisoners were then remanded. THAMES. Mary Ann Watson a young woman who carried an infant in her arms, was brought before Mr. Yard ley on remand, charged with being concerned with three other women i❑ assaulting and robbing Mr. William Ebblewhite, an elderly gentleman, on the highway. The particulars in this case were the same as those specified in that of Julia Lennard, who was convicted and sentenced to seven years' transportation on Mon day last at the Central Criminal Court for her share in the outrage and robbery, and her paramour, James Furlong, was convicted and sentenced to three months' imprisonment for an assault on one of the witnesses. The prisoner, who sobbed loudly, declared her in nocence, and said she was not in or near the place mentioned on the night of the robbery. Mr. YARDLEY committed the prisoner for trial. MARKET INTELLIGENCE. (Fram the London New Price Current of Sept. 29.) ~ SUGAR.—To-day the market presented a firm appear ance ance for every kind of raw Sugar ; buyers alsonovr)r, " L i r all with increased freedom. West India was in id de wand by grocers and refiners, the rates paid and kinds are fully equal to those of y public the purchases reached 800 hhds, BLe " in a t firm rates, sale 94 hhds 174 brls Trinidad, which sold w 1. 34s 6d to 355; cludi t u a g rd:tY' middling yellow at 35s 6d to 278 hhds 131 barrels St. Lucia, fine e 353 to 365, low 34s to good 36s 6d to 37s 6,1, middling t. i, r The purchases for 39s to 40s 6d, perdscand tierces, and prices in 2,889 hhds 34s 6d, fine brown 33s 6d the week amount to 36s 6dy,eliovr trade were desirous to REFINED.—To-day the home an d higher rates are paid, wt . Bonded Crushed Sugar a t 494 6d to 50s, and to d m o o most ucsainseesss6idnpßereficwnetdasgb:viihen:mhoese of Friday last. brown grocery lump s ' 6d, but there are not many orders ipsa heldss th e fe s r t a 2 n 6 d s a t r e d 2 5 6 1 , , in the market. lI A —This afternoon Mauritius Sugar was i n excellent and 3, 344 bags at aucti on sold at ' yellow went at 38s 6d t o 39 5, good 37s l ij36s6'3l, low 34s 6d to 355, fine 3s to 33 s 6d , l ow and m low to fin e grey 34s to 38s, washed brawntotitd3B ri i , uln34 g middling rates, RiTsdemand,3o3t fine s e . t o 3 4 3 3 s 2 6 3 5 ,t o goocl 6d, 32s to 38s, and syrupy 32s 6d to 35s 6d per cwt. EAST INDIA.—This afternoon at public sale 744 bskts 132 bags Of Penang Sugar went upon full terms ; low yellow 32s to 32s 6d, middling 33s to 33s 6.1, brown 295, fine 30s 6d to 31s Gd. Of Bengal, 2,383 bags were disposed of at rather better prices —fine white Benares 435, good 428 to 42s 6d, middling 41s to 41s 6d, ordinary 40s to 40s 6d, good and fine yellow 38s to 39s Gd, damp 38s 6d to 42s per cwt. FOREIGN.—This afternoon 61 hhds of Porto Rico at auction sold at the full value, low and middling yellow `^ 38s 6d, and brown 363 6d per en MOLASSES.—Prices rule firm, and there has been S fair business concluded in all sorts this week. The value of low to tine is 15s to 18s per cwt. There is * smaller stock than last year by nearly 2,000 purls, 5114 arrivals are not half of what they were in 1847; but deliveries are 2,400 smaller. Bengal Treacle se not much wanted, and have been obtained at 153 to 165. COFFEE.—This afternoon the public sales of 34 casks 54 barrels and 16 bags of West India went at full rates, fine fine ordinary Jamaica 36s to 40s, fine ordinary 2 9 s to 335, good ordinary 263 to 28s, low ditto 235; Dense" rara, good ord 255, and a part was taken for shipping; 23 casks 667 bags Ceylon went at the full value, fine fine ordinary Plantation 35s ed to 40s, fine ordinary 32s 6d to 345, low 22s 6d to 26s 6d, and damaged 24s 6d to 35e 6d; 465 beg; Costa Rica went at the full worth, damaged 24s to 3i: 6d, very low ditto 14s 16s, one lot of fine tine ordinary sound 37s 6d; 88 bag s Company's Java taken in at 365, being above the value; 245 bags washed Rio weer disposed of upon full terms, good ardinary 27s to 21s, fine orainery 6d to 30s 6d, fine fine ordinary 3156 d to 335, damaged 265 to 293; 5 casks 20 bags of Lacruayra, fine ordinary 3 05 1 fine fine ordinary 35s fid, and damaged 25s per cwt. TEA.—With Green the market has been much better supplied this week, and as buyeea have manifested little desire to do business, a slight decline is apparent in the value. Black is nut cheaper, still the demand is lim ited for home consumption, and there are few export or ders in the market, whilst a large quantity is on offer. M public sale 19,000 pkgs have been offered, of which 7, 0 ° 13 were sold. The value of ordinary Congou is 7id t o Bd, and good ord 84d to 9d per lb. Rim—There is no improvement to record in the value of East India this week, still on the part of holders there is more fallsfirmes and they have sparingly supplied the market with ortS. Buyers are also more disposed to operate, and privately a fair amount of business has been concluded. At auction 1,149 bags of Bengal were sold, low dusty white at 103 to 105 6d, middling 1 15 to 11s 6d, damaged 5s to 1 ls. In Cleaned Rice more business has been concluded, and quotations ru'e firm, Patna selling at 16s to 214 - town dressed Carolina 28s to 325, and American 22s to 245. For Sago Flour the market is quiet, at 16s to 16s 6d. and Farina is dull of sale at 16s. Sago is wanted, and the parcels sold in the private market were at 18s to 22s per cwt. SPICES.—To-day, at public sale, 101 barrels Jamaica Ginger were sold at 50s to 69s per cwt; 157 bags ll' memo went at full rates, low middling 4id to 40 per lb. Senairs.—Although Leeward Island Hum can be ob. tained at is 6id to is 7d proof, still on the part of the trade little desire is manifested to operate. Jamaica has been dealt in with caution by exporters and home consumers; 28 to 33 per cent over proof of plain And mid quality can be obtained at 3s 2d to 3s sd, 34 to 38 over good middling and good 3s ed to 3s 9d, and fine 3s 10d to 4s 4d. There are sellers of strong Demerara at 2s 2d to 2s 9d, yet little business has been done. East India met with little demand, and can be , obtained at is s*l to is 6d proof. Brandy ie held with firmness, and continues in excellon demand; deliveries also keep greater than arrivals t Cognac, best brands of the vintage of 1846 is held for. 4) 10,1 to ss, ditto 1,847 at 3s 10d to 4s, inferior 2s 6d to 3s 6cl, and Bordeaux 2s to 2s 4d. Geneva is worth 2s to 2s Id for exportation sort, and 2s 6d to 3s 6d for home trade ki d. For British made Spirits the rates paid are equal to Friday last, INDIGO.—Fur East India the market has a firm sr pearance, and exporters as well as home trade buyers make purchases to a fair extent this week at prices rather above those of the last quarterly sales. For public com petition, 10th of October, 9,661 cheats are declared. SALTPETRE.—TO-day, at public sale, 349 bags Benga l sold at the full value, good 6 to 4} per cent. refraction at 26s to 26s 6d. and 5i per cent. 25s 6d per cwt. TURPENTINE.—Rough is not much wanted, but as the supply is less plentiful, holders will not accept lower rates, and ask 8s 6d to 9s. Spirits met with little atten tion,English can be obtained at 37s to 37s 6d, and Arne: rican 38s 6d to 395. For Tar a good demand exists, and the rates paid are 15s to 18s per barrel. COCHINEAL.—Prices are not lower ; but only a small amount of business has been concluded by private con tract ; at auction a part only of 105 bags faund buyers-- Mexican black at 4s to 4s Id ; Silvers 3s lid to 3s 9d, very fine 4s 2d to 4s 3d ; Honduras, low black 4s to 4s ld, good and fine 5s 3d to tis 9d per lb. OlLS.—This afternoon at public sale 432 pkgs of Cocoa Nut were mostly taken in, Ceylon at 42s to 44 5 , and Cochin 41s to 425. TALLOW.—This afternoon there was less demand for Tallow, and for fine new P. Y. C. prices declined to 47s to 47s 6d on the spot. At auction 258 casks Odessa sold at 465; 141 pkgs South American 44s to 455 9tl; 28 casks East India 45s to 465, and 382 casks New South Wales 43s to 46s 6d; 99 cases Vegetable Tallow 443 6d to 475. RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS. LIVERPOOL, Szrr. 29. Szocs EXCIIANGIL—The sales ars—Caledonian, Prefer., ence, 13s. 9d. c. dis —East Lancashire, Preference, ls. 3 11 • dis.—Lancashire and Yorkshire, Preference, Is. 3d. p.- -- Ditto, Fifths, 4 1 ,i i dis.—Ditto (late West Riding Union), Fifths, dis.—London and North- Western, 10504^ Ditto, New Quarters, 21s. 3d. dis.—Midland Stock, 821,477 Ditto, New Halves, 10% dis.—North Staffordshires ss dis.—Scottish Central, 23 1 / 2 —Shrewsbury and Birmingham, Preference, 3s. 9d. p.—South-Eastern and Dover, No. 4, 61. 13s. 9d.—York, Newcastle, and Berwick (G. N. E. Purchase) , 31s. 3d. c. dis. MANCHESTER, SErr. 29. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Huddersfield (281. paid), 8 3 4—Shetlield, Eighths, 7 dis.—Ditto, Preference, 9 3 / 4 —North Staffordshire, 5 11-16 dia.—Caledonian, Prefer ence, % dis.—Leeds, Preference, 1.16 dis.—Great Northern, 12 3-16 dis.— Manchester and Birmingham, Quarters (a)' 5 / 8 p.—South-Eastern and Dover, No. 4, 6%—East Lanca shire, Preference, par—Fleetwood, 121 s. dis. BIRMINGHAM, SILPT. 29. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—North Staffordshire , 45 , / s dis.—Shrewsbury and Birmingham (A), 7 dis. ex new . —JAW), Preference, 4 p. LEEDS, SEPT 28. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Caledonian, Prefer ence, 12s. 6d. dis.—East Lancashire, New, 104 Ditto, New Preference, Quarters, par n:—Lancashire and Yorkshire, Preference, is. 3d. p.—N ort h S ta ff or d s hire, sN dis.—York, Newcastle, and Berwick, N 0.2 (New Bervrick s ) , 30s. dis. NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, SErr. 2g. STOCK Excnazzor.—The only sale was—Newcastle And Carlisle, 103. EDINBURGH, SErr. 23. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are —Ab er d e en, IG--Edi r Y burgh and North ern , W. 10s.—Ditto (Newport), 41. 175 .,", 4 tiitto (Granton Preference), 15—North British, 1151 ' . —Ditto, Quarters, 31. 15s.—Di tto , N ew Q uarters , 35' ,„I`..- Ditto, Thirds, 41. 17s.— Scottish Centrals, 22/. 15s.—Shr e "" bury and Chester, Halves, 6/. 10s. singular Dropsy cu effi ra c b a l c e y b o y f the use a o y f ,s ti p o i l i l l o s wf i t n y Of [ADVERTISEMENT.]—The most fearful cases cures effected by their use, is some of the most obstinate cases of Dropsy, is truly astonishing. This invaluable medicine acts with such peculiar effect upon the syst em ' that the fluids arising from this direful disease are joy' perceptibly evacuated and wholly prevented from WV, further accumulation. The distressing symptoms which accompany the complaint being thus dispersed, the ferer regains buoyancy of spirits and a completely recto; Holloway's vated constitution. Females of a particular period of life should have recourse to these admirable Pills, which are sold by all Druggists, and at Professor Holloway's Es t ' s. blishment, 244, Strand, London. r the PARISH OF LAMBETII.—A vestry meeting 0f inhabitants of the parish of St. Mary, Lambeth, we' held yesterday in the Vestry-hall, Church-street, for t he nomination of four substantial householders to serve the office of overseers of the poor, to be returned for appoint ment by the magistrates. The Rev. C. B. Dalton pre" sided. The nomination for the Bishops, the Princes, and Marsh liberties, were agreed to unanimously, but two lists being proposed for the out liberty, a poll was demanded and granted. The polling commenced ye s ' terday, and will not terminate till Tuesday next. A requisition to the vestry, to take into consideration the appointment of a committee to inquire into all matters connected with the defalcation of the late collector, Thomas Woodward, was then read. A long and most personal discussion arose on this subject, particularly with reference to an arrangement for the appointme nt ail sue :essor to Woodward, so as to relieve his sureties from loss. One party contended that the office had literally been sold, and the other defended the trans- action upon the ground that it was the Lest that could be devised under the circumstances , inasmuch as by it the parish would sustain no pu.n e iary loss by the defalcation, whilst the sureties would b t. lenty of late sons which it appeared that there we!!). pleat rd's late sons in Lambeth ready topurchase Wo and the re lieved as much as possible. After much recrimina ion, ey are to roff ice, epo t to tll e a ppointed ; committeerutureyest wa3 a m!=tnimilltr l7B. house, Blackheath, Lady IlaOornnriettthheeß.2lHl ;heah inst., at o ft the e the s on. Ranger vicarage,' Fleming, A. M., of a daughter. shire, the w:- th inst., at Cirencester, the wife of J. Sewell, ° the Esq O n th., of a son. inst., 27th nst.,at Penenden-h ea th , M a i dstone, the lady of the Bayley, of a son, stillborn. On the 28th inst., at Soßth-grove, Mile-end, Mrs. Thomas squire, of a daughter. On the 29th inst., at Upper Woburn-place, the lady of J. Salt, Esq., of a daughter. MRRIED. On the 26th inst., at Denm A ark-place Chapel, Camberwell, Henry, third s on of W. 13. Gu rne y, E sq ., o f D enmar k-hill, to Phebe Wickenden, second daughter of the late W. Whit church, Esq., of Salisbury. At Newtovrnbred.,, on . the 26th inst., Matthew Blakiston, Esq., eldest son of Major Blakiston, of Mobberley, Cheshire, to Anne, daughter of R. 13. Blakiston Houston, Esq., of Orangefield, county Down, Ireland. On the 27th inst., at St. John's Church, Notting-hill, M. Bayly, Esq.. of Coimbra, Portugal, to Esther, youngest daughter of E. Weld, Esq., of Nutting-hill-square. On the 28th inst., at St. Ge.irge's, Hanover-square, Francis, only son of the Rev. F. W. J. Vickery, 31. A., to Harriette Ellen, elder daughter of J. T. Clement, Esq., of Clarge::, street. DIED. On the 20th inst., in St. Margaret's-terrace, Cheltenham, Julia Nlargaretta, second (laughter of R. Sutton, Esq., of Scofton, Nottingham, aged 76. On the 21st inst., at Cheltenham, Ann, the wife of T. G. Edwardes, Esq. Oil the 21st inst., at Hereford-road, Westbourne-grove, J. T. Rowlandson, Esq., aged 53. On the 26th inst., at Vicarage-house, Buckland, Dinhara, Louisa Jane, wife of the Rev. H. Clutterbuck, aged 34. On the 26th inst., at an advanced age, Mary, the wife of the Rev. W. Brown, Horton Rectory, Colnbrook, Buckg. On the 26th inst., Elizabeth, youngest daughter of W. B. Stapleton, Esq , of Pembroke-square, Kensington. London: Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, at No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy. in the county of 4111111 ms, Saturday, September 60, 1848. I