The Sun. — London, England, 1825-08-06 00:00:00

4object to pay a sum for his son, as he was too extravagant. Mr. Frank said he allowed this second son 3001. per annum or 330/. ; and his eldest son 4001. per annum. The Rev. W. A. Norton recalled. COmMIssiONER—I am at a loss to know how the conversa tion of this gentleman with Mr. Bellamy can be received. Mr. BROUGHAM—I have shewn that this conversation reached the ears of Mr. Frank, and that he was made aware of the tact that Mr. Bellamy, when he heard of the reconcilia tion of Mr. Frank and his wife, raved, and declared that he had lost 3,0001. a year. Witness then said—Some letters were brought to Mr. Bel lamy at my house ; he opened one of them, and became vio lently agitated. I said, for God's sake, what is the matter ? Previously to answering my quest;on, 14r. Bellamy run about the room, dashed my chairs about, -toro his hair, and threw his head on the tithe-papers, saying, here am 1 with those d—d tithe-papers, (I presume 1 must repeat every,word)._a mere humbugging 500/. at stake whereas lam losing thou sands per annuM in YotitShire. I asked, how are you losing them ? His answer •was and 'I believe I' use the very words, that d—d idiot - Frank -hrZs got his , la—h of a wife back again. I think he said 3,000/., . but-I alit not sure. This occurred, I believe, in tin , month or3\lovember,lB2l. • • Cross-examined by Mr. WAKEFIELD—I am positive this conversation. occurred in 1821, and I am -sure that all I have stated took place, An affidavit was then handed to the witness. It was then read. Mr. WAxmrt eti—Why did you state in that affidavit that it occurred in 1822 ?- Witness—Ll•can explain. This is a mistake that has caused me great uneasiness. The instant 1 discovered it 1 wrote to Mr. Leigh ; stating that I had made this mistake, and begging 7 .bim to inform me if by so tiding I had affected my , affidavit. This blunder was most positively unknown to me. I first men tioned this conversation to the successor of Mr. Bellamy. -I do not know that a commission was applied for in 1822. never -saw him until two or> three years after-I - became his curate, I merely knew him by name, and if heard so I'have no recollec ties of it: It would have made so-little impression on me that I should -have forgotten it. I only met Mr. Frank once since I have been his curate; I then dined with him. The Bis •pp of the Diocese recommended me to him, and his recommendation was taken. • When I dined with him I believe it was in March, 7822; Mrs. Frank, Mr.-Fisher, and my brother were present. The commission was not then spoken of. I never heard of Dr. rowel before to-day. Mr. John Propert examined—l was medical attendant to Mr. Frank in 1822. never heard at that time from him, or any body, of an application for such an inquiry as the present. Elizabeth Jenkinson examined—l knew Lucy Bradley, ser vant to Mr. Frank ; Mrs. Bradley told me that Mr. Bel lamy would do any for her if she would speak against Mrs. Frank; I never heard Mrs. Bradley speak ill of Mrs. Frank ; she always said she was a good mistress ; and , that she had nothing to say against her. I live at Sutton, in Yorkshire, and this conversation took place five years ago, at Mrs. Bradley's house, at Sutton, where 1 had lodgings. Ann Coe examined—l knOw Lucy Bradley ; she told me that Mrs. Frank was a good wife ; it was at the time that Mrs. Jenkinson lodged at Mrs. Bradley's ; Mr. Frank lodged with me at Sutton, in 1823. I had many opportunities of seeing him and his conduct, and 1 considered him as in his sound mind ; he was with me not quite three weeks. Cross-examined—My husband was then **farmer, and rented a farm under Mr. Frank. My house is a mile frorri Camp sail-hall ; I cannot say why he lodged at my house. He had then let Campsall-hall. I never saw Dr. Dickenson once.— _Mrs. Frank did not sleep in my house, but she called one day. She came from Doncaster in the carriage: Ido not know why she did not sleep in the house. Mr. Frank was well at the time. His fOotman came sometimes. I have not yet been paid for his lodgings. He wrote me to take my lodgings, from Newark, and directed me to keep him two rooms. His eldest -daughter also came to see him. COMMISSIONER—How did Mr. Frank pass his time while with you ? Witnesi—Very regularly. He rode in a chaise every day. Mrs. Clarissa Jennings examined—l lived in the service of -.Mr. and Mrs. Frank.in 1815. I lived with them altogether 15 years ; from . lBo2 to 1817. Lucy Bradley lived in the family the two last years. During the time I lived with Mr. Frank he never conducted himself extravagantly or improperly. I was the nurse and housekeeper. I never saw anything, improper between Mrs. Frank and Dr. Dickenson, or any thing that led -me to suspect any impropriety between them was. going on. I was generally with Mrs. Frank ; but the latter end of nay time, - the year 1817, was spent with Mr. Frank. ~rsaw Mr. Frank at Aston, the sumn:er before last. I saw him then.for a few weeks. In all that I oliserved of him I never saw anything contrary to sound mind, or extravagant, or improper. Cross-examined by Mr.. IcrriGnT-1, am married to Mr. Frank's _groom. I was married nearly eleven years ago—in p lA h ginti r r 'in li the ic c s a e ln rv ein e t : twelvernontl:. I was dismissed from Mr. Frank's service. My _husband was Sent away, and I said-I would lea- o. -It yea. in -consequence of some unpleasantness. I was told I might stay ‘,-„in the family if I liked. I once went up to town with Dr. Dickenson. -I went to Mr. 13cllamy.'s. did not pay the ex pence of the journey. John Greaves examined by Mr. SPENrCE—I have known Mr. Frank. I had transactions with him in February, 18:14 ' .as the landlord of a farm. I saw him again a few weeks . after. Be gave me satisfactory answers. I consider him a man in his senses, or I would not have dotre.business with him. Cross-examined—The second time I agreed with him for a farm Dr. Dickenson was present. - I agreed most with Dr. Dickenson,.because he was the steward. Re-examined—l conversed with both, with Mr. Frank as the landlord, and Dr. Dickenson as the agent. COMMISSIONER—TeII us what-Mr. Frank said, Witness—Mr. Frank said to me, you are come about Mr. Coe's farm. but I believe it is promised to _Mr. Justice ; but if he does not take it, you shall - have it. The second time I saw 'him, Dr. Dickenson was present; -and Mr. Frank said my father-in-law should have the farm,-as Mr. Justice did not take it. Mr. Frank said I should have the farm at .the same rent as Air. Coe paid. Mr. Frank saki,- if Mr.. Coe kept the farm, he would he better pleased, because he had had it when the times were hard. I think he spoke sensibly and feelingly, as a gentleman ought. [This witness , was a plain country farmer, who gave his evi dence in a very fair and open manner.] Mr. Badhani examined—l - am the son of Dr. Badham, and a student at Cambridge. I travelled to Cambridge with Mr. -Frank, and his conversation was very sensible, no appearance of an unsound mind. Whav he said was much to the purpose. dined with him the next day. His conversation - was not in delicate. After dinner Mr. Luby came in. On neither clay did I perceive any thing irrational. in his manner. On our journey, we spoke of the French and English schools; also of -opera dancers. The subject's were always light. - - Mr. BROUGHAM—Except education --(A laugh.)—You , know it is a ground • for charging insanity to speak lightly on serious subjects. _ _ Witness—l gave lir. Frank a wrong name. My reason for sa doing was, that when I found him so talkative, I thought I would talk too; and I described myself as a schoolmaster; I did not, therefore, like to give him my name. This species of quizzing is a common practice. I did not in the least con . cider him as insane. Mr. nnonomast then put in a letter from Mr. Frank to his sister, dated Nov. 5, 1817, which was read. [The letter respected the younger daughter of Mr. Frank, _alluded to his domestic misfortune, 'spoke of the time he • had passed with the object of his earliest attachment, his regard for his native place, • which he ,was anxious to-let, and . wss per r.fectly coherent, sensible, and well written.]l Dr. Hailain examined.-1 ;wended .51r. Frank, and have seen him six tithes since last March. I have been forty years attending patients in every variety of intellecnial calamity. my conversations with Mr. Frank, we spoke much of the present inquiry, and much of other topics. •. - From 'those . conversations, I have no' doubt, from the result of my ex perience,.that his mind is sane. I have heard And read all she evidence in this inquiry. Notwithstandieg this, Ido not consider him-otherwise than as'l have stated; and t;he observa tions of those eminent men stimulated me to - look nihre narrow ly into the case. -1 do not consider him as' labottring .under mental -.disease. I haie Nit) -doubt en the , subject. I spoke to him about his wife and Dr. Dickenson. .1 spokeof certain acts of profligacy that had been - Atated in evidence, phrticularly that at Cambridge. He said he lr-4 been drinking brandy andi . water, end had said something wrong, which he was sorry for. He admitted that he did net always act on his better judgment.: With respect -to his illness in - 11116 and 4817, he - acknowledged he tad been insane. One particular source of inquiry -was a.sto )his former illness, which he acknowledged. lie was deeply sensible of it, and he was able to draw a comparison between his .present state:of recovery, and his former state of disease. . Cross-examined—l am the author of a work on insanitY. The SOL IC rtOR.OE TIAL —Have you not maintained - the doctrine, that the finding by a Jury, that a man is of unilitinC 'mind, is mot sufficient to prove a man of unsound . staFia , mind P 0,1 Witness—You must first explain to me what is naeanthfun... _found state of mind. In' my book, I have contended, that the merit term, unsound mind, should not authorise a Jury to de .prive a wawa his liberty and his property. Strictcyrott,OßN'Enat.—Did you hear a letter read from 'Jr.f Frank, resPicting . his wife? Witness—l did: • Fkos.torron-OkrtFait..L:,Allow me to ask if Mr. Frank is prored to Inm-separated from his wife, and bow to hare stated.J thathe does not believe the reports true, such a man is sane or not ? Witness—Do you take it on yourself to say the adultery is proved ? SOLICITOR-GENERAL—I do, on her own admission in those letters. . Witness—presuming the crime to be proved, considering her as the mother dins children, it. would not prove unsound ness of mind to restore her. It is no proof of unsoundness. I may be a mistake-of his. I knew nothing of his state when those letters were written. I merely speak of the present"; his affection may be superior to his prudence. I say distinctly this is no proof of unsoundness. • __ _ The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—Have you not stated that un soundness of mind is always discernible ? Witness—l really cannot say; show me the passage, and I will tell you. _ SOLICITOR-OEKETtAr.--Is it not one of your doctrines ? Witness-=lam not bound to recollect all my doctrines; I did not say that unsoundness of mind is always discernible. The word is inthecillty, and .you will so find it. Imbecility is to be explained by half a dozen other hypotheses than un soundness. CommisvolVEß—Did Mr. Frank, in the course of your conversation, originate.any idea ?, Witness—Yes; he ,conversed with me the other day about the great inconvenience and exp.:nce he shard & h, put to by this examination. .He also spoke of local distances ; said there was good fishing at Newark ; and that he had met with an ac cident at-Cambrvige, which prevented him from shooting. Our .conversation did not merely consist in his answering questions ; •he.kept up the ball of conversation. When I saw him to-day, hespoke of your investigation yesterday. He appeared to be in good spirits. I did not think myself justified in asking him what had taken place. In conversing he did not speak so fast as to cause confusion, or so slow as to make it appear that he wanted memory. Sir R. BllltilE-Will you mention one or two hypotheses that will explain his state, besides unsoundness of mind. Dr. Haslam—lf you will be satisfied with two, I will give them. One is proffigacy = another is affection. •In answer to a question.by a Juror. Neither unsoundness, nor idiotcy, nor imbecility, applies to the case of Mr. Frank. Dr. Haslam then retired. . • Mr. Propert, surgeon, examined—l have seen Mr. Frank,,in March, and to-day, andyesteiday, and I perceived nothing like unsoundness of mind. In his cross-examination, be said that he regarded the con duct of Mr. Frank as proofs of a weak mind, but not of insanity. He had known him for many years, and regarded him as a dis sipated but not as an insane man. COMMISSIONER—How long have you known Mr. Frank,? Witness—,Between seven and eight years : I have had fre quent opportunities of seeing him, and regarded him as a weak man, and a depraved character, but nothing more. A:half-past four o'clock, the case was postponed till to-mor raw, (this day). MR. JUDGE AND COL. BERKELEY. HEREFORD ASSIZES, A uG. 4. [Before Mr. Justice BtinnotlGH and a Special Jury.] JUDGE V. BERKELEY AND OTHERS. At nine o'clock this morning this case, which had attracted a most crowded audienee, was called on for trial. 'fen special jurymen answered to their names. As William Symonds, Esq. took the book to be sworn, Mr. PHILLIPS, who led the plaintiff's case, rose and said —Sir, before you take the oath, I beg to put one question to you. Mr. CAMPBELL, who was one of the Counsel for the defend ant, in the absence .filar: Taunton, said—ll eally I am astonish ed at this course: it is quite irregular. You forget that this is a special jury struck by the parties themselves. Mr. PHILLIPS—I am sure Mr. Symonds will not desire to serve if he has expressed any opinion on the case out of Court. Mr. Symonds—l don't know what you mean, Sir:! Mr. PHILLIPS-1 have been told that you have made a strong declaration of your intention as to the verdict you will give in this cause. Mr. Symonds—l never did. Mr. PHILLIPS.—I assure you I was so instructed, and it is right you shonld know on what authority I asked the question. I pledge myself you shall know when the trial is over. Mr. Symonds.—Really I don't know what to do after what has been said. Mr. PHILLIPS.—If you act on your own feeling I shall be perfectly satisfied. Mr. Symonds was then sworn ; and John Freeman, Esq. ; Thomas Serjeant, Esq. ; Samuel Compton, Esq. ; William Palmer, Esq. ; James Hare, I•lsq.; •Richard Dansey; Esq. ; Robert Price, Esq. ; Samuel Peploe, Esq.; and Kelehinge Hoskins, Esq. were also sworn as asseelaleiusasa- A tale. w.s prayed and Jobil Davenport and Santa Bishop being sworn,. completed the Jury. Mr. LOCKHART stated, that in this case Jasper Tomsett Judge was plaintiff; and William Fitzhardinge Berkeley, Esq., Lord Sussex. Lennox, and Robert Carr Hammond, Esq., were defendants. The declaration alleged a violent assault to have been committed by the defendants on the plaintiff' on the 14th of March, to which they. pleaded " Net guilty." Mr. -Prirr.r.tiss stated the case on behalf of the plaintiff'. He could assure the jury that it was with feelings of pain and sor row that he rose to bring before them the details of the case of which they had heard an outline, not only on account of the atrocity of the circumstances, it would be his duty . to disclose, , but also on account of the rank of the parties which those cir cumstances tended to degrade. The plaintiff; -Mr. Judge, was a gentleman by birth and education, who had been the editor, of a paper at Cheltenham, called the Cheltenham Journal, and though probably inferior in rank and fortune to the defendants, had supported a character without stain. •Mr. Hammond, one of the defendants, was a gentleman of fortune and estate ; Lord Sussex Lennox; another defendant, was son of the late, and brother of the present Duke of Richmond, and participated in no small degree in the fortunes of his illustrious family ; and the third defendant, Mr. William Fitzhardinge Berkeley, who perhaps was better known as Colonel Berkeley; was the inhe ritor of Berkeley Castle, and the proprietor of large estates in Gloucestershire, worth not less than 20,0001. a-year. Colonel Berkeley, whom, though first named on the record, he did not admit to he chiefly to . blame in the atrocious outrage he was now to describe, took it into his head, and perhaps justly, that he had been spoken of harshly in the Cheltenham Journal. He did not think proper to appeal to the laws of his country nor to call on Mr. Judge to afford him satisfaction, but chose to go to his house, attended and assisted by the other defendants, and there to per petrate the outrage which formed the basis of the present action.. It was with regret that he (Mr. Phillips) stated the part which Lord Sussex Lennox took in this disgraceful transaction. He went, on the 14th of March, to the - house where Mr. Judge lived, with a letter in his hand, and asked if he was at home, saying he had a letter for him, which was palpably and grossly untrue. Mr. Judge was from home, and he retired, saying he would call again to deliver the letter. About three o'clock he Came again alone, to the door, while Colonel Be r k e l e y was peeping behind the corner of the street, to observe and profit by the success of his enterprise. He was desired to walk in, when instantly the two other defendants rushed into the house and entered the room where Mr. Judge was sitting. Accord ing to the testimony of the servant who followed them, Mr. Judge said, " Whom have I the honour of addressing?" Col. Berkeley, who was armed with a heavy whip, gave his name, and said, ." 1 am come for an explanation respecting the ar ticles in Your paper." Aar. judge made answer, " Come with me to the office, and I will afford you any explanation you can desire"—an answer which the jury would consider most pro per, when they knew that at this time there were ladieS in the house whom Colonel Berkeley himself was in the habit of visiting. The defendants replied, " No; we must have it now; now, now ;" and on this, the maid retired from the room. She was soon, however, recalled by the sound of blows, and the cries of her master, and attempted to open the -door, but one of the gentlemen within kept the door, so that she could not open it. The defendants beat him till they were tired, and then opened the door and allowed him to go into the passage. There would be ample evidence that they all con curred in the outrage; and just as the door opened, either Lord Lennox or Mr. Hammond said to Col. Berkeley, "D —n it, he has had enough ; let him go." Mr. Judge came out of the room streaming with blood from head to foot, and in a condition of pitiable weakness Which might, one would think, have satisfied the most unrelenting hatred. But no; these defendants were no ordinary persons--even yet they were unsated. Would tile jury believe that, when their victim came out covered with blood, and attempted to get to his room, he was pulled by a nobleman, who laid old of the skirts of his coat, and held him • to receive further punishment ? Would they believe that a gentleman of fortune, Mr. Hammond, seized him 'by the hair, and held him to receive Colonel Berkeley's blows ? ' Would they believe that when a wig, which, on account of some indispo sition, he'had worn, came off; Col. Berkeley beat him over the head thus exposed, till he cut the-ball of his eye, and laid open hi 4 cheek from the eye to the lip ? Would they believe that, after all this, Col. Berkeley retired laughing, and saying to his companions, " Did not I give it him properly ?" with an oath. All this, incredible as it seemed, would be proved by witnesses beyond suspicion. ' Mi. Judge retired to his room, took to his bed, and for a fortnight was incapable of leaving it. He had gradually become better ; but an experienced oculist would be produced, who would give his opinion that his eye was not yet restored, and that it was still doubtful whether, it would ever perfectly regain its powers. What defence was to be made—rather what mitigation offered of this barbarous and unparalleled outrage ? Would it be said that Mr. Judge ought rather to have indicted these parties than to have sued them ? Certainly he ought. if he could have done so; but the persons of Lord Sussex 'Lennox and Mr. Hainmond were unknown to hint : he felt that they were at least as Culpable.as Colonel Berkeley ; and therefore be could not indict with suc cess. 'He had brought his action • but he could not h a v e fi xe d them - even civilly witho u t an :dmission that they were the guilty parties, which was given on express 'condition that he would neither institute nor countenance any criminal pro ceeding ; therefore this was the only meana left to him of bringing the defendants to justice. Of what feature of ag gravation was this case destitute ? No sudden passion could have prompted the assault; for that was disproved by the cold deliberation with which, it was conducted. If th e de fendants had chosen to le a rn justice from the champions of the ring, whose language they did not disdain to imitate, they might have- learned that the lowest of those barbarians would disdain to employ three to attack one, or take any advantages but those of skill and science. But the worst ag gravation remained behind—the place chosen as the -scene of this outrage—the very home of the plaintiff, within his peace ful threshold, beneath his sacred roof—in that temple which our laws and our feelings alike hallowed, and which Lord Chatham had exulted that the king dared not enter. And by whom was this , : profanation committed ? By some desperate outcast ? No; by a gentleman of fortune—a young nobleman of the realm, and a magistrate, whose duty it would be to close the prison -door on the peasant who should dare to imi tate his example! Tf the Jury had read of such a transac tion as ;happening in the wilds of Africa—if they s h ou ld h ear of the serfs of the soil thus swindling themselves into the house of an unarmed and defenceless man,'and drawing his blood—if they should find them recurring in laughter to the attack, and exulting in the sufferings of their victim; how would they even then blush for humanity in its degradation But, savages ,would not thus have acted ; they might take a sudden and a fatal revenge for real or imagined 'Wrongs ; but they were incapable of this ambushed cruelty—this compound of atrocity and fraud, exhibited in the present transaction. Let the Counsel for the defendants produce any parallel to this -case—he would not say among the nobles and gentry of 'the land—but among its rabble; and lie would give up his claim to damages. Let them shew him a case in which the lowest of men bad so conspired three to one to beat a defenceless man ; had seen him streaming with blood, yet bad renewed the.attack—and had laughed at his'agony; and then lie would give to those of the aristocracy the benefit of the precedent. As yet no such instance could be produced ; but if, by their ver dict, they treated the matter lightly—if they allowed these parties to purchase ii , punity with a few' hundred pounds, which were nothing to their fortunes, they might find parallels among the people, and could they punish what they had assist ed to encourage ? It was rumoured that Colonel Berkeley meant to palliate his conduct by asserting that he had been attacked in the plaintiff's Journal. Suppose this true ; the Jury would still consider—first, whether any provocation could kis, tify such conduct; and, secondly, whether the provocation was not itself provoked by the conduct—the public and notorious conduct—of Colonel Berkeley himself. He denied that there was any comment ; that the occasion did not justify ; and he. hoped some lingering feeling of remorse—some respect for the laws of God and man—would prevent Colonel-Berkeley from again bringing forward the subjects to which allusion was made. At all events, the other -defendants were free from the aggra vation of such an apology;—they were not attacked—their names were never mentioned in the paper—they were without excuse for thus attacking an unarmed stranger, and practically justi fying, in the eyes of the rabble, the worst theories of the level ler and the Jacobin. They were fortunate that they were ex posed only to the moral degradation of this trial; for if death had ensued, as it might, they would all have been guilty of murder, and must have answered it at the bar of earth and Heaven. After some further. remarks on the manner of the assault, and the rank of the defendants, the Learned Counsel concluded by calling on the jury by their verdict to vindicate the rank to which the defendants belonged from any sympathy in their feelings, or participation in their conduct—to teach the humblest class that they would, never invoke vainly, and the highest that they could never outrage safely, the laws made for all, and to assert and prove the-high and impartial justice of their tribunal. The admission of the defendants' attornies was read. They admitted that LOrd Sussex Lennox and Mr. Hammond were the parties who accompanied Colonel Berkeley to the house of Mr. Judge. in consideration of an engagement by Mr. Judge's attornies, that he would institute no criminal proceedings againKt them. • - Mary Curtis called and examined by Mr. JusTicE—l am a married woman ; 1 follow the occupation of a washer woman .1- on Thursday, he 14th of March; •I saw .Col. Berke ley, with two gentlemen with him; I hid gene out for the pur pose of seeing. Colonel Berkeley ; when I saw them at first they were alone, at Warwick-house • I saw them. go up Portland, street ; know Mr. .Judge's house, it is in Northfield-place, No. 14 ; I saw them all turn the corner to go towards Mr. Judge's house; 'they were walking arm-in-arm together ; 1 fol lowed them • my intention in going out was to see Colonel Berkeley ;.I went round the 'corner that leads to Northfield place; I saw all three in the passage of Mr. Judge's house; I heard the noise of a horsewhip, and I heard .the cries of a man, which caused me to go towards the house;. I saw Colonel Berkeley come out of the house afterwards, with a horsewhip in his ,hand ; .1 heard him say he had given it to him cursed well; he was not laughing.. The other two gen tlemen were with him ; the same I. bad seen before. 1 saw Mr. Judge in the passage ; the blood was runing down, his face.— They went away the same way as they came ; towards the town they went. The defendant's Counsel declined asking this witness any queitions.. Elizabeth Izzard called, sworn, and examined by Mr. PHILLIPS.—On the 14th of March last, I lived at No. 13, North .field-place ; that is Mrs. Morris's house; Mrs. Sargent, a widow lady, and her daughter live there; have seen, Colonel. Ber keley visit those ladies.; I kn ew hi s p erso n f rom having seen him repeatedly. At about two o' c l oc k o n th a t d a y, L or d S ussex Lennox knocked at the. door; he asked if Mr. Judge was at home ; I said he was not; his Lordship had a letter in his band at that time; in about half an hour afterwards Lord Len-. mix called again, with .a letter Otitia hand, and asked if 11Ir. Judge was at home, lie said he had a letter for him, and asked me to tell Mr. Judge so. 1 told him Mr. Judge was at home, and went and told Mr. Judge that there was a gentleman with a letter who wished to see him. He said, ." Shew him in ; I don't know who it is." In an instant, two other gentlemen rushed in • one of them was Colonel Berkeley, with a whip in his hand. . ' They all three went into the' parlour where Mr. Judge was. I thtm left the room ; before I left it, I heard Mr. Judge say, " Whom have I the honour of address ing ?" Colonel B. said, " My name is Colonel Berkeley. I am under the necessity. of seeing; you about something in the paper." Mr.. Judge said, " if'you will come to the office, I will give you every intimation about it." I then went out of the room, and I heard the gentlemen say, " No; we will have it now; now ! now ! now !" repeating it three times. I closed the door wheO 1 came out. When .I was in the passage, and immediately after these words, I heard the lash of a whip re peatedly ; 1 heard also some of the gentlemen say, " Give it him well, the rascal ! give it him well; it is what he deserves." I could distinctly here Mr. Judge's voice, and he said, " For God's sake, have mercy on me." ' I attempted to get into the room but could not ; I ran for help next door, to Mr. Davis's, but fcould not get assistance; his wife was alarmed at the noise and had feinted. When Mr..Tudge came out of the room. it was after the door was opened by seine one inside; he was covered with blood, and the blood was running down his clothes. He attempted to go up stairs, but the tall thin gentleman (Lord Sussex Lennox) caught ho l d of the skirts of .his coat, and pulled him down. The other gentleman with Colonel Berkeley caught hold of his wig, and pulled it off; Colonel Berkeley then struck him with the whip repeatedly over the face and eyes. Afterwards I saw the premises • there was blood on th e sofa in the p ar l our, as a l so blood on the ground where he had been standing in the passage ; and likewise a mark on the wall of a bloody thong of a whip, about a foot in length. Medical assistance was called in ; and Mr. Judge was confined about 14 days. Miss Morris saw these things, and also tried the door. —This witness was cross-examined by Mr. Taunton, bat no. thing important was elicited from her. Miss Sarah Morris was called, and proved she was residing in the house where Mr. Judge lodged at the time of the alleged assault, and fully confirmed the testimony of the last witness. She was not cross-examined. Mr. Brown, assistant to Mr. Morley, a surge on, of Chelten ham, proved the violent effects which the assau lt had produced; and from the inflammation of his eye, it was necessary to apply twelve leeches. Mr. Maley, surgeon, confirmed the last witness's statement, and proved that there was 'a long cut from Mr. Judge's eye to the corner of his mouth. The lip was cut through, and there was an injury inflicted in the cornea of the eye, which the plain tiff might never recover. Other Surgeons were called who proved the most severe lace rations on . the plaintiff's head and face; and Mr. Ware, the son of the oculist in London, proved that the cornea of the eye was Considerably injured ; but he might recover it. Mr. Warth, a saddler, residing in Cheltenham, said—On the 14th of March, two gentlemen called on me to purchase a whip. They examined several, but said they did not find one heavy enough. They asked for a jockey's whip, which is a heavy one. Captain Hathmond was one, and I believe Lord Sussex Lennox was the other. They looked out two of the heaviest, and sa id if th ey cou ld not get a heavier one in the town, they would take one of them. Mr. PHILLIPS —That is the case for the plaintiff. Mr. TAUNTON then, , in a most ingenious speech, stated that tie did not mean to contend in this case that no assault had been committed. Unquestionably, there had been. But, lie urged, 'that the feelings of the defendant, Colonel Berkeley, had been roused to such an excess by repeated and reiterated attacks, not only on his own character, but on those of his mother, and other members Of his .family, that it was utterly impossible, with the feelings'of a man, that he could abstain from inflicting that castigation which was so justly called for: The Learned Counsel then proceeded to comment on the atro city and malignity of the following .publications in the Chelten ham Journal, which were afterwards read in evidence. Let any one look at the malevolence here depicted : " Cheltenham, Jan. 3.—Colonel Berkeley was for many years universally recognized and received as the eldest legiti mate son of the late Earl of Berkeley, by the title of Lord Dursley. The famous Berkeley Inquiry, in the year 1811, however, reduced him from the patrician to the plebeian rank of society. His mother, the present Countess of Berkeley, was a Miss Tudor, alias Cole, the daughter of a butcher in Gloucester. The 4 Inquiry' disclosed some curious particulars of the late Earl and his Lady." Heavens I Were all these passages in the private history of families to be thus ransacked, raked up, and published " as fashionable chit-chat," to gratify the most depraved appetite for scandal ? Did the Jury mark the cruel 'and contemptnous " alias" applied to the Countess of Berkeley —an epithet Com monly heard as associated with criminals at the bar of justice ? Was that man to be blamed who suffered the great instinct of 'human nature to overcome his sense of positive law, and to in duce him to take vengeance for such an insult on a venerable mother ? And in the same paper was an attack on Colonel Ber keley himself; and here it was to be regretted, that the name of a laxly, already too much the subject of public calumny, must be introduced once more. With the merits of her case the Jury had nothing to do; with them Mr. Judge had nothing on . earth to do ; and the motive which induced him to introduce it would appear in the sequel. , The article was headed" - :hiss FoOte," and a grosser string of falsehoods was never penned. It contained the following attack on. Colonel Berkeley : • "Miss Foote, at a very early age, became acquainted with Colonel Berkeley, and was his victim. It is really difficult .to know what expression to use when speaking of such gentle men as the Colonel. Fame is not a word to be coupled with their names. They are famous who, in the field of battle, the senate, or the seclusion of thei r o wn s t u d y , benefit their native land y the exertion of their bravery or their talents. Those are the votaries of fame—not the heartless seducer, the shame less adulterer—the man who saves A few hundreds at a trial by spewing the letters of his partner in guilt; nor the faithless lover who, having triumphed over the prudence of a-beatitiful and ami able girl, refuses her the reparation which he had promised, and ! accuses her of a diminution of affection when she says, " Perform your promise; marry me; let me not bring another miserable being into the world ; marry me, and let my second child be legi timate." Col. B.'s answers are invariably full of equivocation; they come from the head, not from the heart; and while we per use them we cannot but suspect that they were written with a presentiment that the writer might one day find it his interest to print them. " The Examiner" of last Sunday says, that Colonel Berkeley should have been the very last person to plead family as an obstacle to marrying' Miss Foote, asheis himself the offsprina• of a connexion p rev i ous to wedlock. Indeed ! is, it even so ? It seems, then, that Mi ss F oo te, even a f ter s h e was seduced by Col. Berkeley, was in all respects the equal of Col. Berkeley7s mother! We have said that .we cannot call him fa mous—infamous is a strong word; notorious will answer our Furpose. Her notorious persecuto r seems to assert that Miss oote had no longer a claim upon him, because she had listen ed to the honourable addresses of other men. Now it is ob vious from her letters, that when other proposals were made to her, she still clung anxiously to his promises, and the chief cause of.complaint which Mr. Hayne has against her is, that, while she was professing regard f or hi m , s h e was evidently im ploring Col. Berkeley to fulfil his promises with all the un- diminished ardour of a first love, and was dreading a final.sepa ration from the father of her children. If she was playing a double game, who caused her to do so ? Who placed her in a miserable and humiliating situation, from which she was anxi;. ous to extricate herself by every means in her power ? Did Miss Foote make large demands on Colonel Berkeley:during her en gagement with him ? No! she had no settlement ; and his presents did ,not exceed 1001. in value. flad-she the advantage of his society and protection during that period? No ! she was neglected during many months of every year. Was she ever accused of being faithless to her seducer, or was her conduet in any ways reprehensible ? No ! no woman could be more re spected than Miss Foote. Mr. Fawcett'lletters speak volumes in her favour, and there is not, I believe, an Individual in. Covent Garden Theatre who would not gladly bear testimony to the Mildness, modesty, anti propriety of her manners. Was Col. Berkeley as faithful to Miss Foote, and was his conduct•as blameless and irreprehensible ? Let trials at Gloucester, and'' triumphs at Cheltenham, answer the question ?" Could any thing be more atrocious? Of the facts of Miss Foote's case, Mr. Judge could know nothing • yet thus he chose boldly to colour it. Here also, in. The Cheltenham Journal, of the 10th of January, was another slanderous libel : " Colonel Berkeley and Mr. Claggett.--4n the course of the publication which arose out of the late trial, Foote a. Hayne, a gentleman of the name of Claggett, thinking himself reflected 'upon by Colonel Berkeley, required an explanation of that gentleman ; the Colonel in consequence has .written to Mr. C. stating that he meant nothing disgraceful to him, and thus the matter has dropped. IVe have given the letters in another part of our paper. '.—There was another atrocious libel in . the same paper :—" It was common some time singe in the fashionable circles of the metropolis (in allusion to a certain non-fighting reginient of :Hussars) if a Man showed a white feather to remark,' the 10:11 don't fight.' 4 The Colonel don't fight,' is now the bye-word of contempt amongst the leaders of the-ton." Then (said Mr. TAUNTON), canoe this, in the pa paper of February 28th " The Berkeley Hunt Affair.—ln giving a description of this very ludicrously " got up" affair, to those who may feel an interest in such matters, we would- wish to abstain froth all personal! remarks towards ale great Lion of the night, Colonel Berkeley, or those of his visitors who ho noured him with their support, by attending the Berkeley Hunt Ball, at the theatre on Thursday evening; ' but we feel ourselves called on, in the performance of our duties to that public by whom we are so highly patronized (du ties indeed !), to give those particulars connected with " the affair"- which transpired with that strict regard to truth, by which we hope our journal will always be diStinguish ed. Every possible e xer ti on h a d b een made for a long time previous by the fri en d s o f C o l one l B er k e l ey to give all the eclat and effect to this annual affair, in order to attempt proving to the world that recent circumstances which have occurred, in stead of lessening the great Lion in the estimation of his Chel tenham supporters, had only tended to raise his character still higher in their opinion, and to justly entitle him to their unqua lified admiration. About 4 o'clock on Thursday afternoon, sym. ptoms of his approach manifested themselves by the appear ance of 200 or 300 dirty fellows, hallooing and shouting through the High-street, evidently well .primed for the occasion, who, we have no doubt, would have shouted just as loud, and with as much sincerity of feeling, if they had been engaged on the same terms to announce the aPprdach of Jack or any other respectable personages.—(A laugh.)—ln the cavalcade, amongst which there were certainly some respectable indivi duals, we observed two fistic champions, Messrs. Cannon and White-headed Bob (as he is called by " the Fancy,") and Mr. Pea-green Hayne (as he was dubbed by Colonel Berkeley.)— In the Colonel's carriage, which was in the rear of the pro. cession, we observed a party . of ladies. We certainly congra. tulated the C o l one l on his improv e d t as t e , w h o , instead, as was his custom on former occasions of this nature, of compli menting the good folks of Cheltenhani, by driving his - bull dog only in his carriage, gallantly escorted those ladies, -whose character an'' s respectable demeanour add lustre to their rank. Notwithstanding the waving of sundry dirty pocket handkerchiefs, the throwing up of half a dozen greasy caps into the air, and the shouts of a few -score of idle apprentices, Berkeley must not imagine that by such ma nifestations of approbation he may consider himself secure in the estimation of the respectable portion of the inhabi tants of this town; who Icioked upon the burlesqued pageant merely as an attempt to gain his lost popularity, and to recover that respect to which at onetime, perhaps, he was justly entitled, Although there were observed many respectable families at the ball in the evening, still there was something wanting to give that pleasing satisfaction to those who attended it which had been experienced on former occasions. Whether that ennui, which was so evidently felt by the thin list of fashionables throughout the evening, was occasioned by the reflection that by their presence they were applauding the conduct of an adul terer, we will not pretend to say; but we are convinced when they give this subject one moment'sconsideration, they will feel as mo thers that they have been supporting the pretensions of a man, in .whose society the virtue of their daughters would be placed 'in time most imminent danger. We have it Iron - 1111e very best au , thority, that many families or the highest rank and respecta bility in the neighbourhood, who had received tickets for that evening, declined the invitation—for what reason is best known to themselves. We are confident, that from the decreased number of fashionable visitants on the occasion to what it had heretofore been, that it will c l ear ly p o i nt ou t to C o l one l Ber keley, that, whatever may be the opinion of the profligate, the giddy, and the dependent, what are the predominant feelings of the better thi n ki ng and more discerning part of the com munity. We are assured by a correspondent, " that upwamds of 100 ladies of the leading fashionables at this place, refused to accept of tickets for the Berkeley Hunt ball, and though several heads of families were urged by personal applications with an importunity not very delicate, they peremptorily refused the invitation." We understand the number of persons who attended " the affair" did not amount to 140, • two-thirds of whom were gentlemen. " Oh, what a falling of was there;'' " Alas ! poor Yorick !" Notwithstanding the above.reras r , l4 ; we consider it our duty, as public journalists, to subjoin a of the ladies present, as far as we have been able to obtain th'' from the best authority." [Here follows the names of several ladies—publis a li d ed ed , doubt, to hurt their feelings—and the article thus concl " A humorous song was sung at the supper-table, dese rir tive of the eagerness of the ladies to procure tickets ((Per e, the room or the gallery ?) At any rate, we consider this WI; was paying no great compliment to the ladies present. We ba i l i e omitted to give the names of th e gent l emen w h o at t e nded t Berkeley Hunt ball, in consequence of our correspondent not being able to procure a correct list in time for insertion." as The next paragraph which the Learned Gentl e man read „ commented on, was one whi c h co n t a i ne d some s t r i c t u res on 3 ; advertisement, Which appeared in some London papers, in ,g e swer to the above account of th e B er k e l e y H unt b a ll. k„ii Learned Counsel concluded by sa yi ng , th a t t h e j ur y kne w "" 10 the denominations of the coin of the realm, and they also which to apportion to the plaintiff as his damages: d i g . Evidence was then called to s he w th a t !Mr. Judge was suaded by his paitners from con ti nu i ng i n t h e stra i n o f the ab°' paragraphs against Col. Berkeley; but he continued in the',_ Mr. C. PHILLIPS repli e d. It h a d b een sa id C o l. Bet" e i .,",t did this from respect to the feelings of an aged mother. ,P se " was there not another. hose hopes he had bl a sted, and we ° 0 feelings he must have recollected. His affairs were the tieolo of every Journal. Mr. `Jud ge th ere f ore h a d not b roug ht th before the public. By whom were Miss Foote's letters P u re lished ? and who . had first appealed to th e P ress ?—the man who now shrunk from its lash. He would leave it to w Jury to say whether they would ; under such circumstance s,,„ with two others to beat a defenceless man. Mr. Justice BURRO [mil, in the course of his observati, ° r, on the evidence, said, th a t w i t h respect to Colonel Berke' l i ; ample provocation had been given by the plaintiff to raise expectation that some assault would most probably be coma mitted on him. It was not to b e en d ure d t h at t h e P res s shea f erect itself into a censor,, for th e purpose of dragging the Phil vate transactions of a mans life before the public; and in , r , case the Colonel had been stigmatised as a coward, a see u r e , and a man guilty of ev er y thi ng th a t was b ase. N eve rthe4 t that did riot justify an assault. A verdict must be found the . plaintiff, as an assault was clearly proved ; but the lo o% a - 0 cation Colonel Berkeley had r ece i ve d wou ld not . o p era te es be excuse for the other defendant s . Th e d amages co uld not divided. The Jury, after deliberating for an hour, found for the Pl 3in' tiff—Damages, FIVE HUNDRED Poumns. The trial lasted from nine o'clock in the morning until 9 063 o'clock ,at night. UNI VERSITY INTELLIGENCE• • OXFORD, A Ira. 7... _ECCLESIASTICAL PREFERMENTS. o f The Rev. George Sherwood Evans, M.A. late Fell°"„ie Pembroke College, has been presented to the Living ofTeWri c , Grafton, in the diocese of 'Worcester, by Mrs. Maria 80110c_.,, relict of the late ,Ferdinando' Bullock, Esq. of Temple Graf!' Warwickshire, and of. Hill House, near \Vantage, Berks , is The Rev. Charles Ward, M.A. of Brasenose Colreg e ' g ii this University, PreePtitor -of Bristol Cathedral, has been. `' toted, by the Bishop of Lincol n , t o th e R ectory o f Mattio Beds; Patron, the AlarquiS of Ailesbury. Tuesday the. R ev. Samuel Paul was instituted to the Vica r :;Oi of Tetbury, on the pr esen t a ti on o f f our o f t h e seven Trus`to of the Tetbury • Charity Estates, in the ma j or i t y o f whoin , e a right of presentation is vest e d. Th e th ree ot h er T rus t e es Y o ' for the Rev. John Frampton. e ntV The Lord Bishop of %l' inchester has collated the Rev. Hubbard, Rector of Hinton Amptner, to the valuable !ei„ tory of Cheriten, with th e Ch ape l s o f' liil mas t on and Ti ts bourne annexed. The Rev. P. Puckle, to th e R ector y o f G ra ffh am , Hun t ' c g s dopshire, vacated by th e d eat h o f t h e R ev . D r . P arr; Patr°"„ "' Lady Olivia B. Sparrow. bridg es The Rev. John Baldwin, B.A. o f Ch r i st C o ll ege , Cam . ' • has been elected a Foundation Fellow of that Society. 0.! The Rev. Dr. Jenkinson, l a t e D ean o f Worcester, walf g e , secrated Bishop of St. David's, on Sunday, at Lambeth r ELEPHANT AND CASTLE CHARITY' COURT OF CHANCERY, AUG. 5. cwt.. The Loan CHANCE LLOR , a dd ress i ng hi mse lf to Mr. wt.. ton, the Solicitor, said—N ow; w i t h respect to our o ld accfli a o; ance the Elephant and. Castle, it has been stated in You r ey et sence that the long petition p resen t e d i n t hi s case was n submitted to the Attorney-Gener a l f or his fiat. Is it so , his • Mr. CLUTTON observed, that it was first answered by Lordship without being su b m i t t e d t o t h e Att orne y-General- vv i ,;. objection was made to it, and the petition was withar!ot upon which a verbatim copy was carried to the A ttornei - The neral, when it appeared a caveat had been entered. a be queition was discussed before the Attorney-General, an e 1 ) 0 determined the Courtlhad jurisdiction, upon which he gaV fiat. 11 • The LORD CHANCEL LOR sa id th e Attorn e y.General ; ' - ,i o ro cl not determine the questi on w h et h er t h e C ourt ha d juris(,,i'petibe but it was- his business to take. i n to consideration, when signed such a petition, wilf•ther the Court,had jurisdictio ti %t, ' Mr. CLUTTON said.that his Lordship had seen the catte' co ll The LORD CHANCELLOR remarked, that he saw i t r ocet• yesterday fur the fi r st tim e , and he had it no w in his 1) ;,/ However in order that they might proceed a s a ca' c or'" strutted them, he would see Lord Giff or d upon t h e subjec a ., ot , he had only to request that the parties would come SO h l eo ieli Monday morning; for he assured them he should be exit glad to get rid of -the matter. t Mr.CLuz TON observed, that the Attorney-General lied papers in.his hands several d a y s , i n or d er - t h at he might them before he gave his fiat. FOR THE SUN. BATH, AUG- 4 + Oa MR. EDITOR—In THE SUN of yesterdaPihe gave a list of places likely to be contested i' t c ity next General Electi on , b u t on g i v i ng publi t to that statem en t y ou e x p ress your d ou bts 0 ' if correctness. Amongst others, Somerselshife noticed *as one. a Alt Now, Sir, allow me to say,. for mysel f .4 F • . - ,ressl 'irother reeholders, that instead of e%1 3 ,-,' o ty my disaprob a ti on o f t h e con d uct of our " -j ibe Representatives, we consider that we tak e tw o lead, and that. there is not in Parliamen t i o more valuabl e M em b ers f or one count/ d - - • those for Somerset. p yieh 'Tat some . of - the M em b ers f or t h e two ut to and the Boroughs in the County, may. --, -- A ; s so' feel a little q ua l m i s h on t h e approac hing '44 lution I do not wonder, because they know have been acting diametrically opposite - t a pt g, sentiments of the majority' of their Consti t r a e t hei therefore they mu s t not b e surprized: i ;„ th e , meet with a rebuff; b u t w i t h re sp e ct • . `" 00 0 . County Memb ers , th ey stan d on suc h high g il ' o ce no person could oppose them with anY f ,t, of success. I am, Sir, your obedient Serv i lift• ' A SOMERSET FREEOO I ' wha t SUSPENSION BRIDGE AT Sill ELDS.--1" . neft.v Engineer, Mr. William Chapman, has just drawn il . ".00 0 1 1 (' • on the expediency and practicability of the proposed D t ,l'h e ide", , Bridge across the Tyne. Mr. Chapman's opinion is, e he in favour both of the expediency and practicability o f t he tOdie. safe. He considers the most eligible site to be — t.o o— be Cooke's Quay, on the south side to • Camden-su e t - Az: north side. According to his view of the matter,"ut sufficient to erect a pillar at each of these points, w i 'L,, ,, „ t- a ing any in the River so as in the slightest' degree to o n lit navigation. The pillars, indeed, will be placed o n „ - i t ige , A to side of low water mark, and the whole span of the, "'ton e is calculated, will not exceed 880 feet, the width been Pr.c, be less than it was supposed. Inconsequence of t he , --0 1 i v& i.r iron, Mr. Chapman conceives the entire esPertplo/,,3- 110 . ,0001.; but he is of opinion that'lo 0001. per an n " l „ o . - derived from the tolls, a much greater Lim than..vn is i,we e culated upon. Viewing all the circumstances there+v--dn'itica u is i e dlN v e e r* r t y ea k r aienargseownsi sorry will be expect brey t carriedo a t h r a iii t nio t t h ou i es announce ec u t p . endous arld" / first commercial firm at Malino t e ll , e in fu S i o lule. , dee''''l :l l'l: e t3i' , :'; / 'C of Messrs. L. KOcKIIUBI and Co,, for t''„, e i • sum of 424,066 dollars Banco—about 1 .v"; sterling ; and, what adds to the misforto,no.'t de" i chi ri e toe f td m o t o f h rise tbe hous e (L. Kockhum) h as j j tha t • Jag bad .debt s li fe . n te 5 1 1 i 4 ri l I: u oe iT i a le t d e i i h al e iras c v o e ta ß c da e et r icclll°: " re 'IP4: