The Sun. — London, England, 1835-01-28 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. The election for Kerry has terminated in the return of one of the O'Connells and of a gentleman of the name of Mullins, a member of the family of that re spectable Nobleman, Lord Ventry, the condition of whose tenants has been so well shown up in the late work of Mr. Inglis. It is fair to state, however, that Lord Ventry declared himself adverse to the preten sions of his relative. The Knight of Kerry is orr this occasion defeated, a gentleman who, during a long public life, has done more for his native county, and more particularly for the rights and well-being of the Catholic body, than all the O'Connells that ever bare the name have attempted, much less accomplished, for any portion of their countrymen. The spirit through which this gross wrong, for such it is, has been per petrated against the Knight of Kerry, is marked by the atrocious menaces of O'Connell, and the diabolical curses of the priests, against all voters who would not obey their will in supporting the repeal candi dates ; while the active and lawless mechanism by which the end has been attained, must, if we are not egregiously mistaken, command the earliest atten tion of the Legislature towards the provision of some legal remedy. The O'Connell threat is already well known throughout the country, viz., that each elector who voted for the "Orange" Knight of Kerry—that " Orangeman" who had dedicated his whole career to the removal of the Catholic disabilities !—should hive a Death's-head and cross-bones painted on his door ; in other words, should be marked out to the whole community as a criminal outlawed and doomed to a violent death. Mr. Sheil's adoption, deliberately and solemnly uttered, both of the sentiment which inspired O'Connell, and of the murderous measures which that reproach to the name of Christian enjoined upon the Papist populace, against whatever electors should be guilty of voting for candidates of their own free choice, is sufficient to show that the policy of assassination had been formally approved by the heads of the Repeal party, and was to be systematically acted on. Mr. Sheil asked "no mercy for those " Catholics who should support" the Conservative candidate for Clonmel, as O'Connell had already consigned to destruction those who should support the Knight of Kerry ! Then what has been the con duct of the priests, those self-called ministers of " re ligion ?" They have invariably turned the unlimited powers derived from their spiritual ascendancy over the ignorant mob, to the purposes of that same tem poral faction whose other avowed instrument was mur der. Now we have not long ago characterised this species of interference by the Popish clergy, as pre cisely identified with that which in the darkest ages of popular ignorance, and the most frightful of priestly despotism, rendered the dominion of the Popish church over the transactions and affairs of civil society intole rable to all Governments and every people ; and, be sides preparing the minds of men for the reformation in some countries of Europe, brought about, in all countries which had got beyond the very rudiments of civilization, a sensible eurtailment of the privileges of the clergy, and estrangement of nations from their in fluence. But Ireland is that country in Europe where the mass of the people is most barbarous, and where the Romish clergy are for that reason beyond all com _ parison most potent. They exercise over the passions of the _multitude, for the promotion of any object which is described to them as being adverse to the established laws and institutions of the State, a propelling force which no earthly law is capable of resisting. They (the priests) have leagued themselves with O'Connell, and with that band of incendiaries which would set up the phantom of a " domestic Government," we knowing that the first definite fruit of such a Govern ment would be the obliteration of every trace of British power and of Protestant freedom in Ireland, and that the whole property of the Established Church, In addition to those spoils which are wrung from the poor parishioners by the irregular rapacity of the Romish priests, countenanced by prescriptive usage, will at once be vested in their all-grasping hierarchy. But it becomes a serious question, and one which we suspect cannot much longer be evaded, how such an evil as the indefatigable obtrusion of spiritual power upon the rights and interests of civil life can be met by any known process of legislation. It is not, among sound thinkers, a novel proposition that the Romish Church has ever proved herself a deadly foe to liberty. She proceeds upon views and incul cates upon her worshippers a class of motives which hawi frequently nothing in common with those of any order of men in political society. She aims invariably at founding zmon considerations exclusively connected with another woil.. l d , an empire in this world which no human might can encounter. Human laws have no sanctions compared with ti,s2se which the wily priest can enforce upon the superstition; terrors of his con gregation. It follows, therefore, ti,wt the powers which the State confers upon its nominal su:.; J ects, as that for instance of voting for Members of Parliament, are turned by means of a machinery, independent of the State, to uses destructive of its authority and welfare. But the principle which regulates and justifies the distribution of political power among the subjects of a State is one which assumes that those who enjoy such power will, through a moral necessity, be governed in its employment by motives of political, or at least temporal interest ; such as are shared in some way or other by bodies of men acting as citizens, and such as have their root in civil polity, or in social action. Those who act implicitly on the suggestions of men whose country is their hierachy—whose patriotism is subserviency to the worldly aggrandisement of their Church—whose loyalty is eager obedience to a power miltwed and uncontrolled by any responsibility known to the British Constitution—such men are not safe de positaries of any right or privilege which enables them to act directly upon our constitutional system. While the Catholic Bill was yet unpassed, O'Connell and his compeers fatigued us with their solemn denials that the Romish priesthood ever could exert, or could ever dream of exerting, any shadow of power over the po litical conduct of their brethren. He vowed daily and hourly that their kingdom was not of this world ; that they had nothing to do with things temporal at all : that they confined themselves strictly, as was their bounden duty, to the religious demeanour of their flocks ; and that if the Pope was to issue a mandate to Irish Catholics, directing them how to shape their political duties, he, O'Connell, " would be the first to laugh at such ridiculous pretensions !" What then are we to think of the scrupulous conformity between the promises by which Parliament was lured into the extension of political rights to Catholics, and the man ner in which those promises have been fulfilled ? It is perfectly true, that the elective franchise had been vested in Catholics long enough before these fine panegyrics were pronounced upon the priests. But it is equally so, that before the bill of emancipation, the desire to exercise the intenneddling influence which then was disclaimed for them had no such pressing motive. We have but opened this important question. it is the Romish priests themselves, and the disloyal as well as ungrateful miscreants into whose hands they play their sinister ascendancy, that have supplied us with et text for our observations. The sum of which is, that as the law stands, irresistible power over the actions of a large mass of British subjects has been placed in the hands alien from, and hostile to, the con stituted authorities of the realm. There is still, no doubt, a remedy in the constitutional resources of this free Protestant state, and we trust there will be no defect of skill or courage to apply it. In the mean time we entreat our readers to remember what we pub lished yesterday in our Irish letter : we mean that far rago of atrocious villainy, entitled the " Patriot's Curse," directed against the freedom of Irish election. Was ever such indecency—was ever such brutality— was ever such cruelty—was ever such blasphemous profaneness—was ever such malignant and savage profligacy before exhibited in the face of a civilized world ? It is from the same foul source as the Death's head and bones, and turned against the Knight of Kerry.—Times. Great is the exultation of the Whig-Radical Journals at the defeat of the Knight of Kerry, by the priesthood and Repealers of the county and K cros erry, s -bones under it he system of spiritual terror and skull intimidation. The Ev enin g organ of t h e late Ministry is particularly loud in its notes of triumph on this occasion. It tinkles its so unding brass to celebrate the victory of the 46 Repaleocracy ff of the Kerry raoun- tains with as much spirit and vivacity as if it con sidered the politics of Brocket Hall and Derrynane Abbey completely identified, and rested the last hopes of the restoration of the Melbourne Cabinet upon the success of the desperate faction that struggle inces- santly in Ireland for the dismemberment of the empire. We recollect when the Globe described the Irish Orangemen as the real friends of British connection —and they have not changed their political principles since that time. What they were then they are now, when the same Journal makes common eause with the opponents of British connection, lauding O'Connell and his " Repalers" as patriots and reformer; of the true stamp, and vilifying all who oppose the priestly and political incendiaries, who, in their hatred to the vet y name of a Protestant Constitution, inflame to madness the passions of an ignorant and superstitious multitude. As a specimen, among many others, of the sort of liberalised feeling which the full concession of the " Catholic Claims" has produced among the Romish Clergy of Ireland, take the form of imprecation which has been circulated among the poor, benighted priest ridden peasantry, for the purposes of the Kerry elec tion. The " curse of Ernulphus," as recited in the life of " Tristram Shandy," supposed to be a bitter sareastic fiction of the witty author of that whimsical work against the damnation-dealing tyranny of the Church of Rome, is mild and tolerant 'compared with this Kerry curse. What a horrible formula of impre cation—posted, too, upon a building consecrated to the worship of the God of Christians I And this blasting and withering curse, as it was intended to be, was di rected against whom ? The Knight of Kerry, one of the best landlords that a Roman Catholic peasantry ever had, and a man who, like John David Latouche, -vas ever the steady and unflinching advocate of Catho lic emancipation. But the Knight of Kerry has refused to acknowledge the mob domination of Mr. O'Connell, and therefore the skull and cross-bones crusade is di rected against him, and his name is posted on the Roman Catholic chapel, encircled with curses that would well become the lips of the foul and midnight hags of Mac beth, as one who " circumscribed the spirit of patriot ism within the wizard circle of the Protestant interest." With such things before our eyes, how can it be said, how can it he believed, that the spirit of Romish in tolerance is changed from what it was in the dark ages of grovelling and persecuting superstition ? Is not every act of liberality on the part of Protestants met by new instances of bigotry and insolent assumption of power ? We speak of the system in its political opera tion, having nothing to do with it in any other; and surely, in its political operation, it is a system that builds the fabric of its ambitious power on the utter prostration of the intellect of mankind. What other class that bear the name of Christians could be ad dressed in the terms of the Kerry anathema without feeling horror and disgust for their ghostly tyrants ? And this is" Reform I" If so, the spirit of evil must be an accomplished Reformer.—Morning Herald. We are happy to perceive that the Clergy of the Church of England have begun to hold archdeaconry meetings for the purpose of considering such questions as are at the present moment of urgent and vital im portance to the interests of the Establishment. We refer our readers to the account in another part of our paper of a meeting of this nature recently held at Barnstaple, over which the Rev. Archdeacon Barnes presided, and at which resolutions and an address to the eminent Bishop of the diocese (Exeter) were passed, expressive of entire confidence in any measures which, in co-operation with his Majesty's Govern ment, the Right Reverend the Bishops may think fit to pursue for rendering the discipline of the Church more effective, and for the equitable ad justment of all questions relating to its pro perty and the religious instruction of the people. We have always entertained a confident belief and have not been backward to express it, that among all the various classes of society in this country there is not one that feels so deep an interest in the pro motion of all safe and beneficial reforms in the dis cipline of the Church and the distribution of its re venues—not one that is really so anxious to see that discipline and those endowments placed upon the foot ing which may render them most efficacious for the sacred purposes which the institution of a national Church has professedly in view—as the Clergy of the Church of England. That they have been determined not to coalesce in the work of Reform with politicians who, under the name of Reform, seek the humiliation or subversion of the Church, or are in visible and un disguised alliance with parties to whom no other objects can rationally be assigned, ought neither to excite surprise nor provoke censure, but is, on the contrary, a proof of their integrity and prudence, a strong symptom of their attachment to the sacred in stitution of which they are the legal and appointed guardians, an abundant evidence of their earnest desire for the removal of whatever real defects or abuses deface its comeliness or impede its success. There will, we are persuaded, be n• opposition on the part great body of the clergy to any plan of Church Reform - th - be devised by the present Ministers unction with the heads of the of the Crown in e 01..; Church ; for the clergy no•e: feel that they can be , zealous Church Reformers without inet;:r.ing: the risk of aiding the projects of the declared foes of the Church and of religion. By this change, not in the objects or the principles, but iri the position and the feelings, of the clergy, the cause of Church Reform has obtained an incalculable advantage, an advan tage which no other Administration than the pre sent would ever have had the power to bestow. The sincere and rational friends of a reform of the Church must be anxious to uphold and strengthen the present Administration, if it were only from the conviction that improvements which may be practicable in their hands would be utterly impracticable in those of their political rivals ; while those who use the name of Church Reform merely as a party cry, or who would so reform the Church as to degrade and enfee ble it, may be expected to manifest an hostility to the existing Government, bitter and unrelenting in proportion as its plans of real Reform seem likely to prove safe, beneficial, and complete. The Whig- Radical faction are greatly mortified at losing the van tage ground of office; and it cannot be said of them that they bear their mortification with the best possible grace. But when, in addition to the loss of office, one of the most formidable and effective weapons of party warfare is about to be struck for ever from their hands, they naturally feel that the grievance is altogether in tolerable.—Morning Post. A few mornings ago we had occasion to notice the second, and oral, manifesto of the Premier, delivered to the worthy electors of Tamworth. But it seems that there were some " errors of the press" in the first edition, which have made the Right Honourable Ba ronet publish a second edition, corrected and revised (as that part of the press with which he is in most intimate connexion is pleased to say) by himself. Of course this amended edition may be regarded as official, and in this respect a very curious document it is. Sir Robert is to be the most candid and open of men. " These are not times when public men can affect mi nisterial reserve, and fancy themselves exempted from the duty of a frank communication with those whom they represent." So says the Premier ; and the words are certainly words of great promise ; and we might perhaps, in our simplicity, suppose, if we did not know our man, that all the Cabinet se crets are to be " told at Tamworth" by Sir Robert, to the good people whom he represents there. But no, there is a loop-hole : Sir Robert has been returned to Parliament by the electors of Tamworth, because he has the influence to make the electors re turn him, or any one whom he may appoint his no minee. But will any one believe that Sir Robert Peel, the Prime Minister of the Crown—the inve terate and invariable Tory Minister, is the representa tive of the electors of Tamworth, or of any other por tion of the people of England ? It is impossible. Sir Robert Peel was opposed to the people of Eng land—that is, he was an enemy to their best interests, when he had no public office save that of Member for Tamworth ; and is it possible to suppose that, now that he is Premier, and became so in opposition to the wishes of the people, and upon the dismissal of the only Mi nistry in which the people have had confidence, or reason to have confidence, for many years—that he can be the representative of the people ? It is im possible. Officially he is the representative of the Administration—or, perhaps, we should rather VIE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1835. say, of the Court party—not, of course, of our Most Gracious King, and our still more gracious Queen, but of those persons about the Court, Who are said to have been sleepless during the whole time that the reins of Government were in the hands of the Grey and Melbourne Administrations. If he is in any other sense a representative, he is the represen tative of Tory principles.; for it could not be because he was a liberal that he was sent for, post haste, from Rome, to be the head of a Government, the whole members of which are illiberal. Sir Robert is either the representative of the mere Court party, or he is the Representative of Sir Edward Knatchhull, Mr. Goulburn, and others of that class. The doctrine upon which his professed credence is grounded is, therefore, a misrepresentation, and the whole of the speech can be nothing else. Let us, however, exa mine the points. First, Sir Robert would not " dis _ _ _ _ parage" the Melbourne Cabinet. He is too generous for that, but he hesitates not to say that " the able men had left that Cabinet," and that from loyalty to the only able man who had it not in his power to re sign and leave them, he came whip and spur from beyond the Appenines to assume the Seals. This is unmanly as well as unjust. The Melbourne Cabi net had the confidence of the House of Commons: and even in the worst of " modern" times, the loss of that confidence has been held to be the only " fair" ground for the dismissal of an Administration. The Melbourne Cabinet had the confidence of the country to a greater extent than even that of Earl Grey, much as the people were inclined to like him for his long and steady services, and for no other reason than that it was inclined to go farther. It does not appear, indeed, that the Melbourne Administration had shown the least ground upon which any one could cease to have confidence in it, except Sir Robert Peel, and those who, like him, had opposed every liberal measure, originate in what quarter it might. Secondly, Sir Robert would have the simplicity to make us believe that he is a Reformer ; but he takes care that it is according to his own notions of the subject. In effect, he says, " Reformers are not agreed ; some want one thing, some another. I have voted against them all, and, therefore, how can I be anything else than a Reformer ?" Certainly, Sir Robert, you voted against all those proposals to which any one of the differently-minded Reformers were opposed; but, you also voted against all those of which they were in favour. Your time function has been, a Reformer constantly opposing Reform ; and there are even now not the least signs of amend ment. Thirdly, Sir Robert feels very confident that he will have the confidence and a majority of the new Parliament, although there will certainly be a majo rity of 150 Members against him. But In this be judges of others by himself ; and faneies that those Reformers with whom he voted against those parti cular modifications of reform of which they did not approve, but against whom he voted in all those which they did approve, will now vote with him. He for gets that it is among slaves only—the slaves of des petism, that there can be perfect uniformity of opi nion ; and the lesson which Lord Stanley and Sir James Graham gave him, might have taught him that there is a wide difference between two persons both finding fault with a third one on particular points, and the two agreeing upon every point whatever; yet this is the the foundation upon which Sir Robert builds his hopes of continuance in office ! Fourthly, he talks on the reforms and retrenchments to which he has been a party. Among these he does not include his Cur rency Bill, and he is discreet in avoiding it ; for it is the severest blow to the industry of the country which it has suffered by any enactment for many years. Other than that he originated nothing. The law reforms of which he boasts were only consolidations, and repeals of obsolete statutes, and even then he only introduced them—he did not originate them. He was also only " consenting" to Mr. Huskisson's mea sures ; and from his repeated speeches and votes upon analogous subjects, there are pretty strong grounds for believing that, if it had not been through fear of being kicked out of office by his more able and liberal colleagues, Sir Robert would have been found in opposition to those measures. That the Premier should, contrary to the usage, and, we may add, to the prudence of all Premiers in times past, feel it necessary to make these repeated small sallies through the postern of Tamworth, shows that there is weakness and fear in the garrison ; and we understand that the Duke has argued with him on this very subject, as he himself—feeling that he must soon die politically—is determined, like an ancient fox, to die silently ; and, therefore, is offended with the junior for "giving tongue " at a time so desperate. The Duke, notwithstanding his necessary ignorance of the people of England, feels, as a man of the world, that this boasting, which the Premier himself must feel to be hollow, cannot fail to accelerate that final ruin of the party, and of all who have the weakness to cling to it, which is coming fast and sure enough, in the natural course of events.—Morning Advertiser. We call the attention of our tenders to a document in another column, on the subject of the Middlesex County-rates. The Committee of the Vestry of the Parish of St. George, Hanover-square, have entered on, the task of overhauling the expenditure, and they Laye already made some important discoveries. Esti mates of ~;,?,/ks are p rover bi a ll y d e l us i ve , in many cases not amounting to half the result. But the county of Middlesex contrive that their estimates should always exceed the reality. Thus, for instance, we find it stated in this Report, that the font estimates for the year, 14th of October, 1833, to the 13th of October, 1834, amount to 97,364/. 13s. 70., while the actual expenditure for the year was only 66,2461. 4s. 81d. It appears, too, that on the first day of each quarterly account, there was always in the hands of the treasurer, in cash and uncollected rates, a larger sum than the amount of the expenditure to the next quarter. The Committee justly complain of this practice of making the estimate to exceed the ex penditure so very much, as it occasions a correspond ing unnecessary taxation. The treasurer probably thinks that the money is better in his hands than in the pockets of the people ; but we suspect the expo sure will lead to a change. We perceive that the Committee have entered on the subject of Lunatic Asylums ; and we are much mistaken if their industry be not rewarded here by some notable discoveries.— Morning Chronicle. COURT OF EXCHEQUER. JONES V. BRAMWELL. Mr. WATsoN moved for a rule to show cause why all further proceedings in this action should not be stopped on the following grounds :—The defendant, who was living in some place in Staffordshire, carried on the business oa surgeon and apothecary, but from some error on his part he had not been duly licensed as an apothecary by the Apo thecaries' Company. Some time since the defendant re ceived into his business a young gentleman of the name of Meek, as an apprentice. The indenture was executed by Mrs. Meek, in consequence of her husband at the time being unfortunately an inmate of a lunatic asylum, and also by the infant and Mr. Jones, who appeared on the occasion as a trustee. From the affidavits in his possession, it ap peared that Mr. Bramwell had married a young lady of the name of Mcek, and consequently some family connection existed between the defendant and his apprentice. This marriage had led to a violent quarrel between the plaintiff and defendant, who then brought an action against his client for practising without a license. From the affidavits of Mr. Meek, who had recovered from the illness under which he was labouring, Mrs. Meek, and the infant, they declare they had not given the slightest authority to Mr. Jones to bring the action, and that he had no interest in the infant's property. Lord ABINGER—You may take a rule to show cause. Mr. WATSON—The defendant has no objection to pay the costs of the rule. WATE V. DASHWOOD. Mr. JEREMY moved for a rule to show cause why the de fendant should not deliver to plaintiff's agent a bill of par ticulars, setting forth what special articles in the possession of the Duke of Marlborough were not protected by certain deeds. The plaintiff had brought an action against a late Sheriff for having made a return of nulla bona to a writ for 9,6001. against the Duke of Marlborough. The property in possession of the Noble Duke was claimed by trustees, and by a creditor named Latimer. The plaintiff then de sired to know what goods were not so protected, but not obtaining a satisfactory answer, was compelled to make this application to the Court. The COURT refused to grant the rule. GIDEON V DOWNES. Mr. THESSIGER having obtained a rule for a new trial in this case, Mr. MAULE showed cause against it. The facts of the case were as follows :—The plaintiff was a merchant of St. Helena, and having empowered a broker in London to purchase certain goods for him, sundry pack ages of glass, vinegar, and other articles were bought for ex portation. The broker went on 'Change, and meeting Captain Gaskill, of the Meta, a vessel about to sail to St. Helena, inquired of him whether he was willing to take a frieght to St. Helena. Captain Gaskill agreeing to do so, plaintiff's broker sent the property to the wharf ; but as Gaskill did not ship it on board the kieta, plaintiff brought an action against the defendant, who was owner of the vessel, and recovered damages to the amount of 201. Mr. MAULE, for the plaintiff, now contended that at the time of the broker proposing to send the goods by the Mete, Gaskill made no objection to receiving them, nor inquired of what nature they were. Mr. THESSIGER contended that it was a perverse verdict given by the Jury, who were unable to judge of the merits of the cose. Lord A BINGER ordered the rule to be made absolute; with costs. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT. CRIM. Cox.—Mr. Thomas Harte Franks, a Lieutenant of the 10th Regiment of Infantry, was opposed by Mr. Nicholls on the part of the Rev. Benjamin Burton John son, the only creditor, for damages awarded in an action for criminal conversation with his wife. He was supported by Mr. Cooke. The record in the action " Johnson v. Franks" was pro duced by Mr. Soll, a solicitor. The action was tried at the last Summer Assizes, at Exeter, before Lord Denman and a Special Jury. A verdict was given for the plaintiff, damages 1,0001., and the costs amounted to 4751. His Lordship had certified that the cause was a fit one for a Special Jury. Mr. Soil, in answer to a question of Mr. Cooke, said he was the agent of Mr. Bennett, of Plymouth. He did not keoW that the plaintiff resided in Ireland. The damages were laid at 5,0001. The insolvent was examined by Mr. Nicholls respecting some property he had derived under his father's will. He was entitled to the third of 2,0001., which his brother had advanced when he entered the service in 1825. He had paid 4501. on his ensigncy and 2541. for the lieutenancy ; his name was down at the Horse Guards for a Company, the purchase of which would come to 1,1001. He denied that his brother had any money in his possession belonging to him. He has had remittances from his brother in Ire and. He had no property save his pay as a Lieutenant. Mr. NictioLLs addressed the Court in aggravation of punishment, after which—the Learned CHIEF COMMIS SIONER, in giving the judgment of the' Court, remarked that very soon after the constitution of the Court, the prin ciple had been laid down in cases like the present to be guided in the adjudication by the amount of damages ascer tained by the Jury. The judgment of the Court was that the insolvent should be entitled to receive the benefit of the Act so soon as he should have been in prison for a period of twelve calendar months at the suit of the Rev. Mr. Johnson, for the damages recovered in an action for criminal conversation with his wife. The insolvent was ordered to be confined within the walls of the King's Bench Prison, and the judgment to be computed from the time of filing the petition. On the application of Mr. Nicholls, the Reverend oppo sing creditor was appointed the assignee, and the Court al lowed the costs of the opposition. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. G UILDHALL. A new mode of dealing with utterers of base coin has just been adopted at this Office in consequence of the in creasing prevalence of the offence in this district. The Mint officers are extremely circumspect in not prosecuting any case where the conviction of the offenders does not appear to be inevitable. Even where a party has just been re leased from gaol for a similar offence, it is required that two fresh instances of uttering shall at the least be adduced to sustain the charge of being a common utterer ; and of every five persons who have been apprehended as smashers, four have been discharged without punishment. Upon the last renewal of the Police Act (3d of William IV., cap. 19), in 1833, an enormous addition was quietly made to the summary jurisdiction of the Magistrates, for, while under the old Police Act they could only adjudge a person to be a rogue and vagabond whom there was just ground to suspect of frequenting the streets with intent to commit felony, the new law authorises them to treat as rogues and vagabonds persons suspected of intending to commit any offence, who shall not be able to give a satis factory account of himself or herself,'and of his or her way of living. On Saturday a man was so committed upon proof that he had uttered a base half-crown, Mr. Field, the Mint In spector, deposing that he knew him, and believed him to be a common utterer, and the prisoner not giving a satis tory account of himself ; and yesterday a woman and a lad undoubted Common utterers, were dealt with in the same summary way. For a second offence against the Police Act the party is to be committed to the Sessions, and may there be sen tenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for one year ; and, further, if the Court shall see fit (the party not being a female), to be whipped at such time and such place as, according to the nature of the offence, may be deemed expedient. HATTON-GARDEN. Yesterday a woman, between 30 and 40 years of age, named Georgina Clarke, was brought to this office, charged with having murdered a man named Henry Jenkins. When Mr. BENETT (the Magistrate) was made ac quainted with the nature of the offence imputed to the pri soner, he desired all the witnesses to leave the office, ob serving that in cases of assault it was a rule to have one witness only at a time before the Justices, and he thought it ought to be the case in charges of felony—at all events, he should henceforth adopt that practice. phoebe Davidson deposed that she lived at No. 1, Ar gyll-place, Tonbridge-street, New-road, where the prisoner, who had for a length of time cohabited with the deceased, also resided. On Saturday night, at 1 1 o'clock, she went into deceased's froom, and seeing him in bed, and the pri soner sitting by him, she asked him what was the matter ; and he said he had hurt himself, at the same time showing a place on his side which bad some plaster upon it. She asked him if he was hurt much ; and he said it was a mere nothing—he was more frightened than hurt. I.Vhcri he got more composed, she inquired how it happened ; and he answered, " that while cutting a piece of wood, the knife s lipped and entered his side. There were three knives upon the table, and said it was one of them, and although she examined them, she saw nothing particular about them. She stayed with him until two o'clock, and then went to bed, leav i ng the prisoner with him. At 5 o'clock on Sunday morn ing the prisoner called her up, and she left the house with her to procprP §9l'i?p brandy. When § l i o i.{a* the de= ce ased com Plained Of the cholic ! - anit tbe - a'acu - ect gave him ha lf a quartern of brandy. At eight o'clock he got up and walked out of the house, and on his return, in about half an hour s he slid he 1141 Berl tt? his 111449 r! VIIR 110 ~gll, 7 9P4iia some unadulterated ranuy some water, tiOon after this the prisoner fetched a Dr. Jones, who, when he saw the deceased, said be would be quite an altered man on the morrow, and he would send him some medicine. She was in the room all day, and the prisoner was also there. In the course of the day the deceased !everal times said lie lia! BAIL COURT. Mr. Justice PATTISON sat in this Court for the purpose of hearing motions. THE KING V. GILLETT. Mr. SMIRKE applied to the Court for a rule calling upon Mr. Adolphus Warren, an attorney of the Court, to answer the matters contained in certain affidavits, and in default to show cause why he should not be struck off the rolls. The Learned Counsel made the application on the part of the defendant, who was proprietor of the Royal Cornwall Ga zette, Falmouth Packet, and Plymouth Journal, against whom several actions had been brought in the name of William Sydney Smith, a clerk to Mr. Warren, by the latter to recover penalties to the amount of upwards of 20,0001. for printing and publishing that journal without the real name and address of the publisher thereto. The penalties sought to be recovered for printing the said news paper were 10,4001., and for publishing it 10,500/. ; there were counts also for not publishing the paper at the place named in the usual affidavit filed at the Stamp Office. The ground of the present application was that Mr. Warren (as stated in the affidavits) had, since the commencement of the said actions, written to the defendant, asking if he would compound the same. That he had brought similar actions against the proprietors of ten other newspapers, by which penalties were sought to be recovered to the amount of 32,000/., all in the name of William Sydney Smith, his clerk, and in each case the defendants have been written to by him to know if they were willing to compound them ; from which it was evident that Warren brought the actions in order to put money into his own pocket. The Stamp.. office authorities, when applied to upon the subject, said they had no complaint to make against the defendant, and that they did not sanction the proceediop against him, the fact being that the paper had been published, for the sake of convenience, two doors only from the place described in the paper. He (Mr. Smirke) submitted that the Court would not suffer an attorney to bring actions, the evident object of which was to gratify private feelings, pp to put money into his own pocket. Mr. Justice PATTISON—This case is one of very consi derable importance. I will take time to look into the au thorities upon the subject. Although I think the proceed. ings very vexatious, I doubt whether I have the power to grant your application. I will, however, give my decision, if possible, to-morrow. better. Mr. Jones came twice in the evening. The first time he applied strapping to his (deceased's) side, and the second time he tried his stomach and chest with an instru ment ; after which he said there was danger. She and the prisoner sat up with him all that night. Mr. Jones visited him again on the following (Monday) morning at 8 o'clock, and was with him a quarter of an hour. From that time until the death of the deceased, which happened at seven o'clock in the evening, she never left him. He always called the prisoner " George," and just before he died he addressed her by that name, and kissed her. She was quite certain the deceased said he had hurt himself. She had known him five or six months. He was a carpenter by trade, and about the age of thirty. Mr. BENETT wished to know if the surgeon was present ? Sergeant Campbell answered in the negative, and informed the Magistrate that he had seen Mr. Jones who was decidedly of opinion that the deceased had not sustained the injury in the manner alleged ; in fact, it was impossible that it could have been so. He then produced a certificate in the handwriting of Mr. Jones, who set forth that, on Saturday night, the prisoner waited upon him, requesting his attendance at her house to see a man, who she represented had stabbed himself while cutting wood with a knife. He found him with a wound between the seventh and eighth ribs, about six inches from the central line of the breast-bone. There had been a considerable discharge of blood, but it had ceased before be arrived. Finding him exceedingly low, his pulse being not above 50, he did not then bleed him. The de ceased complained of pains in the stomach and chest. He saw him again on Sunday morning, when there was consi derable inflammation of the wound and usual signs of injury of the lungs. He then bled him. The deceased died about seven o'clock on Monday night. The stomach was injured. The wound was the cause of his death. Mr. BE NETT asked if there was any other witness? Inspector Titterton said he understood the deceased and the prisoner were quarrelling and scuffling for some time before the witness Davidson entered the room. Mr. BENETT was of opinion that enough had been stated to justify him in remanding the prisoner. It was a case in which a jury would be empannelled ; and after the verdict had been returned, he would have the prisoner up for fur ther examination. She was accordingly remanded. For some time past several anonymous letters have been forwarded by the post to Mr. Howe, livery-stable-keeper, of Horse-and-Groom-yard, Theobald's-road, threatening to de stroy his goods and premises by fire ; and yesterday he at tended at this office to solicit the advice and assistance of Mr. Benett, the sitting Magistrate. Mr. Howe handed to Mr. Benett a letter, dated Jan. 1, directed to him, which was as follows : " Dear Sir,—Lose no no time in removing your horses and property, as your house and stabling will be on fire before Wednesday next. I have learnt the above statement from good authority.—Your obedient servant, " To Mr. Howe." " A FRIEND." The next letter he received was as follows : " Incendiaries' Head-quarter in Town, Jan. 6, 1835. " Sir,—You took no notice of my warning of yesterday. I can only tell you they are determined on destroying your pro perty. If you wish to save it from destruction, remove your horses and cabs, &c. ; also your granary, as that is their main object—especially your best horses and house. If you remove your horses, do it between six and eight o'clock in the even ing, as that is the time they go in and prepare their instru ments of destruction. They are watching an opportunity to get to your house ; but nothing can save your stabling from being destroyed, as the liquid of destruction is poured into them. Therefore be sure and remove your horses. I shall give you no further warning ; if you do not notice it, you must abide by the consequences. " I still remain a bitter foe to my sworn companions ; let the farmer and the horse-dealers beware of them, and do as I have warned you. My name shall be known in due time." The next letter he received was as follows : " INCENDIARISM. " Sir,—We intend firing your premises to-morrow night, so take care of yourself. " THE LONDON AND ROTHERHITHE INCENDIARIES. " January 6, 1835. " To Mr. Howe, livery-stable-keeper, Horse and Groom yard, Theobald's-road, Red Lion-square. " P. S.—Here is a little bit of information before we do it —that is, you life is at stake. The policemen may look out for their own heads. We were on your premises last night, but we didn't do it, because all your cabs wasn't in ; but we will do it now ; whether or not, we put some of the flare up' in. Oh ! what a flare up' the fires at Rotherhithe was—take care, Old Boy." Mr. Howe said that he became rather uneasy in conse quence of such letters, and he removed his property, and acted with every precaution to save his property and the lives of his family, and he instantly consulted with Miller, 3 E, and Powell, 10 E, active officers, to inquire into the matter, and, if possible, to trace the parties who had written the letters ; they having placed a proper watch over his property and premises, they had escaped being fired. Mr. BENETT.—Have you quarrelled with anybody of late ? Mr. Howe—l have not, your Worship. Mr. BENETT--Probably it is a trick adopted by some malicious and despicable individual to keep you in a state of irritation and to annoy you. Inspector Oakley said that the case had been laid before the Commissioners of Police, who advised them to come before the Magistrates of this office. Mr. BENETT—I can do nothing unless the writer of the letters is brought before me. Inspector Oakley—We have traced the writer, your Worship ; but, in consequence of the grief and entreaties of his parents, who are respectable, Mr. Howe hesitates to prosecute him, and we have not taken him .yet. Millar and Powell said that the writer was in the habit of writing bills for "lodgings to let," and they compared the handwriting in the letters to that in several windows, by • which they traced the writer, who, on being questioned, was alarmed, and confessed having written them. Mr. BENETT—Such a person deserves severe punish ment, and he ought to be brought before the magistrates. He must be a dangerous and malicious person. Such con duct is calculated to do great mischief. Some minds would treat such threats with contempt, but in others alarm and terror are excited. Inspector Oakley said that the Commissioners had fully investigated the case, and thought it one fit for the interfe rence of a magistrate, and it now remained for Mr. Howe to decide whether he would prosecute. Mr. BENETT—It certainly deserves prosecution and pu nishment. ...... ~..... Mr. Howe then quitted the ofd :ae to consider the subject. MARLBOROUGH-STREET. Yesterday Mr. Wingfield, the solicitor to the Paving Board of St. James's, summoned Mr. T. Sharpsnlith, of No. 46, Pall-mall, before Messrs. CONANT and CHAM BERS, for having constructed a brick ornamantal erection to his doorway and ground-floor story, so that a projection was created beyond the general line of frontage of the street. The question was brought before the bench under a local Act, and as considerable importance attached to its decision, inasmuch as a number of buildings already erected were constructed so as to be liable to similar proceedings, a number of surveyors were summoned to give evidence on the matter at issue, and models and drawings of the front of the house were brought forward for the further assistance of the magistrate's judgment. Mr. CONANT inquired why the information had not been laid under the Building Act, rather than a local Act ? Mr. Wingfield replied the District Surveyor had not taken the matter up, therefore it was necessary for the Paving Board to resort to the local Act, in order to acquire the power of proceeding. It was then proved that, beyond the line which was ad- mitted to be the general line of frontage, the house in ques tion had a brick erection carried out the entire length of the ground-floor front about nine inches, and also that a sort of arched portico to the door projected about 10 inches further. These erections, it was contended, were an in fringement of the 58th section of the local Act. Mr. Wingfield called several surveyors, who all gave it as their opinion that the portico and brick projection were in contravention of the Act. Mr. CHAMBERS considered the projections were not in fringements of the Act. Mr. CONANT was of opinion that an infringement of the Act had been proved. On the part of the defence, a surveyor stated his opi nion to be, that the projections were allowed by the Act in question. _ _ Mr. CHAMBERS remarked that the Building Act, among other impossibilities, required that two surveyors should agree in opinion on such matters, which was not at all likely, and also that two Magistrates should agree in. opinion, which appeared to him quite as unlikely. Mr. CONANT, in: looking over the i n f ormat i on, po i nted out certain informalities, which prevented him from giving any decision, though he thought it right to state, in case further proceedings were contemplated, that he was crf opi nion the prejections were ille ga l Mr. wep, one of the Board of Paving, said it was the determination of the Commissioners to have the questin clearly decided. Mr. CHAMBERS, after lookiN ilyey, the Local Act, said he could not fire MAgistrates we re empowere d to de wiyy }tie, at all. He should recommend the parties to look over their Act, and to see if the power wad nor, vested elsewhere. The matter here vgi,e,4l Q UEEN-S Q UARE. Ann Gibbons, a laundress, living in D'Oyley-street, Chc.,l r . sea, was placed at the bar before Mr. Buktam4, , claayge4 by General Bruce, of Sloane-street, AvAth, illegally, PAWni% a quantity of articles of Nmarwg appa,rel, which had been eutruated t o o , Am. tQ Wckali; Qa4lAire.ite, *avant to General Bruce, stated that, on the 14th instant, she, had given the prisoner the linen of the family as usual. Part of them had been returned ; the others were missing. Charles Bond, shopman to Mr. Kimber, of Knightsbridge , Mr. Perkins, of the King's-road, and Mr. Thomson, of Grosvenor-row, pawn-brokrs, proved that the prisoner had pledged the different articles at their shops. General Bruce said the value of the property was 503. The prisoner, on being called upon for her defence, denied having any intention of stealing the things. She in tended to replace them. Mr. BURRELL fined her 40s. for illegally pawning, and 50s. the value of the articles. In default of payment she eras committed for one month o the House of Correction. Mr. Thomas Hose anon, a gentleman of very fashionable appearance, residing at No. ill, Grosvenor-street, West Pimlico, was charged before Messrs. GREGORIE and BUR' BELL, by Major John Holt White, of No. 5, in the same street, with an assault. From the evidence it appeared that Mr. Hoseason had endeavoured to provoke the Major, the cause for which did not transpire ; and Major White stated that, on Thursday last, the defen dant came to his house and threatened to use his stick over his (complainant's) shoulders ; but was prevented by Mr. George Stevenson, a friend, who happened to be present. He had known the defendant about six months, and swore that he went in fear of his life. The Magistrates ordered Mr. Hoseason to find bail to answer the charge, which he did in the course of the day. A lad, named Wyatt, was charged by Edward Routledg 6 with having disturbed the congregation, during Divine Ser vice, in the chapel in Palace -street, Pimlico. It appeared from the evidence that the prisoner was an incorrigible young scamp, and completely hardened in de pravity. He came into the chapel on Sunday morning and immediately began making a disturbance. He wag turned out, when he threw a large stone against the inner door of the chapel, which had nearly burst it open, and very much alarmed the congregation. Mr. Routledge said he did not wish to press the charge against the prisoner, if he would promise not to offend again• Mr. BURRELL, after admonishing him as to his future conduct, ordered him to be given up to his parents. MAR YLEB ONE. John Lake and Francis Davis, two lads, the former aged fifteen, and the latter eleven, were on Monday night placed at the bar before the sitting magistrate, Mr. RAW LINSON, charged with stealing a valuable cow of the Alder ney breed, the property of Mr. John Salter, of Notting' Barns Farm, Kensington. The prosecutor stated, that on the 15th inst. he missed a cow from out of a field near his residence, and in cone' quenee of seeing an advertisement in the newspapers stating that a strayed cow was confined in the greenyard at Pad dington, he went there and immediately identified it as be longing to him. Peter Holt, keeper of the greenyard, said that on the previous Monday, about six o'clock in the evening, the pri soners came to him and stated that they had brought strayed cow by order of a policeman in Oxford-street, and hoped that he would reward them, as they were very hun gry and had no money. He gave them a shilling for their trouble, after which the prisoner Lake abused him in $ dreadful manner, and went away saying, " We could have got more than that if we had taken it to Kensington." Wit' news than advertised the cow, to discover the owner. John Brady, a drover, in the employ of Mr. Bartram, $ cattle salesman in Smithfield Market, stated that o n th , morning of the day mentioned by the last witness, the p . n. , Goners brought the cow in question to him, desiring hull " to let it go at any price," and saying that it belonged to $ Mr. Westbrook. He was bid 61. for it, but refused the money, as he considered her to be worth double the a: - .nount , she being in calf. In the afternoon they fetched ;per awaY again, and witness felt satisfied, that having no money with which to feed themselves or the cow, they took her to the Greenyard, thinking they should be handsorAely rewarded for their pains. Witness thought it was all correct when they brought the cow to him, as he sold two or three lately for the prisoner Lake in the name of Westbrook. , Police constables H ancoc k an d Blundell, of the T sion, said they apprehended the prisoners that afternoon in the Edgeware-road, and on taking them to the station, house, Davis said that about four o'clock on the morning 01 Thursday week last, Lake called him up, and stated that he had got some houses, land, and cows left him, and wished him (Davis) to accompany him to a field in which the cows . were in, and help him to drive one of them to Smithfield' market to sell it. He accordingly went with him to tha prosecutor's field, and took away the cow then in tile Greenyard. He further stated that he and Lake, a short time before, stole another cow from out of the same field, and sold it for 101. Prosecutor here said that he had forgotten to mentkal the fact of his being robbed about six weeks ago of a r.:Oif , all traces of which he had been unable to discover ; . The prisoner Lake said nothing in defence. D a:f i i , w ho sobbed bitterly during the examination, said that, what 10 had told the policemen was the truth. The Magistrate, after saying that he thought there were other persons concerned in the robbery as yell as the Pri" soners, ordered them to be remanded. HEBER'S LIBRARY. Monday's sale of Mr. Heber's books at Wheatley's.fift h part, (seventh day) was characterised by the following lota and prices :- 1633. " Fisher, Bishop of Rochester's Sermon On' cernyne certayne heretickes, abjured for holdynge the here: sies of Martyn Luther. T. Berthelet." n. d. " &pool; cion of the VII Psalmes, wants title. R. Pynson, 1510. Sold for 4/. 2s. Thorpe. 1654. " Payne Fisher's Marston Moor, 1650.? 4. Ire' nodia Gratulatoria 0. Cromwello, with two portraits of 0 ' Cromwell, 1652." II 1 vol.-11, Thorpe. 1697. " Fulke's (W.) New Testament, and Defence o f the Translations of the Scriptures into English." ImPe r° fect copy. Father Tempest's, and notes in hi* i nandwriting: —l7s. 1777. " Fryth's (J.) Boke answerynge *into M. Morel Letter against Fryth's Treatyse concrtnynge the Sadly mente of the bndy and bloude of r jhrist. R. Jugg e ' 1533." " Ant. Gilby's Answ er to fne Devillish DetectiO, of Stephane G ar di ner , 1547." W . Tyndale's Practyse 01 Prdaies. A. Scoloker." n. d. s n 1 vol.-21.85. Thorpe a 1918. " D. Gordon's Phararco-Pinax, or a Table an d Tare of the Pryces of all usur ;t1 Medicaments, simple o a composed, contayned in Tt). Gordon's Apothecarie at l Chymicall Shop, with Robert Farquhar's high Lou ing, in New Aberden e . Imprinted by Edward Raba! , Aberdene, 1625. X note says that a copy of this work',,„ which occupies vc:ry few leaves, " at the Gordonstoun Sow brought Si. 7s. bd." It now feached four shillings! " 1920. " Simon Grah ame ' s A na t om i c o f H umour s is ~ I Interspersed with Poems. Rare. A little volume ntea at Edinburgh, 1609. With licence-31.35. 1937. " John Gwynneth's Demonstration, a Jobs Frithe's Lacke of Witte and Learnynge in 1;l s Under standynge of Holie Scripture. T. Powell, 1;57"_11.81• 1938. " Gwynnethe's (J.) Declaration of an Hereti4o and Detection of John Frithe. J. Berenelet, 1554"-1 1949. " Hanway's (Jonas) Journey from Portsmouth Kingston-upon-Thames. 1756.' (In this volume there a note in Garrick's handwriting-, criticising or rather eiP °fr .- in the bathos of th e 41 st l etter, p. 127, and in reply t , ` o 13 , Hanway's inqui r y as to wile her " L a d ys hi p ," to w h onl letter is addressed 4 should do with " such rA rhapsody' Garrick proffers A very unceremonious recommendation .) The book, or rather the MS.. sold for 19s. to J. Bohn. BIRTHS. On the 27th i ns t., in Berkeley-square, the Ludy Jane Wal 2 - , of a daiaghter. On the 25th inst., at Barton Seagrave, Kettering, the 11°° ' Mrs. Stopford, of a daughter. On the 20th inst., at The Oaks, Surrey, the lady of Sit Charl e° Edward Grey, of a son. On the 24th inst., at Penton-place, Kennington, Mrs. Meates, of a daughter. On the 25th inst., at the house of her mother, Bedford-street, Bedford-square, the lady of the Rev. Gre side, of Coleshill, Warwickshire, of a daughter. MARRIED. of On the 22d inst., a t B a l cas ki e, Fifeshire, Captain Scriaervi t s the Scotch Greys, t o A nna , M ar i a, youngest daughter of the " Major-General Sir Henry . Torrens, K.C.B. On the 27th inst., a t St. Ann's, Limehouse, 'Frederick 0. t 4 chardson, Esq., of Streatham, to Harriet, et :lest daughter of late Peter F. Richardson, Esq., of Limehou4e. DIED. On the 26th inst., at Ramsgate, Mr,. Carleton, widow of titt late General Carleton, aged 83. On the 94th inst., at East DulwirA, in her 11th year, Jane' tb eldest daughter of obert Hichera t Esq. 101 On the 21st inst., at K enrae l P ark, Denbighshire, t h o Dinorben. On the 17th inst * , at Cheterholm, the Rev. Anthony 1 44 aged 57. 00 01 On the 53t inst ., at Stockwell-green, Surrey, Lieat.• ,-,1 Hugh Sutherland, formerly Captain of his Majesty's 73d Rieg' l : - tOnl afterwards in the service of Dowlut Row Scindiah, agi .d l,7 ; l iff On the 25th inst., at Bath-terrace, Newington, Sarah., th e of th er. William Thoernan. On 17th inist., at South Ocke a do n , Essex, Edward V et' Esq., aged, 4 1 0 ` 1 " 25th inst., in Barnsbury-street, Islington, the j eer Tkas. Greenwod, A.M., of Tri n ity C o ll ege , C am b r i , dge, 'root' of St. Giles's, Cripplegate, and Chaplain to the Wo , eslupflo pany of Coopers, aged 41. nog t On the 224 inst., Mr. Thomas Farley, of Thory.t on -heath , Croydon, in his 8.3 d year. t he ...n the 24th hut. at East Dulwich, in her nth year, J ae ' ghlesf daughter of Robert Hichens, Esq. -gdost j ' At Lii'Vpool, aged 40, on his return f rom S wan Ri ver , o rs, second son of the late Michael Samson, 'E sq . o f Spit&Oq Lendon.is London • Printed and Ponshi j d by MURDO YOU r ' • at The Sun Office,. No. 112, Strand. aiii________„:l3:;lol,enitdhli E T 0 } 11 OFFIC wit h Powers m end 4th and 5t c hase of immei The game Priueipal offie ( Country Agen AV o s d ei' 6 E B d ' . . LAND, are in every usual an( eurn ag;,e.fi To be be sol square. r e ftPositio 2 Soap, z and 625.. ss. 6d. and 6s. At Davies's ° PPosite New ousehold Fur ivir At hi ODE remora w,nlred vrardro tin fl oo leis and beddi: d r ( :IrPeta, di , a wing -ro om Plated arti 1 Catalo "' U„ the Premis te :l4 :_ „4r°ll)s. teti sted7 : l-'' 4 ll: : t e ll: gi3 g a . a-ta i eh n a l° l nnse d y nlin ii :ns s l p: :: s ° ,. ac " i . kild tin baths £ 44atidard lam coote .oironmon lutbie c rges, it atalogues at Air. Bul ---- Leasehoh Pounds ft:itolt:solllaryeti EASE , lane, 8, Lot 1. A c Ilttre, Sower °c ell at* Ro l _ ion ; th itt t a o t t 2 . A el ' , ....... for 4 6 yei Lot 3 . Tw lel cress, for 31 ye; lel . 4 . Fox ldi(); g4 .ye; Lot 5 Till of v ine • Reid fer-aryte,t Ma rt part ` gi rt ; and of CTIEL SE egant Furnit