The Sun. — London, England, 1835-06-26 00:00:00

. _ during the dynasty of the unfortunate House of Stu::: t. Our middle, and many of out lower classes, are better educated now, than some of our first nobility were dur ing the reign of James I. The great stable of popular violence and lawless tumult—ignorance fast disappearing. Our future revolutions Will be moral ones ; even the most ignorant of our peasantry know right well that they possess a power of controuling the acts of any Government which must ever render an appeal to arms an unneces sary protection of British liberty. Mr. Johnson has executed the task undertaken by him with care and impartiality. The work is dedi cated to Lord Stanley, of whose moderation the author professes himself a great admirer. We could have wished his political opinions more decided than he has thought proper to express them. The brief notices of the lives of Sir John Eliot, Denzil Hallis, Sir John Maynard, John Pym, Sir Dudley Digges, &c., contemporaries with Selden, which precedes Mr. Johnson's life of him, have been judiciously selected, and give a new interest to the volume. The work is embellished with a well finished likeness of Selden, by Scriven, from a painting by Sir P. Lely, and a rough sketch of the cottage which claims the honour of his birth-place. The following description of the per sonal appearance of James I. will convey to the reader a fair impression of Mr. Johnson's mariner : " The King possessed none of those brilliant qualities that dazzle a people, and make them willing to excuse an extrava gance that arises from the more generous emotions of our nature. He was neither young, courteous, open-hearted, or brave ; but on the contrary old, unwilling to be seen by his People, hypocritical, and cowardly. The man of common rea son knows that exterior deformity and deficiency of grace are of very trivial consideration in forming an estimate of mankind, but he also knows that it has great influence with the majority of individuals, and there is no doubt but the personal appear ance of James did much in increasing the disgust his misrule produced. He neither acted nor looked like a King ; he was awkward and rickety in his movements, bulky in person, and With a tongue too large for his mouth, he slobbered out his Words, which were additionally mutilated by a broad Scotch accent. Education had not improved him ; learned, but defi cient in useful endowments, he was a pedantic, blustering pol troon. He was ridiculed at home and abroad for that weak ness, which made him conceive that he could deceive his People by proclamations. and foreign nations by his ambassa dors. The first, says Wilson, were current coins a great whiie, till the multitude of them lessened their valuation ; and the estimate, on the continent, of his foreign policy, is evinced by a satirical speech in a contemnorary Spanish comedy. A Messenger is represented as arriving in great haste with the news that a formidable army would soon march to the relief of the Palatinate, for the King of Denmark was about to fur nish it with 100,000 pickle herrings ; the Dutch with 100,000 butter boxes ; and England would send 100.000 ambassadors." THE EMPRESS: A NOVEL. y O. BENNETT, AUTHOR OP THE "ALBANIANS. " In 2 Vols. London: Smith, Elder, and Go. 1835. The subject of this novel is one of the most difficult. and at the same time one of the least interesting that a novelist could pitch upon. To represent to the life, a *omin in the act of sacrificing her honour, her reputa tion, her virtue and her religion, at the shrine of ambi tion—to paint her with her hands reeking with the blood of her husband and her kindred—to pourtray her i etimes doubly reflected in a son, whose great s t u d y is how to be guilty of matricide without employing his OWII dager, comes only within the province of the his torian ; b and the writer of fiction who attempts it ought to blame himself if he only excite horror and disgust Where h e expected to afford pleasure. Mr. Bennett has failed in his attempt to elucidate the characters of Agrippina and Nero ; but this will surprise no person acquainted with the state of society in Rome at that period. Th e vo lumes, however, are replete with pas aof redeeming merit, and had the author c hosen a subject more congenial with human interests and sym pathies, we think he would have produced a very re- Zectable lib rary nove l. If he be a young man and amenable to friendly counsel, we would advise him to check his predilection for the marvellous, the gloomy, and the fearful, and to keep an eye to the world as it really is, rather than ns it exists in the morbid imagination of enthusiasts. It is much safer and Wiser in an author to deal only with men, and the Passions of men, than to take up his time in describing the ugliness of monsters, under the appellations of dwarfs and witches. Besides, the ancient Romans are by far too stately a race to figure as the heroes of alight less solemn than an epic poem or a tragedy. The learned world will not bear to have its earliest impressions disturbed ; and there are few scholars to I thorn the idea of a fiddling prelate would appear rnore preposterous than the story of a Roman court ship in the time of Cicero. Ancient Italy belongs to the historian—modern Rome the fairy-land of romance. The following description of the heroine of Mr. Ilennett's novel, is, in our opinion, a fair specimen of the author's style. It may be as well to add, that his descriptions of the games of the circus are classi cally correct, heightened with passages displaying Rreat dramatic power : " Agrippina, surrounded by her a tt e ndants, was the a dig ration o f a ll the Circus. The beauty of her person, the l 'ity of her countenance, the magnificence of her attire, ex cited universal homage ; and even those who reprobated her anlbition, acknowledged her to be a superior being in beauty and intellect. Upon this occasion she had paid unusual at te.ntion to the decoration of her person. Her jet black hair LwfTheut the aid of foreign tresses, generally worn by the "ercu:n ladies of this perfect) was arranged so as to represent heln:et. and the delicious perfumes that e xhaled from it, s Pread themselves around : the stola or gown was of finely Woven gold, ornamented with a profusion of pe arls ; s ecureand the Rirdle, w hich was one solid inasmi of diamonds, d in the fro n t by two rubies of unknown value. Her slippers, in which persons of quality always appeared in public, were pur- Ple, but so thickly covered with gems, that the ground-work W as nearly i m perceptible; and the splendour of her dress was rlrnpleted by the imperial robe of tyrian dye, clasped on the eft shoulder with gems, and richly embroidered with the most *urious workmanship. Thus habited, she formed a powerful contrast to the bloated sensualist beside her—for whom almost *very diversion had lost its charm, and who now slept soundly on his golden seat, unconscious of everything that passed." The King was most graciously pleased to confer t he h o nour of knighthood, as Knigh t Commander of the Royal ganoverian Guetphie Order, upon Captain William Henry pill on , of the Royal Navy, at Wednesday's Levee, the 24th 148 tant. Sir John Taylor and fa mil y , Mr. Holland and 4a rnily, T. Herbert, Esq ., &c . &c. took their departure for Antwerp in the General Steam Navi g ation Company's packet 'QC Attwood. A line of steam - packet s hi p s between London and "e‘v York is in contemplation. Mr. Cavendish, the Member for Derbyshire, is '‘„bout to lead to the hymeneal altar Lady Louis a Lascelles, Lao youngest and only un married daughter of the Earl of Hare- Wood.--Sheffield Iris. We have heard that an offer of the Solicitor-Ge xlerahhip will be made to Mr. Holmes.—Dublin Register. LORD STANLEY AND THE CONSERVATIVEs. tmeeting of the North Lancashire Conservatives-was held at ,reston on Monday. Very great surp rise was expressed at t ae contents of Lord Stanley's letter to Sir Thomas Hesketh, 11 nich has created a verb strong sensat ion amon g the consti :.,ency of this division of the county , an d more p articularly in `ne neighbourhood of Preston, the stronghold of his Lord supporters, where he is most popular. The necessity of g out for a more uncompromising candidat in case Lord ota n i ey should continue his ,opposition to . Conservative associa r"s, has already been tho subject of much conversation. — (From a Correspondent of the Liverpool Standard.) MIDDLESEX REFORM CLUB.—On Wednesday night a meeting of the members of the above club took place at the Salopian Coffee- House, when a favourable report was made of the progress of the registration. Mr. Davies, the Se cretary, stated that he had completed a list of the various !lectors, preparatory to the final registration ; which report 'tive gr ea t sa tisfaction to the Committee, who elect ed Mr. ulackburne, M.P., Dr. Fellowes, Isaac L. Gold smith, Es q ., a nd M r . F. C. Barkley, Vice-Presidents. At a meeting of that highly-respectable Friendly I. ) cic'tY. the St. James's Union, held at their Club-house, "entity-fourth St. Martin's-lane, it was resolved to hold their !WY-fourth Anniversary Dinner and Festival at that re p smelt-improved rural ret;-,:at, Highbury Barn. This t Z ll 4 l i is setting a noble example cco; the irrirrovonent of t !E , useful institutions, Friendly F , ),,ietiPs, wortby id they pay . a. long list of useful benefit:3 .1! in fulL hoaa fide funded capital, and pro,.i.ie 24-yed and indigent mervb, - rs, thus 00.1)kil)g 01 1 'it anyar.4 alt comparatively on parochial assistance inkier Faip , affliction, comparatively at nearly a nominal contribution. Harriers is a proposal cm foot for establishin g a p ack Hurlers near Abe:aeen. CIIINA. The following is an extract of a private letter received in the city by the last arrivals from Macao, dated Feb. 3 : " My object in writing is to tell you all I know of an un fortunate seizure of British subjects, which, if not skilfully adjusted, may bring us into trouble with the authorities, arid, for a time at least, lay an embargo on our trade. A short time ago, during a severe gale, the ship Argyle made the coast of China, and the Captain, being ignorant of the navigation, and naturally anxious for the assistance of a native pilot, rashly sent a boat ashore with an officer and no less than 12 men. On landing these men were immediately seized, and after an inter val, two Chinese were despatched to the ship to announce that they were detained for having infringed the laws of the empire by landing, but that they were empowered to say, that if the Captain would send on shore 500 dollars, they should be all forthwith liberated. The Captain stated that they had not the money on board, and after a fruitless altercation, he seized the two Chinese, and proceeded on his voyage. On the 29th ult. he landed here, and after fully stating his case to the su perintendents, he took his ship to the usual anchorage, Lin tin, where I believe she now lies. In the evening of the same day Captain Elliott, the third superintendent, in company with Gubyleff, left this, with the intention of settling matters. Their destination was kept perfectly secret, and though they returned this morning, it is not yet known where they have been, or what they have done. It seems also uncertain whether the party who seized the men were acting under the autho rity of the Mandarin, or whether they made the seizure on their own account as pirates. It is to be hoped that everything possible will be done to avoid paying the dollars, otherwise it will be but the commencement of a frightful system, which must sooner or later be the cause of serious disturbances. It is now said, and on good authority, that the Americans have often suffered in the same way, and have invariably paid the sums demanded. " I have just returned from making inquiries about this af fair, and the result is, that the letter was presented at a fort some miles above Whampoa, called Howqua's Folly, and that Captain Elliott, in his full naval uniform, offered his petition to some Mandarins, telling them he was a King's man, and that, on their refusal, he would retake the men by force. They refused to acknowledge him as in the employment of the King of England, and would have nothing to do with his petition. And so the matter rests for the present, and we are now wait ing to hear the resolution of the Superintendents, which is of course kept secret. " A gentleman, who came as passenger by the ship Anne, confirms the above statement ; but he does not attach quite so much importance to the circumstance, as he is of opinion that the Chinese would release the men, though they would have nothing to say to a King's officer." POLICE INTELLIGENCE. GUILDHALL. A Lady from Stoke Newington tendered an affidavit re specting the identity and change of residence of a stockholder, for the satisfaction of the Bank. Mr. Alderman FAREBROTHER said such affidavits should be made before a Magistrate residing where the deponent lived. why, would probably know, or could ascertain, that the party making the affidavit was the person named in it. 'the faci lity, of personating a party from the country befbre a nigis trate in London. who would have no knowledge of their iden tity, had led to the commission of crime in one instance within his own experience; and where an affidavit was to warrant a transfer of money he would never again administer an oath to a person of whom be bad no knot ledge. The affidavit was therefore refused. Another affidavit for the satisfaction of the Bank was after wards tendered by a gentleman not unknown to the Alderman. In this case the trustee of a charity school fund of 3,0001. had become bankrupt, and as he was described in the Bank hooks as of the City-road, and in the Commission of Bankrupts as of Broad-street, the Bank required an affidavit of the identity and change of residence of the party. The Clerk observed that, according . to the new Act, a Magistrate could only administer an affidavit where it was re quired by some statute, or in the course of some judicial pro ceeding. This affidavit appeared to belong to neither class. The Bank Solicitor should turn his attention to the new statute. The gentleman hoped that the Legislature was wise enough to have provided for the ordinary despatch of business. No," said Mr. Alderman FAREBROTHER, " our Legislators only pass Acts of Parliament."—The affidavit was refused. LAMBETH-STREET. Yesterday James Hamilton, Thomas Young, and James Lamboard, three recruits, belonging to the force at present raising in this country for the contemplated Spanish expedition, were brought before Messrs. HARDWICK and NORTON on a charge of disposing of a part of the stores served out to them, and oi), suspicion of having deserted from the force and cause in which they had enlisted. The prisoners, all of whom have but a few months ago re turned from Portugal, where they had fought under the late Don Pedro, were ordered by the Magistrates to be taken to the barracks or depot in the Isle of Dogs, to be dealt with as their Officers might think proper. EXTRAORDINARY CASE. Sir—l trust you will pardon my calling your attention to a circumstance which has fallen under my notice, and to which I conceive it to be my duty to give all the publicity in my power, and to denounce as a scheme of the blackest villainy, which nothing but the heart of a demon could conceive or perpetrate. On Thursday last an advertisement appeared in the papers, stating that an accomplished female was required to superin tend the education of a young lady, aged 15, and that a libe ral salary would be given. The letters to be addressed Mrs. Knight, Post office, Maddox-street. This, Sir, is my house : and in the course of two days several answers were returned, addressed as above. A person of fashionable exterior announced himself as hav ing conic for the letters, but he could not give a satisfactory statement as to Mrs. Knight ; and being refused the first time, he called again with the receipts from the newspaper-offices, showing payment for the insertion of the advertisements. On this I gave him what letters I then had; but my suspicions being further excited by one of the applicants calling upon me, I questioned the gentleman on his next visit for letters (n'ear fifty of which I have now in my possession) ; and after being guilty of great prevarication, he was driven to confess that there was no such person as Mrs. Knight, and that the advertisement was inserted by him for the purpose of selecting a victim. Notwithstanding the bullying tone first assumed by this per son, and threats of proceedings, I still retain possession of the le i ters. Now, Sir, I have discovered that this fellow holds a cum• mission in his Majesty's service, and calls himself a captain; and lam informed that he wears the Crown button. I sup press his na me on l y f rom a conv i ct i on I f ee l t h at t h e disgust ing exposure he has made of his want of veracity, honour, and courage, rend er hi m too contempt ibl e an o bj ect to b e visited, by the fathers an d b rot h ers o f t h e app li cants , by summar y punishment. Will it be believed that this gallant officer crouched liked a lashed hound on the discovery of his beastly purpose, and poured out torrents of apologies and protestations of sorrow and amendment to the man he found he could not bully ? Sir, I cannot find language sufficiently strong to ex press my indignation at the parade of female modesty before such a wretch. Are the feelings of unsuspecting females of refined education to be outraged by fellows like this ? A sort of monkeyfied apology for a man 1 who made his boast that " other men got their women so." I trust this exposure will be a warning to young females, wh o , in their unsuspecting simplicity, dream not that such fiends in human shape exist, never to attend an appointment of this description without the protection of a gentleman; in which case they may depend that even the blusteri ng , b u llyi ng i mpu d ence o f t h e ga ll an t captain himself would shrink before the just indignation of an honest man. The reptile will, doubtless, see this exposure ; and he had better meditate in private on his firmly-established character as a self-convicted liar, and a dishonoured man. Trusting you will give immediate publicity to this letter, I beg to subscribe myself, Sir, your obedient servant, CHAS. DAVIES. • 19, Maddox -street, Hanover-square, June 22. P. S. The letters delivered through the medium of the Post-office, which did not fall into the hands of the gallant captain, have been returned by me to the General Post-Office, from whence they will reach their respective writers. As re gards those left by private hands, they may Le obtained on ap plication by the writers, on describing the seal. REGENT'S PARK.----A correspondent informs us that a considerable portion of the Park, fronting Ulster and York-terraces, which was agreed and marked upon the plan to be given up to the public, is not only still withheld, but part of it has since been actually made over to the Toxopholite So ciety. Our correspondent adds that this is not a Royal-park, but belongs to the public ; and that it is, therefore, the more strange, that while the Royal Parks are freely given up to the public, officers of the Crown should be found to withhold the free enjoyment of this. It appears that Don Carlos and Zumalacarregui have received severs large packets, containing plans for their operations, sent them by the Duke of Angouleme. It is pos sible that his Royal Highness, recollecting his memorable ca mpaign in 1823, may feel a desire of dhecting from his place of exile, a new adventure by the Defenders of the Faith. Neither Don Carlos nor Zumalacarregui, however, it is said, pay any attention to his suggestions, but throw them aside as waste paper.--Vapor of Bar ce l ona . The remains of the late lamented Duchess of Argyll were yesterday interred in the catacombs of the beau tiful Cemetry on the Harrow-road, near London. Though the funeral was considered private, the number of Noble re latives and connections who attended it was very great. There were several Royal carriages in the procession. The Rev. sEdn. It waswardJohn rosteornenvse,oasustlhy statedeofficiatingin C lergyman on the occa iopapers yesterday that the body would be removed to Inverary. NOVEL METHOD OF ROBBERY.--A lad named Askew was yesterday charged before the magistrates at Queen square, under the following circumstances :—The prisoner, it appeared, entered a public-house in the NVestruinster-brillg , _ road, and after having called lor a glass of elder, was oh , rnonew, and irpinpdiatply !ervf-ti to put a large stick over the. counter towards a pile w ithdra w :t with a sovereign .tic;•.- iug to the end of it. The Ftia' tyas ttoyered with pitch, gorne other adhesive substance. He was about to repeat .:is inffenious experiment, when he was taken into custody. The prisoner did not deny the charge, and was fully committed fur trial. 414: -> f 4Let COURT OF COMMON PLLA S. CRIM. CON.—BIRCH V. NEELE. (Concluded from The Sun of yesterday.) Cross-examined by Sir F. PoLLoca.—Told Mr. Birch at the first meeting that she believed Mr. Neele was in her mis tress's room. Her master would not believe it. Witness said that she was sure that she had heard her mistress's door shut, but did not recollect that she had said it was bolted. Did not say that clean sheets had been put on the bed, as herself and fellow servant wished to say as little as possible. Had said that she had seen a kindness on the part of Mr. Neele which was not right. That he came often when Mr. Birch was not at home. Had never said that she had seen Mr. Neele cross over to her mistress's room. Had said that she was sure Mr. Neele was in her mistress's room, though her mistress po sitively denied it. Had no reason for saying she was sure of that, except the door being shut. Mr. Birch asked witness why she was sure her mistress was with Mr. Neele, but did not recollect what answer she gave. Did not recollect any thing else that passed between them. Her mis tress and the witness had had a few words. Witness said that she was uncomfortable. Her mistress asked her what she was uncomfortable about ? The same night her mistress told the circumstance to Mr. Birch, and witness and her fel low-servant were called into the parlour before her and Mr. Birch, to explain the reason of her being uncomfortable. Another meeting took place either in December or Ja nuary. Mr. Neele then said that she had told the master that he had been in their mistress' room, which he most positively denied,—and, upon witness attempting to speak, she was prevented from doing so. Mr. Neele gene rally dined at her masters' on Sunday, and lunched generally once or twice a week. Her master was sometimes at home on those occasions, and sometimes not ; but he was not aware how long he stopped. Mr. Neele had slept at the house since July, when her master and mistress were absent. Mrs. Birch left the Rectory in November. Mr. Neele was very popular, very regular in his attendance upon the Church, very attentive to the poor, and was thought very highly of. Re-examined by Mr. PLATT—Witness told her mistress she was uncomfortable. Her master, who was present, asked the reason, when witness said her mistress knew the reason. To which her mistress replied, she might tell her master all about it, as she could fight her own battles. Witness said she would not, as she did not wish to make them uncomfortable ; the mistress insisted that she would tell all she knew before she left the room. Witness said she would not, unless her fellow-servant was present. Both Mr. Birch and Mr. Neele assisted in administering the Sacrament. Mary Blowes, who was examined by Mr. BROWN, corrobo rated the statements of last witness. Had left the Rectory about seven months, and had been living with Mrs. Birch at I Holloway. On cross-examination by Sir F. Pou.oex, the witness stated that one of the children was sometimes with Mr. Birch, and at other times with Mrs. Birch. Had told Mr. Birch that she had suspicions with respect to her mistress and Mr. Neck. Re-exaramed by Mr. PLATT—Had conversed with Mr. Birch upon the subject only once, when Mr. Neele was not ~ ,resent. Had always stated the same account. Mr. John Williams resided at Hackney. Was a clerk in t.c. Bank of England. Knew Mr. and Mrs. Birch before they were married. Before residing at the Rectory Mr. Birch lived at Mr. Lushington's. Mr. Birch was married Mrs. B. in about fifteen months afterwards. They appeared to live 011 terms of affection with each other up to 1833, when Mr. Birch appeared in a distressed state of mind, and requested itness to call upon Mi , Neele ; he did so, when that gentleman sated he was guiltless of any criminality, for Mrs. Birch had come to his bed room, and he felt surprised at finding a person in bed; when he found it was Mrs. Birch he clasped her to his bosom, but recollecting himself he jumped out of bed, and begged of her to have the ro-,m. Witness urged him to leave the pa rish immediately. He afterwards called at witness's house, where he was received coolly, and stayed only a few minutes. Upon leaving, witness accompanied him to the door, when he stated that he felt hurt at being received coldly by Mrs. Williams. Witness said he could not be surprised at that, for Mrs. Williams had only that day heard of the reports in circulation. He asked witness what he would advise him to do, when witness said he could give him no other advice than to leave the parish, to which he made no reply. Cross-examined by Sir F. PoLLoe lc—Witness called upon Mr. Neele, in consequence of the ill feelings that seemed to exist be tween him and Mr. Birch. Witness did not know the cause of the difference, but he advised him, if he could not agree with Mr. Birch, to leave the parish. At another time, when witness urged Mr. Neele to leave the parish, he said he could not do so without having the whole matter enquired into, or it would be a confession of guilt on his part. Witness had no commis sion from Mr. Birch to endeavour to persuade him to leave the parish. Believed Mr. Neele made it a point of honour to stay in the parish. George Holland, examined by Mr. BROWN—Was a butcher, residing at Lower-road, Islington. In August last assisted in getting a female out of the New River. His father was with him. Took her to Mr. Smith's, the nurseryman. George Smith, a nurseryman, saw Mrs. Birch after she was taken out of the water, inquired who she was, and whom she wished sent for? She gate witness the name of Mr. Neele, for whom he sent to Shackel well. When he came, he was much agitated, and told witness he was surprised she had done it, for she had a most indulgent husband, and had everything she wished for in the world. Mr. Neele stated to witness when he first received his note, that he thought it was some person requiring spiritual consolation. After some time he told witness it was no use disguising it, and told him all, the parties begging him to keep it a se cret. Mr. Neele had an interview with Mrs. Birch, after which he fetched Mr. Birch, who appeared dreadfully affected. Mr. Neele said that she had not suffered enough to prevent her from committing a like offence. He called a witness on one side, and asked him particularly whether he thought she meant to drown herself, or it was only pretence. Cross-examined by Sir F. Poeeocx.—Mr. Neele came alone about six or seven o'clock. Mr. Birch and Mrs. Birch's sister came in about an hour afterwards. Could not say how they went away, as he had gone to bed. His servant and daughter attended Mrs. Birch. Several letters were put in and read, and this closed the case on the part of the plaintiff. Sir F. PoLLocx then addressed the Jury on behalf of the defendant. It was no question for the Jury whether Mr. and Mrs. Birch lived happily together, or whether Mr. Birch was a fond and indulgent husband. Not a syllable had been said against that; indeed the defendant himself admitted it. Mr. Neele had pleaded not guilty, and he, as his advocate, un dertook to satisfy the Jury, that under the circumstances of the case, it would be against all justice to find him guilty. If, as had been stated, the union of Mr. and Mrs. Birch was blessed with the approbation of both families, was it not singu har that no witness had been called who was a relation to any of the parties ? He was at a loss to know why, when Mr. and Mrs. Birch separated in November, their household was divided ; in common one servant living with Mr. Birch fora certain period, and then going to reside with Mrs. Birch, one child residing with its mother, and after a certain period going to live with its father and strange to say the two servants, the one residing with Mrs. Birch, and the other with Mr. Birch, were the only two witnesses to prove this singular case. It was singular also, if Mrs. Birch had been guilty of that with which she was charged, that Mr. Birch allowed their children alternately to re side with their degraded mother. All that was important to Mr. Neele was whether the verdict was for the plaintiff or the de fendant, as it would drive him from the honourable profession of which he was a member, and would send him forth a vaga bond without friends on the face of the earth. The amount of damages was not what Mr. Neele dreaded—he feared the loss of that which was more valuable, namely, the loss of his cha racter and station in life. The Learned Counsel having concluded his address to the jury on behalf of the defendant, the Lord Chief Justice briefly summed up the evidence, and said the case was purely for the consideration of a Jury ; but he trusted they would, in their quantum of damages, be governed by a dispassionate consideration. _ _ The Jury retired for about 20 minutes, and then returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 2001. COURT OF EXCHEQUER WRIGHT V. WOODGATE. This was an action for libel. The damages were laid at 5001. Sir F. Pommel:. stated that .the plaintiff in this case was a young man, who, being entitled to a sum of 5001. per annum, and a minor, was made a ward in Chancery. Ele wished to marry before he was of age, and he instructed his solicitors (the defendants) to make the necessary applications to the Court. Shortly after his marriage he was displeased with the manner in which they were conducting the cause, and wished ,to put it into other hands ; upon which, they addressed a letter to a Mr. Byrom, a solicitor, who had been appointed as the next friend of the plaintiff, which contained the alleged libels. After stating the particulars of the cause, the defendant went on to say, " He (plaintiff ) was apprenticed a short time ago to a very respectable sur veyor, but his master gave him up his indentures, as he was found to be worse than useless in the office. He was put un der terms by the Court of Chancery, to make a settlement upon his wife when he comes of age. We told him that we must see that done ; that the Court required us to do so, which makes him anxious to get some other solicitor, in order to avoid making any such settlement. These libels were imme diately sent to Mr. Jackson, the father.in-law of the plaintiff. Nothing could be more annoying, nor might lead to such do mestic calamity, as such unfounded calumnies. He trusted the Jury would give exemplary damages, and teach these solicitors to carry on their business properly. Mr. Byrom, a solicitor, residing at Liverpool, received a letter signed " Currie, Horn, and Woodgate," which he had copied, and sent to Mr. Jackson, the father-in-law of the plaintiff. Cross-examined--Had known the defendant for eight or ten years, as an extremely respectable firm, with a large prac tice in Chancery. Re-examined—He was appointed as next friend to the plain tiff in the suit in Chancery on the death of his master, who formerly had the conduct of the cause. When he came into the cause he found the defendants the London agents and legit them retain it. The letter did not alter his opin,on of Mr. Wright in any degree. \lr. E AGLE for the defendant submitted that the declaration h;d not been Droved, end ti tt the defon , Ldit wit; (.:'• u l ,ll for any trelenee. Tbe CouaT overruled the objection. . . Mr. EARLE then submitted that the communic.r.tion was a ed otle, 4r., it was made to Byrom, who was the client of the'detenciant—tlyrom being the party to whom they were , 0 look. for their costs, _ _ . FES LORDSIIIF saved the point. He thought the whole of THE STTN, LONDON, FRTDAY, JTTNE 26, 1P35 IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Je2VR 25. ie letter was a privileged communication, except that part of it relative to the apprenticeship. Mr. EARLE then addressed the Jury. He contended that, taking all the circumstances in the case into consideration, the letter was no libel, and that the defendants only did that which it was imperative upon them to do in the course of their duty. After a consultation between Counsel, in consequence of a remark made by the Judge, the plaintiff was nonsuited, and leave given him to move the Court above. The SPEAKER took the Chair at half-past three o'clock. On the motion of Sir M. S. STEWART, the Gourock Harbour Bill was read a third time and passed. The East India Dock Bill was read a third time and passed, on the motion of Mr. Clay. Major BERKELEY presented a petition from the owners of flys and vans, complaining of the duties upon their carriages. DORCHESTER LABOURERS. Mr. CLAY presented a petition from the Tower Hamlets, and Mr. AGLIONBY presented one from a place, the name of which we could not catch, praying that a pardon might be granted to the Dorchester labourers, on the ground that the Act un der which they were convicted was passed for quite a different offence to that of %%Lich they were guilty. Mr. BAINES presented a petition to the same effect from Leeds. Mr. POWER presented a like petition, but from what place could Tv be hoard, owing to the low tone in which the Hon. Member spoke. TIMBER DUTIES. Lord SANDON presented a petition from the ship-owners and burgesses of Liverpool against any alteration in the duties in foreign timber. THE LIVERPOOL CORPORATION. The NOBLR Loan also presented a petition, signed by 2,500 persons, against certain parts of the Municipal Corporation Re form Bill, which are calculated to deprive them of many privi leges which they had hitherto enjoyed, and which, as freemen, they consider themselves entitled to retain. Also one from the Corporation of Liverpool, stating the manner in which the said Bill was likely to injure the various local interests and public bodies of the town of Liverpool. The petitioners did not express any opposition to the general principle of the Bill, but they con ceived that their rights ought to be respected. Mr. E WAR T would not contradict the allegations, or op pose the prayer of the petition, but he trusted that the House would act in a manner consistent with its sense of public duty, and in accordance with the universal opinion of the country. NEW MEMBER FOR CARLOW. Mr. Sheriff RAPHAEL, who was introduced by Mr. O'Con nel and the O'Connor Don, took the oaths and his seat as Member for the County of Carlow. Lord SANDON resumed, and said that in reference to the last petition from the Corporation of Liverpool, it prayed that the House would provide securely for the payment of the debts due by the Corporation, and that a sinking fund should be provided out of the Corporation funds, before they were ap plied to other public purposes. They also represented that there had been contracts for the improvement of the town to a large amount, and as a security for these debts they prayed that these contracts should be confirmed by the provisions of the Act. They also prayed that the House would provide for existing interests and inchoate rights. There were many circumstances connected with the Ecclesiastical establishment, which, as they would come before the House in another shape, he would not make any observations upon. There must be some provision made not only for the interests of existing clergymen, who had accepted their situations upon the faith of the continuance of a certain income, but a permanent provision must be made to secure the services of future clergy men. There were other points on which it was necessary that some legislation should take place, either by a separate Bill, or by a clause in the Municipal Corporations Bill. It did not appear to him which course would be the most convenient. They also represented the state in which this Bill would place the vast dock estates of Liverpool. By certain trusts a Com mittee was constituted of 21 persons in number, of whore 13 were numbers of the Corporation, elected for 9 years. This provision would be inconsistent with the Bill before the House, and unless some provision were made, the Dock estate would be thrown into a state of great confusion. There were various other parts of the Act inconsistent with the Corporation as it at present existed, but he would not enter into it at present, but would content himself with moving that the petition do lie upon the table, and he called upon Hon. Members and the Government, when it was printed, to give that attention to it which the interests of so great a body so imperatively called for. Mr. E WART said that many of the statements in that pe tition were very objectionable ; and if there were no other ground for opposing its prayer, it might be found in the discussion which took place in that House last night, when it had been stated that a merchant of Liverpool had been charged 1,4001. in one year, merely because he was not a freeman of the town.—( Hear.) He regretted that the peti tion should contain a request to embody the provisions of a local Act in the general Corporation Reform Bill. Lord SANDON explained. The petitioners merely prayed that a certain provision of that Act would be embodied in the Bill. Mr. EWART hoped the House would not sanction the introduction of any particular provision for paying the clergy totally and uncontrollably out of the funds of the Corpora tion.—(Cries of Hear, hear.) He hoped the House would not interfere with the wholesome controul which existed under the present system of voluntary payment, by the insertion of any specific enactment. He would not enter further into the subject at present, as he felt that this was not the propor time. But so far as he could, he would prevent any attempt to fix permanently upon the funds of the Corporation the pay ment of the Clergy, which had been previously voluntary. Mr. THORNLE Y said a good deal of remark had been made upon the risk of the bondholders. It was true the Cor poration owed a debt of 800,000/., but they had an income of 100,000/. per annum. The Dock Company owed a debt of 1,400,0001., but they had an income of 200,0001. There was not, therefore, so much risk to the holders of the Bonds as had been imagined. He would support the Bill for effecting a Reform in the Corporation of Liverpool with all his heart. Mr, BAINES thought that with an income of 100,0001. a year the Corporation should have been able to provide very good accommodation. When the Noble Lord spoke of them in terms of eulogium for having done this, he was only saying what was just and true, and it proved that they had applied these funds judiciously. He begged to ask the Noble Lord a question with respect to the peculiar position in which the clergy of that town were placed. When the subject had been previously before the House, it was stated that certain corporate funds were applicable to the payment of the clergy. Now the question he wished to ask was, whether these funds could not be applied to the support of the clergy, without having recourse to the funds of the Corporation ? He thought that would be an arrangement to which no possible objection could be made. Lord SANDON said it was a very difficult legal question —he had no doubt the Clergy had an undoubted claim upon the property in question—which was not much. Lately the Churchwardens had petitioned to have the poor rates drawn out of the Corporation funds. Mr. M. PHILIPS said he must bear testimony to the fact, that the money collected by the Corporation of Liverpool was laid out in a very splendid, ornamental, and certainly very useful manner; but it was a heavy tax upon the trade and commerce of the country, and notwithstanding all the splen dour and taste with which it was spent, he could not allow that those ships which did not receive any benefit from the docks should be obliged to pay for them. The petition was then laid on the table. Mr. CAVEND IS H presented a petition from the innkeepers of a place in East Sussex, praying for the better observance of the Lord's Day. Mr. WILK S presented a petition from a congregation in Bristol, complaining of the vast number of beer-houses which were licensed. Mr. O'CONNELL said it would have been better had the petitioners complained of the Clubs, and the drinking of champagne.---( Laughter. ) Dr. BOWRING presented a petition from Rutherglen re lative to the Imprisonment for Debt and arrest of wages in Scotland. Colonel WESTENRA presented a petition from Tulla more, praying for the abolition of Tithes. Mr. FITZSIMON cordially aupported the prayer of the petition. Mr. AGLIONBY presented a petition from the mill owners of Keswick, praying for an alteration in the Factory Bill. ROCHESTER PETITION. Mr. FECTOR presented a petition from the Mayor, Al dermen, and Common Councilmen of the city of Rochester, against the Corporation Bill. The Hon. Gentleman was pro ceeding to read it at length, when he was interrupted by The SPEAKER, who said there was an order of the House against that waste of time, except in particular cases. Mr. FECTOR then moved that it be read by the Clerk at the table. Mr. GISB 0 RNE rose to order. The course the Hon. Gentleman was pursuing was ,a mere evasion of the order of the House. He did not expect that the House would allow its orders to be so set aside. Sir GEORGE CLERK said that the course the Hon. Gentleman was pursuing was the regular one. Every petition ought to be read.—( Laughter.) It was the regular form— the question was put upon every petition " that it be read." Mr. ROBINSON rose to address the House, hut could not proceed in consequence of the general cries for the reading of the petition. The petition was read at length by the Clerk of the House. It prayed that a qualification would be introduced into the Bil l, by which their rights should be protected. Mr. C. BULLER would not enter into an examination of the allegations of the petition, but he did not think that the Bill would produce any of those lamentable effects to society, in Rochester especially, after the admissions which they them selves had made.'—( Hear, hear.) Party feelings of the worst description appeared to have existed there for a long and the Corporation had carefully excluded all those from the Government of the city who were not of their own party, and the effect was, that the most respectable inha bitants of the city were deprived of those privileges to which they were entitled, in common with their fel low citizens.—( Hear. hear.) Besides this, the Corporation had resisted an investigation itato their accounts, none of which had been made public for several years.--( Hear, hear.) In deed, the governing body came to a resolution that the town clerk should rot produce any documents whatever to the Cor poration Commissioners.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. FECTOR said the evidence in the Report of the Cummissioneis was erroneous, and hi, boate parts very contra dictory.—( Hear.) STAMP DUTIES. An HoN. MEMBER (whose name was unknown in the Gal lery) presented a petition from Lymington Priors in favour of the repeal of the stamp duty on newspapers. Mr. BARNARD presented a petition from Inverness, pray ing for an alteration of the laws respecting landlords and tenants, and requesting the same might be referred to a Com mittee. /,/ "%I ht ? i) BEER SHOPS. Mr. GULLY presented a petition from Pontefract against the Beer Shops, end in favor of measures for the establish ment of temperau 0. Mr. WILLI presented petitions from the weavers of Coventry, and t: ,s, Hamlets, praying for relief. Sir J. C. HOBAIO USE presented a similar petition from 5000 of the weavers of Nottingham. TAXES ON NEWSPAPERS. Mr. K. TYNTE presented a petition from the lace-weavers of Sornersetshire, praying for the Repeal of the Taxes upon Newspapers. IRISH CHURCH. Mr. BARRON moved that there be laid before the House a copy of the oath taken by the Protestant Clergy in Ireland on being inducted to their livings. Sir G. CLERK objected to the Return on the ground of expense. The Hon. Member ought to state some reason to the House to induce them to agree to his Return, and he ought at least to have given notice of his motion. Mr. BARRON believed that the Protestant clergy took an oath on being inducted to their livings, to maintain a school in the living to which they were inducted, and he believed that that oath had not been kept. Sir JOHN 110BHOUSE wished to know whether the Hon. Member had given notice of this motion ? Mr. BARRON had not given notice, but he would give no tice now that he would move for this Return to-morrow. FACTORY BILL. Mr. HUTT moved that there be laid upon the table of the House the regulations adopted by the Inspectors of Factories under the Factory Regulation Act. Mr. HANDLEY gave notice that, when those returns were laid on the table, he would move for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal the present Act, and to introduce a new Bill, founded upon the Report of the Commibsioners. DUTY ON SALT IN INDIA. Mr. WILBRA iiiNiLe g edt; ask the- Right Hon. the President of the Board of Control. whether it was the inten tion of his Majesty's Government to take any steps to put an end to the monopoly enjoyed by the East India Company in the manufacture of Salt ? Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE said his attention had been di rected to the subject since he came into office. The Hon. Member was not perhaps aware that the income of the Com pany on the manufacture of salt amounted to 1,600,0001. per annum—( Hear). He was not aware that the Government intended to make any alteration in the law relating to this subject. The despatches sent out to the Indian Government on the 15th of April last, left the monopoly in the same con dition as it had previously stood. He begged to assure the Hon. Member that the subject should have his best attention, and that he would endeavour to make such an arrangement as would be satisfactory. Mr. WILBRAHAM gave notice that next session he should bring forward a measure upon the subject. A Message fro:n the Lords informed the House that their Lordships had agreed to several Bills sent up from that House. Sir GEORGE CLERK presented a petition from a place in Scotland, against the immoderate use of ardent spirits. TAXES ON KNOWLEDGE. _ Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition from members of a society for the encouragement of the Fine Arts at Worcester, praying for a repeal of the Taxes on Knowledge. Mr. HUME presented a petition to the same effect from between 2,000 and 3,000 inhabitants of Brist:il. He hoped a reformed Parliament would recollect that an educated people were more easily managed and better conducted than an igno rant people. Mr. HANDLE Y presented a petition from the borough of Stamford in favour of the Municipal Corporation Reform Bill. Mr. R. STE WART presented a petition from Hadding ton in favour of the Bill for the abolition of Imprisonment for Debt. CORPORATION REFORM. Mr. GISBORNE presented a petition to which he wished to call the earnest attention of the House. It was from the Deputies of several corporate towns and boroughs, at present in London, expressing their regret at the decision the House had come to last night with respect to the 10th clause of the Municipal Corporation Bill.—(Loud cries of" Hear, hear.") They were most anxious that this petition should be presented before any further discussion took place upon that measure. REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS. Sir MICHAEL SHAW STEWART, seeing the Member for Haddington in his place, begged to ask whether he meant to proceed with his Bill for the Registration of Births, Mar riages, and Deaths ? Mr. ROBERT STE WART, in answer to the Hon. Ba ronet, begged to state that it was not his intention to pro ceed with this Bill in the present Session, but having twice had the honour to introduce the measure to the House, he begged to state, injustice to the House and to himself, that his reason for abandoning the Bill was from a conviction that it was a measure which could only be satisfactorily carried through the House as a Government measure, and as his Majesty's Ministers had been urgently called upon to intro duce a measure for establishing an uniform system of re gistration throughout the whole empire, he (Mr. R. S.) had determined to press his Bill no further at present, in the earnest hope that that important question would be taken up by them early in the ensuing session. IPSWICH ELECTION. Mr. H AWE S presented a petition from John Pilgrim one of the parties in custody under the Speaker's warrant for a breach of the privileges of the House of Commons. The Hon. Member felt it his duty to lay certain facts stated in the petition before the House. The petitioner had been 30 years preceding this affair a confidential clerk to the firm of Sewell, Blake, and Sewell, solicitors of Norwich, and he stated that he had been entirely under their control ; also, that when he left England to go to Canada, in order to evade the execution of the Speaker's notice, that he was asked by the House of Sewell to give a note, which he did, for the purpose of giving a colour to his absence ; and that he received the sum of twenty pounds to pay his expenses. When absent, however, he became naturally anxious to get home and see his family. On returning to Norwich he was arrested on a criminal charge, and he now states that what ever imputations might be cast upon his character, he was willing to be brought to the bar of the House, and reveal every thing he knew of this transaction. This was cer tainly a fact in his favour, for none of the other petitioners had gone so far. He was willing to be examined, and to com municate all he knew respecting the affair. But there was another strong reason why the petitioner's request should be granted—he was to take his trial on this criminal charge on the first day of August next, and therefore he prayed for the clemency of the House to be extended towards him, that he might be discharged, and have sufficient time and opportunity to prepare for his defence, and a more just or rea sonable request could scarcely be made. He (Mr. Hawes) should now bring up the petition, hoping that the last request would at least be granted, and, as a matter of form, he gave notice that he should to-morrow move that Pilgrim should be discharged. Mr. GROTE rose to support the petition. Mr. HUME suggested to the Hon. Member for the City of London that the petition should be first read. He said so, because from what had taken place since the commence ment of this business, it appeared that men of respectable charac ter had been concerned to defeat the purposes of public justice. The question then would arise, whether a Special Committee should not be appointed to ascertain the truth of those facts. —( Hear, hear.) Not only did these individuals appear to be implicated, but men holding the rank of magistrates in the county of Norfolk had become involved very much in this mat ter, and a thorough investigation was therefore necessary. He hoped that the petition would be allowed to be read now, in order that to-morrow the question might be brought fully before the House. Mr. WARBURTON thought with the Hon. Member for Middlesex, that the appointment of a Committee would be by far the most convenient course. If these prisoners were brought to the bar of that House to be examined, he would suggest that the House should meet at twelve o'clock to examine them, in order that they might not inter fere with the important public business then before them. Mr. GISBORNE—If the House examined those prisoners at the bar, they would adopt a course that had never been adopted before. In every case they were heard by petition and not by a viva voce examination, and that they should be brought to the bar simply to be reprimanded and discharged. He agreed with the Hon. Member for Middlesex, that a committee ought to be appointed to investigate the circumstances of the case, and he thought that this would be a much superior course to examining the parties at the bar of the House, even if there was a precedent for that purpose.—( Hear, hear.) He would not throw any impediments in the way of this motion_ indeed, he would be very sorry if the motion were not adopted, as otherwise to-morrow being Friday Mr. Pilgrim would necessarily be detained till Monday ; and under the cir cumstances of there being an action pending against him, he would be glad when the petition was read if the petitioner were discharged. Mr. W A SON concurred in the prayer of the petition, under the circumstances stated by the Hon. Member for Lam beth. The question, that the petition be printed with the Votes, was then agreed to. On the question being put, that Mr. Pilgrim be brought to the bar of the House to-morrow, Lord JOHN RUSSELL was u,,derstood to object to the petitione r being*brought up to-morrow, as there so•much pub lic business. Mr. HAWES thought that if the Noble Lord had been in the House, and had heard the circumstance of there being an action against the petitioner, he would not object to the motion. Mr. WILK S reminded the House that even supposing Mr. Pilgrim was detained till Monday, he would still have five weeks to prepare his defence against this action. Mr. AGLIONBY—When other persons were in prison, they were not usually let out so easily. The simple ground stated _by the H on . Member did not, in his opinion, weigh much. Mr. HUME recommended the Hon. Member to postpone his motion till Tuesday. Mr. STUART presented a similar petition from Mr. Decent professing his readiness to appear at the Bar of the House to answer any questions, and praying for his discharge. The Hon. Member thought the best course to adopt would be that which w:, , s taken in the Camelford case in 1819, in which a chemist, who had beers summoned to attend' the bar of the House, had absconded. In that case, upon the parties giving taking to appear when called on to be examined, the House discharged him. Sir GEORGE CLERK was inclined to concur in the course proposed by the Honourable Member for Lan caster.--( Hear, hear.) The question was, whether these parties had not already suffered sufficient imprisonment for the offence of which they had been guilty. Generally in these sort of cases the course had been that the person offending i'muld be called to the bar next day, reprimanded and cis barged Mr. K EARSLEY then moved as an amendment, that all the persons now confined in Newgate, in consequence of the Report of the Ipswich Committee, should be brought to-mor row to the bar of the House, reprimanded, and discharged. The SPEAKER put the question, when— An Hon. MEMBER gave notice that to-morrow he should present a petition from Messrs. Sewell and Blake, denying all the statements that had been made with respect to them. Mr. WYNNE suggested that the motion and amendment should be withdrawn, in order to afford an opportunity of pre senting any other petitions on the subject. Mr. STEWART thought that the petitioners had already suffered sufficient imprisonment to assert the dignity of the House. He should therefore make the same motion on behalf of Mr. Dacent as the Hon. Member for Lambeth had dom., ith respect to Pilgrim. Sir J. WROTTESLEY thought that the House ought to take 24 hours to consider of the subject, and to examine the petitions when printed. Mr. GROTE thought that the discharge of these parties ought to be preceded by the appointment of a select Committee to inquire into the mystery which still e iisted. Lord J. RUSSELL was of opinion it would be better to postpone the consideration of the matter till the whole of the petitions of the parties were before the House. Mr. WYNN suggested, that the House should make a simple order, for the attendance of the parties to-morrow, in the custody of the Keeper of Newgate—and the House could afterwards resolve, as to the course to be taken respecting them.—( Hear.) After a few words from Mr. WILKs, Sir R. PEEL, and Mr. HAWES— The motion was withdrawn. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. Mr. GOULBURN brought up a Report from theDrogheda Election Committee, which stated that Catherine Adams, John Doyle, and Thomas Ferran, having been duly summoned to attend before the Committee and give evidence, had neg lected to appear. The Report having been ordered to lie on the table, the Right Honourable Gentleman then moved that the said individuals be taken into custody by the Sergeant-at.. Arms.—Agreed to. Lord HENNIKER then presented a petition from John Eddowes Sparrow, expressing contrition for his offence, and praying for his discharge from Newgate. Sir B. VERE presented similar petitions from John Bo t n and Arthur Bott Cooke. Mr. RUSHBROOKE presented a similar petition from Robert Beauchamp Clamp. Mr. JACKSON presented a similar petition from Frede- rick 0' Alallcy.. Mr. O'DWYER, referring to the Report of the Drogheda Committee, hoped the Housn would allow him to express his full concurrence with the proceedings adopted. THE DORCHESTER LABOURERS. Lord J. RUSSELL asked the Hon. Member for Finsbury whether be would have the goodness to postpone his motion, which stood first on the paper, for an address to his M a j es ty t o grant the pardon and order the recall of the Dorchester la- bourers. The reason he addressed this request to - the Hon. Gentleman was, that the House might go at once into Com mittee on the Municipal Corporation Bill. He would avail himself of this opportunity to afford the Hon. Gentleman some explanation in connection with this subject. The case of the Dorchester labourers was one to which he had given a great deal of attention, and after a careful consideration of a ll the circumstances, he thought it his duty to recommend to the Crown a remission of the punishment of those persons to a certain extent. The extent to which he had recommended a remission was this—that pardon be granted to the whole of them, there being six, on the condition that they remained in. the colonies—such being the form in which pardons were often granted—and with respect to four of them, he recommended that at the end of two years from the time of their arri va l in the colony, provided the Governor approved their conduct during that period, and no offence was attributed to them, they should receive a full pardon, which would enable them to re— turn to this country. But two of those persons named Love-. lace, whom he considered the most culpable, and who in fact had incited the others to the commission of thel offence, would not be allowed to return to England. Having given this ex planation, he would ask the Hon. Gentleman whether he would Press his motion now; and he could not help hoping that the lion. Member would not consider it necessary to do so at any future time, inasmuch as the motion was one of an unusual nature, and involved an interference with a prerogative of the Crown, viz., the exercise of mercy.—(Hear.) Mr. WA KLE Y presented several petitions, very numem ouslv signed, in behalf of the Dorchester labourers. Similar petitions were presented by Mr. Grote, Mr. Roe buck, Dr. Lushington, and Mr. Brotherton, who presented one from Manchester and Salford, signed by 20,918 persons. Mr. HARVEY presented a petition from an Attorney at Dorchester, who stated that he was so affected by the arbitrary and severe course pursued by the judge on the occasion of the trial of these men, that he could not remain in the Court to witness the remainder of the proceedings. Mr. PONSONBY was one of the Grand Jury who found the Bill, and there was no difference of opinion amongst them. Mr. T. ATTWOOD hoped the Crown would carry its clemency a little further, and place the whole of these unfor tunate men on an equal footing.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Mr. C. PELHAM said the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury could hardly be considered an interference with the King's prerogative of mercy, any more than it was an in terference of that description to petition the Crown for mercy, which was often done with success. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from Finsbury, praying a free pardon to the Dorchester Labourers. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that after a great deal of deliberation on the case, it appeared to be the opinion of all persons that these unfortunate men had violated the law. Mr. O'CONNELL had given the case much consideration, and the opinion he entertained was, that the conviction was not sustainable. After a few words from Mr. ROEBUCK, Mr. WARD said when it was seen bow much difference of opinion existed as to this case, he thought a very strong claim. was made on behalf of these men for mercy.—( Cheers.) Mr. HUME wished to press on the Noble Lord's conside ration that what appeared to be the general wish was, that all six of the men should be placed on the footing of the four. The Noble Lord could scarcely be aware of the anxiety which existed amongst all classes of the community on this subject, but it was partiCularly strong in that class with which he was most anxious that the Government should stand well. The prevailing feeling was, that the punishment of these men was a personal injustice. Though his Hon. Friend had given a pledge to bring the question forward, he was inclined to ask his Hon. Friend to postpone his motion for fourteen days, to give time to the Government to take the case again into consideration.—( Hear, hear.) There were the names of half a million of petitioners upon the table of the House, and three times as many more would have been sent, if sufficient time had been given. Lord JOHN RUSSELL had considered most deeply the case of the Dorchester labourers, and it did appear to him, on looking into what had been the conduct of two of the parties, he meant the two Lovelaces, that in the extension of mercy towards them they ought to be distinguished from the others. His opinion was, that the four had been the dupes of the two he had named. With respect to these two, then, his conviction at the moment he was speaking was, that if he recommended, either on his own authority or in consequence of any pro ceeding in this House, the Crown to extend further mercy to them, he should be lending himself to weaken the authority of the law, and to impair the influence which that great in stitution—trial by judge and jury, ought to have in this country.—( Cheering.) Mr. WAKLE Y said, that if the two men had been treated in the same manner as the other four, he should have been more disposed to be content. If the Noble Lord would con sent to re-consider the question, he would defer his motion • till some day next week, otherwise he should feel obliged to bring it forward. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it seemed to him, that after what he had said, it would be better for the Hon. Member to bring forward the motion at once. Mr. WAKLE Y then proceeded to lay his case before the. House, detailing'all the facts which have already been broug:ot under the public notice, and contending that the prosecuti on was illegal, the trial partial, and the conviction consequently wrong. He spoke of the excellent character and t'ne praise worthy attainments of the unfortunate labourers, and read. extracts from the letters of one of them, showing the nature of his mind and the delicacy of his feelings. The Hon. Mem ber concluded by moving an address to his Majesty for a re mission of the sentence of transportation. Mr. HUME seconded the motion. Lord JOHN RUSSELL was not then about to dispute• that the two Lovelaces did not conscientiously intend to en. danger the interests of society, by engaging in these unions and advising others to take oaths and enrol themselves as members of them. But what he did insist on was, that it was not less the duty of the jury who in this case administered the law, or the Government by whom it was counte nanced, to watch over and preserve the community from the contamination of that moral guilt which these per sons had unquestionably incurred. It would -be recol lected that in the course of 1833, there was a great many Unions established throughout the country, for the pur pose of adjusting bargains between the possessors of capital and those whom they employed, by.a forced and compulsory system, and by an unjust combination to direct the terms on which labourers and artisans should receive employment; and he•thought it was a fortunate event—an event for which Lord Grey was at the time well entitled to take credit, that all the dangers which such a state of things threatened to inflict on society, were overcome without the necessity of resorting to ccercive measures, and the suppression of which was left to ' the mere ordinary operation of the laws, without any strong • interposition on the part of Government, or the adoption o any new system of legislation.—(Cheers.) It was not, hr, contended, any exception to the forbearance which was tb.eu observed by the Government, that the Dorchester lab/Avers had been declared guilty of a violation of the law. He Was satisfied that the Hon. Member who brought forward the ques. , tion in so calm and judicious a manner, did not suppose that ' these men were guilty of any intentional breach of the laws; . but he was sorry that he or the Hon. Member for Middlesex should have declared, and the latter expressly pronounced hits his opinion, that these men were guilty of no offence whatever —that they had met for legal purposes, and that no t mixed. ~~/ he hd he )n ig Tit ie.. ,11 bp- syl lieu it a 'e ..9 'fie as• ive PY fly es,,, io rly his , K ~: ■