The Sun. — London, England, 1824-04-28 00:00:00

HERTFORD SESSIONS, Arum 27. Before LORD DACRE and a . Bench of Magistrates. TUE PING v. WY.I.DE. [Specially reported for THE Sus.] •• Mr. JESSOP addressed the Jury for the prose zution. lie commenced by describing the case as one which required their most serious considera tion, It was a charge made againbt the defend. apt, a gentlemaa moving in a respectable situation .-of life, for a very gross and outrageous assault upon the prosecutrix a poor -woman, who would be' called into the box to be examined. . . The defendant was a professor of music, a man of' property, living on - terms of intimacy with the most respectable part of the community where he resided—a Gentleman of education, and eminent - for his professional attainments.—The prosecutrix was a poor woman, -who, a little before the period when the occurrence in question took place, was a pauper in the parish of St. Andrew's, Holborn : she had seen better days, but had • - been reduced to poverty. It was her custom to go about the • ...neighbourhood where she was known, selling. articles of dress, winch those who were acquainted with her purchased, to enable 11er to add to the allowance of the parish; she had been much Patronised by the family of a gentleman well known in the county, Mr. Clutterbuck, who had form er ly res id e d i n t h e h ouse • now occupied by 411 r. Wylde a,dhe had been allowed to go and sell her wares among the servants, and had- received such hospitality as the housd afforded. On the 29th March, 1823, she went to the house of the at Clay-hill, and pro ceeded to the back minor of • the premiies, but saw•no one ; she then went to the front door e - with intent to ring the bell, when some person called out and desired her to go about her business; 111 r. Wylde was at this time employed in clipping a hedge in his garden ; something was said that was not- disS tilactlyheard frOm the window of the house; an answer was made by the prosecntrix, whi c h h e a ppr e h en d e d was not satisfactory .;•• there- - was .some slight altercation she did not recollect; while engaged in this way, to her utter astonishment, some person came behind her, and she received. a violent blow which felled her to the ground, and occasioned bee such aghny that she fainted; she was unable to stand; when she. came to herself it was found that two of the bones of her leg were fractured. He Should have supposed that, when lying in this situation, any' gentleman of ordinary feelings would have called - his servants. to- assist her, even if the injury had not been occasioned-by his own unjustifiable violence e but '.esterat of so doing, they would be surprised to learn that lie sent .forthe constable of the parish to removehers If she was a trespasser on the premises, or behaving disorderly, he should, in the first isldtance, have sent for a constable, complained- to him of her being there in a state of vagrancy, and de.siredhim to remove ter; but here lie had, in the first instance, taken - the law into ais own hamhe, and - inflicted this severe injury. The constable, when he found that her leg was fractured, said it was not a case . far him—the parish-officers must be sent for. In the result .she was taken to the .parish workhouse, and a -surgeon was sent for he understood it was to be said that this was entirely the effect:of accident; that the defendant, seeing this woman behaving intemperately, and making use of improper language, merely pushed her, and in falling down•-the sustained the injury. It would be seen in evidence that thefracture was an oblique one—had it been occasioned by the fall, it would have been a transverse fracture ; besides, there were two wounds such _as were likely to have been produced by the shears which he under stood the defendant had in his heed ; he contended that the injury must have been occasioned by - ex t er n a l violence: it was true that the prosecutrix had stated th a t it wa s a s cythe with which,, the injury had been effected, but it turned out that it must *nave been done by the garden shears ; the prosecutrix remained nine weeks in the parish workhouse of Beasley, and was so ill that during a part of the time her life was in danger, so much so, that the Afagistrates of the County conceived themselves bound to take an account of the transaction, because, had she died, tnis gentleman the defendant, m us t h ave b e en pla ce d a t t h e 'oar, to answer for a capital offence. The Learned Counsel said to was not instructed to press any thing against the defendant; mere was fin 'personal hostility towards him, it was the anxious wish of thos e h e represented, as guardians of the poor, to see that justice was dene,:and that, if'Mr. Wylde had really been guilty of so outrageotts an •assault, be •ahauld answer for his conduct; they knew nothing of: Mr. 11 - Ode-hit was on public greunds alone the prosecution was instituted, ant tp‘slieW that tee poor were equally protected by the law with the rich hhe wee told that the prosecutrix was to be represented as, at the time when this transaction. took place, in a state of • drunk en_ erns, and as having used language unfit for modest ears. With regard to he r being intoxicated, - he was able to prove that she 'aid not the means of becoming so ; but whether she had been drunk or not, whether she bad been abusive or not, that was no aaawer to the present charge, it did nut justify.a man in using s , ,.eh an instrument as garden shears, and inflicting with them a:I wof the nature described. They had lately heard within sae walls, from high authority, that where a Gentleman for; the advantage of fortune and education, more was ex - eesed from }inn than others. At this moment a per son was on his voyage to another country for having yield ed ma the influence of an ungovernable temper.; it was neces -try that those who acted so intemperately should be checked by thastrong cent of the law. The Surgeon who had attended the :1-9secutrix would Lac called, and if, after hearing his evidence, tdiee could be induced to believe that the injury had been produced .btaccident, or in any other way than he had stated, they would, in lost case acquit the defendant of the charge imputed to him,but it' on the other - hand, the cane should be substantiated by the evi dence, they would be bound to return such a verdict as would satisfy the objects of justice, by enabling the Court to inflict such a Punishment as an assault of No eggravated a nature merited. 4a.ry Foulkes was called and examined .by Mr. JEsson, she appeared blind of one eye, and came into Court oracrutches, h-:sire said, on the 29th of March last year she passed through harrow born the place where she had been long resident, the perish of Gredt Ealing, but stopped so where on use way ; :del had no articles for-sale except a fancy pincushion, -intended for :dr. Clutterbuck's nurse ; Mr. Cl , hterbuck lived sot i3ers2ey ; :she had been accustomed to go to his house for 20 • years, where she was always received in a friendly and cordial stianaer, she went to his house ondhat day ; she timid net say - at what o'clock, imt imagined by the sun it must he about half-past atusee or thur ; she bad hot had a bit of bread front an early hour in the twerning ; she had two - vessels in her hand, but had drank out met' neither; she had had nothing to drink but tea ; she was pert - way sober when she got to Bersley ; she was informed that dna Thotnas Clatterbuck had moved into the house which Mr. Wykle now occuoiea; she went to the house ; in the first -place, efidgate was wide open ; she wont to the door leading to the hank of the house, the door was open ; a person within side the window, said " there is nothing wanting," in a vociferat. lag tone of voice or "-nothing is wanting," or words to that effect, to which the witness made no reply ; she then - whit rotual to the front door, meaning to pull the bell, 'eta she did not hear it ring; she then saw a person com ing from the further part of the plantation, which was ter. minated by a thick hedge about breast high ; he came at a seri quick and hasty step ; she did not say any thing to - him ; sli t could not say at what distance he was, being no judge of diantrice, for she was almost blind. As the person approached her, he stepped at the slab of the door, near to a gravel path, which lawi oat been disturbed by human feet : as he approached she was well convinced by his voice it was a person she knew bathing of, she had but a. transient view of him ; his hat was drsw:i over his forehead and concealed his eyes; as he approached lad lie muttered something, but she could not make out what he daps-eased, it was so inarticulate ; he Came in so questionable a shape that she turned round to make her exit off the premises; thhile she was in the act of turning round, her eye glanced at instrument males his arm ; the handle of the shears was concealed under his right arm therefore her eye glanced on the bright part—her eye lingered on it as she turned, wondering attiat kind of an instrument it was, for on the night preceding, being superstitious, she dreamt of being murdered by a cleaver ; hence it arose that where she saw this instrument she turned, otherwise she should note she did 'not like his appearance : as she Was in the act of t uraing, .he shuffled so that she saw him in pro ; ha right foot was on the advance, in the act of steppin g ; .as she turned, the instrument stabb e d her on the instep, and a blow followed hy the flat part of the shears, they being closed; -she fell, and just exclaimed " Oh Lord, have mercy on me !" !but before she could finish the sentence she fell, so that her face was towards the quick hedge, from which she had seen the defendant come e in the fall she lost her breath, but did net then faint ; she rose as soon as she collected her breath, but her leg was in that state she could only sit Hp; she then- took her stocking and turned it down to see the consequence ; the defendant was gone and tile shears too n when she saw the state of her leg, she did not know that it was broke; she thought her foot was severed from her leg an] then she fainted ; the first person she recollected seeing araa I'd c. : Ad ergan, the 'parish officer; Mr. Lawford, the Over seer, was there, and assisted in conveying her to the Bell Inn. where she was attended by Mr. Shute, the Surgeon. Upon her cross-examination by Mr. Bitonoetcic, she was asked whether she was given to dreaming, and whether the account she had given to day was similar to her first exaniinatiod, or something she had dreamed of since the accidtait ? She meant, she said, to speak the truth—she had leerned tc weak the. thath from her infancy--she had always isdid the starne stJry, or -to th e same effect. On being asked whether sae had stated the fact of the handle of the shears. being under the dethndant's arm, and her eye glaring on the bright part of the shears? she said she did not feel herself obliged to s:iswer such quibbles. She said she had represented to time Ma giotrate that she was cutewith .a piece of, a scythe ; she never used the expression that she was mowed down like grass ' . she had never told the Magistrates that the defendant desired her to go off' the premises ; he muttered something ; he might mean to say what do you do here ; she said she had never spoken to any of the servants. Upon being asked whether • she had ever been in a theatre PeShe replied that e she had been long on the grand amphitheatre of life, and was now perforMing the part of Mr.ollty Rag'in her own clothes. Mr. JESSOP auboutteel that this was a course of examination that was not relevant to the subject. -• Mr. BRODERICK insisted that it was important she should tell her story in her own way, in order that the Jury might be the better able to judge by .her conduct and manner of its pro bability. She denied having seen the cook-maid, Charlotte Bout, or having used opprobrious language towards her; she had never said that the defendant's house was Lord Claren don's house, and that she was determined to see somebody; she said she came to the neighbourhood as often as it suit ed her ; she denied that in proceeding along the road she staggered or expressed herself improperly, or ever accosted' a Lady and Gentleman in a tandem, or took notice of any person; she said she had never told a woman of. the name of Mary Allen that she did not know how the accident happened. She said there had been plenty of holes in her stockings, but most of them were darned very decently ; she could not inspect her stocking to - see if it was cut; she thought if she took her stocking off - her foot would come off: There were two wounds in the front of the small of her leg ; she persisted that she had always given the manse account. John Francis said he was a carpenter, living at Clay-hill.._ On the day stated in the indictment he was :scuttle . some hurdles on Mr. Wylde's pleasure-grounds ; he saw Mr. Wyltle clip. ping a hedge; a female servant called him away, and he pro-1 ceeded towards his house ; witness would have followed him, but was prevented by a little spaniel dog biting him on the lawn ; when he went afterwards to his master, he saw the pro secutrix ; he found her leg was broke ; he had before, observ ing the woman was abusive and would not go away, asked Mr. %Vylde if he wanted assistance. Joseph Morgan, the constable, Raid he was sent for on the day , in cpiestion ; the defendant said he had got ahvonian in the yard who was Very troublesome; she was lying on the gravel. walk ; he made an attempt to raise her, bat she cried out that her leg was broken—that the gentleman had struck her with a scythe, and broke her leg. The defendant denied having struck her, said it was e a s se heber leg could not be broke, and that h e had better take her and give het a night's lodging in the cage. .• Iktr. Joseph Lan-fords the Overseer, gave his evidence to the same effect, with regard to the assertion of the prosecutrix and the denial of the defendant. He added, that the cope:teem paid by the parish of St. Andrew, Ifolliorn, amounted to 301. Min chute; Surgeon, was called in afterthe accident; .he re moved the stocking, which had some blood on it ; he observed two wetiericlee . one a little above the instep, and the other •the breadth of three fingers, higher; they were angular wounds ; the larger one bled freely ; Oiley wire produced by. external violence; without knoivirig what instrument they had been .made with, he should sayethey were incapable of producing a fractured limb—the fracture was an oblique fracture of the principal bone—the small bone was fractured with it--nineteen times out of twenty a bone would be broken - transversely by a fall. On his cross examination he said he could not swear a hone might not be broken -obliquely by a fill-he 'Would chew the Jury'a model of a leg Fractured as this was, but he had rather be spared the trollble—he had fr.:timers of his own as well as the defendant—sdSnothing.,extenuate, nor stet down aught in malice." He had met Mr. Wylde on a certain day in January, and had told him in substance that it would be better to compromise thenattere the defendant auewered, that the trouble he had been put to was owing to him ; witness answered that he was ready to give him any satisfactioa. fielhed certainly told Mr. Wylde thatif he had spoken to him he could: have e ttiotteneal the matter down. His opinion was, that iff - a fracture` took place whets the ; Berson was in a state of intoxicatiek the sufferings would 'be greater than if the patient wa s i n a ft.....rate. gate. BrozwEstrox, in a very able speech addressed the jury. All he' asked was an impartial attention to the case heshotald lay belbretheni on the part of the defendant, to examine' the evidence C"almly, to attend to its contradictions, and, fortes a dis passionate - cenclusiou from the whole of the circumstances. The defendant was charged with what had been described as an outrageous assault, but with conduct not to be ; palliated or defended, but which, eeeestipon the evidence for the-prose cation, appeared ex tremeiteimprebable to have been committed. Some allusion had been made to itscroot of recent occurrence ;. what reference it had to the present one he could not inlah,iiie there was not the slightest similarity betteatti. them e If the Jury . would only enncede to ltizit the ` impeehatsillty!of A gentle- Man - in flier Tifp.of the efendant, committing an act t:f such wanton barbarity, he would demonstrate beyond all doubt that there wits no tbundation for the imputation. , Orie great advantage of hearing these matters in open Court was the opportunity it afforded the Jury of judging of the value of testimony by the conduct of the witnesses ; they could ascertain whether there was any thing in their manner that challenged credit, or was calculated to excite a suspicion whether their evidence was dictated by a regard to truth. They hatl seen the manner in which the prosecutrtx had given her &nee: Could they, . after hearing her lay ,heir hands on their hearts, and s a y i t des e rv e d th a t degree of credit which as cautious men they ought to give to it before they came to conclusion unfavourable to the defendant. MrdWylde lamented as much as any man could do the accident this poor woman had met with, and although his conduct required explanation, there would be no difficulty in giving it, and he entertained no doubt the defendant would tfo out of Court cleared from every Suspicion of his having acted in the brutal and outrageous man_ ner alleged, conscious as he was that he had done nothing to the woman bUt merely touched her on the shoulder, when she fell and Unaccountably fractured her limb. It had been stated by Air. Shute, the surgeon, that if the young man, the defendant, had ahalied to him, he would have softened down the matter.— What would have been the conduct of the defendant, or of any rational min, if he had not felt perfectly conscious of his inno- I ence?—fle would give every faulting he was worth rather than risk the effect of an exaggerated statement by the Counsel for the prosecution. lie would have made any sacrifice when the offer of compromise was tendered to him. That would have been the conduct of a guilty man ; but how' had the defendant acted, he had repelled the idea of compre.." mice—he had said I rely on my character. remove the stain attempted to be cast upon me, by a public examination, and I will look with confidence to the assertion of my innocence before a Jury of my Country. A most singular story had been detailed by the prosecutrix ; shelled described the transaction in language which had astonished him ; hehad never heard so extra ordinary a display—it was not to be wondered at that a public body like the parish officers of St. Andrew's, Holborn, should have given credit to the expaite statement of this woman. The Learned - Counsel then proceeded to state the nature of the (ash. dence by which he should contradict the statement of the pro secutrix ; he should prove that when site came to the defend. ants' house she was in a state of intoxication ; that she be haved in a most outrageous and abusive way towards the female servants ; Mr. Wylde was with his wife in their garden, he was clippi ng some trees i n a 'hedge, when a sir. vent came to him stating there was a woman using abusive lee guage, and who refused to go away. Mr. Wjlde gave the shears he had in his hand to Mrs. 'yule, and went towards the house ; when he came to t h e spot where the prosecutrix was, le had neither shears or any other instrument in his hand ; he gently pushed her, and she fell. The defendant could not believe that she had met with an injury so serious as that of fracturing a bone ; on the contrary he considered her an impostor, and under that impression desired the assistance of a peace officer. —It was in evidence that he had called to Francis to assist hirn—a plain proof he had no idea of what had happened to the prosecutrix. The Learned Counsel having at very great length remarked upon the satisfactory nature of the proof he had to offer, concluded by confidently trusting that the Jury would return a verdict which would restore the defendant to his wife, his family, and to Society, with a character innocent and unblemished. Charlotte Bent, the servant of the defendant, at the period of this transaction, stated, that on taster eve, last year, the prose cutrix caine to the scullery door; witness told her she had no thing to give her; desired her to go away ; she called witness an infernal w--; she would have it mat it was Lord Cla rendon's house, and she knew Lord Clarendon ; she then went round to the hunt doer and ruing the bell violently ; she consi dered her at the time very much intoxicated ; she went down the garden, and called her master ; he came up—the witness shortly after saw her master helping the woman up; he had nothing in his hand; she was quite distiuct in her recollection that her master had put the shears away before he went towards the house. Witness had no suspicion the woman's leg was broke when she went for the constable. Gordon Horwood, the nursery-maid, was in the nursery with her master's two infant children; she saw the whole affair from the nursery window where she was standing ; she observed the conduct of the pros•Tutrix till she saw her tap at the window of the dining-room ; witness told her she had better go about her business, upon which she abused her ; she held a petition in her hand, am(' said she was sure it was Lord Clarendon's house - she said it was a grsat pity that a young creature, like the witness, should forbid her getting any thing in the house she could. Nothing further passed till her :Vaster came up ; he put his hand on her shoulder, in a way scarcely to brush a fly ofi'; the prosecutrix was standing cross legged and she fell backwards on the flint stones near the window—her master had neither shears nor any thing else in his hand—the prosecutrix did not faint-she was talkirg loud all the time at times prayin g t o G o d to f org i ve h er , at o th e rs swearing—tile witness said she had been examined by the So licitor for the prosecution. Mr. Jusso P.—She was exFunined on tile part of the prosecu tion, but her story did not agree with ours. W. Humble proved the manner in which the prosecutrix was walking along the * road ; she was swearing; he thought her drunk, and said so at the time ; saw her stop and talk to Mr. Wade and his sister in a tandem. • , John Dumbleton gave evidence to the same effect, and w,as corroborated by his wife. Mary Allen proved the declaration of the prosecutrix, that she did not know how the accident happened. Mrs. Wyldei the defendant's mother, confirmed the testi mony of the servants, that the defendant had given the shears out of kis hand, before he proceed e d to war d s t h e prosceittrix. Dr. Monro spoke in .11igh terms of the defendants' character. The Hon. and Rev. Capell, always considered him, for the nine years he had known him, a kind and honourable man, never saw the least ill - temper about him, quite the contrary. The Rev. Rich. Vivian gave testimony of the Caine nature. Matthew Higgins, Esq.. described : him as the mildest m an h e had ever known. ' Mr. Henry Molineux had known him 19 years ; had been his school-fellow, a more quiet boy he never knew ; always dis played the greatest kindness and humanity, though brought up in a school where fagging was allowed. After the accident witness picked up two flint atones with blood on them, but he threw them away. - The examination taken before the Magistrate was read to show the discrepancies between its contents and the evidence now given by the. prosecutrix. Robert Clutterbuck, Esq. the Magistrate, stated that he had examined the stocking very particularly, there appeared to be no hole corresponding with the wounds ; die wounds had healed, were perfectly circular, of the size of a pea, one much smaller. He had kndwn defendant nin e years ; always con sidered him a kind hearted y . Mr. Coleby, surgeon, had practised for 29 years t he wag of opinion that the character of a fracture would not indicate whether it had -been prqnced by a,blow or a fall; a fracture was more likely to be obliqu e if the subject was advanced in life.; the character of the fracture afforded no evidence that it was caused by external violen ce . Mr. Jossor replied. . Lord DAoftE slimmed up the whole of the evidence, and commented upon it With .great force and ability. His Lord ship considered the weight of the testimony as greatly prepon derating in favour of the defendant and observed, with reference to the evidence of Mr. Shute, that although nineteen times out oblique, yet, after hearing dia, e ,„,;4„ ce , oftwenty a fracture Ergot a fall would be transverse, and not he should be disposed to consider this as the twentiethinstance. . The Jury, after a- very sho r t cormu l tat i on , returned their verdict--Yot • F thi LONDON GAZETTE, April 27. Crouta Of re, April 27; 1824. • • • Mernher returned to serie in this present Parliament. - porough of Lancaster—Thomas Greene, Esq., in the room .of Majoi..General Gsaii i Dovetou, deceased. BANKRUPTS. W. Lansley, Andover, tfampshire, carpenter, to surrender Mar 11, 12, June 8, a t the White , Hart Inn, Andover. eitori, Messrs, Hicks and Braikenridge, J. Morgan, Bedford-itreet, Commercial-road, victualler, May 4, 11, June 8, at the Bankrupts',.Court, Basinghall-street. SolicitOr,. Mr. Young, 'hark-lane. • T. Brown; Chzlmarsh, Shropshire, farmer, Mayl7, 18, June 8, at the .Union Inn, Birmingham. Solicitors slessis2 WU"- liam; and White, Old-buildings, Lincoln's-inn. ' T. Cooke Banbmji, oxfordshire,.rnealman, M a y 3,'4, J une 8, at the White Lion Inn, Banbury . : Solicitor, Tin); Banbury. William Johnson, Worksop, Nottinghamshire, coal-dealer, May 3,4, June 8, at the Tied Lion Inn . , Worksop. Solicitors, bilesstS. a:nd Brownicy, New Boswell-court. DIVIDENDS. !lay 19, \V. F.lcast, St. Erny, Cornwall, lime-burner—May 2J, T. Grectliam; Liverpool, shtp-chandler.-51ay 25, 0. and I. Peet. Gutter-lane, Cheapside, rib - and-manufacturers—May 1, A: (lornpertz, Great-Winchester -street, merchant—May 13, P. F. Batterbee,,Norton, Suffblk; brandy-merchant—A/ay 22, A. ltivolt3, Brook.street, Holborn, looking-glass-manufacturer. —May 21, J. Cunningham, Birmingham, Linen-draper:—May 29, J. Grant, Coleman-street, merchant—May 19, 0. Leigh, Cheshire, dealer in • ceals—May 21, J. Yirmin, Buliner, Essex, farmer-,May 27, J.,Avery,„Barnstaple, shop. keeper-4day 18, D. U. Stevens, narlow, Essex, linen,draper. CERTIFICATES, MAT 13. Govett, Stringstone, Somersetshire, tanner—J. Long. 7. worth, Liverpool, joiner —F. Jones, Bristol, mason—L. 'Davies snit J. T. Dorlin, Liverpool, - timber-merchants—lL A. Jones. Tottenhum-eourt-road, linen.:draper—J. Cox, Wells, Somer set§ltire.:iniller—L P. Powell, Brighton, silk-mercer—T. Oakley, Poole, caul-therchant—r. Dixon, Gienwieh, linen-draper. PA RTNF,R.SOI.P,S,DISSOLVE 3. Bristowc, jun. and J. jinl. Venison Island, Labra dors:, North America, mcrobantl: Iloghton and J. Leem ing, Manchemter, worstett-spitiners...:A,Breton and Co„ por. tery-Fieid colliery, Bilston, eoal-masters.J. Carter and J. Raw, Ovendon, Yorksbie, butter, factors—J. Dell and R. Sall:art!, Brunswick-place, Ham mersmith, boot-makers-4. Pillans and Co., Leith, merchants —G. Ilutterott, jun.. and CO. ' Hoge-Cassel, as far as regards G. F. Bahr—W. Barlow and 0, Marcia, Manchester, flannel ' manufacturers—J. Cable - and P. Bass, Ray-street, St. James, Clerkenwell, iten-founderl—T. P. Flint . and. W. Rogers, Bir iningham, drapers—R. Sims and M. Husband, King-street, Snow-hill, London, curri.rs-:`l'..Lewis and C.- Pike Wood street, Cheapsid e , c a rpenters—J. C o l l i ns and 'l'. Savage, Wool wich, coach-masters—J. lies and Co., Bankside, Southwark, coal-merchants—J. L...800te and J. B. Knight, High Hol.. born, clieesernongcrs—J Roper and T. Troughton, Lire.-pool, porter-merchants—W. Clay and Co. Old Broad -street, Lon- ' don, merchants—T. Sutton. and Co., Leek, StaTordshire, silk manu&cturers. . . APOTHEOSIS OF.ZUONAPA RTE.— We bad yes terday a private.viecmt an extraordinary picture on this It Übjeet; D4)ited by a French Artist.--- Whatever opinions: ma y prevail respecting the character of the fate Usurper of France, there can be no reason why we should not do justice to the Artist. The picture is painted on a large piece of plate glass of great thickness : a sage old man appears . to be lending the departed Chief to a place among the Gods. The likeness cor responds exactly with all the portraits of that ex traordinary man, .whose countenance expresses a meek expectation of the happiness prepared for him. The colouring is vivid and harmonious, and the Picture :11together : is.an admirable proof of the skill of the Artist;. There is . a border, in which appear the heads of-Josernnix and MARIA. LOUISA, the two wiVils of the Ex-EMPRILOA, with emblematical decorations, expressive of pas sages in his life. It is strange that the Artist should have chosen so fragile a material as glass for this display of his talents, but he has certain ly produced a striking composition. 1 • COUNTY' RILDARE.-t--011 Tues d a y s a Meeting of the Magistrates of.the cowy of Kildare was held at Naas, when it was vnanirnouslyre"Scilved to recomMend to Govern ment that the Bironief . subject. to - the' Insurrectioa Act should be relieved therefrOM. We understand that this measure, which -was forced 'on the :County by the ground less apprehensions of some. 31agistrates, and agreed to by others as a Preventive, Will be withdrawn at the next Privy Council.—Ano.,her Meeting of Magistrates was held at Naas on Thursday, where the Duke of Leineter took the Chair, for the purpose of adopting rules and regulations for the con_ duct of the Polic e , w h o h ave b een deriving some consid e r a bl e fees levied on poor per sons k ee ping pigs and cows on the roads. —There will also be a meeting , at Kildare on the 26th instant, by which time it is expected that the Lord Lieutenant's Pro clamation, to take off the Insurrection Act, will be issu e d.— ( Carlow Morning Post, April 26-) Wm. *John s o n , Bow-STREET-o'ms DAY•)— aged 30, was put to the bar, charged with a most daring burg lary in the house of Mrs. Smith, widow, of Chapel-court, Carey-street. The prisoner had the impudence to go into the house at four o'clock different afternoon, break open the locks of the.doOrs of three rooms, and ransack the drawers of everything worth taking, and then coolly walked down stairs. He was, however, pursued, and taken with the property on him.—Fully committed. 'We are requested to correct a mistake in our report from Mar y -le•b one Office yesterday ; the reporter having unintentionally misplaced the names. The complainant was, therefore, Mr. Campbell, and the defendant Mr. Amsinck.— (Times.) LORD ELDON. [From the QUARTERLY REVIEW.I OBSERVATIONS on the JUDGES of the COURT of CHANCERY, and the _PRACTICE" rid DELAYS com plained of in that COURT. The Laze's delay has been a complaint ever since England has had law: . Poets, play-writers and' novelists have made it the subject of facetious allusion ; disappointed litigants and disgraced 'PractitiOrieiri have Usat it as a peg on which to hang their individual malignity ; theorists, who have never weighed the difficulty of adjusting conflicting- claims, balancing contra dictory statements, and unravelling complicated rights, `have reprobated a delay the causes of which they did not under stand ; and many wise and able men have admitted that the delay does sometimes amount to an evil, although they are unable to devise any plan by which suits can be accelerated without endangering the security of , ndiridual rights, and the general confidence in the law. Nor is It in England alone that this problem - has been jocu laxly or seriously treated. Every nation which enjoys a free and impartial administration of law, also suffers the inseparable inconvenience of delay, and that inconvenience is generally. in proportion to the merits (in other points) of its legal system. We hear little complaint of delay in Russia ; in Turkey, we apprehend, there is none at all. Frederic of Prussia, when he was modelling his institutions, attempted to give rapidity to justice—,he might as well have attempted to make round square ;--nand there are some well known instances in which his desire to do right speedily, led to substantial and permanent wrong. France, whose system of civil justice was excellent, complained, as we do, of the delays of the law, and the chi canery of practitioners; iout this was set right at the revolu tion : and during the reighs of Robespierre and Tallier), all , processes, both criminal and civil, advanced with a rapidity that at first delighted, and soon after astonished the reforiner3 themselves, -- `Whose herds fell headlong, wondering why they fell.' In short, it is the infirmity of human nature that falsehood, vio. lence and wrong are prompt and sudden; while the elucidation of truth, the proportioning of reparation, and the development of justice, are difficult, complicated and slow. But it has been reserved for our days to sea this popular com plaint assume a more commanding tone, IA n d receive a degree of countenance which ( to our knowledge at least) it never had before. Individual Legislators, as well as Committees of both Houses of Parliament, have, for some years past; been occa sionally,employed on this subject ; and even the Government itself has, by the appointment of an additional judge in eetiity, admitted the necessity of doing something to remedy this in convenience, and seems thereby to have given encouragement to propositions for - doing more. We have always doubted the constitutional propriety of the creation of the office of Vice- Chancellor, and we more than doubt its expediency and ad vantage. Notwithstanding the zeal and ability of the learned .Terson appointed to that office, is has not (whatever other good it may have done) accomplished the object for which it was specifically instituted ; and there even seems reason to appre hend that it has had a tendency to increase rather thari diminish the quantity of equity business ; but one useful effect this ex. perirnent will have had, if it teaches us how little we ought to rely on the most plausible propositions ;—how slow we ought to ,be admitting expedients into our legal system ;—how uncer tain it is that any alteration of that system will produce the pre sumed advantages'iiiiid - how certain it is to produce some in conveniences which never were contimplated. Let it not be supposed that we deny that the administeetion of our law, like all other human institutions, must be 'affected— that is, altered in its practical details—by time and circum stances ; or that the internal situation of this country has been, within the last century, so essentially changed. as to vary, in a mostiMportant degree, the proportion which existed between the legal business to be done and the means of doing it. It will be seen in the progress of this Article that we are fully . core;: vinced of this change, and the views we take of the case are mainly directed by such conviction ; but we wish in the first instance to stern the public against imputing to our legal sys tem as a fault, that which is really its merit—the diffusion of wealth and the extension of rights which have groVen up under its protection, and the confidence which it universally inspires as a real, impartial, and substantial measure of equity and justice. We also wish to warn the country against such a sup. pseition as, that the inconveniences which are occasioned by an increase of bussinees, are to be remedied by an increase of judges, and that, because there may be twice as much business as in Lord Thurlow's time, and thrice as much as in Lord Hardwick's, the proper remedy would be the appointment of two or three Lord Chancellors. If, whenever a clamour against the administration of justice happens to be excited, the Govern ment and the Judges are to make a compromise between their conscientious duty and their desire to satisfy popular demands, it is not hard to see that such clamours will become-more fre quent from every partial success, and that—what with admit ting this and altering that—the Constitution of England will be undermined, and the venerable fabric of our legal system (like the actual Courts in which it is administered) will be so amended and improved' by the hands of modern artists, as to .be no longer fit for the purposes for which it was erected. We will, however, fairly confess, that although we think it right to throw out these suggestions, we derive consolation and confi dence on this topic, from a quarter which does not at first sight appear likely to afford any ; we mean the exciters of these clamours themselves. They do not, we are satisfied, wish to alter the law—they have no desire to subvert the constitution : they ate actuated by mere personal motives—by a desire to re taliate on the present Chancellor for being blind to their merits, or by the hope of awakening him to a due sense of their im portance—they are far from wishing to overturn the system, they only want to profit by it—they have no enmity to the Ser. jeant's coif or the silken robe, they only wish to wear them—.. they have as little desire as we have to overthrow the bench of justice, they are only anxious to mount it : and, accordingly, eeannt been ea thateten d minalaena theg impeach. chargesnps e t a t c h h e - We find that the ancient and general complaint against the isene practice re t nt h ei ce immemorial, ole m win el i r s ior n n w w i h i e t o , c f o f u r tChanc e ry i o a e l ° ,a n ;: , Chancery, are now levelled personally and directly at the indi- ' victual Chancellor. The delay, the expellee, the anxiety, the ruin, which other men in other times have attributed to the proceedings of the Court, are now charged upon the Adige ; every thing else is kept out of sight—the necessity of the forms in which justice is slowly, in order to be safely, administered—the passion and pertinacity of men in defending rights or inflicting wrongs -L, the indolence, ignorance, or chicanery of practitioners—the complication 'of the kind of cases which come into Chancery,— all these are wow passed over in respectful silence, and the whole evil is discovered to arise from the doubts, hesitations and delays of the Earl of Eldon. _ We will not waste our readers' time in an eulogy upon this venerable and execellent judge— one of the greatest, we be lieve, of a series of great men, who, for the last 150 years, have presided in the Court of Chancery, each bringing to th e b enc h, for the use of his own day, and for the instruction of posterity, different but admirable powers of intellect and dispositions of mind. One was eminent for the largeness and another for the accuracy of his views. The turh of one mind was to the de velopment of prihiciples—that of another tended to their prac tical application. lie that comes latest has, as to general prin ciple, nothing to invent and littl e t o a dd ; b ut h e h as t h e less brilliant though more difficult task of distinguishing the effect of these principles—of reconciling the ever growing variety of prceedents—and of guarding the application of old principles and precedents to a new cause, froin any doubt as to the pre cise points to which such authorities are to be applied. Lord , ' Nottingham and Hardwicke may be considered the fountains, as it were, of equity law ; it was reserved for Lord Eldon to il lustrate them both (as Coke illustrated Littleton) by the ad mirable Commentaries which he has pronounced on the decisions of his predecessors. In order to expose the unfair (and, we doubt if we should not add, Innii4rmint) attempts to make Lord Eldon personally re sponsible for all the lacmtvenience which is imputed to the Court of Chancery, we beg our readers to allow us to make a few quotations front some works new before•us It cannot be unknown to you how this Hon. Court of Chan cery (which is one of the highest of the kingdom) has had many grievous complaints preferred against it• in the ffigh Court of Parliament—how it is traduced, and how sc many foul aspersions arc thrown upon it, as to be termed a dilatory court !—Will your Lordship know the reason , and who ate the caries thereof ? I answ er i n a wor d, Counsellors Our readers, perhaps may think thee this charge is reads against the present Lorj. Chancellor, anti that they may liDd in the Parliamentary Debates the names of the Counsellors who traduced hint—they are mistaken—these words are extracted front an old tract in the British Museum—this charge of delay applies to the time of the gre4 Lord Bacon ;. but the nalnel et l,is trcutucers are forgotten — as th ose of Lord Eldon will he. Again —we have before us a pamphlet with the following plausible title : Proposals for Regulating the Law, to make the same more plain and easy to he understood, and leas chargeable and ex pensive than heretofore.' This Learned Author, who, we believe, was some time Corral - rum Serjeunt of the City of London, has (aroonsst tru!nl others to the sante effect, but too long to quote) the tollowlng passage Experience 'hews that very great delays and ir?to,i'erabg shard •r arise from being tost front Court . to Court, viz. front Chancery to Common Law, and so back again ; nay, au: per suaded that not one csuse of ten,- esuec!ally if of any copse quer!ce, but first or last come; into Chancery merely for detcyk, by which means peacable-minded men will rat ber give away half their right then, be troubled to site for it.' Our readers may probably suppose that this refers to the pre' sent impaired constitution of the Court of Chancery, and that they can give a shrewd guess at the name of the Common-See jean t ; but here again they are mistaken—the date of this tract is about 1541—the Chancellor, or rather Lord Keeper of the day was Lord Littleton, the writer was Caithorpe, after wards (absitomen 1) Recorder of London. . Proposals concerning the Chancery, wherein is set forth the desires of divers well affected persons fel' the regulating of the High Court of Chancery, and the pioceedings there, and abolishing of several fees, offices and'officers thereunto belonging.' This pamphlet, complaining of the great delays in the Court of Chancery, and enor mous profits of the offiCcrs—(the Kiz clerks having upwards of 2,0001 per ann. each)—is so much in the style of our own day, that we :tie astonished to find it pub lished—not in the corrupt times of Geo. - III: or Geo. IV., but in the pure and regenerate age of the Cowi.;iionwecttla—not when poor Lord Eldon sat single-handed , in the Lords and in Chan cery—inamacy and in banitrupts-Lbut when the Great Star was in commission; as Firnnes, Lick, and Buistrode White lock, were Commissioners. We now approach more modern times. Mr. Williams, -1 4 eminent Barrister, asserts that, By our Magna Charta (upon which we much value oar selves), cap. 29, it is ordained, that justice should not be sold, , or denied, or delayed by the King to any man. But if by the, subtle contrivance of th e officers and clerk s i n th e C our ts V Equity, the proceedings are extended to an extravagant and unnecessary length, and thereby the charge of prosecuting or defending men's rights is extravagantly increased, and the de termination of causes is unnecessarily and unreasonably do' laved, I take it to be a selling pf justice and right at too dear, a rate; and it is manifest to all that have h a d an y exper i ence o f Chancery suits, that the charge and delay in proceedings there are grown to be such, that in causes of great wrong and op pression, the remedy is worse than the disease, and moss men, of small and indifferent estates, that come thither for relief, often meet with ruin by the very charge of the proceedings.' These . will not surprise our readers, as the sentiments of Mr. Williams ; hilt they may be a little startled to hear that this gentleman's Christian name was Waiter ; that these com- . plaints were Uttered—not in a speech in Parliament in 101 4 , but in a pamphlet published about 1709, and that the Ctian-, cellor, to whose administration the complaint must have more immediately referred, was not the Earl of Eldon, brat Lord Chancellor Sonars ! We shall next venture to quote— Reasons humbly offered to both' Houses of Parliament to. passing a bill to prevent delays and expenses is suits in law and in eqUity.' This author insists that " ' The-unavoidable expense, as well as unnecessary doily, , the prosecution of .nits in the Courts of Law and Equity ( es pecially in the. latter.). are become so exorbitantly great and burthensome to.tlic subject, that they may be justly rs.ne d amongst our first4ate grievances '.• • , we had room to quote more of this author's styl4 and sell' timents, not a do u bt wou ld remain, on• the minds of our readers that he was one of those Gentlemen who have discovered tha t the whole guilt of .soch enormities • lies on -the head of Lord Eldon ; but the truth is, that this work ,was published in 17(• and directed against the Court of Chancery while presided by Lord Chancellor Cowper ! One quotation from another pamphlet, and we hare done. • The High Court of Chancery is mcontestibly the rwst dila torv, as well as the ?nest expensive: an oppression which his Majesty's subjects have long laboured under, and universally complained of; inasm uc h, th a t th e i nterro g atory proverb hatn. not been more jocularly than pertinently proposed, to such who, • with more precipitation than precaution, resolved to engage in Chancery suits : " Will you be hung up six or eight years it; Chancery ?" implying that his cause may so long depend there, until his purse and patience are exhausted., his health impared.. and his person (by vexation) emaciated, like a skeleton in the study of a physician, or an anatomy in thebilice 'of a surgeon r for the delay of justice is said - to he the denial thereof; litho: what is not done in due time is not done at all. Justithe procrastinatio, ejusdem fit abnegatio.' Our readers will here recognize the topics, and indeed the , very expressions, of some late declamation against the -cons duct of the present Chancellor. They are -well calculated to ex cite general indignation; ruin produced by expencesiekne4o' by anxiety—death by despair • such are the consequences attic administ rat i on of—Lord Eldon ? no, alas !—Lord Chaneelk>r Hardwicke :int', not Lord Hardwicke, . newly come to the seals, and not having r a i se d hi s court to that dagrec of excellence which it afteriVards - attained, but Lord flardwicke in the fifteenth year of twhat is now called) his dynasty,' and when his character was at the very summit of, its faint * After the extracts which we have just made, (and we rolg,Dt have produced double the number of specimens from eveY reign since Elizabeth,) can our readers recollect with aunt - nor= patience the attempts made in the years 1823 and 1824 to im pute the fault of those delayiand expences to Lord Chancellor Eldon personally ? To persons well acquainted with our laws and our history, the refutation which we have thus given of this calumny may seem superfluous; but we flatter ourselves that with the world at large some good may be done by ihewing, that what is norm charged as'the crime of an individual, has been for two hundred years objected to ALL the greatest and most eminent persons who have occupied the woolsack during' the most enlightened days of our history, and the most illus trious periods of our law !_ Having thus, beyond all contradiction, shown that the Court. under other Chancellors has been blamed just as it now is under . Lord Eldon, we proceed to prove, that the real subject amazement is, that the latter has been able to do so much — that be has dispatched so much business—that he hits so little arrear. We shall not distract our readers' attention by olving this part of the subject in the perplexity of Chancery • ads, which it would take a volume to explain ; nor shall we descend to squabble about individual cases, on Which no fair judgment could he formed without knowing minutely, not only all the facts of the case itself, but the tempers and objects of tit° parties, and the skill, activity, and honesty of their respective agents : for on these elements the real delay of individual cases depends, and the judicious inquirer who overlooks socl► considerations, will, if he happens to' meet with a windmill , be sure, like an ancient redresser of grievances, to convert I t into a giant. _ _ ( To be continued. R As grave legislators have condescended to tell an affecting story, (which even if Lrue could not have assisted the argu ment,) of an inferior suitor dying before his cause W3B deter mined, we take the liberty of quoting (though we modestly throw it into a note) a case much more in point, a great deal more terrific, and, we apprehend, somewhat more true, of a ca tastrophe occasioned by the delays and expences of the Court of Chancery, rather before Lord Eldon's time. John Batesham, a headstrong litigious man, who had suits in Chancer 3 depending thirty or forty years, and having been awarded, by the report of Sir John Tindal, a Master in Chan cery, a less suns than lie expected, he, in revenge, by a pistol loaded with three bullets, blew out Sir John Tindal's brains, and then hanged himself.'—oldys's Cattalogue of Pamphlets in Harl. Collection, No. 83. This tragical occurrence happened in November, 1617, temp. Lcrd Bacon. • • Ott Lc by h t, Al ru th Ce AI rat d o PC tht