The Sun. — London, England, 1824-04-21 00:00:00

THE LONDON JOURNALS. DAILY . . Extract: from the Morning Perpers, April 21. NEW TIMES.] We have always participated in those feelings which the subjection of Greece to the barbarous domination of the Turks is calculated to excite in every generous mind ; but we own that our hopes of success to the cause of Grecian independence from the efforts of the present leaders are not sanguine : and the intervention of Lord Byron appears to us singularly injudicious. It was ob served by Mr. Cannisg that Sir Robert Wilson's memorable exploits at Corunna tended only to embarrass our negociations, and to weaken our influence ; but with such Diplomatists as the Turks the case is infinitely worse. It would not at all surprise us to hear that they had impaled his Lordship. Nay, if they should not catch him, they are but too likely to revenge themselves on any Englishman that may fail in their way.— These considerations are extremely vexatious ; but they serve to place in a very strong light the propriety of those rules of international law, • which bind up subjects in the acts of their Go ' vernment.z. Lord Byron acts in open and daring - defiance of the laws of his own country ; and what is the consequence ? Why, that his coun try is in danger of being dragged into a war, to resent injuries which he may provoke from the ferocious Turks. BRITISH PRESS. The Ottoman empire is every day tumbling to its foundations. The dynasty of Othman, within the Bosphorus, will soon be no more. That bar barous dominion, still spread over the fairest por tion of Eastern Europe, which has existed for snore than five centuries, maintaining its rude en campment on the classic soil of Greece, and hold ing in basest vassalage the city of Constantine, and the surviving remnant of the Roman empire, is now pressed by the triumphant arms of its Christian subjects, and the threatening forces of the Russian Autocrat, and destruction hovers over the towers of the Seraglio. This Power, which once menaced all Europe with subjuga tion, when the haughty Bajazet threatened to feed his horse with a bushel of oats from off the altar of St. Peter's ; and the Grand Vizier Ku perli, little more than a century since, in 1685, poured his whitening tents around Vienna, which was only rescued by the valour of the chivalrous Sobieski, has long been suffered to exist solely from the rival jealousies of tlit. other European Powers. But a domestic enemy is now pressing its ruin, while an ambitious foe hovers on its frontiers. The fine city of Constantinople was taken by assault, by Mahomet the Second, in 1456, when Constantine Paleologus fell on its ramparts. His heroic valour, aided by that of the Venetian, Justiniani, long withstood the at tacks of the fierce barbarian; but Byzantium then contained little more than a crowd of enervat ed and trembling slaves. The towering walls of the great capital of the East had long bid defiance to the assaults of the infidels who thronged around it. Timour, who overran all Asia with his Tartar cavalry, was pre cluded from further conquest in Europe, because the mighty master of the East had not a single boat to float his innumerable " Tomans" of horse across the Bosphorus ; and the fierce Bajazet, surnamed from his fury " Ilderim," or the " Lightning," after vanquishing Boucciault and the proudest chivalry of France before Nico .polis, sunk in his subsequent contest with the •victorious Tartar. The Turk still includes within "his d e solating dominion in Europe the wasted provinces of Wallachia and Moldavia, and the fine and fertile countries of Bulgaria, Servia, Bosnia, part of Croatia, and Dalmatia, Romania, Macedonia, A lbania,Thessaly, Livadia, and the Morea, with the Islands of Archipelago. The latter have been the principal scenes of the revolt of the heroic Greeks ; and for the last three years the tyranny of the Moslem has been almost unknown in the Morea and throughout the Gre cian Isles. The insurrection of the Christians has now extended to Thessaly, and the warlike Albanians are in arms against the Porte. [MORNING POST.] The baster Festival at the Mansion House, all things considered, passed off with becoming pro propriety, and " the concentrated Dignity of the City of London," alias Lord Waithman, took every praiseworthy care to prevent any misap pi-ehension..from the presence of two of his Ma jesty's Ministers at " this great corporate feast." His Lordship seemed, without sufficient rea son, we think, to dread that the attendance of Mr.: Secretary Canning and • Mr. Wynn might be construed into " personal feelingi or prejudices," towards himself, or any " po- Jitital bias " for his opinions on public af fairs, and accordingly assured his guests of the contrary, and elicited a formal declaration to the same effect from our distinguished Foreign Mi 'lister. Lord \Vaithman is reported to have said, with his usual politeness, that the " attendance of Ministers certainly did honour to the city of London, for they were there to pay respect to ihe-Constitutional Authorities of the Metropolis of the British Empire." And afterwards added,'; that " the Ministers present in doing honour to the City of London, did equal honour to them selves," together with an amiable confession of Ibis Lordship's own " freedom from all personal prejudices." It was impossible for Mr. Secretary Canning, in returning thanks for his health, dot to notice some of the foregoing sentiments, which •he did in such terms as will attach to the fame of the existing Chief Magistrate. "I f any per-: • sonal feeling could be supposed to exist on 'the • part :of his Majesty's Ministers towards the pre sent Lord Mayor," said he, " they were di •Nested of them on this occasion. They attended t#uereto participate in the celebration of the • great Corporate Festival of this great Metropolis, to contribute the expression of their respect tO the concentrated dignity of the City of Lon acrii.,,,_2(Applause:)—After a few more words, flue night Hon; Secretary " congratulated the Lord Alayor on the present tranquillity which • prevailed, and hoped that he (the Lord Mayor) would find an auspicious continuance of such an advantage." We copy these sentences from the, Journal under Lord Waithman's especial pa tronage, and of course they are reported in cor respondance with his Lordship's presumed wishes and approval. May we hope that he will equally understand and ruminate on the sound instruc tion they contain, or at least that the lesson they afford will not be lost upon such of the present Lord Mayor's political disciples as aim at becoming the" concentrated Dignity of the City of London." Lord Waithman's motives in his past career of politics may have been the best ima ginable for aught we know, or, to use his own words, he may always have been " regardless of his public reputation." These are matters for his own private consideration—but this we know, that in turbulent and dangerous times, when the safety of the throne, the freedom of the country, and the happiness of the people were at stake, his conduct was, to say the least of it, hi g hly impru dent. Well therefore might he be 46 cong ratulated" on the present prevalence of tranquillity, for we should regret exceedingly to see him p laced in a situation of exalted responsibility without the probability of an " auspicious continuance of such an advantage," during his Lordship's Mayoralty. We are not therefore destitute of hope that the remaining half of his civic reign may pass over as innoxiously as the half which has now nearly expired. In that event we shall rejoice, as we could not well escape the chance of his being some time or other raised to his pre sent eminence, that it happened when the greatest firebrand that ever fell among the combustible materials - of the Corporation of London could effect but little mischief. [MORNING SKRONICLI.3 S IR J. M - ALCOLM AND MR. LUSUINGTON.- Which of these two gentlemen is finally to be sent out to Bombay ? Public curiosity has long asked the question, and public opinion has long ago answered it. The very high character of the former Gentleman, his tried firmness and in tegrity, his long acquaintance, both in civil and military employments, with the customs, feelings, and prejudices of those who are now expecting their master at our hands, have combined to point him out to all persons and all parties, not merely as the fittest, but as the one fit person for the si tuation. This is no question of party. Sir John Malcolm is no party man. W• publish no laboured panegyric upon him. Those who have enjoyed the pleasure of his company for a single half hour will know that it is difficult to write of him at all without it ; but it would he unnecessary here. Panegyric is wanted to white wash a sinecurist, or gild a Treasury scribe.— The man we speak of is too well known to be aided, and too high minded to be gratified by it. Mr. Canning is understood to be the enemy who is now retarding, or preventing, the advance ment of Sir John. We should wish to ask Mr. Canning, whether, as President of the Board of Control'', he did not, on two distinct occasions, recommend Sir John to the notice of the DireC tors us the most proper object of their choice,— ' first, on the appointment of Mr. Elphinstone, and subsequently on that of - Mr. Munro ? A large majority of the Directors—if our informa tion be correct, 19 out of '24,—are now in favour of the claims of Sir John Malcolm, —of the man who has been twice honoured by the preference of the lion. and consistent Secretary. We doubt not that it may be a very convenient thing to Mr. Canning to get rid of Mr. Lushington. We doubt not that the latter Gentleman, if appointed to the situation, will admirably perform those duties for which he has such admirable qualifi cations, —that " Tn a sieve he'll thither sail, And, like a rat without a tail, He'll do, he'll do, he'll do !" And we doubt not that the public voice, even in this age of surpassing and surprising jobs, will denounce the Bombay job as one of the most surpassing and surprising jobs of all.—We can not but feel somewhat warmly on this subject, because it is clearly a case of litigation between merit and patronage, between justice and the Secretary of State—because we know that Sir John Malcolm is himself above all the petty trickery of crouching and canvassing—and be cause we are well aware that this mention of his claim will be read by him with regret, insufficient though it be to express either the respect of the country for his talents, or the esteem of the writer for his ♦irtues. [MORNING RERALD.] Paris Papers of Sunday arrived last night, by express. On the preceding day the long-expected proposal of the reduction of the interest of the debt was submitted to the Chamber. M. Masson, the Chairman of the Commission, reported at some length in favour of the plan recommended by the Minister. The chief opposition to the measure is described as being made in the capital, especially.hy the Stockholders. The Chairman, in his report, contended that public credit would be rendered more steady by this operation.— The existing system, he said, gave rise to speculating avidity, because under It the holder of the rentes might derive from his capital one, and even one and a half per cent. per mouth, whilst the present measure would confine the pendulum of the public credit between three and four per cent. per an num on good security. It is admitted that some injustice is done by the reduction of the interest to those early holders whose rentes would be de preciated. But the Reporter urges, that indivi dual good must result to that of the public ; that few, if any, of the original purchasers hold shares at present, and that no exception in favour of small holders of rentes could be made, because any limit would still be a hardship on those im mediately beyond its operation. Among the stated advantages of the measure are these, as stated in the Report : There will be an annual di minution of taxation to the amount of (28 or 30 millions of francs. The rate of interest will be lowered, and the number of abortive speculations and failures will be less, because the interest of money in the funds will he more mo derate and steady. The Reporter of the Com mission further states, that the capitalists wh o • have undertaken to support the operations of the Minister of Finance, are so wealthy, and esta- 1 blished in credit, as to render it unlikely that it should be necessary to draw upon the resources of the Government at all—the probability being, that the five per cents. renters, would univer sally consent to the reduction of the interest on their stock to four per cent._ The Minister of Finance made some observations in favour of the Report, and observed, rather sneer ingly, that those who had lent only from 50 to 88 francs, had no reason to complain of being paid off at a hundred! MM. de la Bourdon naye—a decided Ultra, Vaublanc—a sort of doubtful Royalist, and General Foy and Casimir Perrier—leadincr Liberals, spoke against the plan. The further discussion was postponed to the following Saturday. The Chamber was next occupied with the verification of the qualifica tions of Deputies. M. Marchongey, who made himself unfavourably notorious by his zeal as State prosecutor during the lust political trials in France, has been a second time disappointed in his attempt to become a Member of the Cham ber. His q ualifications have in both instances been found insufficient. [THE TIMES.] Mr. Guebhard, by what he calls his " Pros " pectus of a Royal Spanish Loan," - ts trying once more to raise the wind for King Ferdinand. He talks learnedly about the millions to be borrowed —the interest to be paid—the sundry series of bonds, professing to represent 200 piasters each —the privilege offered to the holders of tossing up for the priority of payment—and, what Is best of all, this bankrupt borrower pre sumes to tell the world, that the whole loan is to be repaid in twenty years from the day on which the money shall have been lent to him.-- Now, Mr. Guebhard, let us ask you one or two plain questions :—For whom are you striving to raise this money ? and what security have you to offer ? " For Ferdinand VII. ; and his " royal signature (quoth Mr. Guebhard) is the " security of the lender, that the several " branches of revenue which the King pledges " for the principal and interest of this debt " will be honourably applied to these, and to "no other objects." Mighty well, we answer : but, like the cosmogony man in the Vicar of Wakefield, King Ferdinand has told us all this fine story before. It Is only two years since he bor rowed large sums of money, which were furnished to him from this country—gums out of which he ate, and drank, and dressed himself, and kept his Court ; and spent, moreovero„ large portion of them in raising Royalist soldiers, and in se cretly destroying those very securities which he tendered to us, his creditors, for interest, sinking fund, and so forth, on the principal we lent him. We cannot, therefore, believe one word this King of yours tells us, or a single promise that he makes. " Oh, but," says the financier, " King " Ferdinand was then in duran c e— t h e niciis own e—th master,e Cortes " had hold of him—he was not ".and had no p o wer'tt!act trt as they compell e d cc hi m ?. This, we enjo in, IS the exact point to which we Nt ished to bring you, Mr. Guebhard. `King Ferdinand assured us, in the former in stance, that he was free to act as he thought fit; he took his oath upon it to his own subjects ; he pledged his honour to us. Which of you is guilty of the falsehood ? for you flatly contradict the King. Besides, if his Majesty excused himself from the obligation of his former bond, because he" was not free," we ask you, Is he free at this moment ? If the (tortes then had hold of him, is he not ac tually a prisoner surrounded by foreign soldiers? And is not that an excuse, far more reasonable than the other, for allowing the validity of the loan which you are now requiring? We say for once, then, before you talk of contracting new debts, be good enough to discharge your old ones —before you ask a receipt for this year's, or for next year's interest-money, skew that the last year's is not in arrear : the King's word of 1824 is not an atom better than his oaths of 1820, 1521, 1822 : let him fulfil his promises of the above periods—let him not laugh at the credulity of those who trusted him, and then ask them to trust him again. Uncertificated bankrupts have no credit here, nor any where. Advise Ferdi nand VII. to pay his old creditors, Mr. Gueb hard, or it is something more than a " toss up" that you and he are hooted off our Exchange as a couple of base impostors. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. LUNT V. BARCLAY. CiIESTER, APRIL 17.—This was an action aris ing on a balance of account, about 81., for work done by the plaintiff in building a house for the defendant. The dispute had previously been left to reference, and two of the Aldermen of Chester had undertaken the task, and given their award, when they discovered that they had made an error of 21. The defendants would not abide by this, and it was to recover the balance that the action was brought. The case proceeded for some time, when the Cm rx JUSTICE suggested an amicable arrangement, and it was finally left to the determination of Mr. Huinberston, solicitor : his award to be final. IMPORTANT TO COACH PROPRIETORS.—LOWS v. BOOTH AND OTHERS. The plaintiff is silversmith in Chester ; the defendant is landlady of the Golden Lion Inn, and part owner of a coach to London, called the Favourite. On the 16th of July last, a box containing some, valuable jewellery, gold and silver coin, &c., was packed up 'by Mr. Lowe, and addressed to Mr. Wm. Bateman, 1011, Bunhill-row, London. It was taken at 10 o'clock at night to the coach-office, and left time, and 4s. 6d. carriage paid for it. Between Chester and Newcastle, in Staf fordshire, it was lost, and the action was brought to recover the value of it. The defence was, that there was no liability. There were printed notices in the office, directly opposite to the door, stat ing that the proprietors would not be answerable for any articles of plate, jewellery, &c., unless they were entered as such, and 3d. in the pound paid as an insurance. It was admitted that plaintiff's sxyl had been in the office at least 50 times ; that he had actually read coach advertisements which were fastened to and above the notice, and yet he swore that he had not read or seen any part of,the notice. It further appeared, that the plain tiff had entered into a treaty with the defendant's bookkeeper, to have his parcels carried as common parcels at 2ld. per lb., instead 'of the usual price 3d., on account of his sending one or two every week to London. The trial occupied the Court a considerable time, and The Lottia CHIEF JusTicE, in summing up, spoke of the improbability of plaintiff's son being so often in the office, and not seeing the notice, which was on a board upwards of five feet long. The plaintiff had never intimated to the bookkeeper that his parcels were of more than ordinary value. Under these circumstances the Jury retired, and in about an hour returned with a verdict for the defendant. It is expected that application will be made for,a new trial. MminaY, APRIL 19.—This day ftentence of death was passed upon Joseph Dale, convicted of the murder of W. Wood LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, TUESDAY, APRIL 20. FELLOWS AND ♦NOTHER V. ROBINSON. This was an action on the case against the defendant, a dealer in dyed silks, for a false representation of the circumstances of a man named Gillingham, to Messrs. Fellows and: Brown. An action against the same defendant, for a similar representation, and in respect of the same person, was tried on Thursday, when a verdict was given for the plaintiff'. In this case, the allega tion was, that the plaintiffs were requested, by Thomas Josiah Gillingham, to supply him with credit : that he referred them to the defendant, and that the defendant, in answer to certain questions put by Joseph Renshaw, a clerk of the plaintiff's, stated that he had a good opinion of Gillingham ; that he had dealt largely with him, and found him regular in his pay ments ; that he would trust him to the extent of 5001. or 6001. ; though he well knew that Gillingham was then insol vent; in consequence of which false representation the plaintiffs trusted him goods to the extent of 4081. 16s, and had lost that sum. The AT TOR NE r-GE NERAL opened the circumstances un der which the plaintiff sought to recover. Charles Ensall, a clerk in the employ of the plaintiffs, stated, that on the 16th of November, Thomas Josiah Gillingham,then a stranger to them, applied to his master's for goods on credit. In consequence of this application, Joseph Renshaw was di rected to make inquiries, and, on his report, goods were supplied to Gillingham in two parcels, the first in December, 1822, amounting to 2521. 135.; the second on the 26th of January, 1823, amounting to 1561. 35.; but, between those two transac tions, some c ommunications took place between Gillingham and Messrs. Fellows and Brown. In November last, Mr. Ro binson called at the counting-house of the plaintiffs, extremely angry at a letter which he had received, threatening an action, and had another person with him, who stood in the door-way. He said, alluding to Gillingham, " What could Ido while he owed me money ? But see what I did when he got out of my debt—l told Tatlock and Hogg not to trust him any more, and exposed the villain." On cross-examination, the witness said, that something had passed about another silkman, named Billinge, having lost by Gillingham, but lie did not remember the words " taken in." lie wrote down what he thought material in the conversation soon afterwards, and had refreshed his memory by looking at them a few days ago. Joseph Renshaw, a clerk of the plaintiffs, stated, that on the 15th of December, 1822, he went, by desire of his employers, to inquire of the defendant, the character of Gillingham for solvency. In reply, Robinson gave the man a general good cha racter, and said he had a good opinion of him. The witness asked to what extent he would trust him ? He replied, 44 You may trust him to the extent of 5001. or 600/." Renshaw asked if Gillingham was regular in his payments. Robinson answered that he was. Renshaw said, 44 I have spoken to a person named Messent, and he said Gillingham was worth nothing." He replied, " Messent knows nothing about it." In reply to another question, Robinson stated that he had known Gilling ham in the way of trade two or three years. lie opened a book and showed it ; but the witness did not inspect the items. Thomas Gillingham, the father of the insolvent, stated that he accompanied his son to Mr. Robinson, at the latter end of November, or the beginning of December, 1822, when he owed him 2001. or 3001. Mr. Robinson told him he could give him no further credit unless security were given for this sum. The witness offered to join his son in a warrant of attorney for the debt then due; but Mr. Robinson declined to give further credit unless he would deposit the title-deeds of his freehold property, which the witness refused to do on account of his other children. As they were retiring, Mr. Robinson said lie could do Gillingham a great deal of service, by recommending him to silk houses, where he could obtain goods at a cheaper rate, and on nine months' credit. The father expressed him self obliged, and Robinson desired the son to call on the fol- lowing day. On cross-examination, the witness said he did not know on what credit his son had been accustomed to deal with Mr. Ro binson. The object of the warrant of attorney was to give him two years' credit for the suns then due. At that time the wit ness believed his son to be solvent_ ; he carried on a l arge esta blishment, employed 60 hands ; had apparently a large stock of manufactured goods; was sober: and industrious, and worked for some of the first houSes in 'London. Ile (witness) arrested his son in August, 1823. Thomas Josiah Gillingham, the insolvent, (who was not call ed on the former trial), stated that he was in the habit of pur chasing dyell, silk of the defendant ; and in December, 1822, was indebted to him in a sum of about 3501. Mr. Robinson had applied for money, and declined supplying goods on fur ther credit. He referred him to, lessrs. Tatlock and Hogg, as a house of whom he might obtain a longer credit. In Decem ber, Robinson again applied for money, and in the same month mentioned Messrs. Fellows and Brown, to whom he recom mended him, and afterwards recommended him to a person named Raine. Upon this recommendation, he applied to the plaintiffs, and obtained goods from them. On the 7th of February he paid 1001. to Robinson in silk, obtained from some one to whom Robinson recommended him, but which he had himself previously dyed. In March or April, he paid cash to Robinson, and in May cleared off the balance of his account by money and silks. Tatlock and Hogg were paid in June ; the plaintiff Brandit (the plaintiff in the former suit) and Bil linge were then creditors, and the other creditors were only for small sums. On cross-examination, the witness said that the credit.which he was usually allowed by Mr. Robinson was from two to three months. He had not been accustomed to dye silks him self, but commenced doing so in October, 1822, when Mr. Robinson complained that he was opposing him in his own line. At the time when he purchased of the plaintiffs, he believed himself solvent; he wished for an extension of credit because his business was extending, and such an extension would have operated as an enlargement of capital. He had been robbed to a great extent—he believed to the amount of hundreds ; and but for these robberies, believed he should hare paid Messrs. Fellows and Brown, and all his other cieditors.— He did not apply, after he received goods from the plaintiffs, for large supplies to the defendant, but he received what he asked for. His whole debts, at the time of his discharge., were not much beyond 9001. In January, before the deli very of the second parcel of goods, he made a favourable repre sentation of his affairs to the plaintiffs. He was in the habit of paying 501. per week In November 1823, he was discharged under the Act for the relief of insolvent debtors. He had an in terview with Mr. Fellows, who had given notice of an inten tion to oppose his discharge in prison. He was not then or at any other time told that the plaintiffs would withdraw their opposition to his discharge if lie would assist them in this ac tion, nor did he ever.tell Mr. James, the defendant's attorney, that such terms were proposed to him. Notice of opposition was,. however, given by the plaintiffs, and afterwards with. drawn. Being re-examined, the witness said that the amount of pro. perty stated in his schedule was 1121., but it sold only for about 20/. Mr. Lane proved that he had pressed Gillingham for a debt ; and denied that he ever gave a character to Gillingham, though on one application he opened his account to view. It was proved that Gillingham was discharged under the solvent Act, on the 24th November, 1823. Mr. SCARLETT addressed the Jury! for the defendant. He entreated them to decide this cause, without reference to that of Thursday, and with a disposition to require proof before they imputed gross and palpable fraud. This species of action was unknown until recent times : the case of Baxley v. Free man, reported in 3 Term Reports, was the first in which it had been attempted; and on that occasion there was a difference of opinion among the Judges whether it could be supported.—lt was really contrary to the principle of the wise provisions of the statute of frauds, which protected a man who encouraged an other to give credit by saying, " If the debtor does not pay you, I will," from liability, unless his promise was reduced into writing ; became no man ought to be charged by loose conver sations retained only in frail memory ; and, on the samegrounds, representations to be binding also ought to be written. On this occasion he would prove that one of the conversations at least had been misreported by witness ; and how, at this distance of time, could they rely on the accurate recollection of the other? He would prove, in addition to what had been already extracted from the witnesses, that Gillingham was recommended by Lane to Ro binson, who knew nothing of him before; that Gillingham dis tinctly stated to Mr. James, that the plaintiffs agreed to abandon their opposition to his discharge, on condition of his assisting them in their suit; and that the supposed confession of the de fendant stated by Ensall, never was made. If Gillingham bore all the appearances of solvency—if his own father considered kim as solvent, and, on that belief, would have rendered his property and his person liable, surely Mr. Robinson might honestly entertain and express the same opinion. There were some minds so constituted, as to infer fraud on every plausible case of suspicion ; but lie trusted, in candour and in justice, that they would insist on proof before they imputed it to one whose character had been without a stain. To sustain this case he called Mr. Barnes; a merchant, who accompanied Mr. Robinson to the counting-house of Mr. Fel lows in November, when he Complained of the threat of an action. This witness did not hear Mr. Fellows say " What could Ido when he owed me money ? But see what I did when he got out of my debt—l told Tatlock and Hogg, and exposed the villain :" and thought be must have heard it if it had been said. He represented Mr. Robinson as saying, " Why, you must have had an opinion in his favour, or why recommend him yourself to Billinge, from whom he obtained goods under your representation ?" Mr. Fellowes asked, " Did you sustain any injury from furnishing silk ?" Robinson replied, " Cer- tastily not." On cross-examination, the witness said he had a converse. tion with Mr. Robinson's attorney in the cause of Thursday', while the clerk was giving evidence. He never believed the action would be brought, and made no minute of what passed, but afterwards went about his own business. He attended from mere curiosity on the former trial. William Stone, a silk.broker, said, the morning after Gil lingham stopped, one of the plaintiffs observed, " This is the third bad debt I have made by Tatlock and Hogg." James Mills stated that- in March, 1822, he was sent by Mr. Robinson to Mr. Lane, who had been examined as a wit ness, to ask the character of Gillingham ; and he did give him a character. Said that Gillingham had dealt with him, and paid as well as people in his trade usually did, and that he did not limit him as to the amount of his account ; and when the witness said, " You appear to be satisfied with Gil lingham's circumstances," he said, " I am." This he report ed word for word to Mr. Robinson. He did not name the house for whom he replied. He saw no book. Mr. Marshall, a clerk of Mr. Robinson, said he was present when Renshaw called from Fellows and Brown, an d sa w the book shewn him, which was produced in Court. Gillingham usually had from two to three months' credit.—[The witness went through the account, and showed, that from time to time, payments were regularly made on it.]—lle had, occasionally , goods afterwards. Mr. James, the defendant's attorney, was called to contra dict the insolvent Gillingham. He deposed, that Gillingham came to him, unsought, in April, and said, " Fellows sai d, that if he would assist them in their action against Robinson, they would withdraw the opposition of which they had given notice." He expressed his regret that lie had any thing to do with the business. He made a minute, but did not read it over to him, as lie understood he had been brought up in an attor ney's office. Robinson came with him. In reply, a paper was put in, by which the amount, marked as received in goods in the book, was stated as received in cash. Mr. SCARLETT, on this evidence, observed, that the entry could not be made to deceive any one, because it was delivered to Gillingham only, to whom the truth was known ; but that,. coming now out of his hands, it clearly proved that he was a willing witness in the plaintiffs' cause. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL replied. He urged that this , fallacious entry was made for some object, and that the appear ance of the account-book, which bore marks of alteration to suit the exigencies of the cause, afforded pregnant evidence of the fraud. Although, in point of form, the action was new, its principles were as old as the English law, and were founded in substantial justice. He contended, that the apparent contra dictions in the evidence could be best explained by regarding the defendants' witnesses as mistaken ; that these did not affect the main points in the cause; and that all the undoubted cir cumstances in the case pointed to one conclusion—that the de fendant had made a representation which he knew to be false, for the purpose of obtaining satisfaction of his own claim. The Loan CHIEF JUSTICE said it wastrue that this species of action was first introduced between thirty and forty years ago; and then one of the Judges of the King's Bench (Mr. Justice Grose), differing from Lord Kenyon and his Learned Brothers, thought it could not be supported. Since that time, however, it had been often brought, and had never been brought under judicial consideration ; it must therefore be taken as • law that it would lie whenever injury arose from a representa tion at once fraudulent and false. His Lordship then read over the whole evidence, directing the Jury to examine the account book, and judge for themselves if it had not been altered ; showed that they might distinguish between the first and last parcel of goods, if they thought the last was furnished on the faith of a statement of Gillingham himself; and concluded by observing, that whether he had a mind particularly liable to infer fraud, lie would not assert ; but this he would confess, that when lie found a nian uttering a wilful falsehood, he felt a great difficulty in believing him actuated by an honest motive. The Jury retired, taking with them the account-book ; and ▪ after an absence of an hour and a quarter, returned a verdict for ▪ the plaintiff—Damages, 252/. 13s. Some years ago the following inscription, en graved on the fragment of a stone, was discovered amongst the rel►cs of an antiquarian, and was considered by him as a great curiosity, and enhanced in value by its translation having puzzled the best scholars of the age BENE. A.T.H. T.H. I.S.S.T. ONERE. POS. ET li. CLAUD. cos TER. TRIP E. SELLER() F. IMP IN. GT. ONAS. DO. TII. its S. C. ON. SOR. Some supposed it to refer to the Emperor Claudian, till a lad one day spelt it out—" Beneath this stone repo set h Claud Coster, tripe-seller of Impington, as (loth his consort Jane." FATAL ACCIDENT.—On Monday night, about nine o'clock, while a boat belonging to a water man of the name of M'Neill, was conveying pas sengers from Greenwich Fair to town, having 11 passengers on board, on passing Mr. Kane'S wharf, it came in contact with a canal barge, when, melancholy to relate, the boat was upset, and the entire party, except the boatman, an old man about 70 years of age, and a child about eight months old, met a watery grave. Three bodies were found yesterday, near the spot, at low water, who turn out to be a young man from Whitecross-street, about 22 years of age, a hatter; the mother of the child which was saved ; and a child about four years old, which has been recognized as the daughter of a respect able engineer, who resides at Limehonse, and who, with his wife, met an untimely end. It has not yet been ascertained who the other sufferers are. • COURSE OF EXCHANGE, April 21. Amsterdam Ditto, at Sight Rotterdam Antwerp l2 4 Hamburgh 37 5 gi kr 6 Altona Paris,3 Day's"cight 2s 40 0 Us. Ditto Bourdeaux, ditto Berlin ......• 7 10 Frankforton the Main Petetsburgli . 9 Vienrys 10 5 Trieste Madrid Cadiz Bilboa S5i Effeetive Barcelona ieville Gibraltat Leghorn Gel.ins ..........q3+-Venice, Ital. Liv 27 0 Malta 45 -Napies 3B+ Palermo Lisbon Oporto Itio Janeiro Bahia SI Dublin .... Sl+ Cork 91 pet Cent., BULLION. .._ Portugal Gold,in Coin -_ - / .O. 0 . 0. pti Os' Foreign GOld, in liars 3 17 6 New Doubloons . .... W. 0 0 New Dollars 0 4 9i Silver in liars. Standard 0 4 114 ___..... BIRTHS. In Upper Wimpole-street, on the Itlth instant, the Lady of George Arbuthnot, Esq., of a daughter. On Easter Sunday, at Cheltenham, the Lady of John Prince Esq., of a son. MARRIED. On the 15th instant, at St. Pancras Church, Mr. John Ed wards, of Bow-lane, to Miss Eggar, of Worldharn, Hants. On the 2uth instant, at St. George's Church, Bloomsbury , Mr. N. Atherton, of Craven-street, solicitor, to Sabina, fourti , daughter of the late David Bernard, Esq., of Jamaica. DIED. On the lath instant, suddenly, at Croydon, in her 62d yeAr' Hannah, wife of Mr. Joseph Butterworth. On the Bth inst., at Romford, Essex, Mr. Joseph Priokett• On the 19th inst., of consumption, Sophia, youngest (laugh° of the late Mr. William Boyer, of Shoe-lane, aged 12. Printed and Published for the PIIOPRIETORS, at tilt Sli t OrricE, 112, strand, by J. B. CAASTAiItS. I