The Sun. — London, England, 1848-03-08 00:00:00

Vbirb 12tittion . s (f y UFl•I (1 E, Seven 0' Clock. THE RIOTS IN LONDON. The shops in the Strand, Fleet-street, Chancery lane, Fetter-lane, and Holborn-hill, have been opened, awl business has been resumed as usual. The mob his re tired to its lair; the disturbances are at an end. IMPERIA L PA RLIAM ENT. (THIS DAY.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the Chair to day at Twelve o'clock. _ _ MANCHESTER WATERWORKS. Mr. BROTHERTON, in the absence of Mr. Muntz, moved, that it be an instruction to the Com mittee on the Manchester Corporation Waterworks Bill, to entertain the petition of the owners of pro perty, &c., in Hyde, presented against this Bill, not withstanding the same was not presented within seven clear days from the day on which the Bill was read a second time.—Agreed to. Mr. JOHN O'BRIEN presented petitions from the City of Limerick for the abolition of Ministers money:; in favour of the Jewish Disabilities Bill ; and against the contemplated changes in the navigation laws. The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY pre seated petitions from Stirling in favour of the Jewish Disabilities Bill; and from Fleetwood against the Charitable Trusts Bill, and in favour of the Catholic Relief Bill. Mr. FREWEN presented:a petition from Islington against any further concession to the Roman Oatholics. CARLISLE ELECTION. On the motion of an Hori. MEMBER, the evidence taken before the Carlisle Committee was ordered to be printed. Mr. WADDINGTON presented a petition from a place in Somersetshire, praying the House to take measures for the suppression of seduction. On the motion of Mr. SPOONER, the River Dun (extension to Sheffield) Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. Mr. FOX presented a petition from Oldham, pray ing for the reduction of the duties on tea. ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIEF BILL. Arlr. C. ANSTEY moved that the House should resolve itself into Committee on the Roman Ca tholic Relief Bill. Mr. H. DRUMNIOND wished to know when the Hon. Member for Youghal intended to proceed with the adjourned debate on the Treaty of Adrianople. Mr. C. ANSTEY said, that if the orders of the day before it were disposed of in the course of the morning, he was prepared to bring the debate to an end that day, 'out as that did not appear likely, he thought the best course would be to adjourn the con sideration of the subject de die in diem, and take the chance of bringing it on some day when the other orders were disposed of. The House then resolved itself into a Committee on the Roman Catholic Relief Bill; Mr. Bernal in the chair. On the motion for postponing the preamble being put Sir R. INGLIS said he was most desirous of knowing what course the Government intended to pursue with respect to the Bill. Sir G. GREY said, that as the House was in Committee on the Bill, he should be prepared to state on the part of the Government, as the Bill went on, what course they would pursue with respect to it. He saw no obj€ ctien to the first part of the Bill, and did not intend to oppose that part of it. Mr. SLANEY could not support the Bill in ifs present shape. He had voted for the second reading of the Bill against the wish of his constituents, but did so in order that the objectionable part of it might be removed in Committee. If they were not he must oppose the Bill altogether. He was against monastic orders having more privileges than they had at present, and must object to everything that was calculated to give them an introduction into this country. Ever since he had the honour of a seat in that House, he had always voted for the removal of real grievances from all classes of her Majesty's subjects ; and he trusted he should not be considered a bigot, if he stated that he was not prepared to go the length of the present Bill If the objectionable part of it were not removed in Committee, he should object to the Bill altogether in a future wage. Mr. GOULBURN was anxious to know upon what part of the Bill the present discussion had teken place ? Mr. BERNAL slid that the discussion had arisen upon the question of postponing the preamble. On the first clause being put, Sir R. INGLIS proposed the omission from the clause of the words, " shall be repealed." After some desultory discussion in which Sir R. H. Inglis, Sir G. Grey, - Lord Mahon, Mr. Law, Mr. Henley, Mr. Smith O'Brien, Mr. Chisholm Anstey, Mr. Qroulburn, Mr. Drummond, the Attorney• General, and Mr. Shiel took part, Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the Committee divided when there appeared— For the clause Against it Majority in favour of it The amendment was consequently lost. Mr. HENLEY moved as an amendment that the words "in so far as the same relates to or concern Roman Catholics" should be left out, so that no distinction should be drawn between Roman Catho lics and any other class of religionists. Mr. ANSTEY had no objection to omit the words where they appeared in any other part of the Bill, but he could not consent to their being struck out of the clause. Mr. GREENE remarked that if the words were struck out, the clause would be rendered unintel ligible. Sir G. GREY agreed with the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire that the words to which he had referred ought to be left out of the Bill. The Act proposed to be repealed by the clause related to Protestants as well as Roman Catholics, and it ought, therefore, to he repealed unconditionally if it were repealed at all. 'Air. BERNAL (the Chairman) gave it as his opinion that the amendment was informal. Mr. HENLEY, under the circumstances, would not press his amendment. Mr. LAW did not think it right that Honourable :Members should be precluded to move the omission of words in a clause, but he felt with the Right lion. the Home Secretary that the provisions of the Art proposed to be repealed applied to all dames - of religionists, and ought to be struck out of the statute-book, without any reservation. He could see no reason why the Roman Catholic should be placed in a more advantageous situation than Protestants, and the amendment proposed by the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire was rot necessarily repugnant 'co the title of this Bill. He hoped the Committee would be allowed to give their opinion upon it. He should therefore re-move the amend. ment which had been withdrawn by the Honourable Member for Oxfordshire.—(Hear, hear.) _ . Mr. HILDYARD said the omission of the words could be m oved on bringing up the report without violating the rules of the House; and as the Hon. Member whin had possession of the Bill had stated that he woOd consent to the amendment then, it would be much better to defer the amendment till the report ‘VitS brought up. Mr. LAW thanked his Hon. and Learned Friend for this advice, and would readily adopt it. The amrndmont was accordingly withdrawn. Mr. HENLEY the* moved the omission of a num ber of words begi k lni ng at the 17th line with the words "so much," and ending with the v,ord, "mainprise." The ATTORNEY—GENERAL stated the opi nions which he had form ed with respect to the powers of some of the Acts propo sad to be repealed. He thought that in consequence of t be ambiguity of the words, in the 9th and 10th Victoria, c. 27, repealing tho penalties of Elizabeth, it iiiight be open to a question. whether the violation of t lie statute was n o t st ill an offence at common law. Mr. LAW seconded the motion of the Honourable Member for Oxford, for t be omission of the words. He differed with the Learned Attorney-General as to the effect of the words .0 f the 9th and 10th Vic. These words had been ii ttroduced upon the most serious consideration by L and Lyndhurst, and their object was to keep alive, a c it were, the offence, by removing the penalty whit had previously attached to it, and making the violas ion of the Act an offence at common law, indictable u rider the form of a viola tion of the statute. 1 After a few words from / dr. GOULEURN and 111 f.. NB WDEGATE, Mr. HII,ISYARD wished to know from the At torney-General what offence m`; common law the vio lation of the statute of the Ist of Elizabeth would be, the 9th arid 10th Vic. being eon sidered as repealing the penalties contain. ,d in the oliAinal statute. Thp ATTORNEI7-CiENER.AI, said that a denial of the temporal supremacy of the Crown was treason at common law. Mr. ],.ASV wished to :mow from the Attorney- General whether it was his opinion that a denial in the terms of the Ist of Elizabeth of "the spiritual and ec clesiastical supre:nacy of the (;rown" would or would Sot be an offence at common ls'.w? The ATTORNEY. (114',NER . AL said that in answer to the question of the Hon. and Learned Member he would state that an Act which should assert the ecclesiastical and spiritual rmpre rnacy of any other party in opposition to the Crown, which was de clared by statute " pre-en anent in this realm" *would be an offence at corn taosi law. After a few words from Sir R. Inglis, Mr. Goul burn, Mr. Henley, and Mr. C. Anstey. Mr. SHEIL said the question in this case was whether they would keep an inoperative statute upon the book. Ile pains and penalties of the statute of Elizabeth had been abrogated, its sting had been withdrawn. What was'!,then the use of keeping it upon the statute-book ? The statute it self contained a direct falsehood, and why was not this false and offensive statute to be repealed ? (Hear, hear.) That statute states that the Pope had no authority in this country ; the Pope had a spiritual authority—he bad the appointment of bishops in this country. Mr. Justice Coleridge had said " that the Pope was the rightful head of the Christian world—(Cries of " No, no")—at least,", before the Reformation.—(Laughter.) He had collected this to be the opinion of that Learned Judge from remarks he had made in a jadgment recently de livered by him. The words he had put into his mouth were not the precise words that his Lordship had used.—(Hear, hear, and laughter ) If the Pope, then, was the head of the Christian world before the Reformation, he still exercised de facto a spiritual authority in this country. The bishops of the Roman Catholic Church had been recognised by various Acts of this country ; they had been appointed upon commissions of trust; they had been given precedence to by various Acts.—(Cries of "No, no.") He insisted that they had been so appointed ; the title of Roman Catholic archbishops and bishops had been recognised. [An,Hon. Member, 'Not Roman Catholic:] The titles of archbishops and bishops had been introduced into various Acts. Those technical expressions intimated the spiritual authority of the Pope. The statute stated what was not true ; it states that the Pop had no authority,; he (Mr. Sheil) maintained that he had, and that the statute spoke a direct falshood.—(Hear.) Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that the fact of the recognition of the Roman Catholic Bishops could not lbe denied. The 9 and 10 Viet., which had been alluded to, was brought in by the Government of which he had the honour of being a member. That measure had been introduced by the then Government, upon the recommendation of the Criminal Law Commissioners, jto whom had been re ferred the whole question of obsolete statutes affecting the religious opinions of the people of this country. 1 t was the intention of her Majesty's Government upon the fullest consideration to propose by that Bill the entire repeal of the Ist of Elizabeth, the statute now under discussion. Lord Lyndhurst, who was at that time the High Steward of the University of Cam bridge, apprehended no danger from the measure, and he introduced that Bill into the House of Lord!, The Hon. Member for Dungarvan (Mr. Sheil) had said that the sting had been withdrawn from this statute ; then in such case the common law would not be in the least degree affected. If, however, the sting be not withdrawn, then he, for one, certainly thought that, in good faith and honour, he was bound to see that the sting was withdrawn.—(Hear, hear.) If the common law he inoperative to punish a party in this country for denying the supremacy of her Majesty, he would be quite content that the common law should not create that an offence which affected the liberty of conscience of more than one-third of her Majesty's loyal subjects. He saw no danger in leaving the common law inoperative in such matters, for any attempt to enforce that law would be per fectly inconsistent with the peace and liberty of the people of this country.—(llear.) With respect to an opinion of the Learned Attorney General, that the denial of the supremacy of the Crown amounted in common law to treason, he must say that he felt considerably surprised by the announcement of such an opiniom—(Hear, hear.) He had a perfect horror of such an opinion, because if every denial of the su premacy of the Crown could be construed into treason, then would a toast which was very fre quently given, via., " The sovereignty of the people," place the persons performing that toast in danger of :in indictment for high treason.— (Laughter.) He had no hesitation whatever in giving his most cordial support to the repeal of the clause recited in the Bill as it now stood.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. NEWDEGATE supported the amendment. Mr. H. DRUMMOND recollected the time when a Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland was ejected from his office for proposing the sovereignty of the people. The motto of the Queen was Dieu et mon droit, and he could not allow the Roman Catholics to be the only legal ised traitors in the country.—(Hear, and laughter.) After some observations from Mr. Spooner. the Earl of Arundel and Surrey, Sir R. Inglis, Mr. Sheil, and Mr. Gardner, The Committee divided, when there appeared— For the amendment ll9 Against it Majority against the amendment -32 The amendment was consequently lost. On our admission to the gallery, we found The ATTORNEY-GENERAL on his legs, mov- ing the omission of certain words in the clause, for the purpose of acknowledging the authority of the Pope on certain matters. Mr. C. ANSTEY supported the omission of the words. Mr. NE WDEGATE opposed the omission:of the words. Colonel SIBTHORP also opposed the motion. After some observations from the ATTORNEY GENERAL, Mr. LAW, in supporting the amendment of the Hon. Member for the county of Warwick, warned the Committee of the danger they were running in legal ising the introduction of bulls into this country, which might ultimately lead to the subversion of the honour of the country. In a few days they would, no doubt, be called upon to consider a Bill to establish diplomatic relations with the Court of Rome, and what the end of this mischievous system of legislation would be he was really at a loss to say. There was every prospect, however, of our being mixed up with the disputes of half-revolutionized states of Europe, and it therefore behoved every Member of the Committee, who valued the peace of his country or the safety of his Sovereign, to take care not hastily to pass these pernicious measures. After a few words from the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, who suggested that they should only repeal so much of the Act of Elizabeth as re lated to the bulls mentioned in the preamble, Lord MAHON said the suggestion of the Right Hon. Gentleman would certaiLlyiremove his objectio❑ to the clause. Mr. LAW said it was much too grave a subject to be dealt with in so inartificially a manner as sug gested by the Right Hon. Baronet ; and, in order to avoid all future doubt upon the question, they ought to recite and re-enact so much of the Act of Elizabeth as the House wished to continue on the statute-book. Mr. C. ANSTEY had no objection to adopt the proposal of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Recorder, but the Acts of Elizabeth were so compli cated that it would be difficult in th e present deto re-enact them.—(Hear, and laughter.) Mr. STEWART said there were bulls both of a dangerous or treasonable and of an innocent charac ter; and if he understood the Right Hon. the Attor ney.General, he proposed by his amendment to legalise the introduction into this country of bulls of the latter description. Now, would not it be safer to leave this clause as it stood, and legalize the introduction of innocent bulls by a separate and distinct enactment ? After a few words from the Earl of MARCH, Mr. SHEIL said, in the course of this discussion the Hon. Baronet the Member for the University of Oxford had attributed falsehood to him in connexion with a statement which he (Mr. Sheil) had repre sented Mr. Justice Coleridge to have made relating to the Pope. Had such an imputation come from any other Hon. Gentleman he should have felt himself called upon to ask for an explanation.—(Oh, oh.) But, in order to justify the Hon. Baronet, he had been out and copied the exact words Mr. Justice Coleridge used, which were these :—" If the Pope had been con tent with the power of Patriarch, he might have re tained his appellant jurisdiction, which rightly be longed to him as the universal head of the whole Christian church." Sir R. H. INGLIS doubted whether the Right Hon. Gentleman had acted wisely in reviving this discussion, but notwithstanding the insinuation of the Right Hon. Baronet, he trusted he knew well enough how to behave himself as a gentleman, and a Christian one too.—(Hear, hear.) He doubted much whether even the words the Right Hon. Gentleman had just used would justify the statement be had made, but he thought, as it might be asked the Right Hon. _Gentleman whether it was customary to take the opinions lln o f a Learne d J u d ge f rom a newspaper repor t or from the a ccre di te d reports o f Ad o l p h us an dElli s ?— (Hear, hear.) e th c a o t ul b d e, nevnever however, ia t e a n s s d u e r d e tthe imputeßi h t Hon. Gentlemen falsehood to him, but what he did mean to convey to the Committee was, that the Right Hon. Gentleman had drawn a conclusion from a statement which was not consistent with the fact.--(Hear, hear.) After a few words from Mr. SHEIL, Sir J. GRAHAM wished to know exactly how they good with regard to the clause ? If the proviso proposed by Government was insisted upon, he should fad. it to be his duty t o vote a g ainst the clause, GovtrnmentTile Cil IpsirColptloLseldelo: of the EXCHEQUER sa i d 11 dd the proviso now. Mr. LAW sad, then bt - i would move as an amend nent that the Chairman do report progress, and as k leave to sit again. The Committee then di‘rided, when therel7s appeared, Noes.. ........... 124 Ayes s —5l Majority against reporting progres • The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then moved the insertion of several words, limiting the prohibition pertaining to the introduction of bulls, into this country. Colonel SIBTIIORP then moved as an amend funent that Mr. Bernal do now Leave the chair. Mr. MILES seconded the amendment. After a few words from the Attorney-General, Mr. M. J. O'Connell, Mr. Law, and the Eurl of Arundel and Surrey, Coloßel SIBTHORP said, that when he found the House'disposed to adopt every trick,event reason able one—(Laughter)--to carry them through the Rouse, he should always feel it his duty to stand up for the rights, the liberties, and the throne of his country. He was responsible for his conduct not only in the House but out of it. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER suggested that the most proper course, considering the lateness of the hour, would be for the Chairman to report progress. Mr. C. ANSTEY said that after the unfair man ner in which it had been endeavoured to get rid of the Bill, he should feel it his duty to take the sense of the House upon the motion. Sir G. GREY said that he did not see what good could result from divi ling on the motion. Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL said that, as the Learned Recorder, who was a judge of the land, had stated that he could not understand the clause, perhaps it would be better to allow him three weeks to under stand it, an I by that time, with the assistance of the Gallant Colonel (Sibthorp), he would no doubt be prepared with a clause on the subject.—(Hear.) Colonel SIBTHORP said that he would have no objection to withdraw his amendment, if the pro posal of the Chancellor of the Exchequer were ac ceded to. Mr. HUDSON thought the better course would be to allow a little time for fully understanding the proposition before the House. Mr. C. AN STEY said that he should certainly persist in pressing the House to a division. The result of the division would, he had no doubt, prove a warning to Hon. Members not to propose a similar motion in the future discussion of the Bill. Mr. WOOD said that at an early stage of the dis cussion on this Bill it was stated that the statutes sought to be repealed were mere waste paper. He could not now comprehend the reason for wishing for further time, in order to be able to digest the nature of a proposed clause for the repeal of these very Acts. The Hon. Member had completely turned round, and seemed now to imagine that the throne and the reli gion of the country were in perfect danger from the repeal of those inoperative clauses. For himself, he had so deep rooted an opinion as to the truth of the religion that he professed, that he feared but little how many bulls were brought into this country. He de precated strongly the attitude taken by those Hon. Members who styled themselves the defenders of Protestantism, representing as they did their religion in the light of a dscrepid old female, unable to support herself, but by the retention of these obsolete statutes upon the book.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. STAFFORD was in favour of the postpone ment of the further considerationjof the measure, that they might not be forced to a premature decision on a subject of such great importance. After a few words from Mr. Wood in explanation, and from Mr. Law, strangers were again ordered to withdraw, bit upon the request of Sir George Grey and Mr. Colvile, Mr. C. Anstey declined to press the motion to a division. The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again. The House resumed. GAME CERTIFICATES BILL. Mr. COLVILE moveds the second reading of this Bill. Mr. G. BERKELY thought that this Bill would be the means of placing fire arms in the hands of a larger number of persons than were at present en titled to carry them, and gave notice of several amendments which he should propose in Committee. Colonel SIBTHORP supported the second reading, reserving to himself the right of opposing nearly every clause in the Bill while in Committee As he had thus promised his support to the second reading of the Bill, he hoped the Hon. Member (Mr. Colvile) who had charge of it would assist him in opposing the " monster motion," he would call it, of the Hon. Member for Manchester (Mr. Bright), on the subject of the game-laws, that Hon. Member not knowing, as he be lieved, "a pointer from a pig." —(Laughter.) The Bill was then read a second time. EXEMPTIONS OF SMALL TENEMENTS. This Bill was read a second timd. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned. INDIA - HOUSE.-(THIS DAY.) THE RAJA OF SATTARA. A special general meeting of proprietors was held this day, at their house in Leadenhall-street, convened upon the requisition of nine proprietors, for the purpose of taking into consideration a series of resolutions, the general effect of which was that " the deposition of the late Raja of Battara was unjust, impolitic, and contrary to law." After much and prolonged discussion, the CHAIRMAN moved the adjournment, which was agreed to without a division, and the Court broke up at a late hour. ELECTION COMMITTEES. (THIS DAY.) BEWDLEY. The Bewdley Election Committee reassembled at the usual time this morning, Mr. Wrightson in the chair. The evidence in favour of the case for the petitioners was resumed. Sarah Binger, a labourer's wife, residing in the neigh bourhood of Bewdley, proved that Mr. Harris, one of the agents for the Tory party of Bewdley, to whom her husband was indebted a few pounds, threatened to 'end him to Worcester gaol it' he did not vote for Mr. Ire land. It was to herself that Mr. Harris made this threat, but he stated, at the same time, that if her hus• band would vote for Mr. Ireland he was authorised to present her with l N. when the election was over. A number of voters were then called to prove that an extensive system of treating prevailed at the last elec tion. They were all of them plentifully supplied with drink and edibles, both during and after the election, free of expense, but it was only upon the condition that they voted for Mr. Ireland. The Committee adjourned at four o'clock till eleven to-morrow. LINCOLN. The Select Committee appointed to try the merits of the petition presented against the return of Mr. Charles Seeley, for the city of Lincoln, met for the first time at twelve o'clock this day. Mr. Morgan John O'Connell in the chair. Mr. Sergeant Wrangham and Mr. Wordsworth ap peared for the petitioners, and Mr. Sergeant Kinglake, with whom was Mr. Edwin James, for the sitting Member. Mr. Sergeant WRANOHAM opened the case for the petitioners. The Hon. Gentleman against whose return the petition had been presented was a miller and baker, in Lincolnshire, and was a candidate for the city in the year ls4l, but he was defeated then by Mr. Collett. After his defeat the friends of the Hon. Mem ber started a club, which they christened " The Pig and Whistle," and it would seem that the object of its foundation was to secure Mr. Seeley's return at the next election. About twelve months before the last election the club began to enroll members with great spirit, and Mr. Seeley made a very liberal donation to its funds. The club flourished after this most astonishingly, and just before the election the interests of Mr. Seeley were committed to the custody of the managers of the Pig and Whistle, and they at once established Free- and- easys at every public-house where landlords would promise to vote for Mr. Seeley. The expenses were defrayed by Mr. Seeley and his friends ; but, in the case of the land lord of the Plough, who had supported the opposite party with his vote, and whose bill for the free-and easy amounted to between 141. and 151., payment was refused, and the bill was afterwards recovered in the County Court, from one of Mr. Seeley's friends, who gave the neceasary:orders for the establishment of the Plough free-and-easy. John Shaw, a freeman, proved that he voted for Mr. Seeley, and afterwards received from a Mr. Seely 305., which he presumed was for voting. Before the election he received pecuniary assistance from Mr. Seeley's book keeper, and was treated on several occasions. Thomas Martin, a joiner, and freeman of Lincoln, proved that he received a sovereign from one of Mr. Seeley's friends; but it did not appear that that was for his vote Joseph Talkes, another freeman, proved that Alderman Graham, of Lincoln, induced him to vote for Mr. Seeley, and afterwards took him and another voter to the Green Dragon, where they were treated and, feasted most libe rally, free of expense. On the Saturday following the election he went to Mr. Seeley's counting-house, and received 18s. There were other voters there being paid, and the money was taken from a bag. There were many dishes with silver lying on the table. A man named Lawton, who had also voted for Mr. Seeley, accompa nied him to the counting-house, and received 18s. too. Upon entering the counting-house nothing was said to them. While waiting outside his name was called out, and when he entered there were several people in the room, and upon being paid they were directed to retire immediately. The same amount was paid by Colonel Sibthorp's party, and he had received money at every election when he voted. . _ Similar evidence was given by other freemen who had been treated, and who had received money on the Sa turday after the election. The Committee adjourned, at four o'clock, till eleven o'clock to morrow. TtlE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVEN I NG, MARC ti 8, 1846. Hill carried on a joint canvass, and threw open a number The schedule annexed to the decree gives the following of public-houses. These proceedings were conducted as the number of representatives to be chosen in each by Sir Dudley Hill in his individual capacity ; but the department, there being one representative for every Committee would find that on the eve of the nomination- 40,000 inhabitants, viz. the department de l'Ain 9, day Sir Dudley Hill resigned, and the gentleman who Aisne 14, Allier 8, Alpes (Busses) 4, Alpes (llautes) 3, had acted with him in bribing and treating the el, ctors, Ardiche 9, Ardennes 8, Ariiee 7, Aube 7, Aude 7, A vey became the inanaging committee for Mr.Atwood,andafter ron 10, Bouches-du-Rhone 10, Calvados 12, Cantal 7, the election they paid all the expenses which had been Charente 9, Charentelnf‘rieure 12, Cher 7, Corzine 8, incurred on behalf of Mr. Attwood in the course of the Corsica 6, Cote-d'Or 10, Cotes-du-Nord 16, Crease 7, election. There was, however, another feature in the j Dordogne 13, Doubs 7, Dreme 8, Eure 14, Eure-et- hoir case, which was more immediately connected with the 7, leinistire 15, Gard 10, Garonne (Haute) Indre 7, sitting Member. Mr. Attwood, the committee would Isere 15, Indre et-Loire 8. Jura 8, Landes 7, Loir- et discover, had been in the habit of purchasing large num- Cher 6, Loire 14, Loire (Haute) 8, Loire-Inferieure 13, hers of houses in Harwich, and letting them to electors Leiret 9, Lot 7, Lot et-Garonne 9, I, ze-e 4, Main-et at low rents, upon the condition that he should always Loire 13, Manche 15, Marne 9, Marne (Haute) 7, May have the control of their votes, while in numerous other enne 9, Meurth, 14, Meuse 8. Morbihan 12, Moselle 11, instances it would be shown that Mr. Attwood had from N , evre 8, Nord 28, Oise 10, Orne 14, Pas-de-Calaie 17, time to time advanced money on loan to electors at a Puy-de-Dome 15, Pyre, goes (Basses) 14, Pyr e goes low rate el interest upon the simple proviso that the ellautes) 6, Pyrenees Orientales 6, Rhin (Bas) 15 Rhin borrowers should at every election place their votes at (Haut) 12, Rhone 14, Saone (Haute) 9, Saone-et his di.poeal. But he should be able to prove beyond Loire 14, Sarthe 12, Seine 34, Seine• In'tlrieure 19, all question that a number of voters wore bribed with Seine-et Marne 9, :eitie-et-Oise 12, Seeri's (Deux) 8, presents of sums varying from 201. to 251. to support Mr. Somme 14. Tern 9 Tarn-et-Garone 6, Var 9. Van Attwood, and he wait sure, after they had heard the cluse 6, Veml3 9, Vienne 9, Vienne (Haute) 8. Vosges evidence proving these facts, the Committee would have 7. Yonne 9-in ail 885 ;- Algeria and Colonies, 15.- no hesitation in unseating that gentleman. Total, 900. Mr. ANDREWS objected to the petition on the ground that the petitioner was not an elector of Harwich. The point was argued at great length both by Mr. Andrews and Mr. Alexander; but the Committee, with out hearing counsel in reply, overruled the objection, on the ground that any party who c l a i m ed a right to vote, which was so in this case, had the power of peti tioning. John Baker was: then called. He stated that he was a voter of Harwich, and gave a description of the secret meeting that was held in Harwich before the elec tion, in support of Mr. Attwood's interest. He refused to promise his vote for Mr. Attwood, because it had come to his knowledge that Mr. Attwood's private secretaries had supplied a Mr. Mesham with means to bribe voters. After the election of 1841, he told Mr. Attwood that he never would have been returned had he not bought the borough, whereupon Mr. Attwood told him that he supplied his agents with 10,0001. previous to the election, but they had since only accounted to him for 6,0001. Mr. Attwood subsequently promised, that if e he would vote for himself and Sir Dudley Hill he would make some expenses which wit ness had incurred in oonnexion with a railway " all right," but witness had no faith in these promises and refused to pledge himself any way. The Committee adjourned at four o'clock till eleven o'clock to morrow morning. THE LIVERPOOL WILL FOR GERY CASE. TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN. Silt,— Observing in your widely circulated paper of the 23d instant, whilst in London, a paragraph headed " The Liverpool Will Forgery Case," I beg leave on the part of the friends and relatives of the late Peregrine Bowen, Lieutenant in the Royal Navy, and also as a decided and firm advocate in the cause of justice and truth, to be allowed the privilege of publishing a few facts with reference to the above case in your valuable paper, in opposition to the untrue statements which are circulated in the public prints. First—The executor did not, as is asserted, prove the first will (made by the testator, the late William Mus grave Bowen, previous to his having England) until after the second will was received from China by Lieutenant P. Bowen, through Miss Bowen, of Pope• hill, Pembrokeshire, the latter person receiving it tint, by mistake, and then transmitting it to the late Lieute nant Peregrine Bowen, to his own residence in Liver pool. This fact is proved in the most undoubted manner by the circumstance of the solicitor of Haverford west, who received the last will from the surrogate of that town, exhibiting it to the executor of the first will, Secondly—l deny most positively and in Coto this statement, that " the forgery of the second will was substantiated," on these grounds, viz , that there is not a particle of evidence to prove it being a forgery, and that tile evidence of several persons, including that of the testator's I.gal adviser, which affirms the hand writing of the second and last will to be that of the tes tator; also the evidence of the witnesses, who saw the testator execute the said last will on the 15th March, 1846, in China, to4ether with the fact of the said will being received six months afterwards by the pre sent tenant of Pope-hill, near Haverfordwest, Pem brokeshire. These I look upon as most convincing and undeniable proofs of the genuine nature of the last will, and also of the innocexive of the late Lieutenant. P. Bowen of the charge which has been so unjustly and cruelly preferred against him, thereby causing his ruin, and bringing affliction and misery upon his unfortunate and bereaved family. With urgent and earnest hope that you will give this letter a corner in your valuable paper, for the satisfac tion of the late Lieutenant Peregrine Bowen's numerous friends, and for the ends of justice and truth. I am, Sir, your most obedient servant. HENRY SANDERSON, jun. Hope-street, St. Jude's, Liverpool, Feb. 27, 1848. THE PRESBYTERIANS AT MALTA.—His Excellency the Right lion. I.fferrall, Governor of Malta, has directed that for the future the bodies of Presby terians shall receive burial in the ground destined to hold the remains of the other members of the Protestant community. COURT-MARTILL ON LIEUT. HARWICH. The Select Committee, appointed to try the merits of the petition presented against the return of Mr. Attwood for the borough of Harwich, met for the first time this morning; Mr. Stuart Wortley in the chair. Mr. Sergeant Wrsngham, Mr. Sergeant Kinglake, and Mr. Power appeared for the petitioners ; Mr. Briggs Andrews, Mr. Alexander, and Mr. Edwin James were counsel for the sitting Member. Mr. Sergeant W RANGHAM opened the case for the petitioners, stating that it was one of a rather novel nature. Mr. Attwood, the evidence would prove, obtained his election by the interposition of a third party—namely, Sir Dudley Hill, who came forward, before the election, as an independent candidate, but who, in point of fact, was introduced to the borough by Mr. Attwood as a sort of blind to enable him to pick up the votes of parties who were susceptible to bribety and treating. Before the election Sir Dudley LAW INTELLIGENCE. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, March 7. (Before the CHIEF COMMISSIONER.) IN RE SAMUEL NIXON. The insolvent, a sculptor, applied to be divharged under the old system, and was not opposed by his creditors. From inquiries by the Learned Counsel, it appeared that the insolvency had been occasioned by a loss sus tained on the statue of King William IV., now standing at the entrance of King William -street, in the City. The contract price for the statue was stated to have been 2,2001., and the insolvent alleged that it had cost him 1,0001. beyond the contract price. The COURT ordered him to be discharged. (Before Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS.) IN RE CHARLES POLLARD. This insolvent, whose case was before reported, again appeared under the new system. Mrs. Burford, a licensed victualler, stated that the in solvent was her assistant. She was not married to him, nor had she ever asserted that they were married. Mr. DOWSE, who opposed, submitted that the present was not a case for.protection, as there was no property to give up for the creditors. The Learned COMMISSIONER was of opinion that if the objection taken was allowed to be valid, more than one-half the cases could not be entertained, as in that proportion there was no property for the creditors. The COURT named a day for the final order. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—Lincoln, March 6. (Before Chief Justice WILDE and a Common Jury.) MALINE U. SHARPE AND ANOTHER. Action upon the case. Mr. Whitehurst, Q.C., and Mr. Waddington, for the plaintiff; Mr. Humfrey, Q.C., and Mr. Mellor, for the defendants. The plaintiff in this case is an attorney, living at Grantham, and was one of the local solicitors for the Northampton, Lincoln, and Hull Railway scheme, and the present action was brought to recover the :.titn of 3471., for work and labour done as such solicitor. The scheme originated with certain solicitors, and Mr. Ma line, who at that time had a scheme of his own, made an application to be appointed one of the local agents, con setiting to abandon his own scheme if such appointment was conferred. His application was granted. The defendants are tradesmen in considerable repute at Northampton, and were on the provisional and sub sequently on the finance committee. The scheme failed for want of means and the panic. The ques!ion then arose as to the liabilities that had been halm.: d, and it was supposed that, if each member of the previsional committee paid his 100 guineas, all charges could he met. The defendants paid respectively their 100 guineas; nevertheless they were sued on the present occasion. . The question resolved itself into one of mere liability;'eVtidence being given' 'el constant attendance of the defendants at the different boards, and so forth. The defence was on indemnity, and, moreover, that the plaintiff, in common with the other solLitors, looked to the coming in of the deposits, and had they come in all would have been paid. _ _ "The jury found for the defendants. In the Criminal Court Mr. Justice Maule has been engaged, for the most part, in disposing of cases of assaults upon females, which we do not report. NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—Durham, March 6. This morning their Lordships sat for the dispatch of business at ten o'clock, the Commission having been opened on Saturday evening. Mr. Baron Rolfe sat on the civil side, where nineteen cases are entered for trial. The calendar contains thirty-eight cases for trial, in which fifty-nine prisoners are imp;icated. There i, one case of murder, two of n,anslaughter,, tyro of highway robbery, three of rape, and five of cutting and wounding. (Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.) Thomas Lonerson was indicted for cutting and wound ing John Wray, with intent to do him some grievous bodily harm. Mr. Fenwick conducted the prosecution ; the prisoner was defended by Mr. Matthews. The prisoner' and the prosecutor were, it appeared, both pitmen, and worked as partners in the same pit. On the night when the occurrence took place, which resulted in the present indictment, being the night after payday, they met at a public-house, and continued drinking until both were a good deal intoxicated. Some dispute arose as to their working in the pit, and they finally came to blows, The landlord interfered and put them out, the pro secutor by the front door and the prisoner by the back. The prisoner was seen almost immediately after to come round to the front with his coat and waistcoat off, say• ", I havetot a knife." Hea d the, prosecutor then closed and h a d severa l rounds. After the fight was over the prosecutor, while going home, discovered he was bleeding from the side; and it than appeared that he had received a wound from some sharp pointed cutting in strument, which had penetrated to a considerable depth, and from the effects of which he was some days in con siderable danger. A clasp knife was found near the spot. Verdict—Guilty. To be imprisoned six calendar months. John Bee was indicted for the manslaughter of Wil liam Hodgson. Mr. Outer conducted the prosecution ; the prisoner was defended by Mr. Matthews. In this case also the affray of which the result was so fatal took place at a public-house. Thero were a great many persons in the house, and a large proportion was intoxicated. The prisoner Bee was seated on a table, toor. the He ce e s a e which w as by some one overturned, and B ee th rown on deceased the table itupd againon a and :sat upontiatme.A it, w k h e e fl e struggle then took place between them, and after two rounds they went out of the house for the purpose of finishing the contest. Two rounds more were fought, and during the last one deceased fell heavily to the ground, in consequence of a blow on the breast, and never spoke more. He died in a few minutes. The immediate cause of death was effusion upon the brain. Verdict, Guilty, with a strong recommendation to mercy. His LORDSHIP, with a very solemn admonition to the prisoner, sentenced him to be imprisoned fur one month in ►olitary confinement. NORFOLK ClRCUlT.—Aylegbury, Merck 7. The commission for the county of Buckingham was opened at this town yesterday before the Lord Chief Baron and Mr. Justice Coltman. The business corn_ menced this morning, and is very light. In the cause list there are but two entries. The calendar contains the names of twenty-seven prisoners, of whom five are charged with manslaughter, two with unnatural crimes, one with felonious stabbing, one with an assault with intent to commit a robbery, one with sheep killing, and two with arson. Nine of the prisoners can neither read nor write, nine can read and write imperfectly, six can only read imperfectly, two can read and write well, and sue has received a superior educa tion. The cause list wits disposed of in a very short time, the first cause being undefended, and the second re ferred. The calendar;will probably be exhausted by to morrow night, and as Saturday is the day fixed for opening the commission at Bedford, some surprise was expressed that so long a period as five days should have been devoted to the business of the Buckingham assizes. It is to be hoped that no miscalculation in an opposite sense has been made with regard to the be iness of the counties which are more productive of litigation and of crime. (Before Mr. Justice COLTMAN.) William Frost, aged 19, was indicted for having, on the 18th of November last, feloniously assaulted the Rev. Richard Norris Russell. The indictment contained three counts, in which respectively the intent of the assault was stated to be to kill, to do bodily harm to, and to rob the prosecutor. Mr. Prendergast conducted the prosecution. From the statement of Mr. Russell, it appeared that about half-past four in the afternoon of the 18th of November, he was passing by a hedge in the parish of Thornton, and going towards Beachampton, of which he is rector. At some distance from him he saw the figure of a man in the hedge, who on his coming nearer stepped out of it, holding a hayfork, and took off his hat, which was white and one of those called billycock hats," and also " wide awake." Mr. Rus sell asked him his name, to which the man replied, William Frost. The prosecutor then walked on, and conversed with the man, who followed him; the answers were satisfactory, and Mr. Russell stepped over a stile into another field. He found, however, that the mm still followed, and fresh suspi cions arising in his mind, he again entered into conver sation. and elicited answers which again satisfied him that he had nothing to apprehend. lie then passed into another field, and got to the middle of it, still followed by the same man. The next thing he recollected was finding himself on his face on the ground, with a sense of some one stooping over him. He then sprang upon his :knee, and almost at the same time the person who was behind him stepped back, and struck him a violent blow on the head. The prosecutor telt that he was bleeding, jumped up, turned round, and saw the same man who had been speaking to him standing with the hayfork in his hand. The man said "It was not I that struck you, but a man who has run a w ay." Mr. Russell rushed on the man, and, seized the fork, turned the man's face to the moon, which had then risen, and was near the full. The man was the prisoner. The prosecutor wr , nched the fork •rom him, and placed himself in an attitude of defence. No other person was to be seen. The man then went away, and the prosecutor made his way home, when it was found that ho had received several wounds on the back of his head, such as might have been inflicted by a hayfork. Another witness spuke to having seen the prisoner at about a quarter past five on the evening of the 18th of November, when he had on a white " bill)cock" and a dress such as the prosecutor described. It appeared also from the testimony of the constable that the pri soner pretended not to have such A. hat or sucn a waist- coat as the prosecutor had menLioLied, but they were foiled at his father's, and the waistcoat had a stain of blood on it. No money was taken from the pro se,utor. Mr. 'IVELLs, for the oefence, contend, that the ioi det.c:- was insufficient to convict of the intents laid in the indictment; that as the prisoner hiid given his tiaine truly, and had twice satisfied thi- prosecutor that he t►ad no malicious intentions, it was prohatiie th•:t the pro sveutor had fallen down and stunned himself, and in the contusion incident to recovery had n►►sund.:rsuood the prisoner, and so had attacked him ; that as no n.otiey had been taken, the intent to rob was rendered most improbable; and that as the prosecutor and the prisoner were wholly unknown to one another, it was unreason able to sup,ose that the prisoner had been influenc. d by either of the other intents. Under these circum stances he submitted that the jury, difficult as it was to suggest the true thtory of the occurrence, ought to acquit the prisoner. The Learned JUDGE left it to the jury to say whether it did not sufficiently appear that one blow at least had been inflicted by the defendant on the prosecutor, and if so, whether it must not have been inflicted, however suddenly, or after however short a premeditation, with one of the intents charged in the indictment. The jury having deliberated for a short time, returned a verdict of Guilty. Mr. Justice COLTMAN then sentenced the prisoner to be transported for the term of 20 years. (Before the LORD CHIEF BARON.) William Thompson, alias Bendigo, James Burns, John Greaves, and Mark Cross, pleaded Guilty to an in dictment which charged them with having riotously and wantonly assembled together with divers other persons on the 6th of July last, for the purpose of getting up a prize- fight. Mr. FrrzPATaicx, on behalf of the prosecutors, the magistrates of the county, intimated that they did not desire to press for the punishment of the defendants, %s ho seemed to be now impressed with a sense of the illegality of their conduct. Mr. SANDERS, for the defendants, expressed their thanks to the magistrates, and added that the conduct of the prisoners in abstaining from offering any obstauction to the constables, might pArhaps be considered a further inducement to lenient dealing with them. The CHIEF BARON was disposed to yield to the re• commendation of the prosecutors, as the fight had not been carried into effect. The defendants, however, must bear in mind that such practices could not be tolerated in a civilized country; and in the hope that they would in future forbear from them, they might be enlarged on entering into their own recognizances in 251. each to come up for judgment when called on.—The recogni zances were then entered into by the defendants. William Wallace, aged 13, was indicted for having feloniously stabbed Matthew Strange, on the 19th of December last. Mr. Sanders conducted the prosecution. The prisoner was not defended by counsel. It appeared that, on the day named in the indictment, the prosecutor, a large boy, sixteen years old, was playing at marbles, and was frequently interrupted by the prisoner, who threw dirt into the holes used for the game. This led to retaliation from the prosecutor, first try throwing dirt in return, and eventually by some very severe blows. The prisoner thereupon borrowed a knife to cut a stick with which to defend himself. He put the knife into his pocket, and soon after flung a stone at the prosecutor. A struggle immediately fol lowed, and the prisoner pulling out his knife opene‘; it, and gave the prosecutor a blow wi. h it that inflicted a wound in his side. He was about to repeat the blow, but his arm was seised, the weapon take's from him, and he given into .custody. The prosecutor made the best of hi% way home, and was ill from the effects of the wound, which was not daegerous, for about ten days. The prisoner, who cried bitterly while the evidence was given, alleged in excuse the state of . anger into whielThe had been'brought by the'age whii;ll • he had reecived'fydrn the prosecutor, who was'much his superior in strength. The - Oink? BARON left it to the jury to say whether the prisoner had done the act proved against him with the. intent laid in the. indictment. The case was for them entirely ; but the strong provocation received by the prisoner rendered it probable that the blow had not been given to carry out a felonious intent, but in a sudden fury at finding himself overmastered. The jury found the prisoner Guilty of a common as sault. The ptihoner was then sentenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for one calendar month. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. OLD COUkT. (Before the RECORDER.) '• William Burlton; 36, labourer, William Johnson, 27, John Flowers, 30, and William Mayhew, 49, agent, were indicted for unlawfully conspiring together to commit a felony. -• Mr. Payne prosecuted. The defence was conducted by Mr. Baldwin, Mr. Metcalfe, Mr. Horry, and Mr. Thompson. • Tile circumstances of this case were of.rather an ex traordinary character. The prosecutor was Mr. Nicholas Mould, the landlord of a tavern called the Powerful, at Woolwich, and it was for a conspiracy to commit a rob bery at his house that the present indictment was pre ferred against the defendants. The principal witness in support of the charge was a Klan named Duffell, who, at the time of the transaction, kept a beer shop at Woolwich. According to his statement, on the 22d of January the prisoner Burlton, who was at the time living in Woolwich, came to his beer shop, and in slang language inquired whether he could not give Jail_ entueruation where a robbery might be committed. He declined at that time to enter into any communication with him,- but a day or two afterwards the conversation was again brought up, and he having previously had a comiunnication with the police upon the subject suggested*Wat a robbery might be committed at the house of the prosecutor. Bunton then said that he would introduce him to some persons who would assist in the robbery, and the next day they went to London and proceeded to a beer-shop kept by the defendant Flee era, at Bethnal green, and he there saw Flowers , and John son, and Burlton having introduced Duffell as "one of them," said he had got a little job for them. Johnson asked what it was, and he replied, " Oh, it is a little public-house job," and he added that he thought it was as good a one a: the other. Johnson then said he hoped they should not have so much trouble with it as they had with the other. Upon this occasion Flowers pro duced a bundle of skeleton keys, and he re marked at the same time that no men in Lon don could _nee. such things better than they could. Flowers then asked when it was to be done, and Burlton replied, that it must be before Friday, because that was the brewer's day, and Johnson said, as that was the case they should go down the next day, and it was agreed that they shOuld meet at the Trafalgar public house, at Woolwich, a little before three o'clock. Burlton then remarked that Mr. Mould was a man or the world, and it would be necessary that he should be " worked out" before the robbery was attempted, and it was arranged that as Duffell was acquainted with the prosecutor, he should get him to go out upon some ex cuse, aid that the robbery should be then committed by the others. It was also agreed that Burlton should keep a watch in his shop, until the prosecutor was taken by Dufell, and this was to be the signal for the perpetration I of the robbery, and Johnson said that if they got any thing like one huedred sovereigns he and Burlton were to have 101. a piece. Information of all these circuin s:ances was given to the prosecutor and to the police, and on the 2d of February, which was the day fixed for the robbery, Duffel' went to the prosecutor's house and they went out together as had been arranged, and after passing Buriton's shop they returned by a back way to the house, and got into the bar parlour, where the police had already been introduced, and they placed themselves in a position to see what took place. In a short time the defendant Flowers came in and stood at the bar, and called for some brandy cud water, and in quired of the prosecutor's daughter, who served him, whether her father was at home? and on her saying he was not, he went on conversing with her and at tempting to occupy her attention. While he was so engaged the defendants, Mayhew and Johnson, came in, and immediately proceeded up stairs, where one of the defendants was taken into custody while in the act of opening a room with a skeleton key, and a number of skeleton keys wrapped up in an old apron were found in the fire, where they had been thrown by some of the party. The witness Duffell was cross-examined at very con siderable length by the counsel for the defendants, but nothing whatever was elicited to shake his testi mony ; and it appeared that from the commence ment of the transa3tion he had been in com munication with the prosecutor, and also with the police, and the subsequent proceedings taken by him were with their knowledge and sanction, and were 5. (opted solely for the purpose of detecting the guilty parties. A police constable deposed that after the prisoners were in custody he went to the :Folly beer-shop, kept by Flowers, in Lamb's-fields, Bethnal-green, and he there found a quantity of skeleton keys, a dark lant horn, some crowbars, and other instruments used in housebreaking. He likewise discovered a number of "dummy " parcels made up in brown paper ; in one of them there was an old shoe. The RECORDER inquired what use was made of those " dummies?" The policeman said they were carried by thieves when they went to a house to commit a robbery, in order to take off suspicion if they were observed, and induce a belief that th e y were u pon some lawful business. The Counsel for the prisoners addressed the jury, and on behalf of Mayhew a respectable witness was called, who gave him a good character; and stat e d th at a short time back he was in very good circumstances and kept his carriage, but had become reduced through unfortu nate railway speculations. The jury returned a verdict of Guilty against Burlton, Flowers, and Johnson, and acquitted Aiayhew. The prisoners were sentenced to two years' imprison. ment. This case concluded the business al the session, and the Court then adjourned to Monday, April 3. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. BOW-STREET. THE RIOTS IN TRAFALGAR -SQUARE.—The disposal of these and other similar cases occupied the Court so long,, that it was found necessary to interrupt the order and postpone the hearing of part of them till the ordi pat), night charges were proceeded with. After the latter were disposed of, the Court resumed the exalt+ nation of the prisoners in charge arising out of the riot. The Magistrate (Mr. Jardine) was occupied with theta for the remainder of the sitting. A large number of prisoners taken in the course of the day remain the station-house. It being found im possible to dispose of their cases to-day, they will ren3sio in confinement until tomorrow, when they will be brought before the sitting magistrate. These cases also arise for the most part from the riots. MARLBOROUGH-STREET. Rilliam Wallace and James O'Connell, two tailor lasi w--r., c;:a,gLA with having wantonly broken windows of the value of 51., at a chemist's shop, No. 10, Pall-mall. Tne defendants formed part of a mob of disorderll persons who assembled in Trafalgar-square on Monds) , It w,ts about eight o'clock when the defendants wer e , the police to throw stones at th e w i n d o ws an d to vans , - c , :n,iderabie damage. The lads said They were out of work, and they denied Laving thrown stones. Nlr BiNoriam fined them 51., the amount of damage , or one month's imprisonment. iVESTMINSTER. Five persons, who were thu , described in the polic e sh. , et—Charles Tothill, aged 20, clerk, no residence ; John White, aged IS, no trade, 18, Noble-street, city ; John Read, aged 36, turner, 44, Hatfield-rtreet, No/ Cut ; John Pendegrast, aged 20, labourer, Orchard street, Westminster ; and John Connell, aged 21, is' bourer, 7, Evans's court, Ludgate hill, were charged with having formed a portion of a mob of several hun dred persons, who created a riot and broke a •gr'si number of street lamps and windows on the previous evening. The circumstances of the case will be best gleans ( ' from the following account of the evidence yesterday adduced:— Sergeant Gray, 10 C, said—l was on duty at half-POI seven o'clock last night in Trafalgar-square in 011ie clothes. I received information that the mob had gone from there down Pall-mall. I followed down Pall-mall into St. James's Park, thence down James-street into York -street, and in nearly the whole line of that toad almost all the gas lamps and a great many windows in the shops and houses were broken. When I came to the Broadwai , Westminster, I found a mob of from 60 0 to 800 people, many of them armed with sticks slid bludgeons. I saw the prisoners Tothill and White, who had each sticks, and they jumped up as they mite to the gas-lamps and broke them. When they came oppe* site the Westminster Sessions-house the prisoner Whitet who had on the pair of epaulettes produced (resembling those worn by the privates in the Guards), cried out-- Halt! To arms! Let's have arms!" The whole of the mob then proceeded onwards, and three lamps were broken afterwards. I then took White into custody. He had put his epaulettes into his pocket in the confu sion before I apprehended him. When I took White, he said, Oh, let me go; I'm only a poor fellow." Mr. BRODERIP—That was the man that had ills' before been summoning them to arms ? Witness—lree. sir. The three priseners, Tothill, White, and Read , were the most active in the riot from the Broadway. Westminster, up to the Sessions-house, in the Broad Sanctuary. Robert Checkley, 184 C, after confirming the fire portion of the previous witness's testimony, said—l saw the prisoner Read break several lamps by throwing stones at them ; he likewise had a bundle under hie arm, containing a loaf of bread, and a short stick in his hand. Bakers' shops were attacked and robbed, as understood. When the mob got nearly up to Westmiir ster Abbey, an alarm of " Police" was given, and thee the prisoner Read threw a stick through a lamp, and ran across to the opposite side, when I took him i ato custody. I saw the other prisoners Whit e an d Tot h there. I saw the latter break several lamps with tis stick produced. White also broke several with a stick nod some stones. I saw White wearing the epaulette& produced in Tothill-street. I was close by his side. lie was walking at the head of the mob. Mr. Moran, an inspector of the B division of pact. , s4id—Between eight and nine o'clock last evening I went with a body of police to suppress a riot in Tothill" street. When we got to the Broad Sanctuary we were met by some hundreds of men, hallooing and shouting. I distinctly heard the gel-lamps being broken, and sew glass flying about. The inspector then confirmed OA evidence against Tothill, whom he knocked down, and took a stout limb or& tree from. The mob were Ter/ violent. Alfred John Fenn, 82 B, gave confirmatory testimony. John Marshall, 60 B. said—At about half-past eight o'clock last evening I was passing along York-street. when I saw a mob of several hundred persons. From 70 to 100 of them were carrying large bludgeonh clothes-props, and other heavy weapons. I saw several of the mob put the gas out, and break the lamps. Thep also broke the shopkeepers' windows, and there was decided riot. I went to the station, and returned. accompanied by a party of police. We met a large mob coming up Strutton-groand. They were breaking the lamps and putting the lights out. I saw Con nell brandishing a stick and calling out "Free traders and he then picked up a stone, when I took him into Due tody. The mob followed, and kept calling out "Free trade I" The stick produced (one with a very heavy knob) has particles of broken glass on it now. I took it from the prisoner Connell, who, at the station, said that he did not stoop for a stone, but for the stick, which some person had thrown away. James Buchanan, 150 B, proved that Stratton-ground. Westminster, was completely filled with the mob, and there was a decided riot, and the shopkeepers were all closing their shops. The police endeavoured to disperse the mob, when they assailed them with brickbats, stone% and large bars of wood like palings. Pendegrast threw a large piece of wood at the police, and at the same mo-. went one of the constables received a severe cut in she face, from which he bled profusely. They that s e ised Pendegrast, when he called out to the rest of th e mob to pelt the ',clic°. A constable named Cochrane proved that Pendegrast was one of the rioters. The prisoners, of whom Tothill, White, and Read were poor, diminutive, miserable-looking men, and the others had much the appearance of ordinary labourers, were informed by Mr. BRODERIP that they were at liberty to put any questions to the witnesses, but, do clined doing so. In reply to the charge—. Tothill said—l decline saying anything, White—l deny wearing the epaulettes. Read—As I was walking to York-street a baker threw the bread over the people's heads, and I caught a loaf. lam only 11 poor mechanic, so I began to eat the bread, as I was hungry. Connell—l decline saying anything at present. Pendegrast—l have nothing to say. Mr. BRODERIP observed, that the cases were of by far too serious a nature for him to deal with summarily, and ho should require White to find two sureties in JOi each, and himself in 1001.; Tothill and Read two sure ties of 401. each, and themselves in 801. each; and Pen dergast and Connell two sureties:of 301 each, and them• selves in 60L, to appear at the next sessions for the county of Middlesex. The whole of the witnesses were then bound over to prosecute for the riot, &c. - William Jones and William Lewer, two. youths, the ellest of whom did not appear to exceed 17, were charged with being concerned with a number of others in creating a riot and breaking windows; also with as' saulting the police. John . Green, 78 B, said that at about twelve oa the previous night the prisoners and about 100 men came dow❑ Grosvenor-place, threw stones, and broke a great number of windows, and amongst them some of very handsome plate glass, at Lady Wyndham's. They were calling out "Down with the crushers" (police). Jones threw a stone at witness, and hit him on the breai-t. ',ewer then struck witness with a stone on the hat, and also threw a large piece of garden -pot at him, which we.it through a lamp. Witness drew his staff, but it wao immediately broken in two by one of the mob, and he received several violent blows on hie, head. The mob was very riotous and violent. With the assistance of police -sergeant he took the prisoners into custody . Jones, in defence, said he was merely walking- down Grosvenor-place, when the policeman stopped hi m and said he was one of the crowd, and Lewer said that be was suddenly struck with a truncheon without doing anything. The prisoners were also ordered to find bail, two sureties of 301. each, and themselves in 601., to appear 23 the sessions. The whole of the prisoners were committed to prix An in default of finding bail. DESTRUCTION OF THE CROWN TAVERN, IL IN. hlNGToN.—Yesterday morning, at an early hour, a fire occurred in High-street, Kensington. It appeared that Mr. White, the landlord of the Crown Tavern, was awoke by hearing an alarm of fire in the street, and, upon opening his bedroom door he found flames mountimf ; the staircase. He immediately aroused his family and do mestics, but so fiercly was the fire burning tb.at at , n e of them were able to get down the stairs. Fortunate ly Mr. White procured a rope, by means of which he lowered his family and servants out of one of the bad; windows , and eventually he succeeced in effecting Ilia own escape , but not until the flames had penetrated the roosia to which he was standing, Upon the arriv a l of the fire men they found that it was useless to atte'mpt to save ell portion of Mr. Whit e ' s property, they, therefore ex geed themselves to cut off the further progress of the fla Wee. Nearly three hours elapsed before the flames were ex tinguished, by which time the tavern was totally de` stroyed, and the premises severally occupied by Air Allen, carpenter, Mr. Turpin, working eutler, fir. Worthington, Mr. Ring, and Mr. Berdon, who were also partially demolished. With two exceptions, the sufferers were insured. The origin of the outbreak is unknown. BIRTHS. On the 3d inst., at Harnbledon Rectory, Bucks, th• wife .of the Her. W. H. Ridley, of a daughter. On the 4th inst., in Queen-square, the lady of Chfirlois Rivington, Esq., °fa son. MARRISD. On the 4th inst., at St. Pancras Church, Mr. Jame& W. Tookey, of Brecknock-crescent, to Mrs. Maria Ann Knapp, , of Upper Berkeley-street, Porttuan-square. DIED. On the Sd inst., at Gaddesby, Leicestershire, Colo nel Cheney, C. 8., aged 70. , London: Printed and P u bli s h e d b y MURD O YOUNG.. I" No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 111 s g Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county Middlesex, Wednesday, Merck 1, 1141. %I, m OUI th• tOtell kite era, immoimomA CROWTHER. CILATEAN, MARCH 6.—This day was promulgated to the 631 Regiment, now lying at these barracks, the sen tence of a General Court-martial, held on the 14th of December last, and which continued by adjournment to the 21st of the same month, for the trial of Licut. George L. Crowther, . of the same corps, 'who was ar raigned on the under-mentioned charges - :- 1. For having on the 14th November, 1847, at Chat ham, absented himself' without permission from the bar rack room of his company when it was visited by his commanding officer, according to the notification in regimental orders, dated 15th November. 2. For having at the same time and place stated that he was present at the barrack-room when visited by the commanding officer, knowing at the time that such statement was false. 3. For having, on the 15th of November, at Chatham, he then being subaltern officer of the day, disobeyed the regimental orders, dated the 15th of November, requiring him, as such officer of the day, to inspect the issue of bread and meat of the different messes of the 63d Regiment. 4. For having, on the 16th of November, made a false report as subaltern officer of the day preceding, as fol lows:—" I inspected the bread and meat yesterday morning, which appesrecl to me of a good and whole some quality, and I arso saw the same issued to the dif ferent messes of the regiment at the proper time," which report was signed by the said Lieutenant Crowther; such report and the statement contained therein, that he, the said Lieutenant Crowther, inspected the bread and meat, and saw the same issued to the different messes, being wholly false, and known to the said Lieutenant Crowther to be false at the time he made such report. Upon which charges the Court came to the following decision :—That Lieutenant Crowther is guilty of the first charge; second charge, not guilty; of the third charge, that he is guilty, with the exception of that part of the order which relates to the inspection and issue of meat to the different messes of the 63d Regiment, of which the Court acquits him; of the fourth charge, that he is guilty, with the exception of the word " wholly," and that part of the report and statement contained therein, which regards the meat and bread, of both of which portions of the charge the Court acquits him. The Court having found the prisoner guilty of the first charge, not guilty of the second, and guilty of so much of the third as is above expressed, and guilty of so much of the above charge as is above repeated, which being in breach of the Articles of War, does in virtue thereof sentence him the said prisoner, Lieutenant W. G. L. Crowther, of the 63d Regiment, to be severely reprimanded. The Court having pronounced senten c e upon the prisoner, Lieutenant Crowther, cannot close its proceedings without moat respectfully remarking upon the circumstance, that he, the prisoner, was employed upon certain duties subsequent to the commission of the charges for which the prisoner has been tried, and which circumstance came only to light during the pro ceedings. The proceedings of this trial having been laid before her Majesty the Queen, by Field-Marshal the Com mender-in-Chief, her Majesty was pleased to approve and confirm the finding and sentence of the Court.— Signed J. Macdonald, Adjutant-General. Lieutenant Crowther, having been reprimanded ac cordingly, was released from arrest, to the satisfaction of his brother officers. FRENCII NATIONAL ASSEMBLY. The Moniteur publishes textually the decree respect ing the elections and the convocation of the National Assembly. It is as follows: " The Provisional Government of the Republic, desir ing to remit ns soon as possible to a definitive govern ment the powers which it exercises on behalf and by the command of the people, decreer: — "Art. 1. The electoral assemblies of cantons are con voked for the 9th April next, to elect representatives of the people to the National Assembly, which is to deer( e the Constitution. " Art. 2. The election shall be on the basis of popu lation. " Art. 3. The total number of representatives of the people shall be nine hundred, including Algeria and the French Colonies. " Art. 4. They shall be divided between the depart ments in the proportion set forth in the following table. " Art. 5. The suffrage shall be direct and universal. " Art. 6. All Frenchman aged twenty-one years, resi dents in the commune for six months, and not deprived of or suspended from the exercise of civic rights by a Judicial decision are electors. " Art. 7. All Frenchmen aged twenty-61re years, and not deprived of or suspended from the exer cise of civic rights are qualified to be elected re presentatives. " Art. 8. The ballot shall be secret. "Art. 9. All the electors shall vote at the chief place of their cantons, by ballotting lists. Each list shall contain as many names as there are representatives to be elected in the department. " The examination of the votes shall take place at the chief place i n t h e can t on , a nd the declaration of them at the chief town of the department. No person can be nominated a representative of the people if he have not 2,000 votes. "Art. 10. Each representative of the people shall re ceive an ind emn i t y o f 25 f r . a day for the duration of the session. " Art. 11. An instru e ction of the Provisional Govern ment shall regulate the details of the execution of the present decree. " Art. 12. The National. Constituent Assembly shall •pen on the 20!h of April. " Art. 13. The present decree shall be immediately sent to all the departments, and published and placarded in all the communes of the Republic. " Done at Paris, in the Government Council, the sth of March." (Signed) By the Members of the Provisional government. CON The Coi ° CUM Mt 1 1•11ce tha rb a d y A sup ply the servic The Col seea :d ock . 1 sre ry lad b ear taw t a, tol etDersa he Co CEn a b , 1, aft ^gr. U m Sku tt / 4 MS Inta re " el CI Win b u , kn . v