The Sun. — London, England, 1841-10-29 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, OCTOBER 29, 184 i DISTRESS AT BOLTON. Our readers may remember that Dr. Bowring brought before the House of Commons, in a discussion on the Corn-laws, some cases of individual distress at Bolton, that Sir Robert Peel caused an inquiry to be made into the circumstances stated by Dr. Bowring, and that on the report made by the Assistant Poor-law Commissioner who prosecuted the inquiry, Sir James Graham and Sir Robert Peel persuaded the House to believe that the s t a t eme nts made by Dr. Bowr in g were exaggerated, if not unfounded. Since the close of Parliament Mr. Com missioner Mott's report has been published, and has been exultingly quoted by the Tories as a floorer for Dr. Bowring and the Bolton Anti-Corn-law agitators. In self-vindication the latter have collected evidence on the subject, and have published the result in a small pam• phlet. It is impossible for us to give entire Mr. Mott's report and Mr. Naisby's vindication, but we shall endea vour to place the matter fairly before our readers, and enable them to decide as to the credibility of the two statements. Dr. Bowring said in the House of Commons, speaking on the authority of Mr. Naisby :—" I visited (says the informant) a man and his wife,'with four children ; I found two of the children Tying on a piece of straw, without any covering. I went up stairs, and found the father dead on the boards, without bedding or bed. His wife told me that the day before he died he wished for a little bread and cheese, but in vain. The neighbours said he had died for want of food." Another wretched case.—" A man, his wife, and two daughters (it is a Guardian of the Poor who speaks) lived in a cellar, the wife and daughters out of work ; this man earned about four shillings per week by weaving ; I was fetched by the neighbours, who told me the man had died of hun ger ; I found him lyin g dead on one of the looms ; they had neither bed nor bedding. I caused a Jury to be summoned; their verdict was, Died for want of food."' He felt a difficulty in selecting cases from the many mournful examples he held in his hand. His correspondent had been called to visit a family which he was informed was in a state of starvation. He found the father had just sold all he had to pay his rent, and had removed, with his family, to his father's, whither he followed him, and found the man, his wife, and four children ; another brother, his wife, and three children ; a third brother, his wife, and one child, all the men out of work—all the women far advanced in pregnancy, in a house four-and-a half yards square ; they all slept in a room above of the same size, and lay upon little but straw. THE CASE OP JAMES PEARCE.—We shall follow Mr. Mott, in speaking of this case first. Into 1)r. Bowring's statement, Mr. Mott was deputed to inquire, and ac cordingly he went to Bolton, where he appears to have remained one day. "I found," he says, " that the case in which it was represented that a Coroner's Inquest had given a verdict of Died for want of food,' was that of William Pearce. With regard to this case no ver dict was given by a Coroners jury." How Mr. Mott found this out, seventeen months after the evept, does not appear. He ascertained that Mr. Taylor, the Coro ner for the borough, had held no inquest ; but Mr. Mott admits that Mr. Rutter, the Coroner for the county, and a Coroner's jury went to the house of W. Pearce; but Mr. Rut-. ter was then satisfied, says Mr. Mott, "that the circum stances under which Pearce died were not such as to require an investigation by a Coroner's jury. Mr. Mott might have obtained Mr. Rutter's attestation of the fact, as he ob tained Mr. Taylor's certificate, and not having obtained it, Mr. Mott's assertion wants the support of evidence which might have been easily produced. Mr. Naisby states that the circumstances were inquired into by a Co roner's jury, and that " one of the jury called upon me the day the inquest was held, knowing I had taken an active part in getting an inquest over the body, and stated they had returned a verdict—Died from want of food; and as a proof that that was the impression of the jury, Mr. Staton, reporter for the Bolton Chronicle, who was one of the jury, stated at the Guardian meeting on Friday, the 10th of September last, in reply to a question from a Guardian, That he was on the jury, and they re turned a verdict of—Died from want of food. "Phis proves that the jury were of that opinion, whether the Coroner recorded the verdict or not. No one ever thought of disputing that the man died from want of food." On this part of the case it is clear that there was an investigation, and that the jury came to a decision, which decision appears not to have been recorded, a loose mode of practice, which perhaps explains why Mr. Rutter was not called on to state the particulars of the case from his official records. Dr. Bowring and Mr. Naisby were wrong as to the verdict, but the important inquiry is whether the death of Wm. Pearce was caused by destitution and starvation. Mr. Mott's report runs thus : —" I visited the house in Howell's Croft, and examined the widow, Ellen Pearce, and the statement made by her would certainly not justify the charge of her hus band's having died of want of food. She informed me that her husband died in the month of February, 1840, being above a year and a half ago ; that he was 65 years of age ; that he had been ill 18 weeks ; that he had plenty of work when he could do it; that he had worked at intervals during that time, and that herself and two daughters w ere full y employed, and were earn ing together about 9s. 6d. per week at the time of her husband's death ; that he had not applied for relief, for they were comfortable then.'" For this assertion Mr. Mott has the widow's evidence, and the negative statement of several guardians and relieving officers that they knew of no such cases. He also has the registered certificate of Pearce's death, at 65 years of age, from gradual decay. At the same time he admits, that after such a length of time " it is difficult for persons to recollect the particulars of the case." Difficult therefore for Mr. Mott to collect evidence from other persons than those who noted the case at the time, and recorded their impressions, but not difficult fur them. Now their statements are to the following effect: —" Thomas Bradshaw deposes as follows—l was elected relieving officer to the Relief Fund Society on the 22d of February last year. On the Sunday following my appointment to such office, I was waited on by Mr. Coop, comb-maker, of Great Bolton, who stated that a man residing near his house was starving to death—this would be about eight o'clock in the evening. Mr. Coop requested that I would immediately go and see him. I did so. And when I got to the place alluded to by Mr. Coop, I found Mrs. Coop there, and the man dead. I was informed he had been dead about a quarter of an hour. I felt the corpse, and it was still warm. I noticed the cellar to be in a very wretched state. Through the wall of the back part of the cellar I perceived dirty filthy water oozing through the crevices of the bricks, which I afterwards found proceeded from a midden stead adjoining the cellar. There was a nauseous smell, and which I considered very unhealthy. All the furni ture in the cellar was a small three-legged table, an old chair with scarcely any bottom ; and a three-legged stool, such as children use ; there was a small bed stead, on which was placed some sacking, containing shavings ; the shavings were quite visible through the sacking. There was no covering. The bed was quite wet with damp, and stunk with filth ; so much so, that I gave orders to have it burned ;_ which, I believe, was done after deceased was buried. The corpse of Pearce lay on a loom, without any covering, but Mrs. Coop lent them a pair of sheets. The value of the furniture altogether, I should consider, would not fetch 2s. if sold. I asked the woman and her daughters whether they had any food. They said, " They had not tasted that day." I went to my house, and brought them a quantity of broth, which they all devoured very vora ciously. I was in the cellar whilst they partook of it, and one of the daughters, immediately after she had taken of it, began to vomit very much, which I attributed to an excess of appetite, and being kept without food so long previously. I may add, that previously to partaking of the broth, they began to quarre l amon g st themselves which had the greatest portion. I reported the case, and they were duly relieved. On the Tuesday following, the Committee sat, and they were o rdered to be relieved. I now refer to the book in which the Distressed Cases' are entered, and I find that they were relieved with a grant of three shillings per week. I find the following entry, Pearce, Ellen, widow, Howell-croft, to receive 3s. per week for an unlimited period ; and the following entry in the remarks, Husband supposed to have died from want.' " James Webster, a town missionary al Bolton, who received information that Pearce had died from want, went to his house on the 24th of February, and his evidence precisely confirms that of Mr. Bradshaw. The case is entered on the Benevolent Society's books, as in the books of the Relief Fund Society , " Died for Want of Food." Nancy Beswick, who had known Pearce for four years before his death, makes a similar statement, and con firms the destitution of the Pearces by many particulars. We will quote a portion of her evidence About three weeks previous to the death of Pearce I stood against my own door-step and saw Pearce com ing towards my house. There are three steps up to my house. He looked very wan, and pale as death, and was so weakly that to get on to my house floor he had to go down on his hands and knees and creep up. He had been in the habit of weaving for us some months before, and I had missed him for a month about the day I am now speaking of. When he got in he said, Nancy, do, bless you, make a sup of tea. for I am dying for want.' I made him some tea and a little toast, and he devoured it very greedily. When he had done it, he told me all that he had had for three or four weeks back ; he had had nothing but a basin of gruel per day to subsist upon. In about a quarter of an hour after the old man had had the tea he was seized with sickness, and I had to obtain the assistance of neighbours, for I thought he was dying. We reared him up in chairs with pillows, and in about three-quarters of an hour he came round. I then asked him why he clammed himself to such a degree, and he said as he did not belong to Bolton he could not get relief. He pulled tap his trousers and showed me his legs, and they appeared nothing but skin and bone, and it was frightful to see him. He was taken home by my husband, and I and. his wife went to the Overseers' office to represent the case to them. We saw Bridge, the assistant to the Relieving Officer, and told him the case, and he was very saucy, and said we had better mind our own business. I gave in the name of Pearce to the officer myself, for although his wife was present when the officer asked her husband's name she could not tell, and desired me to do so. The officer said he would visit the case, but whether he ever did so or not I never ascertained, and I never heard anything more until about three weeks afterwards, which was that he was dead. I heard this the same night that he died, and went to the cellar. I there found them in a most shocking state, and the cellar sm elled so much that I could not remain in it. He was laid out on the loom, with a sheet over him. I noticed in the back cellar there was a sewer, or midden channel, ran through, a nd the floor was covered with nauseous filth and water. All the goods in the house were a broken three-legged table, a stool, chair, and the bed, made of sacking, without covering. I went again on the Monday mor nin g , and turned down the sheet to look at the corpse, and there were hundreds of creeping filth upon him. I pointed out the filth to his wife, and she appeared to be quite vacant. William Coop's evidence is precisely to the same effect, hct,me.eoMonpltehteelyone handcorro corroborating tingthat testimonyo of Mr. B fo r u a r ds a h p r o. . We . rently disinterested witness es t o th e shocking destitution - •Utbia -..E CENSUS OF 1841. PIRE. INro LATION OF ME BRITISH E" just been ,toN iv r t,t_ the results of the census which haz :ire at Bri 4kttrST it appears that the of 27 o' ni t eland in the present year amounts to upwards, .11g. population of f, ' ''" ll o.s: t - h - wi te ° l lo of 'souls. The return for the three % as *Tio% uftunel Islands, and the Isle of Man, 1 ••-.... ieZtalinitanTiduidll- Jersey,d..alee: n:d......3.1. Sian Guernsey, .... 15,901,98 1 .... 2.624,58 6 .... 8,203,382 124,079 Thi g i, T0ta1.. . ... merchant 41,,lenekelusive of the army and andnavy,. abroad, or ?lot ondail°at, and of all persons travelling 2 6 , 8 56,028 ta f ,. th _ et a roof en the night of the sth of June. Includ taken at 27,000" e elasss ,the population may be safely 184 1. Mu% whieh is an increase of about 2,000,000 since i.leNnaelnftto this .is added the population of the colonies of of thell this country, it wilt be found that the 13 that o fit tl i 3 th i s Crown are more numerous than of ?: other civilized monarchy or republic on the Nssib e l e Zl°l3e. After making every allowance t for q th - exaggeration or uncertainty in the accounts face_ o taf e k e ln or Australian population, we may e_ nisi saY that her Majesty Queen Victoriais the soy n of th e t3 i f i a hundred millions of subjects —a larger por u ti r o o. Pttit s "'lan race than has ever obeyed any one E the (Iverein since the downfal of the Roman empire. AkitPri°Pulation of the other great Powers of Europe and of w v, 4 at the present time is pretty nearly as follows,. o 4 4 ' ° ' 1 1 t h e thirty millions may be of the Russia .. I tlaci, 4 " the rest a mixed multitude of Cossacks, Cal 1,4 ;Tartars, and other wandering tribes, or of Poles, I lel i t la.ni . 4ll 3, or Caucasian mountaineers, bitterly host w ile a. to . hq t follr'4ans, and either in open insurrection, or only o . 0 1 0 t , 0 1 1 , 41, an opportunity of being so :—France, 35, 00 0 the t"11' 33,000,000 are Frenchmen in the proper sense of l 'iats . 111 ' and about 2 000 000 Algerine or French colo- II le the Webt Indies ' Cayenne, Senegal, the Isle of ci'll'hoo 0%,, ci ~, and l'ondicher'ry • Austria, 30,000,000, 11 . vrassi°,,l ernlana, H ungaria ' ns, Italians, and I Y rica a n _ a ! m th"'„,.bout 14,000,000 to 15,000,000 of GF.T..nwoi. the A., united States, 1 4,000,000 of freemen, chiefly ,14,;.8,iig10-Sxon race and 3 , 000 , 000 ofnegroes, chiefly --Liverpoo/ Time Nl)l4iriT ------'4.-------_____ N , M.D. ** -- Ar e —or DR. WILLIAM Borro tkiif 1 regret to have to announce the demise of this arid 14', Prattioner. He was a man of considerable talent of Ileliassie attainment, and was deputed by the College tfa%Zi_3'sicians to deliver the " Herveyan Oration" at the a (. l iiang fneeting of that institution. e ied on n Of se vere of an a ff ection of the heart, after d several days te atiffer ing, and in the 54th year 91 his age. Vicar of this parish, is the president, end the Rev. J. S Birley, Vice-President, in which the° following important information appears:—` Number of individual* consti tuting the families of applicants, 2,656 ; eTsrar income per week, ls. 22d.; average income per week of part es relieved, 10 4 1 d." We leave these matters to =he their own imgession on the minds of the people. of the family, and we have on the other the denial of the wife, who insists that they were comfortable before her husband died, and the negative evidence of some G uardians. But if the family had any earnings, as Mr. Mott states they had, it would be a terrible reproach to the widow had her husband died of want, and she not given him relief, or, wanting the means, had not sought out the proper quarter for assistance. She had strong motives for making out a case in her own favour, and we consider, therefore, not• withstanding her assertion, and the certificate of death which proceeded from her, that the balance of testimony justifies the assertion that Wm. Pearce died from starvation. Dr. Bowring and Mr. Naisby spoke the strict truth, except as to the doubtful circumstance of the verdict. At the same time the death of an aged man, surrounded by a family, whom all the witnesses describe as of weak in tellect, and rendering him no assistance,is no evidence what ever of the working of either t he Corn-law or the Poor law, and ought never to have been quoted in Parliament. In all individual cases so much depends on the character and prudence of the individual, that it is very rarely such cases can be adduced as a general rule, or as illustrating a law. JAMES BRISTOL.—The next case, that of James Bris tol, does not seem to us to afford any contradiction. Mr. Mott's statement is this : " This man emigrated with his family from Alton Priors, in Wiltshire, in 1836. He was then 35 years of age, and his wife, Ann, was also About the same age. They had six children, three of whom were of suitable ages for the factory work. He did not emigrate through the agency of your Board, and consequently had some difficulty in procuring work. Such a family would, through the migration agency, have obtained employ ment for a period of five years, at not less than 30s. per week ; but James Bristol could only procure work for himself. and engaged with a master at 15s. per week. The relieving officer, Mr. Brown, states, that he was applied to by Bristol's family, some months before his death ; that the Guardians ordered him to be relieved with 2s. 6d. per week for four weeks, and reported his case to the parish to which the family belonged ; that an answer was received, refusing to allow him out relief, but offering to take him and his family back ; that he communicated this to James Bristol, and they did not apply again ; that he afterwards met with an accident in his master's employment, which rendered him incapable of working, and reduced him and his family to great distress." The widow's statement is as follows: " Ann Bristol says—My husband died about two years ago. I recollect, when he was laid out dead, Mr. Naisby then coming to visit us. My husband was laid out on the necessary door, up stairs, covered over with a sheet, which a neighbour had lent us. I was lame myaelf at the time, and could not walk. My child was blind at the time, having the St. Anthony's Fire: she was then nearly sixteen years of age. I had another daughter, very ill also, aged about thirteen years. I had four other children besides, the eldest of which was nearly eighteen years of age, the next nine years of age, the next seven years of age, and the other four years old; altogether I had six children. For three weeks pre vious to my husband's death we had nothing but three shillings per week coming in; and we had to live some times on potatoes, sometimes on porridge; but had only one meal a day, which we generally made about four o'clock in the afternoon. I think it was for a fortnight that we had to confine ourselves to one meal a day, sometimes having porridge and sometimes potatoes. When Mr. Naisby found us in this state, we got more food, otherwise I believe I should have lost more of my children, for we had got as far distressed as we well could be to be alive. About five months previous to my husband's death I had a child sucking, which died; and I feel sure that its death was occasioned by my not being able to give it suck, for want of sustenance. I had no bed, bedding, or anything whereon to lay, when Mr. Naisby visited us. I had only a stool whereon to sit, for myself. I had no shop where I could get provisions at : they all refused to give me credit. My husband wished for a bit of cheese and bread, the day before he died, but I was unable to procure him any." It is confirmed by the statement of Betty Brown, which we quote for the illustration it affords of the ter rible condition of the poor at Bolton : " Betty Brown says, I knew the last witness's husband previous to his death, also all the family for about two years. At the time of the death of Bristol, I laid him out, on the top of a necessary door. I assisted to undress him, he having died with his clothes on, in which he had lain for many weeks, having nothing besides to keep him warm ; when I cut his trowsers legs and stocking legs open, there were large quantities of creeping filth, which had eaten quite into the flesh, and his legs were nothing but putridflesh and scabs. He had nothing but straw to lie upon, which was spread on the floor. One of her chil dren had the St. Anthony's Fire, and the rest were all more or less very sickly and bad. They all slept together in one room, and the wife of Bristol had a great hole in her leg, and could not walk or assist her husband ; but after she had received relief and had got bedding, she began to come round. I recollect Mr. Naisby coming down, when Bristol was laid out on the necessary door, and I then told him the man had died for want, and I know such to be the case." THE KIRKMANS' CASE. — On the third case, that of the Kirkmans, there is too little difference of statement to require an observation. It is admitted on both sides that the Kirkmans were crowded into a small room, that they were bricklayers out of work, and that when their condition was known to the guardians of the poor they were relieved. We agree with Mr. Mott that the case does not imply "inattention to the wants of the necessi tous poor." On the whole we conclude that Mr. Molt's report confirms all the material points of Mr. Naisby's and Dr. Bowring's statement, except that a verdict, in the case of Pearce, was recorded that he died of starvation. The substance was there, the form was wanting. We cannot, however, close our remarks without ad verting to Mr. Mott and his employers. In the debate Sir Robert Peel made a remark which threw the blame, if any, of the miseries which Dr. Bowring had detailed on the mode in which the Poor-law was administered. A Poor-law Commissioner was sent to inquire into it, and his great object throughout obviously was to exone rate the administration of the Poor-law from any im putation of not attending to the wants of the necessitous poor. The Learned Commissioner kept this object in view, throughout his brief and hurried investigation, and en deavoured to make out a case favourable to the Poor-law. It does not inspire us with any confidence in his impar tiality, when we find, at the commencement of his re port, these remarks, which had no relation whatever to the case in hand, in which, according to his own state ment, no verdict was recorded : " It is to be lamented that verdicts should be given, implying such an awful neglect of •duty as that of al lowing a fellow-creature to die of want, without the most satisfactory corroborative evidence A case has recently occurred in Manchester, where the verdict of the Coroner's Jury, on the body of a poor woman, was Died of diseased lungs, and other parts, and want of food.' The relieving officer had received no notice of the inquest, and the Coroner, on being ap plied to by the officer to offer an explanation, admitted that, had his evidence been received on the inquest, the Jury could not have returned such a verdict. In the town of Liverpool, last year, no less than seven different verdict s by Coroners' Juries declared the persons to have ' Died from want of the common necessaries of life.' On in vestigation it turned out that, in five cases out of seven, money was found on the person ; and one was the case of a young man of wild, dissipated habits, who was at the time of his death, and had been for some weeks pre viously, living with his father, a respectable man, at Liverpool, and in neither case had any application been made to the parochial authorities for assistance." Mr. Mott, then, begun his investigation in the spirit of fiercely repelling imputations on the administration of the Poor-laws, and that spirit he carried through out. He is a partisan, not an impartial judge ; and if there were any need, which there is not, to doubt on the subject, we should at once conclude that Mr. Mott was not to be trusted. Prompted more by zeal than by his instructions, he went out of his way to make comparisons between the number of houses built at Bolton and the number required, and to satisfy his Corn-law employers, made the hardy asser tion that " there are now 3,456 more houses in Bolton than the number required." But Mr. Mott proves by his observations that the people of Bolton are badly lodged. In every one of the three cases quoted, the people had most miserable accommodation. To provide the inhabitants of Bolton with better lodgings is a praiseworthrspecielation. By what rule could builders guide their operations ? In the year 1837 there was great prosperity in the manufacturing districts ; and the builders, having no more prescience than lawmakers, did not foresee the distress that was to come in 1838, 1839, and 1840. They followed the only practicable rule they could have for their conduct—the progressive increase of the population, in numbers and wealth prior to 1837, in constructing houses in the following years. That those houses are not wanted, according to Mr. Mott, is a proof of the fatal stop which has been put to the prosperity of Bolton. Instead of Mr. Mott reporting to his employers that there were too many houses in Bolton, he ought to have reported that the prosperity of the town had received a severe blow, as was proved by numberless untenanted tenements, while the wretched inhabitants were living in cellars beneath dunghills, and exposed to the dripping of the most noisome fluids into their damp and cheerless dwellings. The partiality and ignorance of Mr. Mott being made plain on the face of the report, we cannot give Sir James Graham and Sir Robert Peel any approbation for the confidence they placed in it. For the Tury Journals, more eager to take an advantage than to weigh testi mony, Mr. Mott's report is a most acceptable document ; but Ministers of the Crown should have some respect for their office and character, if they have none for their opponents ; and they should, in quoting Mr. Mott's re port, have warned the House and the public that it was a partial defence of the Poor-law administration. They, however, quoted the report in a partial manner, and produced the impression that Mr. Naisby and Dr. Bowring exaggerated the distress at Bol ton. The loathsome statements we have copied, and Mr. Mott's unoccupied houses, teach a very different lesson. The scenes described by the evidence of Nancy Beswick and Betty Brown are such, till we read their po sitive testimony, as we supposed were never to be seen in Christian England. We hope that evidence, loathsome though it be, will be read, and that the rich and the noble, and particularly the ladies and clergy of England, will feel it their duty to remedy the evils brought to light. If the ladies of England be not lost to the feel ings of womanhood, they will never allow their husbands fathers, and brothers to have any rest till those laws be abolished, which degrade the condition of the people of England to the level of that of the Hot tentots. Mr. Naisby's pamphlet concludes by the following reference to the present condition of the people at Bolton " It may be said that these cases having occurred some time ago, that distress is not so great in Bolton at pre sent. On that subject I beg to refer to a report which has been published and circulated in Bolton, within the last ten days, by the Committee of the Society for the Protection of the Poor, of which the Rey. J. Slade, IRELAND. DUBLIN, OCT. 26.—The weekly meeting of Repealers took place to-day in the Corn Exchange, ➢lr. DZ•Clelland in the chair. _ . . When Mr. O'Connell entered the meeting, which was very numerously attended, he was loudly cheered as the new Mayor. Amongst those near the Chair was an eastern Prince, attired in the costume peculiar to his country, whose appearance attracted much attention. His name is Conaschi Courzetchelli, and he is about to visit from Am enclosing 401. ;from Quebec, ria were enclosing —from Brooklyn, 5a Mr. O'CONNELL moved the insertion on the minutes of the document from Canada, and expressed his de light that the Canadians could be admitted to mem bership in that Association, as they were British subjects. Their American friends, although not ad missible as members, could co-operate with Ireland by sympathy, by their contributions, and by forming public opinion in their favour. As a British legislator, he had always voted against every oppression sought to be in flicted on Canada, and in favour of any measure brought forward', for her relief, but the moment her inhabi tants had the folly anti wickedness to resort to arms, he ceased to interest him - self in their behalf. Had they kept within the limits of the law they must have been successful, but when they attempted force they found the British too powerful with bayonet and cannon, and were ut down as they deserved to be. His secret was to be always in the right, and never to violate the law.— (Cheers.) He was, therefore, glad of the opportunity of making a marked distinction between the maniac strug gles of Papineau and the peaceful agitation in which he (Mr. O'Connell) was engaged.—(Hear, hear.) Two other communications from America were then read by the Secretary ; one from Philadelphia remit ting 2001., the other from Boston enclosing 1001., which were received with vehement cheering. Mr. O'CONNELL said, that he would close the corres pondence from America for that day by reading a letter from Judge Doran, of America, and he pledged himself that one of the first letters which he would despatch from the Mayoralty-house would be one in reply to him.— (Cheers.) The generous sympathy of their friends in America overpowered him, and he wanted language to express his gratitude. They had received by that day's post no less a sum than 350 i. ; and it was not, therefore, surprising, that grateful thankfulness to America for munificent contributions should be the prevailing senti ment throughout Ireland.—(Cheers.) He sincerely hoped that nothing would occur to sever the bonds now existing between Irishmen and Americans, and that the " vexed spirits" at both sides of the Atlantic would be quelled by their mutual good sense. He had read with the deepest horror and disgust a paragraph in the Times, in which the writer had the audacity to threaten the great American nation. He had the unpardonable impudence and audacity to strive to 'bully and terrify a people amounting in number to 17,000,000. What was this writer's object ?—evidently to foment a war be tween the two countries.—(Hear, hear.) It was a most traitorous document—injurious to the country—men acing blood and war—dangerous to the throne, and inimical to national liberty throughout the world. Was the man insane enough to fancy that his paper thunder could terrify the noble American people ? He might as well think of frightening soldiers with a pop-gun, or beating back a regiment of grenadiers with the squeak ing of a child's penny trumpet.—(Laughter and cheers.) There was se pride about republicanism— for the Repub lican had no master—which was apt to be exaggerated and to lean to irritation and excitement. This the Times knew well, and intended nothing but mischief in sup porting the Tories by articles like that to which he re ferred. However, they would meet with no sympathy from Irishmen. Irishmen would never enter into an insulting crusade against the Americans. They would continue to obey the law and support the Throne ; but at the same time, and above all, they would hold a firm attitude of defiance towards that miscreant faction the Tories, and their lying, villanous, and insulting organ, and show that the harmony between Britain and America could not be disturbed. Was it not enough that the Tories had a pre ponderating influence in both Houses, and controlled the Queen —a power obtained by depriving the operative of cheap bread; by giving the aristocrat two slices of the loaf without reserving a morsel for the poor man? Was England insane? Was her destruction coming on, and was that insanity indicative of her approaching dissolu tion? He hoped sincerely that the omen might be false, and concluded by moving the insertion of the letters from America on the minutes. Several communications having been read, Mr. O'CONNELL again rose, and said, that he should move that the meeting at its rising should adjourn until that day week, because on Monday they would be en gaged in electing the new Lord Mayor.—(Cheers.) He congratulated the citizens on the triumph which had been achieved, and announced that out of fifteen Wards, the Radicals had obtained eleven. With regard to the triumph they obtained, he called on his fellow-citizens to rejoice and be glad.—(Cheers.) They had cause, but still though the old Corporation was the most robbing, jobbing, peculating one that ever existed, they would forgive them now—they would bury it in the "Devil's Pit," where the Tipperary boys buried the tithes—they were gone, joy be with them.—(Laughter.) There ho was now Alderman of two Wards—(Cheers)—and Member for two counties ; but what he liked best—there he was a Repealer.—(Cheers.) But the most disgraceful means were employed against them. Some said, " Vote for the Government candidates ;" others said, " Will you vote for the Papists ;" and Mr. Alexander Ferrier moved the influence of the Bank of Ireland against them. They threatened, bribed, worried, vexed, harrassed, and yet they were defeated, and he would be the first Magis trate in the first City of his native country, and he would use his best exertions to be patient and impartial in performing the duties of his new office — in exercising it with a total absence of sectarian or party strife or fa vouritism—and with the sole view of lessening the bur thens and increasing the franchise of his fellow-citizens. —(Cheers.) No person should expect of him to show favouritism to cast or creed. He loved his friends--he forgave his enemies, and he never was in better humour to forgive them than at present. The meeting was adjourned to this day week. SHERIFFS' COURT, OCT. 28. WOODING V. DAVISON. This was an action brought for the recovery of the amount of a bill of exchange for 15/. which was al lodged to have been accepted by the plaintiff who was a Trinity House pilot. Mr. BOVEN stated the case for the plaintiff, and called several wimesses, who proved that the endorsement on the bill, executing the acceptance, was in the defend ant's hand-writing. Mr. CHADWICK JONES, who appeared for the defence, cross-examined the witnesses at great length, when they admitted having heard the defendant accuse a person named Jones, who was his brother-in-law, and was under trial at the Central Criminal Court on a charge of felony, of having frequently forged his name to Bills of exchange ; and called witnesses in proof of this, wital the Jury returned a verdict for the defendant. me in the morning. Nothing more passed relating to his wife. By the COURT—He seemed in good spirits. John Charles Davis--I am a cutler living in Aldgate. A person, I believe to be the prisoner, came into my father's shop at about one o'clock on the 21st September. Mr. C. Pitman's objected to this evidence being gone into, as the witness could not swear to the prisoner. Lord ABINGER supposed all he could say was that a person had purchased a knife. Mr. PAYNE would not press the point. The witness then withdrew. Thomas Quinlan—l am a private watchman in East cheap. On the night of the 21st of September I met the prisoner at about five minutes before ten; his hands were in his pockets, he said Good night. At ten I saw him again, and he asked me if I should be back in five minutes. I said, I hope so; anti in about two minutes after I was called to the King's Head by a potboy. I saw a man lying at the front of the bar. He was not dead then. I saw two ladies in the bar. James Jarvis—l am a porter in Fenchurch-street. I was in the parlour of the King's Head on the night of the 21st of September. I heard a scream, went into the bar, and saw Mr. Burden staggering. I un derstood him to call for a doctor. I remained with him until one came. I saw deceased fall. Eliza Burdon—l am the widow of the deceased James Burden. He was 38 years of age. He kept the King's Head, Eastcheap. I saw the prisoner there on the night of Tuesday, 21st September. I was sitting in the bar with my sister. I know the prisoner, that mur derer.—(Here the witness became much affected, and the prisoner sobbed audibly.) My husband was sitting asleep. A table was near him. I heard a step coming, and saw Blakesley. He sprang to my sister, and saying, "My wife or my life," stabbed her in the right side. My sister was his wife. He then turned round and stabbed my husband when he was asleep in his chair. He had a knife in his hand. He then attempted to stab me, but my sister prevented him. He then went out of the bar with the knife in his hand streaming with blood. My sister and my husband followed him as far as the bar door, and my husband reeled against a dresser, and I heard him say, What is the matter. The prisoner turned round with the knife in his hand and looked at them; he came back half way across the passage, threw the knife down, and went out of the house. I never saw the prisoner after. My husband fell down, and we sent for Mr. Smith, the surgeon. My husband died shortly after. He had a silk pocket handkerchief over his face when he was asleep. Cross-examined by Mr. BODKIN—We were sitting inside the counter. A person coming in would have to walk the leng;:i e: the counter to get to us. He had passed round the counter when I first saw him. I was sitting on one side of the table and my husband on the other. I had - spoken to my husband about five minutes before he was awake. Not half a minute elapsed after he came in before he stabbed my sister. My attention was directed to the prisoner. I can swear my husband did not rise up before he was stabbed. The knife was thrown away by the prisoner outside the counter, but my sister went and picked it up and threw it in the in side. I never mentioned this before, for I was never asked. I think he held it in the left hand. I did not see him attempt to inflict any wound upon himself. Daniel O'Connell—l live in Fenchurch-street. I was in the parlour of the Kings Head on the evening in ques tion. Shortly after 10 o clock I heard a shriek in the bar. I went into the bar and saw two females standing, one lying over the bar, and Mrs. Burdon was coming out after her husband. Mr. Burdon was standing just out side the bar, he fell against me, and that broke his fall. The police came directly. Jarvis was there by nay side. James Croft—l was pot-boy at the King's Head. I heard a scream on the night in question, and ran to the bar from the tap room. I saw prisoner going to the door with a knife in his hand, he came back and tossed the knife outside the bar. I fetched the doctor. Mr. Burdon was standing outside the bar. Cornelius Smith, surgeon, in Gracechurch-street, saw deceased lying on his hack on the night in question in the bar; he died in about a minute after I arrived. I found a wound in his abdomen one inch and a half in length, and half an inch in breadth ; it was a gaping wound. The intestines were protruding, the instrument had penetrated five inches into the cavity of the abdo men ; a knife might have inflicted it. James Bradley—l am Sergeant in the City Police. I was called in to the King's Head, Eastcheap, on the night in question. I found the knife produced in the bar ; this was at ten minutes past ten. There was blood on it. I went in search of the prisoner, but did not find him. Mr. Smith recalled—such a knife as that produced would inflict the wound. Mr. Davis recalled—This is the knife I sold on the morning in question. I sharpened the knife at the back as well as at the front at the request of the prisoner, who purchased it. No one was in the shop when pri soner purchased the knife, but two men passed through while he was there. Thomas Dunn—l am a policeman of the Hertfordshire constabulary ; I apprehended the prisoner at Hitchin. Pilgate, a policeman, and myself saw him loitering about the market-place. I said, "It's a fine night ;" he said, "I am almost mad." I asked if we could ren der him any assistance ; he said, " I suppose you have heard of the dreadful circumstance in London." ' I said, " Murdering the landlord and your wife ?" He said, " Yes." I took him to the station ;he went to sleep, and frequently awoke, exclaiming " That scream ! that scream !" He said, " I did not intend to murder Mr. Bur den. If he had not got between my wife and myself, he would not have been hurt. I intended to kill my wife first, and then myself." I frequently cautioned him. Mr. PAYNE said this was the case for the prosecution. Mr. C. PHILLIPS, for the defence, said that as the cir cumstances of the case would be likely to become the matter of investigation, he had no discretion as to the facts he should lay before the Jury. The facts were too clear, for him to attempt to deny what had been set forth in evidence. It appeared that his wife had been detained from him by Burden, why did not appear. He did not attempt to argue that this detention of his wife was justification for the crime ,- but let them look at the effects of that detention. The prisoner was attached to his wife. This detention was sufficient to drive the prisoner mad according to his own statement, and he would put it to the jury, whether his con duct throughout was not that of a madman. His telling the police that he could have shot Burdon ; his whole conduct showed that he was goaded to mad ness; and like all madmen, the first object which he attacked was the woman he most dearly loved. Did not his whole conduct prove that he was not in his proper mind ? He should show that the prisoner's mind was naturally one which being excited would be driven to madness ; and then he would ask if some interposition ought not to take place to prevent this dreadful occur rence being consummated by one still more dreadful ? He should show that he wandered from his home for days without being able to give the slightest reason for his conduct. It would be shown that he had set up a brew ing business without any knowledge of the business, and without connection. The Learned Counsel then went on to give some particulars, which he stated lie should prove in evidence. All these were marks of an intellect so feeble, that cruelty would be likely to drive it to madness. On another occasion, he had attempted to enter into an agreement to set up as a baker at Foot's Cray, for the purpose of supplying Lon don with bread. When the matter was explained to the solicitor, the agreement was cancelled. On another oc casion he had fancied he had a large interest in coaches. He represented himself to his wife as a man of property, and said his guardian was living at Enfield. When they went to Enfield, of course they found CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. it a delusion ; and when Burdoa stated so to Yesterday being appointed for the trial of Robert the prisoner, he went into a convulsion of rag e, ran off and was ultimately found at Gravesend. Was it impro- Blakesley, charged with the wilful murder of Mr. James gable that the refusal to restore his wife, and the in- Burden, the Court was crowded to excess at a very suiting denial of all knowledge of him , should have early hour. driven a man with such a mind to desperation? Was Mr. Sergeant ARABIN took his seat upon the Bench at it right in Mr. Burden thus to have held him up to the nine o'clock, when oliceman as an impostor? He hoped he shou l d Robert Blakesley was placed at the bar to p!ead to the indictment, charging him with stabbing Sarah Blakesley, not be misunderstood—he derst did not give these as ood—he instances ofinsanity, but as indicative of such with intent to murder her. The prisoner, who was a state of mind as might be driven to insanity dressed in mourning, pleaded not guilty. His demeanour by the extreme cruelty that had been practised on him. was firm and decorous, without the slighte s t a pp earance He e would not trespass further on their time, but would of levity. He was then removed. sit down, satisfied that their verdict would be at all (Before Lord ABINGER and Mr. Baron GURNEY.) events just, and if possible merciful. He then called James On the arrival of the Judges, the priso n er was aga in Blakesley, the prisoner's father, who seemed placed at the bar, for the purpose of taking his trial on much affected ; the prisoner also appeared quite con the indictment for the murder of James Burdon, to vulsed. The witness—l am prisoner's father. lam a which he pleaded Not Guilty yesterday. Blackwell Hall factor. Prisoner had a very bad illness Mr. PAYNE, in stating the case for the prosecution be- when between four and five years old. He was subject sought the Jury to dismiss from their minds all they to paralysed limbs ever afterwards. He would drop might have heard on the subject, and to come to the -de down, and lose the use of his limbs for cision as to the guilt or innocence of the prisoner with hours. He has not been subject to attacks in the out prejudice. The Learned Counsel having stated the limbs since he has grown up. We have always consi. facts of the case, called the following witnesses. I dered and treated him as weak and foolish. You could not i Edward Beeston—l am a policeman in the City police. reason with him. His reasoning faculties a pp eared at li The prisoner came to me on the m ornin g of the 21st of times gone. It remained so until he went to school be- September. I first saw him about three o'clock. I was twecn seven and eight years of age. I was sent for by on my beat. He said his wife was detained from him by the master to see how Ile would stand for hours by the Mr. Burden, at the King's Head, Eastcheap. He said wall while the other children were playing. I have he would get a summons for Burden from the seen him so. He left school when thirteen years Lord Mayor. I offered to go with him to be of age. He was brought up to my business. His his witness, when he went to claim his wife; occupation was to make entries in the Day - book. we went to the King's Hea d at seven o'clock, and saw He has left my house frequently without giving u s an y Mr. Burden in the bar. W hen Blak esley claimed his notice or making any preparation fora Journey. He wife, Mr. Burdon said, " I know nothing of you, go out of has been away for a fortnight. There had been no dif my house." I said to Mr. Burden that I was come as his ference with any of the family. On his return he w itness, as he intended t o go before the Lord Mayor. would n a day or two appear quite incoherent appeared sorry for what be bad incoherent and embarrassed, and Mr. Burden said , " I know nothin g whatever of after him." I said, am I to take that as an answer ? not done but I could get from him where he ha d been, He said "Yes," a nd Blakesle y and I left. Blakes- or what he had been doing. I have frequently ley said he had been unfortunate in business, seen him in the warehouse in a state of extreme and on that account his wife had been kept there. itation and have had great difficulty to get him to Cross-examined by Mr. Pumairs—l saw him first at ' three, and the last time at seven. I had seen him be tween five and six ; he bore the appearance of having irritate him. In 1835 or 1836 he attempted to open a been up all night. . brew-house. He had no knowledge of the trade, nor any himself.. We were always particularly cautious not to George Allen, hair-dresser, Lime -street—The pre- from my own knowledge. I spoke to him on the sub in question, and . sect. He said he had applied for a loan of money. Ho said that his wife and his property had been kept from J . means of carrying it on. I knew nothing about this soner came to my shop on the morning him by Mr. Burden, of the King's Head, Eastcheap. had obtained some, and I gave him some to pay it. It He said he had been unfortunate in business at Seven nscurccbeeaddinbge. place at Foots Cray. I asked oaks, and that was the reason Mr. and Mrs. Burdongabaout his manufacturing bread, and were against him. He said he had demanded wabaosutabobt 401. tsin I had had a communication in 1838 himbringing about t it, tc or London in a cart. He said he was his wife of Mr. Burden that morning, and had been refused ; that it was enough to drive any manbusiness, nor mad ; and if he had had a pistol he would have shot him. Ie knew i r means. In 1839 Mr. Brookes, of Tot- He showed me a letter he had from his wife, beginning any pecun ay siorrthat nothing e tb s ic a g w of the t r b e e w b e a r k e ini n g o b h u o si p n e e s " Dear Bob," and appointing to meet at the same place. came in, and Mr. Brookes said that my Cross-examined by Mn BODKIN—He came to be my son. H tenham, made c a communication to me, and asked for horsesfor shaved. He did appear in an uncomfortable state of • mind. He spoke rationally. the Cambridge coach, and asked why he had not corn ted his arrangement. My son said he had never William Blacker—l am a City policeman. I saw the son had taken some stabling from him for - prisoner at half past nine in the morning of the 21st P si; him.. I said Robert, Robert, what new thing is this. He of September. He said he hato demand his wife, d been us i tended he never had seen 3.1 I 3 ok r. ro es. My sonleft my house in April 1841, and has never re and that they, were going to turn him out of the house. • My house was ever open to receive turned since. him, We were passing a butcher's shop at the time, and he Mr. Burden once made a communication to me about a pointed to a knife and said —If I had had that in my d guardian living at Enfield. M sid nothing a con suppose hand I should have made use of it. I said, Nonsense.; and he said—By God I think I should. He said he hadsb about and not been in bed all night. I saw him again at six in the been heard of for three week into Somersetshire on business; he wandered yson was sent I had never . . On his; e advertised evening. He came up, and asked me if I was going to man. return his in tellect seemed so weak that I dared not converse • h him. stand half a pint of porter. I gave hint some, and he iwith 1 Cross-examined by Mr. said he was going to see his old woman by and bye. I I PAYNE-My son was never was with him for two hours. He said that he would meet su Jecte to any restraint nor to any medical treatment. h• d ‘ By the COMIT—IIe kept the day-book under my for a situation as a farming MORNING SUN COURT CIRCULAR. Her Royal Highness th e D uc h ess o f K ent , L a dy fan-11 Charlotte Dundas, Baron. Stockmar, and Mr. and the 0 11- Mrs. G . Anson, had the honour of dining with her at Bucki ng h am Palace last evening. Ron. Miss Stanley has succeeded the Hon. MISS r eget as the Maid of Honour in Waiting on the Queen. _ Messrs. Fl em i ng, Hobson, Leach, Crabtree, and B rooke, a deputation . from the Shme Com o f the W est R iding of Yorkshire, had an ort-ti . intervie m w ittees with Sir d r James Gr a h am yesterday at the Home-office. 11 ±-2_e_puLation, consi s ti ng of Mr. George Clavering Mr. Matthew Forster, M.P. and Mr. Robert Iterrison, had an i nterview yesterday with the Right 4 ten. the tiubEarl of Aberdeen, at the Foreign-office, on the j eet of the Portendic claims, on which a Commission tail lately been sittin g a t P ar i s. lir* been Cope, jun., Honorary Secretary of the etropolitan Anti-Bridge Toll Association, had the I,l.?nour of an interview on Wednesday with the Earl of l ' ln e° lll , Chief Commissi oner o f h er M a j esty ' s endiForests, at the Woods and Forests-office, on the sub- Woods i.e .. et of the redemption of the Tolls on the Metropolis Bridges and other Metropolitan improvements. 11-.4 deputation from the Short-time Committee of the r i est Riding of Yorkshire, including Messrs. Fleming, ;21?b60n. Leach, C ra b tree and Brooke, had an interview ! Sir Robert P ee l yesterday, at his official residence 44' tiewning-street. de putation f rom Paisley had an interview with the Right W. Gladstone yesterday, at the office of the oard of Trade. T he Du ke of Wellington arrived in town on Wednesday. VAS „ -- "tuNABLE INTELLIGENCE. Miss Vir 13 ARRIVALS roam and Miss Paisley, at Marshal Thomp kekfield, Esq. ilott's Rotel, avendish-square, from Hyde ; iiippsley , and Mis. Tueltfield, at ditto Miss P P al eY, at ditto ; the Rev. Mr. Mills, at ditto. Rev, j DEPARTURES. Cass eltenain_; for e h ullea C. Gordon, from the Burlington Hotel, General Cass, Miss Mrs. Cass, and fo r /1.,..49111Mar5hal Thompson's Hotel, Cavendish-square, thei r Z . s ; Captain and Mrs. Canfield, from ditto, after hit; - C,, ri age; Wilkinson, Esq., and Waddnlg 11x,,Q11.01t1 Mrs. Waddingham, from ditto ; the s Hon. from cr „ 'irk Carnegie, from ditto ; Palmer'ci" for Q._ l "° for Oxford Sir G. Clerk, Bart., fromditto, -- ..,,votlanci.; isi;`-',..A.TING INTELLIGENCE. "'•wIIIARKET HOUGHTON MEETING. kateh 7st 131 k 'WEDNESDAY. 100, M. M. Lord Exeter's Seal . ; 71b. IL. ° ( 14 , ain), beat Duke of Bedford's Taurida, 8s ih n — i tti llg, to lon Taurida. Won by a head.. F. p 'cap plate of 501., for three-years, &c. F caylle's Johnny, 4 yrs, 7st 121 b (Nat) 1 The Clementina, 3 yrs, sst 71b 2 es .uLl°wi ng were not placed :—Mr.Graydon sChnker, , R st 51b; Alr. Bateman's Vapour, 4 yrs, Bst 51h; Mr. li ro r a jord' s Peel, 4 yrs, Bst 9 lb ; Mr. Meiklam's 7st 7iL wa v", 4 yrs, 7st 121 b ; Mr. Coombe's The Nob,: yrs, 1 4114 u, Mr. Batson's Barbara, 3 yrs, 7st 71b; Mr. , Bal hi _ t 114trattillwar Whistle 3 yrs, ist 61b ; Lord Chesterfield nig en h . yrs, 7st . Colonel Crawford 's out 0 ;' 3 Yrs, Est 101 b; Duke of Portland's cby Und d i, z , f by ,Th e b„ , 3 yrs, sst 101 b ; and Duke of Rutlan s rnilis, out of Miss Mary Ann, 3 yrs, sst 71b. 5 t o Itting--4 to 1 agst Johnny, 4 to 1 agst Ermengardis, Th e , agst Clinker, 6 to 1 agst Vapour, and 8 to 1 agst _pe r. s colt. Won cleverly by a length. Lord • G°odman's sis to Glencoe Bst 71b (Conolly), beat ItleogUthe, Bentincle; Proof Print, ist. Won by half I :ntry for Sat 41b--- the D. I. Plate (Thursday.—Flambea, 7st 12„_ Welfare, Bst 21b--Tamburini, ist 121b—Isabella, 7st 121b—I-am-not-aware, ist 71b 64 t711 e ).! °tIn g'un, 7st 61b—Zelmyra, 7st—The Ruler, tst,„. Creole, 6st 71b—Silistria, Est 71b—Miss Stiltonend , a _nd Pocket Viper, sst. 7w.T.e.Pstakes of 50 sovs. each (Thursday).—Hester colt octY.,!seacre ero4 l eY End Stakes Entry (Friday). Flambeau, Lelia Bolin All Pours Tamburini, I-am-not-aware, Isa- W hi ' stie ° . llrin Y , The Yong-'un and The Knight of the to betting on the Derby. ItZSaid that the match (Friday) between The Squire alph Will end in a forfeit. 4r(lllM;l,_l)4l—Captain Rous' Nicholas, Bst 71b, agst Zelrnyra, Bst lib, T.Y.C., off by con ' 4 ist e ,o'rd Albemarle's Nuncio (Robinson), beat Lord tin Albion, B st 7 1b each, T.Y.C., 100 / . h f t. Bet h ' 1. ""..- d t°4 on Nuncio, won by h a lf a length.—Duke of .titset.„23,vakley, 3 yrs, Bst 61b (Robinson), beat Lord 6,1,2,90/.h fs All Fours, urs, 5 yrs, Bst 71b, first half of Ab. • Betting-5 to 4on Oakley, won by three , t k r, • Goodman's Belgrade, 7st bulb (Crouch), ‘.1,A1) t.',Osaldeston's The Mountain Sylph, Bst 71b, v ta 6° ol . h ft. Betting-4 to lon Belgrade,won ole eth • — Sweepstakes of 501. sovs. each, h ft, for 2 Ng, Bst 71b, and fillies, Bst4lb. Ab. M. (12 Subs.) C Wrefo r d' s ch c Wiseacre and Col. Peel's ch c by "411,c;g:ri tik oZi e li d t o o ve f r. A V — Hester, divided the forfeits, and Na 4ll " Race w as not over w hen our Express left. hltt. ll s elect comp an y, a nd the rain descending in 4 14 b t ai .tr : __ m _ NEW MATCHES. • Byng's Garry Owen, Bst 71b agst Duke ~ ia ls ll - :.ug of the Per!k, 7st 101 b. T.Y.C, 100. _ 84 72_0n, 83 1 1 : 111 ! 1 , n ore's Potentia, Bst 51b, agst Col. Peel's attt rtn A y . _ ... .,,f.Y.C. 200 ; h ft. Laterazta:;;sG sa_ oo a it .d oe, 7st ; win's Sister to Glso. en coe h ft Bst 31b a A ll th R MAJESTY. .4 e. Preparations rendered nece ssary in conse ke,ota, °I the near approach of he r Majesty's taty' e reent are in readiness. That inte resting event t At i ll " be hourly expected, or possibly not place for at short time, as, although the t the 6," rather indisposed the last day yet l'aoto,;.,flerter considered it necessary to keep her att Yeitorday her Majesty . was quite as well as att larno el uay. Orders were given some days past for 4 40" to be issued from the Home-office to the the Lora le a°P of Canterbury, the Bishop of London, . vo. h° s e u dtit e.hrt.ncellor and those Cabinet Ministers tide hi ts h Y it la to be g in attendance at the Palace when %tat Prince or Princess is expected, the ino reetiv"Y iotelligence of her Majesty being unwell t was le p % h e ti frOro the medical attendants, or officers of i t4 4l : il tte:a ° t l it i ",datY ; but up to last night no such offic ial had been received, neither had any sum- Th e s been issued. back 4,ifferent branches of the Royal Family sent to Set 1: 14 " 1 Palace yesterday, to make inqu i r ies l ire,f er Majesty's health. Sir Robert Peel's ho ei g h t °l' the last two days, been kept harnessed day and 114)14'4 ore that if any information shouldpe receive t,i.d o atitce, the Right. Hon. Bart. mar not be de li n e rainu:e. 41 4. 4 +4' joined th e R oya l party l as t even i ng at ,r r " 4 was, we are happy s to say, in the possession wo nted h ea l th and spirit. 11,i —CHEQUER BILL AFFAIR. %io ta nc t u irY into this mysterious affair is pursued in testek,Pri2vate manner but at the same time with the teile--..'gilance in all the offices connected with the QQ10e1:14" department. On Wednesday night about t five e tto e i t pa ' l umber of the most influential members o . h t e le eh "ge, and several gentlemen connected witih 'art, e e Y Market met Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Gou Doit„, Jein ea Ci;aham and Lord Monteagle, by a l l " 11.„,7N, at the official' residence of the Right lo t a. tolefiltadet is boo vning-street, on the subject of the a e did transactions in Exchequer Bills. The meeting i " mottli ng Parate until half-past eight o'clock. Yesterday tO4 t'aetii! thLinquiry was again proceeded with. The tnot„' wednesday , we believe, was attended by on e d fall,4tis e;,,gentlernen connected with the Bank of Englan cl'if2ted Mr. Lewis will be again examined. Mr. oliet'ulef Magistrate of Bow-street, and Mr. Maule, "' Q tat el ee of the Tr,sasury, were in attendance at the -o.4ice Yesterday morning. 143 superintendence. His conversation was generally ra tional. He spoke as if he understood his duties, but there was an occasional aberration of mind. I had once sent him into Somersetshire, and after staying there three days instead of twelve he went to Birmingham. I sent him to extend the business. He totally abandoned the object for which he had been sent. I sent him with a view of making a man of business of him. I had more hopes of him then than I have had since. By the COURT—He had left my house before his marriage. I knew nothing of his marriage, until after it took place. He wrote to his mother, and said, I am married. Mr. R. B. Williams—l am a wine merchant, in Suf folk-lane. I have been acquainted with prisoner's family some years. In 1839 I found the prisoner at Foot's Cray. He said he had gone to open a baker's shop. The house he had taken was a cottage standing by itself, with a garden in front, three quarters of a mile from the vil lage. I asked him what was his motive for tak ing such a house for a baker's shop ? He said, because it was very pretty. He seemed to have no 'tnowledge of baking, and said ha had agreed with a person to build an oven for 201. He said he had 501. from a gentleman in the City, and had spent 121. of it. He said he should take bread to London in a cart, for which he should hire horses at a livery-stable. He said he had no means of getting flour, but that any body would supply him when he - had a baker's shop. He said he had no connection, but did not doubt but lie should sell bread by driving from door to door, and saving the bread was baked in the country. Icould make no im pression on him to induce him to desist from his scheme I should think he remained in Foot's Cray two or three days after. He then went to Dorking, from thence to Hastings, and returned to Dorking, where I found him. He said he was looking out for a baker's business. He had agreed with a man at Dorking to take his premises, and had paid a deposit. He was then possessed of about Si. I remonstrated with him, and he agreed to give up his schemes if his father would set him up in business in the country, and his father would not consent to do so. When I told prisoner he displayed a violent degree of passion, and his face became livid and convulsed. This lasted a quarter of an hour. He used strange and ridiculous language—said he would sell dogs' meat in the street, and threatened to hang himself to a lamp post before his father's door. His conduct was usually sane and moral, but he was not of strong mind. By the COURT—I considered him sane up to October 1839. I have net spoken to him since that period. This closed the defence. Mr. PAYNE would willingly have been spared the pain of replying in this case. His Learned Friend had commented on the conduct of Mr. Burdon, and he (Mr. Payne) thought that observation might have been spared, as it was evident that Mrs. Blakesley was at Mr. Bur don's as an asylum, and was not detained there. With regard to the plea of insanity, Lord Denman, in the case of Oxford, had laid down the law that in order to entitle a person to an acquittal on the ground of insanity it was necessary that he should at the time of the commission of the offence be in such a state of mind as to be unable to distinguish between right and wrong. He would put it to the Jury to say whether such could be considered to be the case in the present instance. Lord ABINGER, in summing up, said that although passion could not be considered insanity, yet the law made allowances for offences of this nature, committed in aparoxysm of rage; but if a sufficient time had elapsed for the warmth of passion to subside, and a man went with deliberation and took away life, then the law made no allowance, and the crime amounted to murder. In the present case he saw no ground for supposing that the altercation which took place in the morning could afford any justification for .the crime committed in the evening, so as to reduce it to manslaughter. With regard to the question as to whe ther when the prisoner committed the crime he was in sane or not, that was a question entirely for the Jury to decide, and he should be sorry to take it out of their hands. The fact of his having left his father's house and married a wife, without the means of maintaining her, was an act of egregious folly, but not of madness. A madman had been stated to be a man acting rightly on wrong princi ples. Now, the prisoner knew that he was married, he was under no delusion, and that was necessary to make him out insane. Rash marriages were of every day oc currence, but those who contracted them were not therefore to :.be considered as mad. It was impossible to consider the evidence of Mr. Blakes ley, the father, without feeling for the painful situation in which he was placed. Yet it appeared that he always treated the prisoner as a rational being. In a case tried at York, a father who was very fond of his children had suddenly seized two pistols and shot them both ; the physicians proved that he did not know the children were dead—that he did not know what he was about, and he was acquitted on the ground of insanity. In another case recently tried at the same place, a person had committed a murder, supposing he had a direct command from Heaven to do so. Was there any delusion in the present case? Did not the prisoner know that he was doing wrong ? Did not his con duct when taken, and the conversation with the police man, show that he was sensible of moral guilt ? The evidence appeared deficient in not going into the facts of the cases in which the prisoner was supposed to be acting under delusion. If they were not satisfied that when he committed the act he was insane, and that a sufficient time had elapsed for his passion to cool, it would be their duty to convict him. The Jury then retired, and after an absence of forty minutes, returned into Court with a verdict of Guilty. The prisoner heard the verdict with great firmness. On being called up for judgment the prisoner said— " So help me God I am innocent of the intention to murder James Burdon." Lord Auatioza then, in the most solemn manner, proceeded to pass the awful sentence of the law. lie said there could be no doubt of the prisoner's guilt. He had first intended to commit another murder, that of his wife ; he had then, without giving him a moment's time for preparation, hurried the unfortunate man Burdon into eternity. lie had exhibited symptoms of remorse since the commission of the crime, and he besought him to make the most use of the short time which would be left to him to make his peace with his Creator. Notwithstanding the attempt that had been made to prove him insane, there could be no doubt but that he had committed the act of murder with malice and premeditation. His Lordship then passed the awful sentence of the law in the usual manner. The prisoner, who seemed dreadfully affected, was ob liged to be assisted away from the bar. During the course of the trial the prisoner became so exhausted that it was necessary to accommodate him with a chair. He was dreadfully affected while Mrs. Burden was giving her evidence, and sobbed con vulsively when his father entered the witness-box. He was defended by Mr. C. Phillips and Mr. Bodkin. NEW COURT. Edmund Bigland and Henry Bearman were indicted for stealing four fishing -nets of the value of 51., the property of George Henry Garthwaite. The prosecutor stated that the nets were safe in his boat on the 4th of October, and on the nest morning they were gone. The nets produced were the property of the witness. One of the Inspectors of the Greenwich police found the nets in the possession of the prisoner Bigland, at Wandsworth, the other prisoner had taken them from Greenwich in a boat. The witness always considered Bearman an honest man. The CommoN SERGEANT in summing up said he did not think there was sufficient proof against Bearman. The other prisoner was found Guilty, and sentenced to be transported for the term of seven years, in conse quence of a former conviction. Bearman, it appeared, was of weak intellect, and had been made the dupe of the other prisoner. SURREY SESSIONS. William Turner, a powerful young man, was indicted for assaulting Henry Middleton, a police officer, while in the discharge of his duty. On the night of the 29th ultimo, the prisoner was in a public-house in Bermondsey, kept by a Mr. Field, he was very noisy and quarrelsome because the landlord refused to draw him any more beer. As he was interrupting the business of the house, and refused to leave, the landlord called in the prosecutor, who remonstrated with him, and ad vised him to leave quietly. He still refusing to do so, the landlord gave him in charge. The noise made by the prisoner had collected a mob ar ound the door, and they seemed inclined to interfere in his favour. The prisoner used very foul language, threw himself down, kicked the prosecutor, and said all the po lice in London should not take him to the sta tion-house. Mr. Field got alarmed at his violence, and called in another officer ; but even the two could not manage him ; however, a third officer was at tracted to the spot by the noise, and then the prisoner became cool and walked to the station. All the policemen were in their uniform, so that he was perfectly aware they were acting in the discharge of their duty. The Jury found hi m guilty, and the Chairma n, said such violence m us t be restrained, and the police protected whil e acting mildly, as in this case. The sentence of the Court was, that the prisoner be confined and kept to hard la bour in the House of Correction, at Brixton, for nine calendar months. MORNING SUN POLICE INTELLIGENCE. GUILDHALL. A respectable-looking person, named Le Strange, ap peared before the Sitting Alderman, on a charge of having been possessed of a quantity of iron and brass work, the property of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty. Mr. Pontifex, an extensive brass and iron-founder, of Shoe-lane, stated that about a fortnight since he pur ceased a quantity of old metal from the defendant, who dealt in such articles at Woolwich, and on further exa mination he found about 14 pounds of it to be marked with the broad arrow, and other stamps, proving it to be the property of her Majesty. In accordance with the terms required by the Act of Parliament, he sent informa tion to the Admiralty, when the present proceedings were instituted. - After a short inquiry, it appeared that the defendant had erred from i gnoran ce in selling the articles, and ne was fined 405., the lowest sum allowed by the Act. BOW-STREET. eneral William Henry Meuce, a messenger in Mr. the J G ardine, Post-office, was yesterday brought before enn o ny ducted Piece' charged with stealing a letter, containing P Mr. Peacock, solicitor to the Po st-office, c the prosecution. Jobn Forbes, a messenger, stated that he was on duty yasterday morning in the i n l an d of fi ce, stamping .letters for the day-mails, and the p risoner was engaged in car rying them over to the sorters. About nine o'clock, with he observed a thick letter ly in g besid e the pr . isoner, a pin in it, and on witness taking it up, it appeared to him to contain cash. It was addressed l, etter " Mr. H. Day, Queen -square, Bristol ; and was ihe produced. Witness then reached over for the puzpose of takinr , up the parcel of letters, on the top of which it lay, when She prisoner said; " Stop, they are not yet obliterated ;" N - . at the same time taking them up and obliberating them, and keeping them some time in his hand. ,Hethen-Mfeht,,_ . behind the desk, where he put the letters on the stamp= ing table ; but when witness looked 'pver them, he dis• covered that the letter produced was /tot 'among them, - They next went into the Railway-roo and witness's surprise being excited, as th e l e tt er 43ktirketo Yound,•be.:'"( communicated with Mr. Hodd, one of the clerks. Further evidence was given, when the prisoner stated in what way he had the letter in his possession, and added, that not knowing what would become of his poor wife, he attempted to get away. —Committed for trial, but to be brought up next Wednesday to have the evi dence completed. MARLBOROUGH STREET. SHOCKING CASE OF DESTITUTION. —EIizabeth Far nell, a young woman of very decent appearance, with her daughter about six years of age in a very sickly state of health, were placed at the bar before Mr. Hardwick, the presiding Magistrate, having been taken into the custody of the police under the following circumstances : Police Constable No. 176 of the C division, stated that about half-past 10 o'clock on Wednesday night he found the young woman and her (laughter sitting on the steps of the Pantheon, in Oxford-street ; they seemed' to be in a very exhausted state, and were drenched to the skin and shivering with cold. On questioning them as to what they did there at that time of night, under such circumstances, the young woman said that the child and herself were in an utterly desti tute state, not havinc , the means of even procuring a place of shelter for the night. Witness therefore took them to the station-house. IlAnDwicK—To what parish do you belong. Young Woman—To Bristol, I believe—at least I've heard my husband say so. Mr. HARDWICK—Your's is a melancholy case, in deed, as no parish here will, under the circumstances, do more than afford you a little temporary relief, and in a few hours you will be in as bad a plight as you are now. No parish will take upon themselves the responsibility of passing you to Bristol, merely because you think it is your parish. But I believe your story : I will supply the means for your child and yourself to proceed to Bristol. The worthy Magistrate then ordered a meal to be given to them, and afterwards that a police constable should see them off by a Bristol waggon. The young woman with tears expressed her gratitude. EXTRAORDINARY ACCUSATION OF ROBBERY. WINDSOR, WEDNESDAY.—The Mayor and Magis trates of this borough have been engaged during the last four sittings of the Bench in investigating a charge of alleged robbery brought by a lady named Sarah Anne Gwynne, the widow of the late Colonel G Wynne, re sidinglin the Lower Cloisters (Windsor Castle), against her servant, whose house, it is stated, was robbed be tween Thursday night, the 14th instant, and the follow ing morning, of various articles of jewellery, consisting of a gold chain and bracelets, a large gold cross studded with garnets, a locket containing a portrait of a General Officer set in enamel and pearls, portrait of an infant in a double gold case, pearl and brilliant brooches, a large star of rose diamonds, gold rings and seals, cornelian necklaces, &c. The proceedings ›cupied the time of the Magistrates on Saturday, the 16th instant, and the following Tuesday and Friday, and also yesterday, when they were brought to a close. It appeared that upon the accused, Maria Anne Hea ton, the servant of Mrs. Gwynne (and who had been in her service for two or three months, having been engaged by her at Jersey), going down stairs on the morning after the alleged robbery, she discovered that a rosewood writing-desk, containing the above-named articles, was missing from the drawing - room , She immediately in formed her mistress, who was in bed, of the circumstance. Mr. Gillman, the superintendent of Windsor police, on examining the premises, felt confident that the house had not been broken into. The cellar was then minutely searched by the police, but no portion of the missing pro perty was discovered. A pair of new pincers, however, were. found upon the ledge of the cellar-window. In the course of that day (Friday) the accused, Maria Anne Heaton, having been suspected of being concerned in the robbery, and treated unkindly by her mistress, she stated to Mrs. Gwynne that she would not ge to bed that night, and went to the police-station and gave herself up, with out any charge having been preferred against her. On the following morning (Saturday) a woman named Roach, who had been sent for to assist in the household work at Mrs. Gwynne's, saw, upon going into the cellar to draw some beer, the missing writing-desk. The girl Heaton was then taken before the Magistrates that afternoon. It appeared, on examining the marks upon the desk which had been broken open, that it had been forced by means of the end of the pincers found in the cellar ; and there were found to be missing the greater portion of the jewellery above described. The prisoner was then. remanded until Tuesday, when, after examination (during which nothing was elicited to criminate her), she was again remanded till Friday last, when Mr. Williams, bar rister-at-law, and Mr. Martin, the solicitor, attended for the prosecution, and Mr. Voules for the prisoner. Mrs. Gwynne was then cross-examined by Mr.Voules, and the substance of her evidence was as follows :—The prisoner has only been out of the house two or three times since she has been with me in England. Towards the middle of Friday (the day the robbery was discover ed), she seemed uneasy, and said she would not serve me again until the desk was found, and she would rather go to gaol, and return when the thief or desk was disco vered. I thought it very extraordinary, if she were the thief, she had not taken another desk, which contained my money. Several of my friends, including Mr. Wil liams, the barrister, searched the cellar during Friday, but they did not find the desk, which was discovered there the next day by Mrs. Roach. I never knew the prisoner have any visitors. The deposition of Mr. Gillman, the superintendent of police, having been read over, and being asked if he had anything more to add, he stated that he was positive the two cases found by the witness Roach in the cellar on Sa turday were not there when he carefully searched the place the day before. Mrs. Roach was then called in, and her deposition read over. Upon being cross-examined by Mr. Voules, she admitted that she had been listening at the door during the whole time she was out of the jastice-room, for which she was severely admonished by the Bench. She then deposed as follows :—I went down with the candle to draw some beer, when I saw the desk. I went up stairs, and told Miss Gwynne of it, and she returned with me to the cellar. We then took it up into the draw ing-room to Mrs. Gwynne, who examined it, and it was afterwards taken back to the cellar. I swore in my former evidence that the police were the first to remove it, but it was removed by me first. Anybody with eye sight could have seen the desk upon going into the cellar. Mr. Williams then addressed the Bench, and applied for the further hearing of the case to be postponed, pledging his professional reputation that if the prisoner were remanded till Tuesday, he should then be able to produce further and sufficient evidence to connect her with the robbery. The Bench consented. Yesterday morning, at eleven o'clock, upon the case being called on, neither the prosecutrix, nor her counsel or solicitor were present. The MAYOR then said, that as no further evidence had been produced, he should certainly order the accused to be instantly discharged. Mr. Voules complained with considerable warmth, of the conduct of the prosecutrix in having kept his poor client incarcerated in the station-house for twelve days, and now abandoning the prosecution, especially after the solemn pledge of her counsel to produce important evi dence to-day. It was most unfair towards his persecuted client, and the public, that the groundless charge should be so attempted to be swamped and hushed up. The MAYOR said that the case on Friday was ad journed only in consequence of the Bench relying upon the promise of Mr. Williams. Yesterday he (the Mayor) received a communication from Mr. Williams, stating that no further evidence would be produced, and that the girl might be discharged ; " but," observed the 11isyee, " I sent a message to Mr. Williams to the effect, that as the girl had been publicly in that hall accused of the robbery, she had a right to expect to be, and justice demanded that she should be, as publicly discharged."—(Considerable applause amongst those present followed this announcement.) Mr. Voules complained of the infringement, in this case, of the liberty of the subject. He would say, and publicly too, that it was a most gross prosecution ; not a tittle of evidence had been brought forward to connect the accused, in the most remote way, with the alleged robbery, and had it not been for some kind friends (gen tlemen who were present), unknown to the poor girl, stepping forward in her behalf, she would have been left, in a strange country, totally unprotected.—(App lause.) Mr. Martin, solicitor for the prosecution (who had a few minutes before entered the room), then stated that the prosecutrix had no further evidence to offer against the prisoner. .not pledged himself to bring forward further Mr. BLUNT observed that if MrlVeirillidaemuseettaod.day, the accused would have been discharged at the last examination. Magistrates for the the by the Bench J. B. SHARPE, Esq., one of b d ; P uiprotected state of county of Bucks, who chanced to 0_ and after alluding to the painfulze _p and that he b t h e e e n n t r e o r s e e d , tion the accused, suggested that j th e e rs u e n y f l ortunate girl. intowould to b d e e f happyay h t e o r expenses assist, coincided in the views of The Magistrates p /E'? era guinea towards the girl's Mr. Sharpe (who su b scribednexample which has since been expenses to Jersey,i withl b o a s : ers te , an the principal inhabitants of the followed by severe town) and the girl was then discharged. She win be town), and the gi t a k e n care of till she leaves for Jersey. -.--The November Number - NA v A NDAR T - 11- 4,..a5e vice Journal and Naval and Military of the i-dr" -- -- r ng other important papors Co contains, Wino , ae rations . with the whole of the Despatches—. tions in China, raria, during the Camp • • tugn against , s Expedition —Sy 'R bl - Anson 's m t Ali—A Three Weeks am e and Cruize in M e-e- e T Barrow, Esq.—llistorical Details Rela tivelB4l, by Jo hn to the Military Force of Great Britain —England's Wooden 'Walls : the Vanguard—Personal Adventures in Georgia, Circassia, and Russia, by Lieutenant-Col. G. P. C ame ron —Nights on the Fo'castl e , b y the Author of " Ratlin the Reefer —A March and Detachment in Ireland —Notes from the lonian Islands —Statistics of the Recruiting Department—Distribution of the Army and Navy; with all the Naval and Military Intelligence of the Month. RECENT OFFICIAL DEFALCATIONS.--It iS the bounden duty of the Tory Government to provide an effectual check against a repetition of the disgraceful plunder recently practised by some of the black sheep among those otherwise efficient public functionaries, " the Official Assignees." No suggestion can be more pertinent to the questions, or better deserving the atten tion, not only of the Government, but of every merchant and tradesman in the kingdom, than those • contained in the Sixth Edition of Mr. Jackson's "Check Journal," in which he points out the most effectual method of pre- Tenting forgery, fraud, and embezzlement. ~~ 3 Y I