The Sun. — London, England, 1819-11-15 00:00:00

LA %.1 7 INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, NovEntpt/t 13. ILLEGITIMATE CHILD. •EAGES6OMM IL ssuGessoN. This extraordinary case again occupied the at tention of the Court, which was crowded to ex cess. We formerly detailed the facts of the case, and the following abstract may therefore suffice : It was an application by. the plaintiff to the Court, praying that the annual allowance of three hundred pounds to the defendant might be sus pended, and that an issue might he direCted for the purpose of trying whether she was the le gitimate child of the late Colonel Sergesson.— The plaintiff having married the Colonel's sister, assumed the name of Sergesson, and took the fa mily estates. The defendant is a child of 13 years of age, anti being entitled to the personal estate of her.deceased grandmother, and other property, in value nearly 20,0001., she was made a ward of the Court, and the 3001. a year allow id her for her education and support. In :consequence 91 the plaintiff having received various accounts respect ing the child being a suppositious child, be went to Dublin, where he collected a number of afiida ♦its, stating the manner in which the child had been palmed on the Colonel as his own. These he. submitted to the Court, and applied to have an issue to try the question of the legitimacy. Meters. HAT : and FASEAR, at great length, * stated the case on behalf of the plaintiff. Mr. WINGFIELD appeared as Counsel on the part of Miss Sergesson. It was his duty, he said, entrusted as he was- with the interest of this young Lady, to resist the application, sad to de monstrate that it was founded in perfidy, and false sWearing, and mixed up with circumstances to which no credit whatever Ought to be attached; and sure he was, when his Lordship looked at the evidence, be would not grant the application. Mr. COMBE followed On the same side. Mr.-HART replied. The Loan CHANCELLOR, after going over the statements in the affidavits, remarked, that he thought it would nor be for the interest of the young lady that the question of her legitimacy should be delayed being tried in an issue till the hearing of this cause. There were four or five rersons capable of being produced as evidence of erillegitimacy—..it was true that ail of them would have to give evidence of their own infamy. They were credible witnesses, if the Jury should not think the infamy of the transaction bore doWn their testi mony. What might have been the effects of their testimony without the explanation of Mrs. Sergcs ion herself he would not say ; but the event of Mrs. Sergesson's death before the investigation of the testimony of such witnesses, might be attended with serious Consequences. He was_ therefore of opinion, upon the whole, that he ought to direct the issue for the purpose of detetmining this mo tion j but he would not stop the young lady's al lowance. His Lordship accordingly directed the issue, to try whether Miss Sergesson was the le gitimate daughter of Colonel Sergesson and his wife. His Lordship ordered the trial to take place in the King's Bench, Westtninster, the 'Sit tings after next term. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Not•. 38. ELECTION BRIBERY. [Further Particulars.] THE ICING V. SIR MANASSEH M. LoPEZ, BART. ♦ND SEVERAL OTHERS. The defendant, Sir Manasseh Massey Lopez, Bart. it will be recollected, was convicted at the last Spring Assizes for the Counties of Cornwall and Devon, upon an indictment in each County, for corruptly bribing certain freemen of the Bo rough of Grampound, to vote on his behalf at the last General Election for Members to serve in Parliament for that Borough ; and that the fol lowing persons were also convicted at the last mentioned Assizes, upon indictments charging them with having been corrupted, and having received bribes to vote as freemen at the said lection on behalf of Sir M. Lopez, viz. :—Wm. Allen, John Brown, Francis Brown, sen. Francis )3rown, jut). Wm. Porteus, Robert Cook. James Cow, Thomas Devonshire, John Hand, George Hand, IVilliam Baker Johns, Edward Luke, Philip Luke, William M'Carrol, Edward Painter, George Watts, William Court is, William Tweed, Thomas Courtis, Isaac Watts, James Crowle, and Thomas Trotter. The indictments against these defendants charged William Allen, an Al derman of Grampound, with receiving a colour able loan of 501. from Sir M. M. Lopez, ,or his agent, George Hunt, for his vote ; and the other defendants with receiving from the same parties a similar loan of 351. each, for the like purpose. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL now prayed the lodg ment of the Court upon all the defendants, and they were accordingly all placed upon the floor, with the exception of Robert Cook, and two others, who were unable to attend on account of ill baalth or infirmity. Mr. HUTCHINSON appeared for Robert Cook, and produced an affidavit, accounting for his ab sence, the reason assigned for which was extreme old age and infirmity. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL consented to post pone the motion against the absentees for the present. . Mr. Justice HOLROYD then proceeded to read his Report of the case against Sir M.. M.l.opez, which was tried before his Lordship it Cornwall. This was followed by Mr. Justice Best's Report of the other case against Sir M.- At Lopez, and those against the .other- defendants, tried- before his Lordship in Devonshire. At the .trial of the first oase against Sir - : • M, .M:. Lopez,. -in question %vas raised whether. the of fence was committed in tiwoc6.llo4o,**Til NV as left . to the . Jury, and . thef:,foo,3 af, tirmative._-When the Learned StrdAtAratiConte-to this part dthe Report,:. •• • Mr. .t.CARLETT, as Counsel for Sir Matthew Lopez, interposed, and said, that be had told his ,client,he should mention,this point to the Court ,when be was. brought up for judgment, fur the .purpose of raising the question whether a verdict of acquittil should not • be entered, persuading himself that (he Court would' give the full benefit of the objection, if it was 'available, not- withstanding the proper time for taking It bad elapsed. In conformity with this promise, he now contented himself with 'barely mentioning the point as it had occurred at the trial, praying the Court to give his client the benefit of it, if it was of any weight. The Court sere unanimously of opinion, that as the question had been left to the Jury, as a matter of evidence, and as they bad found the defendant guilty, it was now too late to disturb the verdict. Affidavits Were then put in on behalf of Sir M. M. Lopez,..in mitigation of punishment. The first, whit% was his own, stated that he was up wards of 64 years of age, had been long afflicted with an a.-.thmatic complaint, and that such was his general state of health that any continuance in or near London would be attended with the most set ions Consequences. It concluded by stat ing that he had now come to London merety for the ptirposd of attending this Court. The other affidavits were made by Timo:by Symonds, Isaac iVatts, William Allen, and three or four other persons, the purport of whose depositions was, that neither Sir M. Lopez, nor. George Hunt, had dire'ctly nor indirectly solicited them to vote at rite election for Grampound ; that they had re ceived from fbe.said George Hunt loans of 351. each, in local notes, but not money of the current coin of this realm ; that they had given notes of hand for these sums, which notes were duly paid before these'indictments were preferred. The de fendant, WM. Allen, put in no affidavits on his own behalf. • Almost all the other defendants put in an affi davit each, which was a literal copy of that de posed to by Timothy Symonds and the others already mentioned. Mr. SCARLETT then addressed the Court on be• half of Sir M. M. Lopez, in mitigation of punish ment. He said, it would very ill become him Uponau occasion of this nature, to attempt to in duce the Court to think lightly of the charge of which the defendant had been convicted. He certainly could do his client no good by any such attempt. Abstaining, therefore, from any topics for the purpose of diminishing the magnitude of the oGnce, he lett that matter to their Lordships' consideration. He intended only to apply him self to such topics as belonged to the individual himself, attempting, as far as he could, to suggest such as would, lie trusted, in some degree be thought worthy of consideration, it was to be observed, That the defendant had reaped no ad vantage from the offence of which he hall been convicted, and that before it was consummated, it was, for some reason or other, abandoned; and it was also to he observed, that Sir M. M. Lopez eras neither a candidate, nor was any person in his interest a candidate tot Grampo , ind. Although he did not mean to say that the offence was not committed in point of la%v by the payment of mo ney for corrupt purposes, yet he trusted the Court would not consider the defendant deserving the same degree of punishment, as if he had prose clued his guilty purpose to final consummation, and derived advantage from it. Another circum stance favourable to the defendant was, that it appeared, tinder all the circumstances of the case, he had been in some degree exposed to tempta tion and solicitation, by the application of per sons to induce him to do what his own mind would not have suggested. There Was no evi dence that the defendant had 'at any time taken a personal part in this transaction; and it was but too well known how often an agent did what hip principal never intended to sanction. It was fur ther to be observed, that although there were two prosecutions against the defendant, yet that both, in point of tact, arose out of thy same transac tion. Hard indeed, therefore, would it be for him to suffer as for two distinct offences of the same kind. After some few ob,ervations of the like nature, the Learned Counsel concluded by calling the attention of the Courtto the defendant's in firm state of health, which he hoped would de serve some attention in weighing the amount of punishment, more particularly as the defendant had already suffered severely by the public expo sure to which he had been subject, by expence, and by uneasiness of mind. Mr. A. AMORE and Mr. ADAM followed on the same side, the latter Gentleman being also of Counsel for the defendant Allen, on whose bcbalf he principally urged the fact of his not having voted at the Election. The other defendants severally besought met• cy, on account of their wives and families. The ATTORNEY•GBN'ERAL said, it was unneces sary for him to use any arguments to convince the Court, that • the offence of which the defen dants had been convicted called for the most ex emplary, -punishment. He contended, that the topics urged by the Learned Counsel on the other side ought to have no degree of weight with the Court, inasmuch as all of them arose, not out of any merit on the pelt of the defendant, but ra ther from circumstances which prevented the completion of a crime which had been deliberately meditated, and carried into execution as far as in him lay. After some general and obvious remarks upon the case, which the press of other matter prevents detail, the Learned Attorney-General called upon the Court to award such punishment as would prevent the recurrence of this public evil, and deter others from pursuing similar courses. Zile Court deliberated upon lhe case for a con siderable length of time. Mr. Justice BAYLEY proceeded to pronounce the judgment of - the Court, and in so doing, he expatiated in-very strong language upon the cha racter of the offence of which the defendants had been convicted. He said their crime was oneN the greatest magnitude, and he confrsed his own _defect of language to express the abhorrence in Which such a crime ought to be held by every man in the country. It was of the highest im portance to the public that the purity of Election Should be preserved. There should be no inroad into the House of Commons, by corrupt means ; for how could the country have any confidence in that House, if its doors were open to corruption, or how could the public be induced to believe that persons who obtained seats by such means, world themelves be free from being corrupted in that place ? The Learned . Judge then proceeded, at considerable length, to animadvert upon the conduct of the defendants, and after adverting to the ease of the defendant Devonshire, who had attempted to take the bribery oath, he con cluded by pronouncing the sentence of the Court, which was—" That for Sir Manasseh Massey Lopez's first offence, of which he had been con victed in Cornwall, he should pay to the King a fine of 80001. and be imprisoned in Exeter Gaol for twenty-one months ; for his second offence in Devonshire, that he should pay to the King a fine of 20001. and be further imprisoned in the same gaol for three months : That the defendant, Tho. , mas Devonabli-e, should be imprisoned hi Bodmiu Gail for six months ; and that each of the other defendants should be confined in the same gaol fov three months." THE xiNa V. SWANN. The defendant in this case, who stood convicted upon a similar charge with regard to the borough of Penryn as Sir M. Lopez, now entered the Court, for the purpose of receiving judgment. . . The ATTORNEY•GENERAL intimated, that if ii was not inconvenient to their Lordships, the de Pendant would attend again on Wednesday. The CHIEF JUSTICE—Then let the defendaw attend on Wednesday. THE OLDHAM INQUEST. Mr. DENMAN, as their Lordships were leaving the Court to go to the Exchequer Chamber, said he had a short, but important motion to make to the Court, It was for a mandamus to a Coroner, direct ing him to proceed in an Inquest,which be had, on no sufficient grounds, and without cause, as was stated in the affidavit on which he moved, ad journed to the Ist December next. Mr. Justice BAYLBY asked what Inquest it was? Mr. DENMAN said, it was an Inquest held partly at Oldham and partly at Manchester, on the body of a person named John Lees. Mr. Justice BAYLEY—When did the adjourn ment take ple)ce? _ _ Air. DI lAN—My Lord, the Inquest met on the 7111 and Bth of October, and on the 9th the Jury again assembled, when the Coroner, without any reason assigned, adjourned the further pro• ceedings to the Ist December. The CHIEF JUSTICE—Take a rule to shew cause. From the LONDON GAZETTE of Nov. 13. COURT MOURNING, Lord Chamberlain's-Of ce, Nov. 10. Orders far the Court's going into Mourning, on Sunday next the 14th inst., for her late Serene Highness the Duchess Dowager of Brunswick, sister to his Majesty the King ut the Netherlands, viz:— The Ladies to wear black silk, fringed or plain linen, white gloves, necklaces and ear-rings, black or white shoes, fans and tippets. Undress—White or grey Instrings; tabbies or damasks. The Gentlemen to wear black, full trimmed, fringed or plain linen, black swords and buckles. Undress—Grey frocks. The Court to change the Mourning on Sunday the 21st in- stant, viz.:— The Ladies to wear black silk or velvet, coloured ribbons, fans and tippets, or plain white, or white and gold, or white and silver stuffs, with black ribbons. The Gentlemen to wear black coats, and black or plain white or white and gold, or white and silver stuff waistcoats, full trimmed, coloured swords and buckles. And on Thursday the 26th instant, the Court to go out o! Mourning. Lord Chamberfairsi Office, Nov. 12, 1819. Notice is hereby given, that the Court Mourning to com mence on Sumay next the 14th instant, will also be for Charles 'Emanuel the Fourth, late King of Sardinia, brother to his present Majesty Victor Emanuel. NOMINATION OF SHERIFFS. The names of those who were nominated for Sheriffs by tho Lords of the Council, at the Exchequer, on the Morrow of St. Martin, in the 60th year of the reign of King George the Third, and in the year of our Lord 1819. Bedfordshire—Sir John Burgoyne of Sutton, Bart.; John Barber, of Broome, Esq.; Charles Barnett, of Stratton Park, Esq. Berkshire—George Henry Eliott, of Bettield-house, Esq.; Timothy Hare Atlohon Earl of Swallowfield-place, Esq. ; Sir Gilbert East, of Hall-place, Bart. Buckinghamshire—Benjamin Way, of Denham, Esq.; Chas. Shard of Hedgerley-park, Esq.; Sir Codrington Edintrnd Car rington, of Charlfont Saint Giles, Knt. Comb. and Hunt.—John Burgess, of Benwick, Esq.; John Edis, of Wisheach, Esq.; Thomas Orton, of March, Esc!. Cheshire—James France France, of Bostock, Esq.; Thomas Wilson, of Llandican, Esq.; George Ackers, of Moreton, Esq. Cumberland—Wilfrid Lawson, of Brayton-house, Esq.; John Marshall, of Hallsteads, Esq.; William James, of Bar rock-lodge, Esq. Derbyshire—Francis Mundy, of Markeaton, Esq.; Sir Charles Henry Colville, of Duffield, Knt.; William Webster, of Ashbourne, Esq. Devot»liire—John Inglett Fortescue, of Buckland, Esq.; Robert Newton Incledon, of Yeo Town, Esq.; Robert Hunt . , of Sidhury,Esq._ . . _ Dorsetshire—Christopher Spurrier, of Coombe A hner,Esq.; Claud Scott, of Lytchct Minster, Esq.; Thomas Billott, of %Vormwell, Esq. Essex—Sir Thomas Nearc, of Dagnam-park, Bart.; Robert Westley Ilan, the younger, of Great llfurd, Esq.; Sir George Henry Smyth, of Berechurch, Bart. Gloucestershire—Sir Ethtin Bayntun Sandys, of Miserdine park, Bart.; IVillimn Miller, of Ozleworth, Esq.; Thomas John Lloyd Baker, of Hardwick-court, Esq. Herefordshire—Dansey Richard Dansey, of Easton, Esq.; John Bidditlph, of Ledhury, Esq.; Thomas Perry, of Eardis ley-park, Esq. Hertfordshire—John Earley Cooke, of Turnford, Esq. ; Joseph Timperon, of New 13ams, Esq.; Thomas Daniell, of Little Berkhampstead, Esq. Kent—Sir Thomas Dyke, of Lullingstone; Bart.; James Tillard, of Street-end, Esq.; Sir John Shelley Sydney; of Pensburst-castle, Bart. Leicestershire—The Honourable Richard William Penn Curzon, of Gopsliall ; John Clarke, of Little Pearling, Esq.; Sir Charles Thomas Palmer, of Wanlip, Bart. Lincolnshire—Charles Allix, of Willoughby-house, Esq.; William Thompson Corbett, of Elsham., Esq.; Edward Wes ton, of Sornerby, Esq. Monmouthshire—Sir Robert Jones Allard Kemys, of Mal pas, Knt.; Watkin George, of Frostmant-house, Esq.; John Baldwyn, of Chepstow, Esq. Norfolk—George Samuel Kett, of Brook, Esq.; Sir Jacob Astley, of Melton Constable, Bart;; John Johnson Gay, of Aldburgh, Esq. Northamptonshire—John ,Cook, of Hoothorpe, Esq. Thomas Philip Mannsell, of Thorpe Malsor, Esq.; John Nethercoat, of Haselbeach, Esq. Northumberland—Ralph William Gray, of Bachworth house, Esq.; William Clarke, of Benton-house, Esq. ; Ch ar l es John Branding, of Gosferth-house, Esq. Nottinghamshire—Sir Robert Clifton, of Clifton, Bart.; George Gregory Williams, of Kcmpston, Esq.; Roger Pock lington, of Muskham Grange, Esq. Oxfordshire—Thomas Fraser, of Woodcot-house, Esq. ; William Vanderstegen, of Cane-end, Esq.; Charles Oldfield Bowles, of North Aston, Esq. Rutiandshire—William Praed, of Lyddyngton, Esq.; Tho mas Adcock Woods, of Braunston, Esq . .; Robert Shield, of Wing, Esq. Shropshire—Richard Heber, of Hodnctt, Esq.; Thomas Taylor, of Elletton, Esq.; Thomas Borough, of Chetwynd end, Esq. Sounrictshire—Sir Cbarles Warwick Bacopfylde, of Hard- ifigtOn-park ,•Barf.; Gerard Martin Berkrtey 'Napier, of Eas t Pennard, Harming, of Dilrtigton, Esq. c i f Staffordshire—Moreton Walhouse, of Hatherton,Esq•Y Joltn Fenton Boughey, of Aqualate, Bart.; Thomas Listen of Armitage-park, Esq. County of Soothampton—Jam es Scotts, of Rot herfield-park' Esq.: Thomas Oran Schute, of Burton-house, Esq. ; George Purvis, of Blackbrook honse. Esq.. Suffolk—George Thomas, of Woodbridge, Esq. ; Philip sens nett, of Bury St. Edmund's, Erq.; Edward Gsviit, of Icklitigi barn, Esq. Surrey—Hutches Trower, of Unsted-wood, -Esq.; John SP iy cer, of Esher-place, Esq.; John. Whitmore, of Epsom,_Escl• Sussex—Willia m J o h n C am pi on , o f D anny, E sq . ; Rieliarn Haslar, of Bognar, Esq. ; Francis Scawett Blunt, of %ro ll ''' . Esq. Warwickshire—William Williams, of the Larches. Esq•,;', William Palmer, of Ladbr oo k, Esq.; Christopher ItoW`' Wren, of Wroxhall, Esq. Wiltshire—Anthrose Goddard, of Swindon, Esq.; George Purefoy Jervoi se , o f B r itf ur d, E sq.; A m br os e Awdry, °r Scend, Esq. Worcestershire—giclrrd Griffiths. of ThorngrOve' Est; Elias Isaac, of B o u g ht on , E sq . ; S amue l It yc l an d , o f North' field, Esq. Yorkshire—Henry Vansittart, of Kirk Leat barn, Esq S ir ; Hersey Wilson, of Crofton, Kitt. ; Thoulas Thornhill, 0 . 1 Fixby, Esq. The names of the several persons nominated by the Chief Justices of the r e sp ec ti ve Ci rcu it s i n W a l es, as proper per " sons to serve th e O ffi ce o f Sh er iff f or t h e ensu i ng yea r, fus , the respective Counties following:— SOUTH WALES. Carmarthen—Ambrose Goddard, of ‘Verriddu, " Id ter Rice Howell Powell, of Maesgwyu, Esq. ; Ralph phen Pemberton, of Llanelly, Esq. Pembrolre—Nathaniel Phillips, of Slebech, Esq.; Orland° Harris, of Ivy Tower, Esq.; Joseph Harris, of Lanonwas, Es4,' Cardigan—Henry R ogers , o f G e lly, E sq.; t h e H onou rabl• John Vaughan, of C.iosswood ; Edward Gataere, of Abe" maide, Esq. Glamorgan—Richard Blakemore, of Velindra, Esq.; Si John Morris, o f Cl aremon t, B ar t .; H enry John Grant, ° Knoll•castle, Esq. Brecon—Thomas Price, of Builth, Esq.; William W it Hopkins, of Aberannell, Esq. ; David Lloyd, of Aberblecht. Esq. Radnor—James Crummer, of Harvey, Esq.; James Wa tt ' of Oldßadnor, Esq.; John Williams, of Cww, Esq. NORTH WALES. Anglesey—Robert Lloyd, of Treauan, Esq.; James We b# stet . , of Derry, Esq.; Owen Putland Meyrick, of Bodorga" Esq. Carnarson—Wittiam Ormsby Gore, of Clenneney, EsE`9' ' Robert Roberts, o f Gun. Esq.; James Gill, of Glas Cwm, Merioneth—Thonias Fitzling., of Cwmheision, Esq.; P i ; we Scott, of Bottalog, Esq.; Edward Lloyd, of Rhag" Esq. Jabs Montgomery—Val e nti ne Vi c k ers , o f C r i gg i on, E sq.; Buckley Williaines, Glanhatran, .Esq.; Philip Morris, Esq.- Denbigh—John Lloyd Salisbury, of Galtvaynan, Esq. • . 10 , t 1. ° Edward Wynne-, of G e r w i nrawr , E sq . ; J o h n Heaton, Of P'" Heaton, Esq. Flint—George Watkin Kendrick, of nirtyn, Esq.; JaiTO Knight, of Ithual, Esq.; llamas Aleakin, of Liwynegri / ' Esq. BANKRUPTCIES SUPERSEDED. R. Cooper, Raweliffe, York,hkre, commuu•brewer, G. Lowe, Manchester, merchant. BANKRUPTS. W. Eames, Haymarket. horse-dealer, Nor. 20, 30, and De' 25, at ten, at Guildhall. Attornies, Messrs. Jones and V" Great Mary-le-Bone -street. J. Wilson, Old Broad-street, merchant, Nor. 20, 27, and WI 25, at ten, at Guildhall. Attornies, Messrs. Paterson Ws' Co. Old Broad-street. DIVIDENDS. Dec. 7, J. Yate, Worcester, leathers,ller—Dec. 4, A. Milne, Mitre-court, Fencliurch-street, merchant—Dec. J. Moody, York-mews, Paddington-street, livery-stable-keer i , —Dec. 4, E. Hud son , Gibraltar, merchant—Dec. 14, J. 1 % 6 '.., ford, Broad-street, Ratcliffe, slopseller—Dec. 4, R. and R. 0 31 ris, J. Wilkinson, and R. H arr i s , W at li ng - street, who l es ale ' linen-drapers—Dec. 10, S. Partridge, Cardiff, ironmonger — Dec. 4, S. Atntiorst, Market-street, Westminster, Brewel Dec. is, H. and C. R ugg , A nst i n f r i ars, 4, H. Cross, Bristol, corn-factor—Nov. 27, J. Jump and T. 1 13 ` groves, Fore-street, hat- m anuf ac t urers —D ec. 11, R. Agg' ,. t Leigh-street, Burton-crescent, paper-hanger—Nom. Ili, 1` Karpeles, Dover, d e al er i n f ru it an d jewel le—Noy. P. Tootal, Minories, corn-factor--Dec. 11, E. M. and C Cotterill, Vine-street, Liquorpond-street, bacon-merettadtg' CERTIFICATES, DEC. 4. J. Leslie, Lower Thames-street, merchant—W. Chambe r ' layne and G. Rawlinson, Leicester, hosiers—J. Howitit Whitecross-street, charcoal merchant—W. Dixon, Co Manchester, calico-printer—W. A. Bragg, Rotherhithe-wa,V shipwright—H. Williams, Duke-street, wine-überchaut-7-'' Shallcrass, Joseph-st ree t, S t . P ancras, b aker—T. Lax, L i v e' „ pool, soap-boiler-4. F. Leitch,Fenchurch-street, merchant - '' J. Masters, Dartford, Kent, grocer. FlRE.—Last night, a little before nine o'clock, a most alarming fire broke out, on the premise . belonging to Mr. S m i t h, coac h and harne ss' maker, Charlotte -street, Fitzroy-square, with il : three doors of Percy Ch a p e l. O w i ng to a g reat scarcity of water for some time, the flames Ns' to an appalling height, and serious apprelaensi° l3l were entertained for the Chapel and neighbour' hood. Uowever, by the exertions of the OP ; doctors of the engines, th e d evour i ng e l emen t wi s e arrested in its progr e ss, a f ter destroying tl) whole of Mr. Smith's extensive premises. The prisoners sentenced t o tran s p or t at i on a t - kt the last Old Bailey Ses s i ons were remove d l ast n ig" at nine o'clock, in a caravan, to the hulks P re ' pared for their reception. METEOROLOGICAL JOURNAL. BY R. BANKS. PHILOSOPHICAL INSTRUMENT MAKEIt Thermometer. I I Weather. ...••••••• • ,7. • • '•,;, 4.; . • .4. . ...; . '! ' .•:, •••• .:::' , ... ste , ..., . 4 F... 7, = c• - ; N ov. o o 0 o Inches 3 43 42 47 38 33.05 Fair F air ' 4 42 47 53 45 • .01 Do. C l ' udi. 5 48 50 55 46 29.77 49 47 53 4l .57 7 44 42 45 37 .50 .10 Cloudy Fair D a l 6 .0.2 limn I)° ' 8 40 SS 45 31 .65 Fair Do., 9 35 42 45 40 .93 Do. ' CIO hundrcal rain have: in the we, Irs of fallen 'S. •' On Saturday, the Lady o BIR f John TH Hall, Esq. of his Ida./esty.s Revenue of Excise, Tower-hill, of a daughter. 0 6 This luornin:r, at Chelsea, of a daughter, the wife - Rev. Weeden Butler, M.A. MARRIED. l orlir On the sth inst., at St. Leonard's, Shoreditch, f gs 4. son, Esq. to Susan, eldest _daughter of Samuel illedleYt of Hackney. I ,- On Friday, the 12th instant, NW at his house. in ."-„ Aington-street, in a fit of apoplexy, John-Dawson, P:l' e nds• D.'s death will be deeply regretted by his numerous r er a ge. h i On the Bth inst. -at Blackwall, in the 18th yrtr° f Jani e° of the small pox, Eliza, fourth daughter of the lat Alexander, Esq., of Edenbridge. DIED 131 1 - „; LONDON: Printed byJ. B. CARSTAIRS; of Nu. ' '; Ormond-street, Queen-square; and published ?„ 1 "4 SO' SCRIPPS, of No. 7, South 1110Iton-street, at 49,der44 Office, No. 112, Strand ; where Adveitisetnent i, Letters, &c. (post-paid) :oust be adeircsseth `j /` ~,, `•••.. 1 11 VEjsil The %:Cei ttvi th 'ro • to ltp, 14 111. ;1414-t t• • 'nzsi w - , %ran • r ei. , 1 4. 911, 'i A4e, 71,1 ) ,?Nti '4, 4 ,„ 411 1 4 , 41 C c y a t t :htit i kb :I! 111:g h, • 1 4 4 ; Pt, ,