The Sun. — London, England, 1841-03-19 00:00:00

EVENING EDITION: passing his last days in comfort. The Hon. Member concluded by urging the House to support his motion. Captain PECHELL seconded the motion. Sir THOMAS COCHRANE opposed it as one highly prejudicial to the public service. He was sorry to take this course, but he felt it b be his duty to do so. Sir C. ADAM said it would only be necessary for him to address the House very shortly. He deeply regretted this case had been brought for ward, for he was sure that no court-martial, and no Court of Admiralty could act otherwise than had been done in this case. In 1807 this officer had been found guilty by a court-martial, for not permitting a frigate under his command to go into action, and was in consequence dismissed from his command. After the court-martial Captain Le Roche suffered six months to elapse before be made any representation to the Admiralty, who after examining his case, answered that they did not think proper to take any step in the matter. He then wrote more than one offensive letter to the then First Lord of the Admiralty on the sub ject. When the Board of Admiralty found the sere ;Nice of the court-martial was founded upon evidence that could not be in the smallest degree impugned, they felt they could not place him on the retired list of Captains. Captain La Roche sent a me morial to the Board of Admiralty in the year 1838, but the Board thought there were sufficient reasons for refusing the prayer of the memorial. He thought the application was one to which the House could not consent. The case having been de cided by the sentence of a Court properly constituted, it would be highly improper for the House to accede to the motion. Captain PECHELL said the Gallant Admiral had argued as an Admiral of 1807. He had denied the authority of the House to interfere, contending that the Government was vested with the administration of the .itrairs of the navy, and the subject should never be dis cussed by Parliament. There were many things which should be considered in relation to this petition. The cieeumstanccs in which Captain La Roche was placed were very peculiar and difficult. The object of the Vrcnch frigate and corvette was to decoy the English frigate under very powerful batteries ; and if ho had - risked the lass of his ship unnecessarily he would no doubt have been censured as strongly as he was now tor the exercise of prudence. It should also be remem bered that a frigate of thirty-six 12-pounders was opposed to a French frigate of fifty 18-pounders. It was not fair to keep back any of the circumstances trhich tended to pace the motion in a favourable light. it had been said that Captain La Roche had tlelayed his application to Parliament from 1808 to 1830. Why had he done so ? Because he knew that he could never obtain redress under the old system. When a Liberal Government came into power he immediately applied to have his case re-considered. Mr. ALSTON replied. Strangers were ordered to withdraw ; but on our re turn to the gallery we found that the motion had been withdrawn. Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL moved for Returns of each British Colony, Dependency, or Possession, in which, since the Legislative Union between Great Bri tain and Ireland, down to the present time, the office or offices of Chief or other Justice, or Judge, or Magis trate of any Supreme or District Court of Law, Equity, or Admiralty, or Attorney or Solicitor-General, has or have existed or been created : The name of each such office or offices in each such Colony respec tively, together with the date of creation : The name lad salary of each person appointed to each such office, - with the dates of each appointment : Whether such parson was,at the time of his appointment, a member of the bar of England, Ireland, or Scotland, and of which re spectively. The Hon. Member said, in the last ten years only five or six appointments of this nature had been iilaced at the disposal of the Irish Bar. Within the last year there had been twenty important legal ap pointments made in the colonies, and of those only one bad been referred to that Bar. Even that one was of an Inferior nature, namely, the District Judgeship in Ja maica, He trusted that, under these circumstances, the House would not reject his application. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it was quite impos sible to give the information asked for by the Hon. Member. He must, therefore, object to the motion. Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL inquired if the Noble Lord would give his consent if the last paragraph were struck out ? Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he had no objection to give similar Returns to those granted in 1832. The motion, omitting the last paragraph, was then agreed to. IMPRISONMENT OF WILLIAM BAINES. Mr. EASTHOPE said that when he gave notice of his motion with respect to the petition of William Baines, he stated that it was not his intention to go into the general question of the abolition of Church-' rues, but as much as possible to confine himself to the grievance complained of by the petitioner. He was aware, and the House must be aware, that it ould be very difficult, if not impossible, to state the aaae of William Baines, who was now immured in rfisou for the non-payment of a Church -rate, without referring generally to the question of Church-rates. He would, however, as far as possible, redeem the en gagement which he bad made at the outset, by adhering strictly and closely to the case of this individual, and avoiding as much as possible the general question of the propriety or impropriety of such impositions. It would be in the reoollection of the House that this petitioner stated that on the 17th of May, in the year 1.938, the inhabitants of a parish in Leicester, made a Church-rate of sixpence in the pound, which to this petitioner amounted to 21. 55.; that that was demarded of this petitioner in the month of August, and was by him then refused ; that when summoned before two of the Magistrates the petitioner dis puted the validity of the rate, and required them to withhold giving judgment in his case, and the case was thereupon dismissed. The petitioner then received a citation from the Arches' Court of Canter bury, dated November 15, 1838, to which he paid no attention. He was thereupon pronounced in contempt, was afterwards served with a legal proceeding, of which he took no notice, and subsequently received a monition for the payment of the rate and costs, amount ing, in all, to 1271. Sr. He went on to state that he was arrested in November last by the Sheriff's officer, taken from his family and business, and has ever since tqat time been a prisoner in the county gaol of Le.ces ter. He then proceeded to state that it was unjust to make a c'emand upon him for the support of a form of 4corship which his conscience disapproved ; that it was unjust, inasmuch as he believed that the demand was 1.a , 1 in law to send him for a remedy to an Ecclesiastical Court, and thus to call upon him to recognise the au thority of the dignitaries of a Church of which he was not a member, and to seek, at an enormous expense, a decision involving his rights, at the hands of parties who were interested in giving judgment against Mtn ; that it was unjust to take his person and oonfine him in gaol, when he had been guilty of no crime eg-inst society, and had merch corrie 1 out his I:rinciFlei t 3 a disienter from the Established Church, choosing to et o in eyGod rather than rear. Now he ( Mr. Easthope) did !an to argue that this MC had been deet with dif reUtli from the case which had formerly come under the consideration of the H ouse ; b ut h e did i ntend to present the cas e - echo House t as one whi c h was ill ca l cu l ate d either to se rve then interest of the Ch u r c h, or to promote way change of conduct on r the part of those who dissented teem it. —( Hear, hear. Be f or ec the proceedings coin ,ienced in the Ecclesiastical meeting or vesry, to tate into 1 1 consideration the propriety of p roc eedi ng- case, and they were unanimously further in the expedient to do so, on the groun d that thate it was ot ! o n : i e n g g ard te i r n ii arc the H ouse tendeJ to make an alteration in th p e re l s a e w nt r rates. He had the honour of Ciat day a petition from Leicester, signed by 6 000 WI " hi'ants, of all sects and parties. An address had also cne up to the Throne, signed by 7,0n0 females o f Leicester ; and he could saftly say that no ques tion bad ever excited more gPneral interest and sympathy in that borough than Mr. Baians's case. They felt that the means taken to enforce the payment of Church-rat es in tae case of an honourable and independent minded man, e ras a v i o l at i on o f all the pr i nc iples of justice, and was neei calculated to advance the interests of rc How would such scenes and such occurrences possibly be veligion in any way ?—( Hear, hear.) The question had been already discussed in that House, and they were aware what the sentiments cf the Noble Lord (.I. Ras- Gel) were on the subject. He believed it was generally ucknowledged that these occurrences were ill-adapted to ProMo.Ce the cause of religior, or the interests of the Es tab..lished Church. H e thought it isas extremely injudi tious to continue the enforcement of a law which acted against all the feelings of religion and humanity. He did not think the sufferings and imprisonment of Mr. Baines were required for the maintenance of any religieus worship, nor could not advance the interests of any religious com munity. Übe entered at any length into the subject of Church -rates generally, he felt that be should be offending against the pledge he had given to the House, but he re gretted much to find that there existed in the minds of some part'es on that subject much bitterness and uncharitableness, instead of the kindly f cl ings which should prompt them to dcv . Ise a remedy for the grievance. He would remind the House that no Church-rates were leve iin Leicester, except in that one parish, and no individual had more honestly and sincerely lamented the effects produ'ed by th at i nfliction than the clergyman who pre,ided. Mr. Ertkine, a name vene rated by every lover of liberty, had told hi m (Mr. East hope) that it was one of the greatest discomforts of his life, and that nothing was he more anxious for than to see an end put to such scenes. The question was not confined to the loyalty of Leicester, for already tweety. s i e indivi _ duals in different parts of the country had been served with monitions, and were liable to be immured in prison. e , Ten persons were actually summoned for the next day—( Hear, hear)--and it WAS impossible that, such a state of things, producing st r if e an d ill w ill, could be allowed to - g o on. Wh a t the feelings of Mr. Beines's fellow townsmen were, might be inferred from the fact that, although he had been four of the inclem en t months of winter immured in a gaol, he _ inelement et , his native been unanimously cl-cted a town coun sellor: boreugh for ore of the lar g est wards in it, containin g a population ' Nothing could exhibit ines of 20.000.—( Hear, hear.) sympathy with such a law"' strongly that there was no his obstinacy and conturnec e W ha tever might be said of inLeiceater that Mr. Qwtabser quarters, it wa s f e lt high courage and =flinching hene a st martyr — a man o f ;sidle Lord and the House would feely.He h ope d t h e that the enforce- merit of such a law in a community where such feelings prevailed, could be of no advantage ; but was, on the contrary, almost a scandal to the Church—was rather adapted to work its decline, and to retard the gs at ob jects which it was the duty of the Church to aim at, and which religion, when lac to its own genial i iraience, would be sure to produce —( Hear, beer.) Ti Hon. Member concluded by moving a resolution, to t' e effect, that the puni-hment of Mr. Baines, for refusing to pay Church-rates, was to punish him for acting in accordance with what he regarded as a religious duty, and was a vio lation of the principles of religion and justice. Lord J. RUSSELL said his Hon. Friend had brought forward the present motion, having given notice of a motion to take the petition of Mr. Brines into con sideration. He lees not aware, till it had bceu read from the Ch a i r , o f th e na t u re of the motion, which, considering no notice had been given, was of a somewhat wide and sweeping character. Although the particular grievance of Mr. Baines was made the ground work of the motion, the cause of the grievance was ono affecting the general que s ti o n of law, and the resolution did not go so much to release Mr. Beines as to denounce the existing law, as one under which the subject should no longer suffer. Using that argument, and not saying that the resolution was not a proper one under certain circum stances, he must say that theuotice should have been some what longer than the Hon. Member had thought proper to give.—( Hear, hear.) With respect to the particular case of Mr. Baines, he did not mean to give any opinion as to whether the parties were justified in the course they had pursued ; but with regard to that i llouse, the question, as the Hon. Gentleman had put it, was, whethe• s was a violation of conscience to enforce the law of the land with regard to the payment of Church-rates?—( Hear, h ear .) He had no hesitation in answering that question directly in the negative. He could conceive very well that it was an impost which it was not desirable to maintain, and that it might be expedient to adopt some other plan. Various grounds had been stated by the Honourable Gentleman, on which it ought he considered advisable to alter the low; but it was a totally different question, as to whether Mr. Baines was to set up the standard as to what was to be the law for himself, and that what he thought oppressive to his conscience was no longer to be tolerated. —(llcer, hear.) Mr. Baines had stated his own case in his peti tion. He did not deny that the inhabitants had made a Church-rate, and therefore it was clear that a rate had been made by the parishioners, of which the legality had not been questioned. He refused to pay the rate, and was cited before the Magistrates. If he meant to dispute the gate, if he meant to say that that rate was not legally hil -1 posed, he could have had reeourse to the Court esta blished by the law in such cases, and endeavour to show that it was not legally laid on. If he was proceei. ing fairly, such would naturally be his course. Then, with regard to the law, ho (Lord John Russell) need not argue whether it was a wise or a politic one. The place fur disputing the legality of the rate was the Arches' Court at Canterbury, to the citation of which the petitioner gave no attention. Now, was that a justifiable cause ? Were they, the House of Common?, to say that, so long as there was a Court appointed to try that case , and that that Court proceeded in the regular course to hear what the petitioner had to say, and cited him to appear—be cause of his disputing the legality of the rate, the peti tioner was himself to decide that that was a law which was not to be obeyed? He refused to pay any attention to the citation, anti, therefore, Hon. Members were to adopt a re solution that the law was a most oppressive and unjust one. Could they keep up any law by that means? William Baleen thought that the existence of Church -rates to sup port the Established Church—that decision with respect to Church-rates according to the law of the land by the Ec clesiastical Court, was unjust and oppressive, and a violation of the rights of conscience. But another man might think the same thing with regard to any other law—another might have just the s ame op i n i on, t h at i t was a violation of the rights of conscience, to ask him to con tribute anything to the payment of the army and navy, which were used, as they sometimes must be, to produce bloodshed. Any payment that might be required to sup port the law or the State might be refused, on the ground that the particular i n di v id ua l re f us i ng f e l t that it was a violation of conscience to contribute to its existence. Where was the distinction to be drawn ? How could they say that Mr. Baines had the sight of deciding for himself? Was he to lay down what was lawful, or what was unlaw ful? Ought not every individual in the United Kingdom to have the same power and right as Mr. Baines to apply to that House to make a resolution in his favour, that such and such laws were oppressive, and a violation of con science ? It was not, therefore, on the ground merely of Church -rates, but upon the general question as to the support of the laws, that he (Lord John Russell) thought it impossible that Abet House could give its sanction to the resolution of his Honourable Friend. With regard to the general question of Church -rates, he did not know that his Hon. Ft fend had entered much into it; and he (Lord J. Russell) did not conceive that it was necessary for him to enter into it now. He certainly regretted that there was not a mode for providing for the support of the Church Establishment in a less objection able way than the present mode was. It was very different, however, to establish by any resolution, or by any Bill that might be brought into that House, to give countenance to the opinion stated by several Dissenters, both with respect to that case and Church-rates gene rally, that it was not proper to contribute to the support of the Established Church. He would be sorry that, by any commutation or any other mode, they should give any support to that opinion—an opinion which, though held by many respectable persons, was, however, incom patible with the existence of the Established Church, and could not be defended by any sound argument. The early Christians were commanded to pay tri bute to the Roman Emperors, which were applied to such purposes as the erection of temples to Jupiter and the other heathen gods, where their superstitious and abominable rites were performed. Yet those early Christians were told by the highest authority to pay taxes. Now ho could not really understand that it was a violation of the rights of conscience to pay sums cf money which were to go to the support of places of worship equally Chri.tian with the form of Christianity which the indivi dual paying felt himself bound solely to believe. That did not seem to him (Lord John Russell) sufficient grounds to say that they had a conscientious repug nance and feeling against such a contribution. Ho wished as far as possible to respect all conscientious feelings. but they should not allow an unlimited decision to every individual in that respect, and that they had merely to pronounce the word " conscience" in order to relieve themselves from the payment demanded. It was impossible that the State could adopt such a principle. The pe itioner said that it was unjust to confine him in gaol when guilty of no crime against society, but be merely carried out the principle of dissenting from the Church, wishing to obey God rather Vann man. He (Lord J. Russell) had no doubt that the latter portion of the statement was true, but he could not completely exonerate thepetitioner from any crime, for be was giving a bad example. It was a mode of act ing which would go to shake confidence in the law, and therefore it was in itself a crime against soci ty to act in that manner. With respect to another mode of contri buting to the Church-rates it was totally a different quei•- •ion. This wan one alteration in the law which he had before spoken of. namely, to make the enforcing of the law take place in a Civil and not in al Ecclesiastical Court. If a Church-rate were levied and enforced at the Quarter Sessions, from which there was an appeal to a superior Court, such a tribunal must be a competent one, he thought, to decide either upon Church -rates or upon tithes. With regard to altering the law in that or in any other respect it was quite a different question from an individual assuming, at a sacrifice to himself, but assuming the iesponsibility of deciding what law ought to be obeyed, and chat rates and taxes ought to be eeforcei. He thought the House would not sanction that each ind:vi. should decide for himself. If the House thought it better to abolish Church-rates altogether, let them decide so on general grounds, but let them not agree to a resolution which was in favour of refusing the Church-rates that were legally claimed—a resolution which might bo also used in favour of disobeying any law whatever. Mr. HUME was opposed to the sentiments uttered by the Noble Lord who had just sat down. The claim for Church-rates with respect to Dissenters was an unjust one. The iebble Lord complained of any man taking the law into his own hands. The Noble Lord well knew that that was the mode in which oppression Lai been met in all ages. Ho (Mr. Hume) was sorry to hear the Noble Lord refer to the Roman Emperors to support his argu ments. The other Light the Hon. Member for the Uni versay of Oxford, said that no man could be an honest men who would pay for the support of a religion in which he did rot believe. He ( Mr. Hume) wished the Hon. Ba ronet was now present to hear what was advanced in the recollection 1833,. when Lord Althorp broughto tion of abolishing Churclx.rates Noble Lord (Lord John Russell ) a t° and Ohl not the House decide I ) thought—that Dissenters ought The Noble Lord then took cf 265,0001. to support the fabri c sum, the Noble Lord declared,h a u (1 sion, to propose to be paid out The Roman Catholics of Ireland were relieved of the payment of 76,000/. Hume ) at wou h l he did call forward the ques getber. Did not the support . that measure, a large majority-266 he eff 55 not to pay Church rates ? ,000/., and left the sum the Church, and that e t; I . l:z : d i on a future occa onsolidated Fund. also at the sameperiod After suchh been given in that House—such decisions oome votestoaftad the declarations of the present Ministers on this head_. er was it not fair to expect that .Government.svould not allow — r period to clap: e without proposing some remedy any longer few further observations - for the abuse ? After a . ons on the which importance of a meeting at he was . present great purpose of opposing the in Leicester, convened for the impost of l Church-rater, the Hon. Member cone udel by seconding the motion. Sir ROBERT INGLIS would not enter at 101101 into the subject of Church-rates, as the Hon. Member ( Mr. Easthope) said he would postpo ne th e consideration which of the general question. The eottnetionich he ( Sir , Honourable R. Ingli.) made on the subject to which tee ' ht man ought Member opposite (Mr. II.) referred, was that a not voluntarily to contribute to the support of aChurch which he did net believe to be the true one according to the Word of God, yet that he ought to submit to the law ; and as far as he ( Sir R. Inglis) could he would make all his fellow subjects submit to the law which bound nut the ir selves but their properiies to the support of schools and places of worship belonging to a creed in which, as individuals, they might net believe.—( Hear.) The question was not what were the personal opinions of Mr. W. Babies ; the question was whether he occupied a tenement in the parish of St. Martin's, in the borough of Leicester, subject to a Church -rate, and which, whether it were occupied by Mr. David Salomons, Mr. Joseph Hume, Sir Robert Inglis, or Mr. William Baines would be subject to it. The question had not the least rr ference to the present opinions of the individual, but to the value of the tenement he occup i e d . I f t h at tenement remained un occupie lit p a il nothing—but if occupied, whether by Jew, 'Turk, heretic, or infidel, it paid the same sum: `lr.Bain eoccupied this tenement, t knowing that it was liable to thisimposition, and knowing that on this account he paid so much less rent for it, or if ho bought it, that ho paid a gross sum so much th e l ess than if it bad' not been subject to this imposition. The resolution on the table of the Home was that Mr. Baines had been sued for THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, MARCH 19, 1841 a sum of 21. ss. for Church-rates Would the Hon, Member ( Mr , Easthope) deny that this tenement was subject to pay this sum long before Mr. Baines occu pied it, perhaps long Wore Mr. Baines w a s ben, and would he deny teat it would pay the same sum if be him self (Me. Easthopc) should . occupy it tomorrow ? Over and oVer again he ( Sir I. H. Inglis) had said that this was net a question of creed but of property. It was the property which paid and net the creed; and if they re leased the property from this imposition, they would give a premium to all persons to di ssen t f rom t h e E sta blished Church. The only ground of nat:onality in the Church was that the nation paid in this way for its support. The nation paid nothing in respect of titbea. Tithes were given ante:edently to the possession of any Hon. Member in his property. The only act by which the nation conse crated its substance in any degree, small as that degree was, to the support of the Church, was that by which the land was made liable to repair and maintain the fabric of the Established Church. The Hon. Member (Dr. Nichol) appeared to deny such enactment ; he ( Sir R H. Inglis) would hardly presume to contradict any statement made so authoritatively, but all his (Sir Robert H. Inglis') reading led him to the conclusion that the fact, that, from the earliest Saxon times, Church scot was distinctly bind ing upon all property in England to maintain the fabric of the Church, was as clear as any fact connected with our history. The oldest landed proprietor in England did not inherit-his broad acres or his castellated mansion on any other tenure than this, and, in stating this, he (Sir R. Inglis) was only stating what he was sure every lawyer in the House was prepared to maintain. The law might be a bad one ; if so, alter it ; but while it remained un altered every acre of land and every tenement in England was held subject to this imposition, varying, it might be, according to the incidents and necessities of each parish, but still subject to such, and, as he again repeated, having no more reference to the creed of the occupant than it bad to the colour of his skin or the height of his stature. For these reasons he (Sir R. H. Inglis) hoped that the decision cf the House would be on the present occasion, and hereafter on further discussions on this subject, to re ject the proposition which the Hon. Member (Mr. East hope) hod advanced in defence, perhaps, of his friend and of the township with which be was connected, but still in defence of a proposition which was utterly untenable by him or by any other person..—( Hear, beer.) Dr. NICHOLL said he did not agsee with his Hon. Friend ( Sir R. li. Inglis) that this imposition was one imposed by any positive statute, because it was one estab lished by the commas law of the lond, and not by that authority only, but also by that of the Court of Exchequer in the Braintree case, in wbich a Court, composed of e'ght of the most distinguished Judges that ever adorned the bench, laid down the law in tie following manner:-- " We are all of opinion that the obligation by which the parishioners, that is the actual residents within, or the owners of lands or tei ernents in, every pa rish, are bound to repair both the par i-h church, whenever it may be necessary, and to provide all things essential to the service therein, is an obligation imposed upon them by the common law of the land." He supposed, therefore, the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Easthope) would not dispute the law of the Court of Exchequer, though he had thought fit to dispute that of the Hon. Member for Oxford. But in this case the sum being ender 101. the Ecclesiastical Courts had no jurisdiction, and Mr. Baines was summoned before the Magistrates. He did not appear, but was re presented by a gentleman named Davis, who declared that he appeared for him, and that the Magistrates had no power to proceed in the matter, inasmuch as Mr. Baines objected to the validity of the rate, and in tended to do so in the Ecclesiastical Court, and that it was on the ground of this alleged invalidity that the pay ment of the rate was refused. The House would recol lect that under the 53d George 111., a person who used this plea ousted the jurisdiction of the Magistrates, and called into exercise that of the Spiritual Courts. These being the facts of the case, let Mr. Baines reconcile it if he could to his own sense of honour ,and duty, and plain deal ing to plead the invalidity of the ra'e in the Ecclesiastical i Courts, when he had determined never to appear to con test its validity. He was sure the Hon. Member for Leices ter would not vindicate such conduct. Lie (Dr. N.) was sure that he was a man of too high honour and too high principle to say that any man was justified in throwing off by false pretences the jurisdiction which properly attached to his case. He (Dr. Nicholl) might respect - a man who resisted a law which he thought to be unjust, if he did so boldly and openly, but he could feel no respect or sympa thy for a man who put forward an intention to dis pute the validity of a rate in the Ecclesiastical Court which he afterwards said he had never entertained. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then recited the facts of the case, and traced the proceedings against Mr. Baines through their several stages, as they have been frequently before the public, and proceeded :—.Now, again, he asked, was there any hardship, was there any "gross personal wrong," as it had been termed, inflicted upon Mr. Baines? There was a sum which by the common law of the land was binding upon all the property of this country, and there was a summary remedy for enforcing payment of it. But Mr. Baines had thought proper to throw it off and to say that he would appear in the Eccle siastical Court ; yet when cited there he had refused to appear, and consequently having thrown up the remedy provided by law against his property, a remedy neces sarily attached itself against his person. It might be a convenient thing to remain a martyr. The Hon. Member for Leicester seemed surprised, but he (Mr. E.) could not be made a martyr of, for, being a privileged person, he would come under the operation of Lord Brougham's Act. The Noble Lord (J. Russell) had alluded to an alteration in the law and to the expediency of removing these matters from the Ecclesiastical to the Civil Courts. If tbo'Noble Lord should think fit to pro pose such an alteration, he (Dr. Nicholl) would give it his best attention, but he thought in this particular case, to which he had strictly confined himself, and not as he thought the Hon. Member for Leicester bad done " kept the word of promise to the ear and broke it to the tense," that he had shown that Mr. Baines was not entitled to the respect or sympathy of the House, and he trusted, there fore, the House would without hesitation negative the motion.—( Hear, hear. Sir R. INGLIS explained. His Hon. Friend (Dr. Nicholl) had misunderstood him. Ho had not referred to the statute law at all, but had said that the right of the Church of England was an antecedent right. But al though he did not say it was created. he believed the right was confirmed by statute. Mr. HAW E S said it was difficult to make any observa tions on this question without alluding to the general ques tion of Church-rates. He would, however, in what he was about to address to the House, endeavour to keep strictly to the question of the allegations in Mr. Baines' petition, without diverging into the question of Church rates generally. If he had wished any argument in sup port of the general allegation of that petition, that the petitioner had been subjected to great injustice and hard.. ships, he could not have found one more powe:ful or more conclusive in support of the truth of that allegation than the statement of tho Hon. and Learned Gentleman who had last addressed the Houle, because, without raising the question of conscientious scruples at all, tie descrip tion of the legal steps which had bean taken, and which had been detailed by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman with such minuteness, was one of the strongest grounds of the truth of the allegation in the petition, that the peti tioner had been treated with harshness and injustice. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said, that if his Bill of last year had boon assented to, this could not have bap.. pened. He (Mr. Hawes) would admit, that if the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's Bill had passed, Mr. Baines would not have been in gaol, but he would have had his goods seized, which would have been a.s great a violence against him as the incarceration of his person. Undoubtedly thrt Bill would have mitigated the expenses; but when he relerrod to his own effcrt., he should have recollected the recommendations of the Eccle'isstical Commissioners ten years ago, which were infinitely better than the Bill of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman; and although, since that report had been made the Hon. and Learned Member had been in office, and had, he believed, been a Member of the House of Commons, and was, if ho recollected arigkt, a Member of that Commission, yet, with the ex ception of his abortive effort of last Session, he had made no attempt whatever to mitigate the enormous expenses in flicted by those Courts upon those who opposed Church rates. Dr. NICHOLL referred the Hon. Member to'the Bill cf 1835. Mr. HAWES wished to refer to:an Act of Parliament and not a Bill.—(Cheers.) What would all the 13;11s in the world do to remedy the sufferings thus inflicted ? Let them only look to the Statute Book, and see whether there was one Government or ether measure on the subject. It was a reproach to the House tl'at no steps had been taken to carry their recommendations into effect. As a general maxim, he perfectly agreed wilt what bad fallen from the Noble Lord, that conscientious scruples could not be attended to when they interfered with the exe cution of the law ; and that if they were attended to it would be in many cases impossible to carry any law into effect; but he thought a clear distinction might be drawn between cases in which the maintenance of good order in society was concerned, and those which were for the support of a religion from which the majority dissented, and could not conscientiously contribute to the mait.te dance of a sectarian church. With regard to bridges and highways, the people, uithout rale-once to religion, derived benefit from them, but not so from the Church; and with regard to the high authority to which the Noble Lord re ferred, he would remind them that the contribution so levied was not applied to maintenance of the Pagan reli gion, but to the support of the State generally. He must say, that on all occasions, he preferred the statute to ilte commo n lair, regarding as he did the common law to be nothing more than what any Judge at any time might de clare to be his interpretation of former uses and customs. But th e Hon. and Learned Gentleman had never told them how the common law, which required all parties to aid in the st e e e ctetion of the Church, was to be carried into the difficulty.—(cieweet.—(Loud cheers.) That was to decide the ".) Was the majority of the parish question, and that question the Learned Judge; hal left totallynnntouclied. Agai n , h ow cou ld th e enforce Ecclesiastical Courts orcethe com mon l aw ? They had no means of enf orc i ng it hir. Baines wes not in prison for a violation of the common had been means la w ; he wa s e i t h er i n pr i son for contempt or as a debt or f or costa, and th e E cc l es i ast ; ea l Covets generally seiz e th e i r victim by runnir.g up an im mense bill of costs ; that was a , abuse, no and it was a disgrace to the House that and cr .l ju g taken to remedy it. The Hon. Memb er for Oxford had said that Church - rates w ere a necessary incident of pro perty ; if s o how came it thet parish Vestries had th e p ower i of deciding whet her p ro f cit y sho uld pay Cr not ?and was a necessary inc ident then he mu st contend the Church rates must last as long as property lasted.—(Hear, bear.) The fact was that Church-rate was a kind of contr i bution in aid of the tithes for the snppert of th e Church, to be paid or withheld as might seem best to the majority of the parish ; and if they were wi t hh old there was no means of enforcing them by means of the Statute or Common Law. He regretted the Noble Lord had not taken that opportunity of throning some light on the views of the Government as to the general question. Were Church-rates to be allowed to be continued in their present state? Was the law, according to the recommen dation of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, to be made Learned Gentleman more stringent ? The lion. and knew that the law, as it stood at present, was a scandal ; ttnd with his legt,l and ecclesiastical subtlety proposed to simplify the law, to cheapen the prceess, but to make it more stringent, and that he thought would please the Dissenting body. Why that was the recommendation of tie Ecclesiastical Commission, and the reason why it had not bodu adrpted3 was that the Government, calling itself Liberal, dared not to introduce a measure so severe in its operation. Did they forget that Church-rates were abolished in Ireland, and did not exist in Scotland ? Was the peace of the Church in every parish in the kingdom to be disturbed, and the House constantly to receive p:tit►ons complaining of their vexations for the paltry considera tion of what might be levied from the people for the sup port of the wealthiest Establishment in the world? In or der to settle the question of Church•ratee, he thought that all parties must concede a little to the general peace of society. He did not believe that the Dissenting body entertained those hostile feelings to the Church, or was actuated by that jealousy of the property of the Church, or the anxiety to possess it themselves, which was some times ascribed to them. They know that the principle by which they were upheld was a stronger one, and that, as the Church adopted the voluntary principle, so would it would become more strong and powerful likewise. He begged pardon if he had trespa.,sed on the House, but he felt strongly on the subject ; and, without wishing to injure the Church, he could not consent to force the consciences of those who dissented from it. D. NICHOLL explained. Sir ROBERT PEEL raid the question was not as to any al oration of the law as to our jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts, or as to any alteration in Church rates, but it was whether the House of Commons would lend its sanction to the principle that there were certain exceptions to the duty, wl , ieh every man owed, of obedi ence to the law of the land ; and that provided a man could allege conscientious scruples, that man slrould be allowed to violate the law.--(Loud cheers.) If this prin ciple were once apented to, where would they limit it? Who would decide what was a conscientious scruple? The Hon. Memb:r for Kilkenny said, if any man would g.) to prison rather than pay, his scruple was a conscier:- t'ous ore; and another flon. Member had stated that re ligious scruples wore conscientious ones. But suppose a man disapproved of them, and prefered going to prison rather than pay taxes, how would they act in that case ? (Cheers.) 'I he Hon Member said that Scotland had no Church -rates. Now be apprebendo:l that if the Hon. Gentleman or any member of the Episcopal Church purchased or inherited a large estate in Scotland, he would be called upon to pay his quota to the support of the Preebyterian Church established, and if he objected on the ground of his being an Episcopalian, that that would be no exemption from the payment of Church-rates, or from the consequences of the violation of the law. If this resolution were assented to, they might have every wealthy Episcopalian in Scotland alleging conscientious scruples as an excuse for the payment of their duet, and coming to the House for relief. Suppose Mr. Baines had objected to pay tithes, would they relieve him there ? The Hon. Gentleman had said Church-rates were ancillary to tithes, and certainly if he was entitled to relief in the one case he was in the other. But where would they draw the limit as to religious scruples ? He found petitions pre sented against the New Poor-law on the ground that Dis senters were deprived of their religious rights in union workhouses; and others stating that the system of relief under the Poor-law was contrary to humanity, justice, and Christianity. Again, in Scotland there were petitions de scribing patronage as a lording of it over God's people contrary to Scripture, and he rather thought that when cer tain persons in Scotland alleged conscientious scruples on that subject, he had heard it said on the benches opposite that if the law were wrong it ought to be altered, but that while it existed no one belonging to a Church established by the State ought to be permitted to act in violation of it. Supposing that parties in Scotland were ready to go to prison for their disobedience to the law, would the Hon. Member for Kilkenny then say, in a resolution of the House of Commons, that they were justified by their reli gious scruples? Ho (Si r R. P ee l) thought the only true principle was, that whilst the law remained in force it should be obeyed.—( Hear, hear.) If it was wrong, let it be altered. It would be an utter violation of all respect for the authority of the Legislature if the House of Com mons, which was only one branch of that Legislature, should sanction a violation of laws which the other branches in concurrence with itself had enacted. With respect to the Poor-laws, were there not many men who had conscientious scruples respecting that, and denounced it as a violation of the laws of God ? How could Hon. Gentlemen presume to determine whether their allegations were true or not ?—(HeAr, bear.) Mr. Baines did not ask the House to pass such a resolution as the present. All he asked for was an alteration of the law.—( Hear, hear.) He (Sir R. Peel) thought the question of the policy or justice of the law was quite foreign from the pre sent question. He asked the House of Commons to consider that if it took upon itself to determine in what case the law should •be respected, its own authority would be con demned. The Courts of Law were bound to enforce the law, and if this resolution were agreed to, the law would not be altered, and Mr. Baines would not be liberated. Mr. ELLIOT said, without giving any opinion in fa vour of Church-rates, he would not vote for this resolu tion, which would go to sanction an opposition to the laws. Mr. E ASTHO PE in reply said that Mr. Baines came before the House on the authority of a resolution to which the House had come in a similar case. He had not riot ously or violently resisted the law • but on the contrary had patiently submitted to its penalties, although he pa tiently, though firmly, declined to comply with its de mands. He was supported in his determination to suffer rather than yield to demands which his conscience rejected, by 30,000 inhabitants of Leicestershire. Mr. HALFORD denied that the inhabitants of Lei cestershire would countenance a resistance to the law. Mr. EASTHOPE said that 20,000 inhabitants of Lei cester bad elected Mr. Baines a Member of the Council whilst he was in prison—(Hear, bear)-7,000 women signed the pe.tition for biii liberation—( Hear, and a laugh) —and 4,000 signed a petition in favour of the resolution now before the House. The House then divided. The numbers were— For the resolution Against it 45 large bill transacthns of the Bank of England there mu-t be some bills protested, but the amount during the last nalf-year was not such as to call for any remark.—( Hear.) Mr. THOMPSON mark some remarks upon the gentle mail who had preceded the present Governor in that chair (Mr. T. A. Curteis), and wished to know whether there had not been a loss of 100,000/. by the failure of the house with which that gentleman was connectel ? The Govitargon replied that the amount was nothing like that sum. The amount proved under the estate was upwards of 14,0001., and of that it was probable 5,000/. would be paid in bills, besides a dividend. Mr. HAMMOND—Then the Bank would lose about I 0 000/. Mr. SALOMONS seconded the amendment moved by Mr. Thompson. On the amendment being put, Mr. BLACKBURN rose to address a few words to the Court. He said that in a great commercial city like this it was impossible to conduct business without some losses —without meeting with some insolvencies.—( Hear.) But he was afraid they (the Bank Proprietors) bad more than their share of them. _ _ _ Mr. FIELDER regretted that the amendment had been brought fcrward, and said he thought they ought not to impugn the unfortunate gentleman who had held the post of Governor by any act of theirs or the Court of Direc tors, in relation to the circumstance alluded to by the mover of the amendment. It was necessary that they should repose confidence in their management, and that confidence the present Governor and Directors certainly had. It was their (the Proprietcrs') duty, however, to ascertain the basis upon which their affairs stood, and with this view he should like to have the sth by-law read by the Secretary. The by-law was accordingly read : it was that which orders that a Court of Directors shall be holden once a week, at least, for the despatch of business. In answer to a question, the GOVERNOR said that no kind of preference was ever given to the bills of a Director —in fact, they were more strictly scrutinized than others. Mr. BARNES HAMMOND expressed his suprise that there was not a larger increase.in the "rest," and cmld not tell how to account for it. He heard that they were cluing ne a. ly all the business of London at 5 per cent., and yet there was only an increase of about 2,0001. on the " rest." Ha feared it was to be attributed to the continual alterations in the building.—( Hear.) The amendment was then put, and negatived; and the question for the dividend carried with only three diss'n tients, being the number of hands held up for the amend ment. The GOVERNOR informed the Court that the dividend warrants would be delivered and payable on Tuesday, the sth of April. Mr. Coerce then called the attention of the Proprietors to the omission which had been made when the Bank Charter had been renewed, in not obtaining some com pensation to the Proprietors fir the privileges which they had been deprived of—compensation to which even the ene mies of the Bank admitted they were justly entitled. Mr. Tnomesois brought forward a motion relative to the election of Directors. He thought the election ought to be as open as that at the East India House. He believed that his list was the only one that was defaced, and in order to prevent his conduct from appearing invidious, ho should submit the motion—That the Goveraor, Sc , do, at all future elections of Directors, furnish a list of 100 names, out of which 24 Directors shall be chosen. After a short discussion, the GOVERNOR said the sug gestion of the Hon. Proprietor should be complied with. The GOVERNOR then said, that before the meeting ad journed, he was anxious to avail himself of the last oppor tunity he would have of addressing the Proprietors, and to return to them, individually and generally, his grateful and sincere thanks for the kindness he had experienced at their hands since he had had the distinguished honour of filling that chair. He would not be doing justice to his own feelings, if he did not take that opportunity of re turning thanks. They were all aware, that, since he had the honour of filling that chair, the Bank of England had had many difficulfea to contend with. He was de lighted to inform them that those difficulties had all been overcome; and, in transmitting the chair to his excellent friend by his side (the Deputy Governor) he would ex press his conviction that it was impossible to entrust the interests of the Corporation to a more honest, worthy, or deserving man. Most sincerely and truly grateful as he was to the Proprietors for their kindness, he should not have done his duty had he not acknowledged it; and the considerate manner in which they had made allowances for his incapacity to fill the situation he had the honour to hold. Mr. WILLIAMSON said he was happy to hear that the Bank had overcome all its difficulties ; and felt great plea sure in moving a vote of thanks to the Governor, Deputy_ Governor, and Directors. Mr. MARRYATT, on seconding the motion, said the Pro prietors were greatly indebted to the Governor for the ready and satisfactory manner in which he had answered all the questions that had been put to him. Tho motion was then put and carried unanimously. The Court then adjourned. LAW INTELLIGENCE. ROLLS' COURT, MARCH 18. •RIFFIN V. WOOD.-FOWLER V. WOOD. These cases wore similar to that of Jew v. Wood, heard on Wednesday. The MASTER of the ROLLS said he should consider the whole of them together. Bovlsms V. ORIENTAL AND PENINSULAR STEAM NAVI- CATION COMPANY. The further arguments in this part-heard motion wore then resumed, but not concluded when the Court rose. SHERIFFS' COURT, MARCH 18. SHELL V. APPLETON. This was an action brought to recover 101. 6i. Gd., the amount of a sailor's bill. The plaintiff was stated to resido at Great St. Helen's, and the defendant was described as the son of the proprietor of the Heroules Tavern in Lead. enhall-street. Mrs. Appleton, the mother of the defendant, was called, and proved that her son had no resources beyond certain pocket-money allowed him by his father, and that he was not of age when the principal part of the work was done. They had a contra-account against Sheil, and if the ac counts were balanced, the sum of 73. 3d. only would be due to him. After hearing other evidence, the jury found a verdict for the defendant. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' CO URT, Illdncn 18. Ttie Learned Chief Commissioner was unable to resume the sittings, and W. NICHOLLS, Esq., has been appointed a Commissioner pro tern. by the Home Secretary. Majority against the resolution 5 The announcement was received wish loud cheers. On the motion of Major CHETWYND a return was ordered in detail of the number of cases which have occur red, from the sth day of January 1837 to the sth day of January 1841, in each year, of letters franked or unfranked, addressed to persons in London, Dublin, or Edinburgh, or which have been applied for, through the General Post offices of those cities, containing money, bills, bank-notes, or other property, which have been secreted or purloined by any person in the employ of the Post-office department, or been demanded therefrom by private parties, as unde livered, with the amount thereof in each case, in each year, respectively; also, of the names and situations of all per sons dismissed or removed from the Post-office department as above, under the allegation of having purloined or se creted letters franked or unfranked, or been concerned therein, containing money, bills, bank -notes, or other pro perty belonging to private parties, with the amount in each instance ' • also, a Return as ab ove o f a ll persons w h o have actually defrauded the revenue department of the Post-office, and been dismissed therefrom ; stating, in either case, if the first offence was visited with removal or dismissal, or if repeated previous thereto (being in continuation of Return No. 265, ordered 30th day of March and 6th day of April 1838). Also a return of the names of the colonels and other officers of the different regiments of militia in Scotland; the dates of their several commissions; distinguishing those who have serve I in the household brigad e , the line, or Royal navy, together with the rank obtained by them in any of the above services, and whether on half-pay at this time, or holding commissions in any yeomanry regiment ; if so the date of such commission. These returns to bo signed by the Celorel or field-officer, or other senior officer of the different regiments, and by the Adjutant of each re giment. Lord J. RUSSELL gave notice that to-morrow he would move that the House resolve itself into Committee on the subject of the South Austr4lian Loan. Mr. H. DRUMMOND obtained leave to bring in a Bill to alter the close time in salmon fishing in Scotland, from the 15th to the Ist of September. The House then Adjourned at a Quarter to Eleven o'Clock. BANK OF ENGLAND. A half-yearly n,eeting of the Proprietors of Bank Stock was held yesterday at the Bank of England, Sir John R. Reid, M. P., the Governor, in the Chair. The minutes of the last Court having been read, The GOVERNOR communicated to the Court the answer received from her Majesty and Prince Albert, through the Marquis of Normanby and Colonel Anson, to the add:elscs of congratulation on the birth of the Princess Rs)! al. The GOVERNOR then stated that this was one of the half-yearly meetings appoin:ed by their by-laws for the consideration of a dividend ; and the Court of Directors having conside:ed the state of the accounts of the Corpora tion, were of opinion that, Mich the approbation of the Court of Proprietors, a dividend might be made of 3i per cent, out of the interests and profits for the half-year ending sth April next.—( Hear.) He should probably be saving come Hon. Proprietors the trouble of putting ques tions, by stating that in October last the amount of "rest" was 2,852,0311_, and that the a mount of their present "rest," after taking from it a sufficient sum to pay the dividend f or the half-year cf 3i per cent., if that pro position should meet with the approbation of the Court, would be 2,854,340/.—(Hear. ) Mr. WILLIAMS wished to ask whether the Branch Banks continued to he a source , of profit to the esta blishment? The GOVERNOR said they did continue to be a conside rable source of profit, ••* Mr. WILLIAMS said, as he believed that in April next they would receive about 200,0001. on the" Dead Weight" ac count, their affairs would then be in a better condition. Was it net so? The GOVERNOR replied in the aftrrni,t've, and was about to put the question for the dividend, when Mr. TIIOMPSON rose to move an amendment. He said that the Governor had studied in a good school, and had not forgotten the principles inculcated by his education. In thatschool " secrecy" was the mate, and " mystery" the watchword • and acting upon the p rinci p les of that school, the Directors came to that Court, and dic tated to them (the Proprietors) what amount of dividend they were to agree upon, without giving them any data upon which to consider the propriety of the amount proposed, or any other amount of dividend.— ( Hear.) The amendment he intended to propose was, that this Court do adjourn far one week, in order to give the Governor, Deputy-Governor, and Directors, an oppor tunity of preparing a balance-sheet as data upon which to ciccile the amount of dividend. Before he sat down he would also put a question to the worthy Governor, namely, wit( they there had not within the last half-year been a large number of protested bills? The GovEntson—Not many. Mr. THOMPSON—Were there not bills to a considerable amount from Dundee, which were protested? The GOVERNOR said that be did not deny thit in th e I A LUNATIC. A somewhat important question in lunacy arose. The insolvent Kidd had been an omnibus proprietor, at Ham mersmith, and had been declared to be insane. He w as now confined in Whitecross-street prison, and a person named Bailey had petitioned the Court for his discharge. To-day was appointed for the hearing of the application. It vi as proposed, on the part of the creditors, to cali wit times respecting books and property, which had been in the possession of the prisoner. The COUKT acquiesced, and ordered them to be called, The evidence a three persons named Hockly, Clarke, and Powell, went to show that account-books had been kept in the omnibus business, which realized 80/. a week, and a profit was made of 201. There were 41 horses and several omnibuses. A person named James Clarke had sold the property under an execution, and after the Crown had been paid he had received 200/., and was now a loser to, he said, some extent. Powell had lent the insolvent some money, and be afterwards gave him six horses f,r his debt, which he accepted. Tl.e books were in the posses sion of a female, or the nephew of the insolvent, who had managed his business. They would be forthcoming ; and, in fact, had not been filed, because there was no sche dule, nor were books ordered, in lunatic cases, to be filed. The COURT adjourned the case until to-morrow for the books, when the discharge, it is understoad, will be granted. LOAN SOCIETIES, —Tyro persons who had become sure ties to loan societies, a ere heard. They stated that they had no means of paying the money for which they had be come answerable. The COURT told them they had acted dishonestly in being sur,ties when they could not pay the money. They were not opposed, and were ordered to be discharged. - - - - ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. HOME CIRCUIT.-111AIDsroNA, MANcil 18 , CROWN COURT. THE ALLEGED MURDER AT STANGATINCREEK. At the sitting of the Court this morning, the Grand Jury returned a bill not found against Robert William Cook and George Wakeham, the former the Captain, and the latter the mate, of a merchant-vessel, for the murder of William Sago, an apprentice on board their vessel. Mr. CLARKSON, who with Mr. Chambers was in structed to defend the prisoners, then applied to the Court for the discharge of the recognizances of the defendants, who had been admitted to bait, and who w ere in at tendance to take their tri a l. The Learned Counsel complained of the prejudice that had been attempted to be created against them, and said that after what had gone foi th to the public, he felt it his duty to say, that the prisoners had nearly forty respectable witnesses in at tendance, who would have deposed, if necessary, to their general kindness and humanity of conduct ; and among them was a relative of the unhappy deceased. Ile con sidered that the prisoners were entitled to have this fact made known. Mr. Baron PARKA said that, as the Grand Jury had ignored the bill against the defendants, there could be no objection to the cours e p ursue d by the Learned Counsel. The recognizances of the defendants and those of their sureties were then discharged, and they retired from the Court with their friends. Charlotte Evans, Tie . (I 30, was indicted for stealing three plates, a basin, two knives and forks, and other arti cles, the Property of the Rev. Mr. Braddon, her master. Mr. Deedes conducted the prosecution, and Mr. C. Jones defended the prisoner. It appeared on behalf of the prosecution that Mr. Brad don is the rector of Milton and Sittingbourn, and the pri soner had been in his service as a cook, and in consequence of some information he received he obtained a search-war rant, and went to the house of the prisoner's mother, where the articles in question were found, and the prisoner sub sepently admitted having stolen them. It appeared that they were, however, of very trifling valuP. Mr. Braddon, upon being cross-examined by Mr. JONES, would not swear that 1w did not say to the prisoner, when the articles were found, " Now, ":d girl, Pro got these things, I'll have you transported ;" and he would not swear that he did not tell her she would be transported for life. Mr. JONES commenced his observations to the Jury by making some severe remarks upon the motives of the pro. seeutor, and he stigmatised the prosecution as a most •un worthy one. Mr. Baron PARKS interposed, and expressed his opi nion that the Counsel was not justified in saying anything reflecting upon the character of Mr.. Braddon, in reference to that prosecution, ane. in his opinion he had done no more than his duty in prosecutiog the prismer. It was high time that prosecutors should be protec:el from such attacks by Counsel. Mr. Jones immediately Fat down. Mr. Baron PnaKE —You may go on with your addre3S. Mr. JONES—No, my Lord, I will not say any more. Mr. Baron PARKS then addressed the Jury, and aga;n repeated that he considered Mr. Braddon had (Duly done hia duty in ly irigiug forward the present prosecution. It was true that the property was of small valu , , but that did not make the least diffetence, and it would be a sexy mis chievous doctrine to hold out that seivants m'g'rs tali° pro perty from their master with impunity because it was of small value. The prisoner here said she some witaese3 to be called to speak to her character ; and, aft r Mr. Jones de clining to examine them, they were questioned by the Court, and they gave the prisoner a good character. The Jury found the prisoner Guilty, and the prrsecutor immediately recommended her to mercy. She was then sentenced to be imprisoned for one month. OXFORD CI I?CUIT— STAFFORD, MARCH 17. Matthew Fowles was indicted far the wilful murder of Martha Keeling. From the evidenca it appeared that the dece tEed, who was an old woman (a widow), of 60 years of age, kept a small eating-house in the town of Newcastle-under-Line. The prisoner, who is a young man, 22 years of age, had for a short time Feviously to the 17th of September, lodged in the home of the deceased. She had no ether lodger. On the night of We lnesday, the 16th of September, the de ceased, who was a strong healthy woman, was seen alive and well in her own, hamc. The prisoner was also shown to have been in the house the same evening, and some of the witnesses deposed to having seen is the window of the shop, at the sane time a newly-dressed fowl. On the following morning, the house not being opened at its usual time, the suspicions of the neighbours were excited, the police were sent for, and the home entered about ten o'clock, the back door being forced open. Upon goirg up-stairs the old woman wag found in bed, quite (ha l, lieg on her back, her hands crossed on her head, and evident marks of hands upon her throat. The sur geons who examined the body distinctly proved that death had been occasioned by strangulation, and there were various marks upon leer body showing that there had been a considerable struggle between herself and the murderer. A silver spoon was found in her pocket, and a man's nigh.- cap was upon a chair by her bed side. A mahogany box in the room opposite to the bed-room of the deceased was found broken open, and various articles of property in it were missing. There was only one other bed in the house, in which one person only appeared to have slept. The fowl also was missing from the shop window, and the prisoner was not to be found. Evidence was given to show that in the course of the Wednesday the prisoner had agreed to purchase a pilot coat of a tailor in the town, named Jackson, and had promised to call and pay for it at seven o'clock the same evening. Ile did not come according to his appointment, but on Thursday evening, about four o'clock, he called upon Jackson, it then raining heavily, and making an excuse for not hav ing come the previous night, paid him a half-sovereign far the pilot-coat, which he put on, and went away with, stating that be was going " on the tramp," for that wages were low at Newcastle. He was identified by another person, who met him in the street shortly afterwards, and it was shown that a little befog five he entered a cottage on the road from Newcastle to the Whitmore station on the Grand Junction Railway, in which cottage he stayed about 20 minutes. While there, he pulled a dressed fowl out of his pocket, ate a part of it, and gave the rest to the cottager; he was seen in the same cottage to take a pulse with three sovereigns out of his pocket, and a large handful of silver, which he counted. He then proceeded to the Whitmore station, which he reached about six o'clock, and after inquiring the fairs to different places, at first said he was going to Liverpool, but afterwards changed his mind and proceeded to Bir. mingham by a first-class train, though the inspector told him if be would wait till nine o'clock, he might go for several shillings less. The guard of the railway train proved that the prisoner, on the same day (Thursday) re turned from Birmingham by a first-class train to Hart ford-bridge station, which is two miles distant from North wich, where it was shown he had formerly resided. The prisoner's track was closely followed by the police, and on the night of Friday the 18th, (the day following the mur der,) he was apprehended at Davenham, two miles from Northwich. He was told that he was charged with the murder of an old woman at Newcastle.. Ho protested his innocence, and said that he had never slept at New castle at all. In his pocket was found 1/. 10s. 63. in silver, and in his waistcoat pocket a pin and a ring, both of which two nieces of the deceased stated their belief had belonged to their aunt; and is appeared that there were marks on the fingers of the murdered woman as if a ring had been forced from it, with which marks the ring found on the prisoner exactly corresponded. After hearing other evidence the Jury found the pri soner Guilty, and the Learned Judge sentenced him to Death, stating that no reasonable man could doubt that the Jury had come to a right conclusion ; and that no hope of mercy could be held out to the perpetrator of so foul a crime. The prisoner, uho is a young men of 22, described in the calendar as able to read and writ© well, showed little appearance of emotion during the trial, and asserted his in nocence to the last. CURIOUS CASE.—Catherine Edden was indicted for perjury. he defendant, who is a young unmarried woman, gave birth to a child on the 9th of December last in the Tam worth union workhouse, where she had been obliged to take refuge, and being brought before the guardians about a month ago, she charged Mr. Thorneloe, the prosecutor in the case, with being the father of the child. The usual application was accordingly made to the Magistrates in Petty Sessions for an order of affiliation on the prosecutor, and upon his appearance before the bench on the 2d February last the defendant swore that the illicit intercourse which had rendered it necessary t) make that application to the Magistrates took place on the 25th of March, 1340, at her mother's house about four o'clock in the afternoon. According to her statement the prosecutor dined there on that eay between one and two o'clock, and her brother Jo seph went after dinner to fetch her mother home from Dor ton, seven miles off, from which place she did not return tll six o'clock in the evening. The prosecutor called his servant, Jane Gee, to prove that he dined at home on the day in question, and that he did net go to Mrs. Edien's till after two o'clock; and two persons, of the name of Bond and Sherratt, stated that Mrs. Edden was at home when they went there, about two o'clock ; that they left about three, and that the prosecutor went away before them, A man named Jackson was also ctllcd, who deposed, in contradiction to statements made by the defendant on her cross-examination, that he Lad been admitted to criminal familiarities with her, ' and, upon the testimony thus adduced, the Magis trates refused to make any order. Mr. Thorneloe then indicted the defendant for perjury, and upon his examination as a witness to-day swore positively that no improper intimacy had ever subsisted between them, and contradicted the other parts of the defendant's statement before mentioned. On the other hand the second witness called to support the case for the prosecution swore as positively, thoug't with less vehemenc-, that the prosecu tor did dine at Mrs. Edden's on the 25th of March, and that he esrved for the company, and she stated that Mrs. Edden was not at home diving dinner time, and d,d not return home till about six o'clock, when her son Joseph brought her home. The witnesses Gee, B nd, and Sher ratt, called by the prosecutor to prove his ci.we before the Magistrate, were not in attendance to-day, and when the man Jackson was called, Mr. C. Phillips objected that his evidence could not be received upon techn'cal grounds. The Learned JUDGE held that the evidence was Mad • missible, and the defendant was accordingly acquitted. NORTHERN CIRCUIT—YORK, 111.4Re1l 17. William Ilepwor:h, 22, ; was charged with the wilful murder of Ann Scarab, at Swinton, and George East wood, 21, wai charged with aiding and abetting in the slid murder. This ease occupied the Court for several hours, but the principal facts lie in a small compass. On the night cf the 28th of January, the prisoners, who were drunk, knocked at the door of the deceased, who had no sooner opened it than she encountered a volley of stone , . She tertit the door; whereupon a second discharge of :tones was heard thundering at the door. Scorah then snatched up an old gun and ran after the assailants, when wounds were inflicted on her person, whereby death was caused. The JunsH did not think there was a case of murder against either of the prisoners, but left the casJ to go t.> the Jury. Mr. ROEBUCK addressed the Jury for the prisoner Ilep won h, col:tending that there was no cv dente to silos that the fatal blow was given to the old woman b) him. Mr. WILKINS then addressed the Jury fer Eairwood, after which several respectable witnesses were called, who gave the r:s:.ners good chsracters for humanity. The Learned JUDGE summed up, after which the Jury almost immediately found Hepworth Guilty of Man slaughter, and Eastwood of aiding and abetting. The prisoners were then sentenced to be imprisoned for two months in the Castle. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. HATTON-GARDEN. Thursday James Chapman, aged 23, respectably attired, was charged by Edward Henry Chapman, Esq., of Harin gay House, Hornsey, with havi❑g entered his house with intention to commit felony. The prosecutor stated that he is a county Magistrate. On Wednesday night, about half-past seven o'clock, he was sitting at dinner with his family, when his attention was attracted by a noise at the hall-door, as if some one was attempting to force it open ; and subsequently a loud ringing at the bell, when the servants informed him that the prison er had attempted to break into the hcuse. He instantly proceeded down stairs, and found 111 prisoner in the hall, conducting himself in a wild and incoherent manner, lle could not say what the intention of th•~ rri soner was, but the Northumberland As)lum for Lunatics being w ithin thice miles of Haringay Hous=, lie concluded that the prisoner might have made his escape from that establishment. Sergeant Williams, 44 N, stated that the priiener when at tl'le station-souse conducted himself in a cool marine-, and gave his name James Chapman, hut in the morning he assumed madness, and indulged in theatrical antics. Witness traced his father to be living at No. 3. Fi , leon terrace, Stoke Newington. The prisoner after being locked up continued whistling and singing. Witness be. lieved that he went to the house for an unlawful purpose, and that he was no more mid than he was. Mr. GREENWOOD (lothe prisoner)—What i 3 your name? Prisoner (looking vacantly).—Za ze-zi•zo- zum. Mr. GREEN WOOD —Nonsense, that is all put on. The prosecutor said that when the prisoner w as se i ze d by him and hi s serva nts, he resisted violently, and broke a pane of g:ass with his hand, which was severely cut in con £cquence. The prisoner's fa}her, a cosclimaster, Lee stepped for ward, and stated that he never knew him to be insane, but on Monday morning last he read the Bible, when he no tic , c 1 him to be very melancholy. Prisoner (clenching his fist and threatening his father)— Za-ze-zi- zo-zum. EVEN I.NG Mt. GREENWOOD--`V at Fe, rJr what has be ue f Tire ly ei a; servant to Biker, Wob , :rn-squaro. M-. GREENWOOD (to the prisoner )--What have r ° to say ? Prisoner—Za-n-z'-z -zum.—( Laughter.) Mr. GREENWOOD said that he was inclined to believe P t i l t . C:e prisoner could not ba in hi; proper senses , a nd tb let tile parish officers of Hornsey should he sent for, in ° d r t o that he might be examined by the doctor, and Passe flans ell Lunatic Asylum. os, Prisoner (holding up a gold breast-pin at Mr. GhaPr o , who sat on the bench near Mr. Greenwcod)—Z" e ttlio zum. H.? then handed a piece of dirty parchment twa, clerk, and said Za-z..3, pointing to show it to M r. Gre" wood, who took it. con s ider Mr. GREENWOOD —I SUOpOSC this i; what he con-, to be his title-deeds. Prisoner—Za-ze-zi-zo-zum. ego Mr. GREENWOOD tried every effort to make him gl'coll explanation of his extraordinary visit to t h e prose" „ j a , hoth , e, but nothing could be elicited from him bp , 0 1 z--zi.zo-surn ; and flail, the usher, was ordered to Pr'at, to Mr. Tatham, the Vestry Clerk of Hornsey, wnd be tended, when it was arranged that the prisoner"Alin tl ; ,b1 examined by a medical gentleman, in order th at it III"'t4 le ascertakel whether the priioner was ret!ly to assuming madne.ss ; and lie was ordered to heAettlia`, 4 the station-house till this day. RS A few days since :kb . .Kampion a nd friends carb e `°;,ls.to Court to complain that having made an eicursioa • Essux last week, they engaged and paid for their relutanci, the evening by Mr. Wragg's Walthamto w They pad twelve shillings for a party of eiffh t ' oa cbr prciiag that they were t o h a ve free occupancf of t' e i „ - s i t ler and when it was ready they took their places, four , and the rest our. It appeared, however, sons had booked for inside places, and the driver it l ' i t ; 0 tyon ejecting in their favour such of the complaint° oop preferred the interior, and too put the whole of them e w here, to side. To such an arrangeneent they objected, the driver detached the horses and put them to a n oa l erf , in which he drove dr to town with his other pai seng- ra and left the complainants to kick their heels ru Ono, the unhorsed coach. After having been some t inic ebef, posed in thin ridiculous position, they procured as conveyance to town, and subsequently came here to cu° c r or Mr. Wra gg or his peop!e with taking their monci 11° false pretences. that othery:e.ti propriit A summons was granted againstlVir. Wragg 4 'b e fore cf the coach, and th e h ear i ng o f t h e .case took pia°. qu ilt Mr. Broughton, the Magistrate, who, after muc h j : found that the 12s. certainly had been received o ich dition of conveyin g th e comp l a i nants to town, on wolf not been done, and he decided, V:ereforc, that Mr ' must return the 12s. and pay th e cos t s , amounting to more. THE MARKETS.. COUNTRY MARKETS. Wheat. • Barley. I Oats. Beans. 0. ° bi Per Quarter.! s. to s. s. to s. I a. to s. s. to s• 4 9 Bath Blandford 59 63 29 33 25 27 44 47 60 „. Bridport 68 I 0 if Chard 53 64 30 32 22 26 38 r, , Gloucester 55 68 21 38 20 28 4ti „.. g Exe'er Guildford 18 71 32 37 32 36 46 P" 58 g Newbury 4U 69 26 35 22 28 38 47 a Beading 52 71 26 37 20 30 40 5 7, , Salisbury 53 66 27 34 21 27 40 5g Sherborne !58 62 30 35 26 32 44 489 SheptonMallet; 56 65 28 37 20 26 36 44 40 Uxbridge —I 37 43 2:3 28 1 Warminster 145 66 30 40 24 2T 39 Winchester 60 64 eeovil i 56 60 28 33 22 26 42 . -- • -- 4 LEEDS CORN MARKET. toll Wheat, Norfolk and Suffldk, 601 b. . .. . 515. t e s. 16 4 York. and Lincoln. 601 b. , w , p Barley, Norfolk and Suffolk Yorkshire and Lincolnshire c „.„.. to 1 j 3 Grinding Beans 63lb. 35;• go ... ~,. tO OP, flats, l'otatoc —Mealing, For. —d. to—d ; to la d ' . e 1 44 ..,.‘,. ling. to 3 l'' P Shelling DEVIZES CORN MA E R n :E 7 I 3I : 9 Per Sack. s. d. s. d. - Per Quai ter. , s 6 oto v st Wheat 22 6 to 33 0 Oats 8 18 ° 46 C gecond 29 0 31 0 Beans (per sack)... 0 'Laird darley 29 0 39 0 Bread (pergallon). ' a DRESDEN, MARCEL 9.—Last night, at rrri d , past eleven o'clock, the venerable poet of the tye Christopher Augustus Judge, departed this lire , ,, 7 n ceol; 89th year of his age, being born on .the 13th of -; sob her 1752. He had suffered from catarrh for a few ‘ ll4 l - : 0 7 1 ? was pretty cheerful, and had a party of friends 0 0 t j ;, O OV iu the evening. But on that same day a kind of ' to ego ness came over him, which increased yesterday, 611 _1, 0 0 F pired without pain, and in a gentle slumber, to Wis" brighter world. seen° THE ENGAGEMENT—This new woe. „joe, to be generally considered the most successful first P'; - Lion we have had since the days of " Tremaint e rat 4 " Pelham." The Naval and Military Gazette °'itise! that—" For sketches of English society, at onee i b i t l y or k , and true, for pictures of human passion at once ',()„,' peoll" imaginative enough for the highest poetry, yet T eal o tb t 3 satisfy the most rigid seeker after the a ctual tr f every day life—for dramatic spirit in the conduct t, to vidual scenes—for philosophical acumen and ac e " n cy ° the delineation of individual characters—for putli: t yle_ i wit, playfulne3s, and humour, and general grace °'' eior i for all these high and rare qualities we have notb,ing ni ii , to The Engagement' since the appearance of ' i re and De Vete.'" Of DR. CROLY'S " PERSONAL HisToft- per- GEORGE IV."—.We are requested to state that “ r % Ore sonal History of George the Fourth," by the se°',, e Crely, Second Edition, in 2 vo l s . sma ll 8v3., bier' is published this day by Mr. Colburn, of Gre et 110' borough-street, and may now be had of all boo kg l , 9 Mr. Colburn has also just ready for publication ,fber French Stage and the French People," edited li r ,l offori" dole Hook, Esq., in 2 vols. sm a ll Bvo ; and " Del 'We or the Constant Man," a novel, by R. Plunterf Esq., anther of " Tremaine," "De Vere," &C. e el Patronized by their Majesties the 1(111 E°,0 0 the r f ; - erhO ucbeln Queen of Hanover, and their Royal Highnesses Augusta and Sophia, her Serene Highness the Princess P' the Princesses Mary and Rosa, her Grace the Dowager of Bedford, and their Graces the Archbishop of Canterbuq,to Dukes of Norfolk, Devonshire, sad Manchester. In ad dit faCt" .. , above distinguished patronage to the newly-investe d s O Lenses and Invisible Operative Voi ce Co n d ue tor, the If‘pe.te and 13. Solomons, opticians and *mists, 39, Albemarle str—iorePe cadilly, and 76, King William-street, Bank of pleasure to state that their valuable inventions have also ga sanction and unqualified approbation of above four IlUn dr ,,,:el (#. principal members of the medical profession ; as also of n 60 11 4, individuals of high distinction, who have b een greatly l l n n e s their use. Immediately these improved Spectacle It, D se s et placed before extrema imperfect vision, it is at once broart.o,l its natural and original state, every object becomes cleß r e ,: s and h le. fillet, and the most minute particle is seen, either by 1 ,13 /; - c ter, -f & light, with ease and distinctness. Their Voice C° 0 4,10 . .., which thousands of deaf persons have bees greatly Wr e , s e, the least perceptible, nor more uncomfortable, than hall'''. OD; of wool in its place, and the faintest whisper at a pu b l ic 5 :PP ° 1 1 ,.. is heard with exact distinctness.-39, Albemarle-st reet ' soy" the York Hotel, and 76, King William-street, Bani'' _AO notion with persons et' the same name. ~..........---"„ _,.- -,-- ''''"---- -- ---- • M 'Oh SILVERTLATED CORNER 1 sto it A. B. SAVORY and SONS, Manufacturing Si r sttW er No. 14, Cornhill, London, opposite the Bank of .tinglo;'corL. pi a te ields iv the prices of the following patterns of strongly Dishes, with silver handles and edges, and silver '''' engraving the crest or coat of arms : 0 The Gadroon Pattern. Xl° 10 Four Strongly Plated Corner Dishes and Covers..• 0 Four Extra Strongly Plated Corner Dishes an d 1,1 ° Covers 0 F ---- Extr St - •10 The Flower Pattern. ly P 1 -d Corte Dish, , our Extra .:rongly rate. utter _Ashes en" £l3 - to t C0ver5............... ................................. • 6: dles , o sa N.B. The covers are mad e w ith movea ble ban,. , N they form extra dishes. Dra w i ngs o f th e above fort any part of Great Britain cr Ireland, postage free. 3 II ORIZ 0 N TAL FLAT NV lei ; 7 1111 very small and neat with accurately finished jevi e .,,' a a ' 4 l rxents, are offered in silver cases, Four Guineas a nd each ; gold cases, enamel dial, Eight Guineas; A prin,ol Nine Guineas; gold dial, Ten Guineas each. ~,t ch es ^ warranty is given with fixed terms, on which the " always receive any attention required. ofr T. COX SAVORY, doll Watchmaker, Jeweller, &e , 47, Cornhill (Seven , . Gracechurnti-street), London. ang e. N.B.—Sccond•hand Watches purclia;ed in ex"- S f O% TABLE CANDLESTICKS, superior t° •°ck -- i, fur durability, equal in appearance. Table c andle inches high, 7s. per pair; 9 inches high, 9s. ; 10 Per pair ; oldie, with rich shell mountings, 9 inches h•g ei a n; per pair ; snuffer trays, with shell mountings awl r yas' 1 011 tre e 4s. each. The particular metal of which the,A froo , to , " great variety of ether articles are made, can on.y. -- silver by reference to the stamp. Catalogues gratis. et , RIPI'ON and BURTON, IVells-street, B TH S. On the 17th inst., at Vine Lodge, Bishop rji James Macfarlayne halmers, of a daughter. f c On the 13th inst., C Mrs. W. liainwortli, of Enfield, ° l s a g On the 17th inst., at Walton -terrace, AylesburP the T. S. Chapman, Esq., of a daughter. On the 18th inst., at Wilton-place, the lady of Ado miiow,barrister-at-law, of a son it of ' l°l' On tthelBth inst., at Upton, Essex,. Mr. R. reY' MARRJSD. s ond 501 ; On the 15th inst., at Kirkcaldy, R o bert WhY. , , -ec a re, i f of John Royds, Esq., Gloucester-place, l'ort in an-sI U fA ,, e Jane, youngest daughter of the late Walter Fergus ' Strathose, North Britain. SC uton, On the 16th inst., at St. Nicholas Church, 13rig“ - ue We Taylor, Esq., to Caroline Brimblv, second daughter of Ls. J. W. Moffett, R.N., Stonehouse, Devonshire. , w..lnc i !,, son, Esq., of Normanby Hall, North Riding On the 17th inst., at Edge-hill, near Liverpool, D . h ire, '''' I St ,i i t r i a e l b i, o ; s n , l , y ,f e l l i t e il n d b e a fLh i e )la la c t e e , Ji.3elrlkilst,oni,,sEqs.q. ef of Li lr e °err P ki9)° ,,, l. -e, ll ' daughter of the late Captain Jones, Ori the 18th i m t a t sr.Geff,o's flanover-stltiloaest t o i'llar , Y, ,_ hire, North Wales. D lED. • r or ig. On the 4th inst., at Paris II ~ , Ina., youngest daug h te r , of ILI°, 0. Fenwick, Esq., late of Northumberland, aged 18. _.,. On die Bth inst., C. Langston, of Vauxhall, aged T, s‘ .. , Ws On the 1:2111 inst.., at Ilawkhurst, P. M. Wynch , ..r' 4 of the lion. East India service. tha John. On the 13th inst., at Ghent, Belgium, Mrs. Mar son, aged 74.50 y 11, 4 St' On the 13th inst., at Birmingham, Mr. E. e th Paul's-church) ard. 8 Franc es ' 31crioneto- On the 14th inst., at Alex, North 13ritain, wife of Captain R. Gore, R.N., aged 50. Isle of VVigh On the 14th inst , at Wuodvale, Cowes, Isfe," ,age d 19' Frances Ann, only daughter of Capt. Fi'aring ton, llr i • oad , 31". On the 15th inst., in Lcindon. terrace, Hackney-r Elizabeth Tindall, w idow, aged 91 . )ern oti On the 16th inst., at Churton Lod g e, near Chester,, Poole H Woyle, Esq., late of Wrexham V iidsworth- On the 18th i n st., in Spring-terrace, a Mrs. Hooper, formerly of Dunstable,l3eds, ,i,„ • e•-ed 81. • ton-bridgitt On the 11th inst., John Goodwin Esq., of Ilun Hefts, aged 67. ....•,..-.... ___ . 19Tv of Lundan: P r inted and Published by 111tMDO YOUIN ;9 tp, Strand ? at The Sus. Office, No. 1164.1' 1122 Strana, tjie ebuixty of Dliddlesex.—Friday Mardi: :~~ y 'flit n sr et , Si In oim T of ~b, Kn Tha l ollort Wa ved ho u.s t kovedi Thai a usi , l ! N at Itored a; al i t , t ,° o, l)( T 1!