The Sun. — London, England, 1834-11-21 00:00:00

SPIRIT 01"IHE PUBLIC JOURNALS. j esty to draw the conclusion that the Ministry could not go on. It may be convenient to the organs of " His Highness " (the Standard and the Times) to throw upon Lord Melbourne the dismissal of himself and colleagues ; but all impartial perso- - must see that the representations irn---• Melbourne never could ha" — r ated to Lord Lordship could ....; proceeded froth him. His - ..tot make these tepresentations, for the best ..., et all reasons, that on all the great questions of Church Reform, the Ministry were quite agreed. In fact, it is only necessary to revert to what took place when Lord St an l e y an d 'Sir Jas. Graham, the Duke of Richmond and Earl of Ripon left the Ministry, to be convinced that there could be no division among Mi nisters on the subject of Irish Church Reform. Lord Melbourne could not confess to what did not exist ! for there never was a cabinet more united than his, on all the great questions alluded to by the Standard and the Times. No difficulty could be anticipated in carry ing on the public business during the next session, be cause on all the questions, as far as is now known, which could have come forward, and more particularly th.! questions respecting Church Reform in Ireland . and England, the Reform of Municipal Corporations, Law Reform of an extensive nature, the relief to Dis senters, &c., there was no dissentient voice in the Ca binet. If it be more decorous to convey falsehood hypothetically than by positive statement, we will allow to the Times the credit of such decorum ; but it is proper that it should be known, that were that stated positively which is put hypothetically, it would be a positive falsehood. It is impossible to state what in ferences might or might not be drawn by his Majesty from what passed in conversation between Lord Mel bourne and himself ; because when there are foregone conclusions, the most immaterial remarks may be ea gerly laid hold of in confirmation of them. This, how ever, we can safely state, that nothing that fell from Lord Melbourne could possibly lead to the inference that he could not go on with his colleagues. There were no actual differences in the Cabinet, and Lord Melbourne was not aware of any questions respect ing which they were disunited; but who can say what is possible or not possible? It is of the utmost importance that the truth, the whole truth, and no thing but the truth, should be stated in respect to this point. If in Lord Melbourne's communication with his Majesty at Brighton, there had been any descrip tion of serious difficulty in respect to the appointment rendered needful by the death of Earl Spencer—if there had been any communication of division or dis union amongst the members of the Cabinet which threatened its destruction, or appeared likely to impair its efficiency—if there had been any intimation from Lord Melbourne to the King, or admission or confes sion in the course of conversation, of a character warranting the inference, that on certain questions which could not be avoided next Session the Cabinet would be divided, we should less deplore the step which has been taken. We utterly and entirely deny the truth of any communication from Lord Melbourne to his Majesty, warranting the inference that the Cabinet could not hold together, either new or during the next Session. We defy our contemporaries to disprove what we stated in our Monday's publication. The Ministry has been dismissed because it had resolved to propose measures of Church Reform in Ireland and England. The Reform which it contemplated was intended to strengthen the real interests of the Church, and increase the numbers and the zeal of its honest sup porters by rooting out corruption and removing abuses. The late Government contemplated other substantial reforms, the particular plans and measures being in a state of great forwardness to be submitted to Par liament. So far from Lord Melbourne confess ing weakness in the Cabinet, or fear to meet Parliament, nearly the last words addressed by him to his Majesty at Brighton, were—" That himself and his Colleagues would serve his Majesty to the last upon reform and liberal principles." We may be tauntingly called on by our contemporaries to declare the authority upon which we make this assertion. We defy them to prove that we are incorrect ; and we fur • ther tell them before-hand, that we shall not imitate one of our contemporaries by any insinuation, or indj_ rest threat of exposing the source from which. - we de rive information. We avow, upon our invn responsi bility, the truth of what we assert : and we are sure our readers will not believe that we make the assertion rashly, and we dare those v`',lo attempt a refutation to produce any authority c .Or a denial.—Morn. Chronicle. The Times of yestarday, affecting to write at the suggestion of Lord Melbourne, contradicts a misre presentation which has gone abroad respecting that nobleman—namely, that he had " made a direct avowal to his Majesty that it was impossible for hi • Administration to go on ; and a request that the King vould be graciously pleased to commit the Govern ment to the hands of the Duke of Wellington." T.„ s , of course, would have been downright treachery ; and it is needless to add, that no one ever suspected .his Lordship of anything approaching to treachery.-- But . the Times, though it acquits his Lordship of a direct avowal that it *as impossible for his 'administration to go on, and of a request that the King would be graciously pleased to commit the Go ernment to the hands of the Duke of Wellington, is get pleased to impute to the representations of his Lordship, the impssibility of the King's arriving at any other conclusion than that he ought to dismiss the Melbourne Ministry. We are quite satisfied that the Times could not have written at the suggestion, either direct or indirect, of Lord Melbourne, as the Standard would have us believe, because the represen tations in the Times are false, and Lord Melbourne would never be accessary to the dissemination of what was not strictly accordant with the truth. But we will first present to our readers what actually appears in the Times :—" Had his Lordship so despaired of the efficiency of his Cabinet as to have found it his duty to convey to the Sovereign a persuasion and proposition of the nature above-mentioned, he would assuredly have felt himself called upon to apprize his colleagues before he left London this day se nnight, that he was compelled to do what amounted to a virtual tender of his own resignation, and to a breaking up of the entire Ministry. But the fact is, that his Lordship did no such thing. He waited on the King, if we are not mis informed, to state fairly to his Majesty the various and considerable difficulties entailed upon him by Lord Spencer's death ; but he went also prepared to explain and recommend the means of adequately providing for them, and carrying on the Government, though without the aid of Lord Althorp in the House of Commons. These means and these difficulties the Noble Viscount did develope seriatim and in full de tail to his Majesty. But if the King, upon a calm consideration of all the contingent results which might or, as it appeared to his Majesty, must have flowed from the adoption of any of the proposed alternatives, became conscientiously satisfied that a dissolution of the Cabinet at the present moment would be attended with less serious mischief than at any time during a session of Parliament, who can blame Lord Mel bourne for such an unwished-for termination of his conference with King William ? We are bound to add, in candour, who can blame the King for acting, on different, but certainly not unreasonable, impres sions ?" The Times then proceeds to lay what it terms afro brief hypotheses, before its readers :—" Sup pose Lord John Russell had been recommended for his Majesty's approval as Leader of the House of Commons—is there, or is there not, reason to appre bend that his Lordship's pledges, either towards the Dissenters or with regard to the ultimate disposal of Church property in Ireland, or both, might have laid him under the necessity of introducing and enforcing measures of so bold a character, that other Ministers, Lord Lansdowne, for instance, and Mr. Spring Rice, would have taken the opportunity of resigning ? Had the task of Leader been assigned to Mr. Abercromby, whose opinions'on the two points specified are under stood to agree with those of Lord John Russell, the same consequences, it was to be feared, would follow. Oa the other hand, in the case of Mr. Spring Rice being appointed Leader, although the Right Hon. Gentle man might not have meddled with such dangerous mea sures as those we have referred to, the Whig Radical Opposition must have done so ; in which case, no less, we apprehend, than four of the Ministers must have voted - against their colleagues, and have then unavoid ably broken up the Government in the very heat of the Session. We state these things hypothetically. It might not be decorous to present them in a more positive form, and we shall leave all comment upon them, and upon the sound discretion of his Majesty's choice under such perplexity, to the unbiassed judg ment of our readers." The concluding sentence inti mates, plainly enough, that it is meant that we should take the hypotheses as a recital of actual facts. The following appeared in the Standard of last night : " Since what follows was written, we have received the annexed, in a note, purporting to be from Lord Mel bourne's private secretary, but without aaiy name. We do not think it necessary to alter one word of what we have written :—" 'We have authority to declare, once for all, that any reports which may have gone abroad to the effect that Lord Melbourne either re signed his office, or expressed clue, unwillingness to hold it, or stated that the Cabinet - must break up of itself either before or soon after the opening of Parlia ment, or gave any advice 'with respect to his successor, are false, unfounded t 'and contrary to the fact.' " Before noticing the cc what follows" in the Standard, the contradiction; in humble • • our opinion, had better not hav e been given, at least in the above terms, for it leaves it to be inferred that that which is DA contradicted, and is far more im portant thsus what is contradicted, is true. But we will now proceed with the Standard;— ,, Whoever has been guilty of misrepresentation in this matter, we have not. We have said, and we repeat it, that Lord Melbourne confessed to the King that the late Ministry could not go on upon the same principles upon which it had been conducted ever since Lord Melbourne's acces sion ; and that a dissolution of the Cabinet, before or upon the meeting of Parliament, was inevitable. Now, this is a very different thing from the misrepresenta tion contradicted by the Times. There is often much in a phrase ; and here the distinction between avowal and confession, is very important. The conference be tween the King and Lord Melbourne was of consider able duration ; and if we are to read that Lord Mel bourne avowed the unhappy condition of his Go vernment, we must suppose that such an avowal com airmced the conversation ; of course, that his Lord ship went down to Brighton prepared to sacrifice his colleagues, than which nothing can be mare impro bable from his honourable character ; but if we read confession, we naturally infer that the disclosure was made reluctantly, and at the close of a long, patient, and a candid investigation of the univ ersally-admitted difficulties by both parties. This, in . deed, is confessed in the succeeding part of the art : Ade of the Times, which very successfully demonstrates that Lord Mel bourne could not, without falsehood, withhold the con fession which we alleged him, and again allege hi m , t o have made. The addition that any one has misrepre sented Lord Melbourne, as, advising to send for the Duke of Wellington, is 84 - naked lie of the Globe. We never hinted anything of - the kind, nor, as far as we have been able to observe, did any of our contempora ries. Here, then, is the state of the question. "We have asserted, and, Lord Melbourne will not deny the truth of the ass'artion, that the late Prime Minister con fessed to the King that a dissolution of the Cabinet before or uraon the meeting of Parliament was inevita ble. The. Yimes has successfully contradicted the ad scititious falsehoods with which the Globe and its ac complices would encumber and perplex this plain state ment ; but that statement it has not contradicted. By its silence it has confirmed it, if Lord Melbourne is the 'prompter of the Times ; and, at all events, our Coaitemporary has demonstrated the truth of the as ee*rtion, by external and collateral proofs. What a sman of truth and honour must have confessed, in lord Melbourne's position, the Times has shown, and there is every reason to believe Lord Melbourne to be a man of truth and honour. Our readers would, per haps, excuse our saying so much in vindication of the veracity of the Standard ; but immeasurably higher in terests than ours are concerned that this point be clearly understood. As respects Lord Melbourne, it is, at least, as important to the preservation of his deservedly - high character, that he should be shown incapable of withholding the truth from his Sovereign, when com manded to state it, as it can be to have it believed that he would not volunteer a display of his own and his colleagues' weakness for the purpose of ruining his and heir Government." The statements of the Times and the Standard are substantially the same. Both avoid charging Lord Melbourne with an avowal that he could not go on, but both represent him as having candidly confessed what led his Ma- Yesterday paKed over the new Administration like the day bef.;fte, except as to speculations, some of which y; ere retracted, and new ones substituted in their plP.'oe. We are told by some of our Contemporaries, who profess to know more of State secrets than we do, that the Duke of Wellington will immediately have the assistance of some additional Ministers, who are to be sworn in to-day. Though we are not so much alarmed as some of our Contemporaries at the disco very that physical causes must continue to operate as heretofore, and that space and time will not relinquish their properties to make politicians happy, we shall be glad to find this prediction of an addition to the Ministry correct. Indeed, unless the Duke of Wel lington surpasses the far-famed bird of his coun tryman Sir Boyle Roche, he will require some as sistance to relieve him from the fatigues of übiquity. Still, however, we do not believe all that we read, nor half that we hear, as to his intentions ; and for this plain reason, if we had no other, that he has always contrived to keep his own counsel very well until the moment when he chose to put it into execution. The Duke is, we believe, by nature, any thing but a communicative personage, and, with the example of some gossipping Cabinets before his eyes, it is not likely that he will abandon his own course for one which has led others into so many pre dicaments. But, to turn from his Grace and the new, or the expected Ministry, to the Ministry which has just ceased to exist, we copy the following paragraph, which appeared in all the evening papers of yesterday : —" We have authority to declare, once for all, that any reports which may have gone abroad to the effect that Lord Melbourne either' resigned his office, or expressed any unwillingness to continue to hold it, or stated that the Cabinet must break up of itself, either before or soon after the opening of Parliament, or gave any advice with respect to his successor, are false, unfounded, or contrary to the fact." It would seem, then, that it was a complete turn out. But whatever it may have been, the people, we be lieve, are disposed to make the best of it, by waiting until the offices shall be filled, and some manifestation afforded of the policy chalked out by the new Cabi net. Some additional resignations, as was to be ex pected, have taken place. Amongst them is that of Lord Wellesley, who is said to have arrived al ready in London. Lord Rosslyn, as we stated be fore, is understood to be his Lordship's intended suc cessor. The Earl of Errol, Viscount Falkland, and Lord Elphinston have resigned their situa tions in the Household, and the Duke of Devon shire has tendered his key of office as Lord Cham berlain, but retains it, at his Majesty's desire, until his successor is appointed. There are rumours which we do not think it worth while to repeat, as it would, in all likelihood, impose upon us the necessity of contradicting them hereafter, as to certain appoint ments disposed of by quidnuncs, who may be right, but who are more likely to be wrong. The Lord Chan cellor resigns his office this day, and it would appear as if it was to be held in Commission, judging from his Lordship's statement in Court that his successor was to continue Chief Baron. The arrangement sup posed to have been made in favour of Lord Eldon has failed, and as for any other particulars connected with ins or outs, we believe that the list furnished by that veracious authority the Court Newsman contains all that can be relied on as indisputable.—Morn. Herald. Lord Wellesley will, of course, rejoice to quit the Lord Lieutenancy of Leland. Indeed we should not be surprized if at the moment we are writing these words the Noble Marquis had virtually ceased to hold the Viceroyalty. At the present juncture we abstain from any very elaborate observations upon the wretched state of that most cruelly and foolishly governed coun try. That weakest of all conceited men, Mr. Little ton, has been playing a most destructive game, and it was not until last Monday that a part of the county of Tipperary was brought under the operation of the Co ercion Bill, although it had been evident for a consi derable time that it was absolutely necessary it should be put under legal restraint ; nevertheless till Mondry TILE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 2L 1834, the Government had shuffled off the question. As for Mr. Littleton's personal feelin— happy release" from " at his rule, contempt, and ridi no man who Ms titarly kir and 'twenty thousand pounds a )ear would, unless he were a vain and presumptuous blockhead, endure), they must be in the highest degree agreeable. To be sure, if he could have fallen back upon the Chair of the House of Commons, notwithstanding- that the late fire has considerably damaged the plans of the Speaker's house, whic'h the Right Hon. Gentleman had so care fully marked and arranged for his own use and pur poses, it might have been better. As it is, he will ascend into private life, and, as-usual, enjoy his otium sine dignitare. Mr. O'Connell, who was at Cork on Monday, copies Mr. Hunt in political opinion, and we know that just after the arrival of the intelligence of the break-up, or rather break-dozen, of the Ministry at that place, he openly in a coffee-room there abused in the grossest terms the late Ministry ; but, as everybody also does, most especially, pointedly, and , particularly Lord Brougham, and expressed the greatest possible satisfaction that he should have an opportunity at a public dinner that evening of vitu perating, not only the retiring party, but their succes sois, whoever they may be. The last letter of this rabid animal is even more seditious than any of the preceding ones. We are told that whenever Mr. Lit.. tleton finally leaves his office, the departure will be cha racterised by a disclosure of ignorance, inability, idle ness, folly, and political timidity, which will burst upon his successor much in the same way as the dirt and nastiness of a low and filthy tenant. of some corn• mon lodging-house is betrayed to the next comer by the rags and tatters left about in the corners and cup boards. Indeed we rather suspect that in all the pub lic departments the snails will be found to have left a line of slime and slaver behind them which, when ex hibited to the public eye, is likely to afford plenty of amusement and even instruction.--Morning Post. The Standard of last night attributed the article which appeared yesterday morning in the Times to the suggestion of Lord Melbourne, because it contained a vindication of his Lordship from some unworthy ca lumnies, touching his recent statements to the Sove reign on the subject of his own Cabinet, as we must not have felt an unbidden eagerness to rescue from de traction the good name of a Minister whose estimable qualities had secured to him the respect of the public, and, so far as our sense of justice would permit, the occasional support of this journal. We shall do no more than add, that it was not the misrepresenta tions of the Standard at which our article pointed. But it seems odd enough, that while one of our con temporaries charges us with writing yesterday what had been dictated by the ex-Minister, another--a sa tellite which has recently taken to attend upon our motions with subservient, though rather suspicious, vi gilance—brings forward the somewhat inconsistent ac cusation, that in our article of the day before we had been " instructed" by the Duke of Wellington to hint the possibility of a liberal policy on the part of his Grace. Now really, it does seem, to say the least of it, rather preposterous, that at this time of day, and after an experience in public discussion which has already borne the brunt of two generations of disputants and rivals, we should not be allowed the common capacity of speaking a word but at other men's dictation. We defended Lord Melbourne because it was our duty. Again, because it was our duty, as guides or correctors of public opinion, to set the prospects of the country in a just and holiest light before our readers, we anticipated not so much the " possibility" of liberal measures by the Duke of Wellington, as their absolute necessity, if, as might b., taken for granted, it was his Grace s inclination to remain four months in office. What are all the boastings—all of what, within these two or three days, we are justified in calling the exag gerations of public distrust and apprehension—good for, if not to prove the impossibility of any man being deci dedly Minister of thi s ki ng d om w h o w ill no t marc h on o.nd vigorously in the cause of practical reform ? Cdr the Duke of Wellington's intentions we know as little as those reptiles which crawl about our path, and spit at us their second-hand venom. The intentions of the Duke of Wellington we infer from his acts, or, more strictly, from the single act of his undertaking office ; whence we conclude, that he wishes to remain in it, and that, with his clear understanding, he will therefore pursue that course, his deviation from which must soon be followed by his or any man's expulsion from power. His Grace is too sagacious not to see that an anti-reform Cabinet cannot long exist. But it is foolishness to debate with those who are primed with virulence and slander, only to serve the malig nant passions of selfish, mortified, desperate, and un principled men—of men, who when spurned by their Sovereign from the bench of justice, pre pare to mount the rostrum of sedition, and beat up throughout Great Britain for partisans against the State, among the lowest of the reckless rabble. If the Duke of Wellington were to advise his political enemies, he could offer them no counsel more eventually favourable to himself or more insidiously destructive of that sound spirit of reform which alone Can ever triumph in this country, because with none other can men of property, intelligence, and character concur, than to set on foot the spurious and sordid agi tation which h as b een a tt empte d t h roug h ou t the me tropolis since S a t ur d a y l as t, an d h as i n ever y instance, without exception, experienced a miserable failure, be cause none but the slop-traders in unmeaning turbu lence have any concern with it. There can, we re peat, be no recipe more infallible for degrading the memory of Lord Grey's and Lord Melbourne's admi nistrations, and for injuring so far as it is susceptible of injury, the great cause of reform, with which their names must ever be associated, than by con necting them with a miserable and artificial clamour, stipulated for no definite or rational end, and only spreading invitations to mischief among the classes most prone to excitement. Whether the Duke of Wellington or Sir R. Peel, or whoever may be des tined to the more prominent part, will succeed or not in carrying on the Government, it is wholly impossible for us to say—it must depend exclusively on their measures. Whether they will meet this Parliament or dissolve it, none of the wiseacres who dogmatize about them can tell. If they can by any (however informal) means make known to the country a clear determination to act in the spirit of that reform in Church and State to which Lord Melbourne had fairly pledged himself, we know not why the Duke and the Right Honour able Baronet should fail to meet the existing House of Commons from any fear of a capricious reception. The constituency of England is now too extensive and too national to accept or reject any man from merely personal motives ; and the House of Commons which represents it must, in that as well as other respects, sympathize fairly with its feelings. Most of the better order of Whig or Liberal statesmen, whose names have ever been much before the public, having, as materials for an Administration, been pretty well exhausted by the Grey and Melbourne Cabinets, are, we fear, disposed of for the present. The immediate alternative, there fore, seems to be between the Duke of Wellington and Messrs. Hume and O'Connell. But a little time will decide for us on which of them our hopes are to rest, or whether a fresh combination may, in case of need, be produced from any available portions of the two preceding Governments. It might induce some of the more impatient inquirers into the future policy of the Duke to be less urgent, if they would consider that a Minister in this country, has not, out of Par liament, any recognized constitutional mode of de claring his intentions except by acts ; and, in the pre sent imperfect state of the Government, the Duke of Wellington can hardly feel himself justified in exe cuting any act which is not absolutely essential to the ordinary course of public business. The only thing which he can with propriety do, we may fairly assume that he has done. Without any knowledge of the fact, we may, without much difficulty, venture to pronounce that every Ambassador has been authorized to inform his Court that our relations with foreign States remain unaltered. The Duke's policy has al ways been pacific, and would, we haw." no doubt, con tinue so, even without the iron band of tree ties ; and none but an idiot can suppose that he is a inch to violate those existing international engagements which have been ratified by his Sovereign and by Parlia• went. There have been diplomatists who have con sidered treaties as mere sheets of scribbled paper. The Duke has always shown that he considers them as sacred 6 .etrantees, which can be dissolved only with the full and mutual consent of the contracting parties. The accident d Sit it F'eel ' s dbgeliee haVitig deta sioned the Duke of Wellington to retain for a short time the seals of several offices in his own hands, has raised a silly commotion •in the two papers whose masters have each a personal cause of exasperation. The truth is, that in ordinary cases, when one Minis ter goes out of town, his scads are invariably handed over pro lempore to some one of his colleagues. Mr. Spring Rice, for instance, has been for some months almost the only representative of the Government in Lon don ROLLS' COURT, Nov. 20. COLLINGE V. BEAUMONT, Mr. Brettitsimit had in this case to shot cause why an injunction, granted to restrain the defendant from pro ceeding with an action at law, should not be dissolved. The defendant, Mr. Beaumont, obtained a patent, dated the 20th of July, 1820, for certain improvements in the machinery of power-looms, and by ah agreement dated the Ist of June, 1824, he agreed with the plaintiffs, Messrs. Collinge and Lancashire, to grant to them the benefit of his invention upon certain terms. The agreement recited that the defendant, Mr. Beaumont, had made certain lin. provements in the machinery of power-looms ; that he had obtained a patent for his invention, and that he had agreed to allow the plaintiffs the benefit of his invention, in consi deration of two guineas premium, independent of the price of each loom, and of a rent of 20g. per annum for each loom weaving cloth over 13 feet, and 10s. for each loom weaving cloth under 13 feet, during the time the looms were contracted to be used. This agreement was carried into effect ; looms were purchased at the premium above mentioned, and the plaintiffs amounted according to the terms of the agreement from June, 1824, to Christmas, 1825. From 1825 the account was taken on an entirely different footing, and the validity of the patent was doubted, it being alleged that the improvements in question were not the invention of the defendant ; but had been discovered by other persons at a date long anterior to the date of the patent. Besides, it was alleged that at the time mentioned the defendant was perfectly aware that his patent could not be supported, and that he had consequently abandoned his claim for premium and rent under the agreement. From Christmas, 1825, ' down to the beginning of 1834, for the space of eight years, no rent or premium in respect to the patent rights was ever paid, or in any way recognised by the plaintiffs. In 1834, the defendant brought an action for the purpose of re covering the rents and premiums due under the agreement. A plea was put into that action. That plea had been de murred to, and the question on the demurrer would be whether the implied abandonment by the defendant of his rights under the agreement amounted to an estoppel. The demurrer would come on for hearing about February next, but in the meantime the defendant might, if he wished, try the validity of his patent in a scire facia:. The chief ground advanced in support of the present application was that there had been on the part of the defendant an aban donment of his rights under the agreement of June 1834, and in support of that allegation the accounts taken subse quent to Christmas, 1825, were adduced. Mr. PEMBERTON, on behalf of the defendant, submitted that the information ought to be dissolved, with costs. His Honour, the MASTER of the ROLLS said, upon the question of contract nothing had been shown to induce a Court of Equity to interfere, and, consequently, the in , junction must be discharged, and the order made absolute. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Nov. 20. 'HE KING V. Sir J. SCARLETT appeared on behalf Lord Middleton to move for a rule to show cause why a criminal information should not be filed against a gentleman who had formerly held a high rank in the army. He should not mention the name of the individual, as it might perhaps produce irrita tions without doing the parties any benefit. Some time since the individual in question held a commission in the army ; he had been long acquainted with Lord Middleton ; and the fact of his not being now in the army arose from the circumstance of his having very weak health, which had induced his friends to recommend him to sell his com mission, and retire from the army. Lord Middleton was one of those who persuaded him to do so ; and, to induce him to do had offered him, free of rent, the occupation of a cottage that belonged to his Lordship in Nottinghamshire. The gentleman accordingly sold out, and took possession of the cottage. He thereby became a near neighbour of Lord Middleton, and was a constant visitor at his Lordship's house. Things went on in this manner till a family dis agreement arose, when Lord Middleton requested him to leave the cottage, and desired that he would not again visit at his Lordship's house. His Lordship, however, in order that he might not be injured by giving up the cottage, proposed to indemnify him for the loss of living rent-free by giving him a sum of 5001., with which to furnish another house,• and by paying him a sum of 100 guineas per annum. His Lordship had borrowed the sum which this individual had received on the sale of his com mission, and that sum too was repaid him, together with Si. per cent. interest for the same. The terms proposed by his Lordship vs ere, after some dispute, agreed upon between the parties. Not long, however, after the arrangement had been made, this individual began writing a series of pro voking letters to his Lordship, accusing him of being base and dishonest, and of having made false accusations against him, and of having made representations that were bare faced lies. When letters of this sort were written, his Lordship had no alternative but to take this proceeding.— Rule granted. BAIL COURT, Nov. 20. Mr. FOLLETT moved for a mandamus to be directed to the proprietors of the Glamorganshire Canal Company, commanding them to equalize the rates of the various com modities carried on that canal. Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE directed the Learned Counsel to take a rule. _ Mr. RICHARDS obtained a rule to show cause why an action to try the validity of a church rate in Bristol should not proceed to trial. The question in this case was whether double pleadings were allowable in prohibition ? The case was one which, of necessity, must have several pleas, and the Statute provided for that case by allowing a defendant several pleas. He referred to the State, of course, to illus trate his position—Rule granted. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 20. MOORE V. BOLTON. This was an action on an attorney's bill. The defendant pleaded that the charges mentioned in the declarrtion were " charges at law or in equity," and that the plaintiff had not delivered his bill one month before action brought, as re quired by the statute. To this the plaintiff replied that the charges contained in the declaration were not " charges at law and in equity." The defendant demurred to this replication. Mr. WHITMORE supported the demurrer. Mr. BECKETT supported the replication. Judgment for the defendant. COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—Nov 18. (Before Mr. Commissioner MERIVALL) JAMES LE COUTEAR'S BANICRUPTCY.—PRIVILEGES CLAIMED BY RESIDENTS OF GUERNSEY. A meeting of the creditors of Mr. J. Le Coatear, trader of Guernsey, was held to-day for the purpose of an audit of accounts. The proceedings under this bankruptcy have at tracted a good deal of attention among the mercantile in terests, in consequence of the privileges claimed by the Guernsey creditors of the bankrupt to distribute the assets of the estate in liquidation of their own claims in preference to those of the London creditors. The question of privilege has been raised by the London creditors, and the opinion of Dr. Lushington has been taken upon the subject, who has given a very strong and decided answer, that under the 64th section of the 6th of George IV., cap. 16, the Court of Bankruptcy has jurisdiction over the property of persons who may become bankrupt, although resident in Guernsey, to liquidate the claims of creditors in England, as well as of creditors residing in Guernsey. The creditors in Guernsey, however, continue to dispute the jurisdiction of the Court of Bankruptcy, and were proceeding to distri bute the assets of the Bankrupt's, estate, which amount to between 7,0001. and 8,0001., when an appeal was promoted to the Privy Council, and by an interlocutory decree the proceeds have been arrested, and will await the decision of the Privy Council on the important point in issue. The bankrupt has expressed a desire to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the Court of Bankruptcy, and to obtain a re versal of the outlawry which has been proclaimed against hi m ; but the main question relative to the privileges of the creditors resident in Guernsey, to apply the funds of the estate in liquidation of their own claims, will still remain open until decided by the appeal promoted by the Privy Council. The assigness appointed at the first meeting of creditors after the fiat was issued against the bankrupt attended to day for the purpose of rendering their accounts of receipts and disbursements, and stated to the Commissioner that no property of any kind had come into their hands, and conse quently they had no accounts to render. The whole of the property to which the London creditors have claims against, the bankrupt's estate had been forwarded to Guernsey before the fiat issued, and forms part of the assets of the bankrupt's estate in Guernsey, which the in terlocutory decree has restrained the representatives of the appropriating to liquidate th e ‘,...za5,,,..... Guernsey creditors f:.° 111 a PP Aliat place. claims of the resident creditors at ' - . The assignees having signed their deposit'Zn; the further f)fticeedings *ere, adjourned, ........_ _ ._. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Nov. 26. Mr. Commissioner BoWEN, whose health seemed to have suffered considerably from his late indisposition, took his seat at eleven o'clock, and proceeded to hear the unopposed cases of Wednesday, and the opposed 'of Monday. The other cases stand for Friday ad Saturday. Judah George Somers, a general dealer, *base case was before the Court on a former occasion, wome up to-day for Judgments He was opposed by Mr. Lewis, a bookseller, and other creditors. . Mr. Commissioner BOWEN sentenced him to six months' imprisonment from the date of his filing his petition. An insolvent named Henry Green was opposed by Mr. Cooke for a creditor named Dun, and was supported by Mr. Woodville. The insolvent, it appeared, had since his incarceration lost a child, and his wife was not expected to live. The Learned Counsel (Mr. Cooke) said he - should not oppose, in consideration of the calamity he had suffered. Hi, client wished a statement in the schedule to be altered. Mr. WOODROFFE consented to the alteration, and hoped the Court would allow the discharge to issue to-day. The Learned COMMISSIONER granted the application. The poor insolvent appeared nearly broken-hearted. He was discharged without delay. L'OLICE INTELLIGENCE. MANSION-HO USE. A case was heard before the LORD MAYOR yesterday, which excited some surprise, and some amusement too. A young man of respectable appearance, named William Jones, and a decent young woman, named Edwina Taylor, were brought before the LORD MAYOR, charged by Mr. George Taylor, the husband of the female prisoner. The complainant stated that he was cellarman to a mer chant, and had married Edwina about a year and a half ago, A settlement had been drawn up before the mar riage, as his wife wag entitled by inheritance from her father to a small farm, which was to descend to her after the death of her mother. That settlement, however, bad not been signed by him, and he now found that his wife had sold the property, with the assistance of the male pri soner for a sum considerably beldw the real value, and he was thus done out of what he had a just claim to. lie believed that Jones had forged his name to the deed by virtue of which the sale had been made. The farm was worth about 201. a year. The LORD MAYOR—You say that the property was settled upon your wife ? Complainant—Yes, but I had not signed the deed, and of course it was of no use. Mr. Hobler, jun. Obi the defendant Jones)—No. You wanted to become master of the property yourself. You were too cunning to sign it. Complainant—l have a right to it, and this here man I think has forged my name to the deed. The' LORD MA.voa—How do you know that this man is not a trustee ? Complainant—lle is no such a thing. I know how it is. Her mother was against the match, for she thought my wife was my betters ; but I knowed that she wasn't, and this man has forged my name. Tire LORD MAYOR—No man could be so great a fool as to buy a property without a title. Mr. Hobler, jun.—Certainly not. The professional man who drew up the deed of settlement is the very person who drew up the deed by which the sale was effected, Mr. White, a respectable solicitor, who resides near Totten ham-court-road, and this man wanted the property for himself. Complainant—Aye, but I am a very injured young man. Mr. Hobler (the chief clerk). But what made you put your wife into prison ? Complainant—Why not? She was implicated. I gave her in charge for that. The LORD MAYOR—And do you mean to live happily with her when you get her home again ? Complainant— Never. I'll never have anything to do with her more. The fact is (here the complainant spoke in a low tone of voice), between you and I, I want to get rid of her. Alderman FAREBROTHER, who sat with the Lord Mayor —Oh very well. Then in order to get rid of her you wish to bang her ?—(Great laughter.) Complainant—l am a very ill-used man. Alderman FAREBROTHER—You mean that you wanted the property and not the wife, and you have missed your mark ? Complainant—lt's quite wrong. Ido not want neither, but I wish to have done with her altogether. The LORD MAYOR—Yeti are a very respectable and affectionate partner for life, certainly--(Laughter)—but you have not come to the right place for relief. Com plainant—Where am I to go ? The LORD MAYOR—Anywhere, so that you quit my presence as soon as possible. Complainant—Here's treatment ! I'll appeal to the public.—(Turning round to the crowd of paupers and friends of the prisoners) A'nt this bad usage ?—(Laughter.) The LORD MAYOR—Let the two prisoners at the bar be discharged. There is not a tittle against them. Complainant—But, my Lord, she has pledged my watch. How am I to get that ere ? The LORD MAYOR—When you married her you en dowed her with all your goods and chattels. Officer, show the gentleman out. Complainant—Well, all as I can say is, that I know I am a very abused body by everybody.—(Laughter.) MARLBOROUGH-STREET. Mr. Hillier, one of the overseers of Bermondsey, yester day applied at this office in order to put the Magistrate in possession of the facts of a very distressing case. The subject of the application was herself present. She stated that she had resided for about six years in the family of Mr. Deputy Saunders, and there coming acquainted with a man named Powel, she was married to him and had two children. About three years after her union with him he died and left her in a state of poverty with the two children. In August,' 1833, she was again married to a man named Joyce ; and she discovered after her marriage he was literally a pauper, having had for a considerable time 4s. a week allowed him by the parish of St. Giles. About two months since her husband was very ill, and her. self and children without a meal's victuals. She then ap plied to the parish authorities of St. Giles's for relief. They sent the doctor to her husband, and all the relief that was administered to the starving family was a half-quartern loaf. A fortnight after this her husband, whose course of life from the time of their marriage had been unworthy and disreputable, was apprehended for stealing a watch, and committed from Marylebone Office. She then removed to Dock-head, Bermondsey, considering that being known there, she might contrive by her industry to gain a sub sistence. During three weeks she took in needlework, and at length, after having disposed of everything she had, she applied to the authorities of that parish, and they informed her that she must apply to St. Giles's. Her children were starving, and with them she walked one Monday night to St. Giles's. A gentleman who had known her prior to her marriage met her on the way, and, observing her crying bitterly, gave her sixpence. When she arrived at St. Giles's she was too late to see any of the officers, and, being weary, she paid the sixpence and obtained a lodging. On her applying the next day, they told her she must go back to Bermondsey, where one of her children was born. The unfortunate woman during the recital frequently shed tears. She added that her father was a very respectable man, and had been dead some months. Mr. CONANT could not decide the question of settlement ; it was for the two parties to fight that out. The poor woman and children could not be suffered to starve. At present he supposed she was with Bermondsey. Mr. Hillier said he had pitied her desolate condition and had admitted her into their workhouse. He could not con ceive what claim she could have upon them. The children were her first husband's. It was true one was born at Ber mondsey, still the first husband had done nothing to gain a settlement there, but that would lay between All Hallows and Clerkenwell, as his settlement was with one or the other. The woman by her second marriage belonged to St. Giles's. and as they could not separate the children from her they ought to have relieved her. They could make an order upon the settlement of the first husband fur the nurture of the children. Mr. CONANT said he could not interfere or give a decided opinion. The poor woman said it was unimportant to her what parish relieved her ; she was healthy, and if any assistance was given her towards the relief of her children, she had but little doubt she could get her living. Mr. HALLS, the County Magistrate, put some money into her hand, and two or three gentlemen who were pre sent expressed their dermination to do something for her. Mr. Hillier directed her to retnrn to the workhouse at Bermondsey. HATTON-GARDEN. Yesterday Benjamin Jones, a boy about 12 years of age, one of the sooty tribe, was summoned to this Office by one of the Master Chimney Sweep's Society, charged with having called out " Sveep" in the public streets, to the great annoyance of the inhabitants, &c. The case seemed to excite considerable interest amongst the knights of the brush and shovel, and the Office was crowded to excess by members of the " purfession," whose black looks indicated that they were highly displeased at the late sweep-ing reform. Mr. LAING asked the defendant to plead to the charge, when the defendant looked with a vacant gaze at his Worship and the clerk, at whose suggestion he pleaded— . Not Guilty." The complainant belonged to the Society of Muter ho Chimney Sweeps. On Tuesday sP ba /If morning .1,, prisoner in the neighbourhood of Brunswick -square' er , a , g nt out " Sweep," and knowing him, he instituted the .nroccedings, according to the Act of Parliament. as ter Ore Mr. BENZI 7. ; was no advocate for the m coming forward to rosecute. He would much ratk e x itt some other person.. He asked the prisoner what he F c i ; say in his defence ? Defendant (twisting his ind with a husky voice)—Vy, I node nuffen o ' th sooet,, Poot and sartinly did cry " Serveep ;" but not to make a ° of t ‘votsumdevet. Vot's us poor flue-fakers t o do, if a s b .:ho o don't cry summit, all for to let the habita nts know -- we are in the streets. 0 Deft! The MAGISTRATE asked who employed him dent—l have no reg'lar master ; but if you let me ti cs here ounce I'll not never cry " Serveep" again. vet e ' Mr. BENETT said it was a very severe la w that Pr e i d them calling out " Sweep ;" but however bad the l aw 0 be they must abide by it. The defendan t seemed t° crisb " Law have mercy on us." The complainant under the circumstances did 00t to press for the penalty in his case. 16• Mr. LAING and Mr. BENETT consulted togetaeo a D e. they advised the defendant to be cautious in future, e!„,slf call out " Sweep," or the penalty and costs would eel' be inflicted ; they would now discharge him. a teti Another man, named Bennett, wag Pow pr °3e ,",, fot s the " soot" of the Master Chimney Sweeps' 6( )ele '„ i ' f similar offence, when a deformed ragamuffin 0 1° ' ° fraternity attended him to the Office. The complainant stated that the defendant entut several boys, whom he sent about to cry " S weep. o .„ icie r Mr. BENETT—What have you to say, yo u are Togibt u and more experienced person than the other, a i r' t (i l „ to be aware of the Act of Parliament ?—Defenn col' cracked voice)—l sartenly have got the Ha rt, bn" read, and ven it was read, I couldn't unerstand it . 1.0 0,`; Mr. BENETT again said that it was a very sing u be severe law ; but as it was now generally known be fine the defendant .ss. and costs, with a cautio n how " hayed in future. On leaving the Court, a bandy chummey, abou t ' ° ,.i c tr high, with his bag, and generally of the most eecenltie, pearance, who had expressed his astonishment eve ° ir in the course of the investigation with staring eYeP'° with a strong shake of the head, " Vell, I ne';„, i i% bless't you know, I never seed sick a thing as t " afore. I vunder vot text ve shall have. Carn't e,c call out Serveep' for vun's livelywood, but vot is arter us, and nails us for five bob, or a month i°l:e'rif, Vy doesn't they look after the bellmen, muffins 89 'eir pets, My yar mickrell,' and New green sprats. ", all! Bill, the postman, you know, is a Giv ertu n 0 and he can ring his bell vithout being con t ra ry to tilee 0/ and has to the ' dusty's' and muffin men, t he y B e llo quoddcd for ringing. Ve'd better take to the ',,f11 selves. I can only say that our business vii be merated if ye don't do summut. I'am blowl i f you He paid thz, penalty and quitted the office. W R SHIP- S TREET. 110 D ee Yesterday Thomas B urridgß, a journeyman C A I" sweep, and Edward Shipley, 'a master, were plce"ni bar, for re-examination before Messrs. BitonGl:tie GROVE, the former charged with decoying fie r about nine years old, named Joseph Hugh Bethnal-green Workhouse, and the latter with ha ii r °. him at his house in the Lower-road, Islington, Ires:ofb; ing him to be so decoyed away, and also with ac" tal l ity towards him. trOnF C he Magistrates thought that it was a ve i l s'" against the prisoners, and said that almost anY was inadequate to the offence, and fully cornmitt"e Cell ° Newgate for trial at the ensuing Sessions of th Criminal Court. ems. SECOND SUN OFFICE, Seven o'doc". re f: THE LONDON GAZETI)) THIS EVENING. j e..o At the Court at St. James's, the 20th day of Notintbers PAESZNT, e° The King's Most Excellent Majesty in Coun c , ar lio l .ir It is day ordered by His Maest in Council, that the.. f r i ; c ry which stands prorogued to Tuesd ay the twenty-fifth day stant November, be . further prorogued to Thursday th e day of December next. g l ' t 11 His Majesty having been pleased to appoint the L 11 ' 0 0111 Edward Earl of Derby to be Lord Lieutenant of tu e .,, t ect t f r Lancaster, his Lordship this day took the oafhs aPP °I „ - il cl s ` 4 Allegianc e an d taken thereuron, instead of the Oaths of macy. WHITEHALL, Nov. 17. as 0 be 71 The King has been leased to direct letters patent t et o under the Great ..Seal, granting the dignity of a ar ° el `i' s l3' l United Kingdom of Oreat Britain and Ireland, unt ß o F Esq. and to the heirs n."ale of his body lawfully be g o tteo• • , n bt WAR-OFFICE, Nov. 21. 3d Regiment of Dragoon Ciziards—A. Campbell, e n4th " Cornet, bypurchase, vice O'Malley, appointed to tb „„. to I?' anent of Foot, Nov. 21. 2d Regiment of Dragoons—Hon. G A. F. J . a'l. , r ter Cornet, by purchase, vice Bogle, who retires, N ov• ;be lot Regiment of Foot—J. E. Langford., gent. • n h master, vice Connell, deceased, Nov. 21. . P t ', • ot' 14th Foot—Lieut. B. V. Layard to be Certain', i n be P ie vice Myddleton, who retires; Ensign R. D. i4krea°4 - ",„ fro° naut, by purchase, vice Layard; Cornet W. ("? 1 , 1 ": e '.2,1. 3d Dragoon Guards, to be Ensign, vice Spread, P o ' . be it s ,l " 21st Feot—Staff-Assistant Surgeon R. Smith, N o v Surgeon, vice H. N. Holsder., placed upon half-Pay , t vw 35th Foot—Capt. G. Young •to be Major, w itbon, vice ,Greville, deceased ; Lieut. H. Grimes t o be S,YS; Young; Ensign J. Dwyer to be Lieutenant, vice Grim" it„fr Piper, gent. to be Ensign , vice Dwyer, Nov. 21. 1 6 e" ' :0 55th Foot—Major P. Craigie to be Lieutena nt- • C v e a e: ‘ , o" t i° out purchase, vice Mill, killed in action. Capt. C. tsiP CaP 1 0 Major, vice Craigie. Lieut. D. L. Fawcett to be c ot , e s!'' War ren. Lieut. J. Hutcheon, from the isth Reg''be P Captain, vice Sheaffe, deceased. ' Ensign E. 11101104,110 Y. .. t vice Fawcett. T. Bell, Gent., to be Ensign , vice - vember, 21. u rcW h e ; 60th Foot--Capt. T. Bunbury to be Major, by - Grove, who retires. Lieut. R. T. Hopkins to he Carbs fir chase, vice Bunbury. Ensign H. R. M. Gulston t to nant, by purchase, vice Hopkins. H. C. Boy s, Geot. sign, by purchase, vice Gulston, Nov. 21. HOSPITAL STAFF. vot.eetoYl rc i" Surgeon J. Pickering, M.D., to be Surgeon to th e t he 29 ; It. Hopkins, M.D., to be Assisstant-Surgeon t°,,,e. vice Smith, appointed to the 21st Regiment of Foot, WHITEHALL, Nov. 21. et) 0 1 : ( 1 , MEMORANDUM. e The appointment (which was notified in last Toe s '' sac* of Arthur Eden, Esq. to be Clerk of the Paten ts, to be DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCII)er ' ALEXANDER DUNCAN SMALL, cattle -o bury, Hertfordshire. - BANKRUPTS' SAMUEL NIX and WILLIAM JUDSON 01 wine-merchants, Cheapside. °l t* SAMUEL CRONSH - EY, grocer, Putney. 0 1 " THOMAS DAVIES and WILLIAM DAME, , Liverpool. spl stt ABRAHAM LAMERT, patent-medicine vender, „Au GEORGE BLAKE SAWYER, builder, Leine° THOMAS WARD, Matter, Live - rpool. ter. hir e. WILLIAM WISE, piaure-merehant, Manches erge o , 4 , AARON SMETHAM, innkeeper, Taunton, Scr_,,,,beslotc` JOHN ROBINSON, wive and spirit dealer, 1%,,, e 5, j, THOMAS HIDSON, facinr, Aloseley Wake tv" ode{ tershire. 13 1. MARTHA ELIZABETH BURNARD, de aler ' r 1 Devonshire. oft co u SAMUEL SOLOMONSON, bill-broker, Vni° °- "'JP' street, London. it' JESSE MILLER, tavern-keeper, R'ed. Lion-pas sa g e ' 5 40 4. square. WILLIAM BROOKS, lamp-manufacture, -74. e vr-stret :i r W ''' Letter-lane. -,-;:" lia ar ber EDWARD ETCHES and HENRY ETCH,-., ,-00 - Hythe, Kent. v ts I,C , e e THOMAS FIELD, flour-factor, Mornington-P • , s tf to . well New-road. THOMAS SPENCER, shoe-manufacturer, C hti. o f Bethnal-green. 5 St6 e 4o ( 10" d 0 • Mr. Arfwedson's " Travels in the Unite ?be I P, North America and Canada," will soon appe ar ' •„ 0 . 0, 11 , visited not only all the civilized parts of the 01 ': the ivr, sketches of the different modes of society existing' the ic o I of each state, but explored the et new sttlements toder:4i neses, nd dwelt among the savagetribes o f the r efi t rs e,s i f e no s portion of the many thousand miles whic h a ? 00 5 0.00 was his keen spirit of enquiry and acute o bserf re pc, j, th to sleep, and his work will, therefore , supp l Y of the existing condition and wonders of the ne vi can elsewhere be obtained. 10 5 • A writer in the Edinburgh Review Cealeti roct re li. number of persons to be carried to a nd from tb the present projected rail-roads as follows :-- , Birmingham 1,302 ,2 . r. 805, 64 ! Bristol Southampton r - ---- Total 307,34 / ct I , ` ° B IR TH S. f til e On the 19th inst., at the Reory, Sh a well, the 101 Y °",g, William Blencowe, of a daughter. ct, t'' ' On the 19th inst., Mrs. Sweatiean, of Berners-str,° oter, On the lith inst., at Clifton, the wife o f Charles ." of a laugh ter. ir Or) MARRIED. , 0 116. On the sth inst., at the British Embassy in Florenc,elatt .0' ness Henry LXIX., Prince de Reuss Koestritz , to 3 , 1 1,,id i 1 i''' ,1 Elizabeth, second daughter of Major-General an u johi , Locke. of t '' ( lo 4 On the 20th inst., at Lewisham, Andrew Harailtoeutogeit Wood, Regent's Park, Esq., to Arabella Theresa, r tcr of John Forster, Esq., of Southend, Ke nt. f a , yOL IT' London : Printed and Published by AIURD O at The Sue Office, No. Ir 2, Straw'.