The Sun. — London, England, 1834-04-05 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. Deeply do we regret the spirit of combina tion which exists at the present day among the working classes, and which has been so exten sively embodied in what are termed " Trades' Unions." All such combinations are productive of mischief to the interests of trade and of society at large, and seldom, indeed, do they work any thing but evil to the combinators themselves. We cannot, however, shut our eyes to the fact, that the present - almost universal spirit of confederacy which exists among work men is but the re-action of labour against the cupidity of capital. The modern race of paliti= cal economists, who regard the great mass of - mankind as mere machines to produce wealth ft r a monopolising few, have set up the great Idol, Mammon, under the more philosophic name of " Capital," as the god of all human adoration. In all their publications, from the ponderous " Cyclopmdia' to the Penny Ma gazine, they boast eternally of what capital can effect by human and material machinery in the accumulation of wealth, without ever thinking it worth their while to show bow the mass of mankind are benefitted by so much wealth being gathered into the coffer.of a few. For our own part, we are so far hardened in our philosophical heresy as to avow the opinion that it is the dis tribution of riches, not their accumulation 'that benefits society and makes a nation rich. „ The despotism of unlimited monarchy is not so bad as the despotism capital ; the former is chiefly felt by high er classes, and the petty tyrants that surrour...d the Throne ; but the latter oppresses tlyz, great mass of society and "grinds the faces f the poor." It is a mean vulgar, sordid, tyranny —that to cheapen its manufactures for the market would reduce men to the state of the cattle of the field, and accept children of tender age in sacrifice, as this Christian country has but too long and two recently witnessed, with the insa tiable voracity of Moloch. Still, trades' unions, though opposing a vicious system of monopoly and accumulation, are themselves bad things ; under the notion of extending protec tion to workmen against the cupidity of the capitalists, they exercise a tyranny of their own. They rely on the intimidation and terror which united numbers moving towards one ob ject in a menacing manner can inspire, rather than on the power of reason, and the efficacy of moral force. They are also bodies so organised as to be easily susceptible of those impulses which may hurry them into actual violence, although no violence may have been originally premeditated. Government, we are told, is re solved to crush these unions, and the sentence passed upon the unionists convicted at Dorches ter of administering unlawful oaths is a demon stration to that effect ; certainly a more sincere one than any of the Palmerston demonstrations against Holland or Russia ; but will it be as effective as it is sincere ? We believe not, and we will give our reasons. In the first place a government that encouraged political unions for their own party purposes, and appealed to the congregated numbers of those menacing unionists as au argument for the intimidation of their political adversaries, unsheathes with a pecu liarly ill grace the sword of severe justice to punish trade unionists. Again, if the govern ment were pure enough to come into Court against them with clean hands, it is not by straining the law to get them within its net, or by punishments of excessive severity, that it can attain its object. As to the strain ing of the law, with all due deference to judicial authorities, and notwithstanding the dictum of Mr. Justice Lawrence, in the case of the King v. Marks and others, we cannot resign the opinion that the Act of the 37th Geo. 111., cap. 123, passed at a time of great political excitement in England, was intended by the Legislature to apply only to oaths ad ministered for seditious purposes ; more espe cially as the preamble of the act expressly de clares the mischief to be remedied was the ad ministration of seditious oaths. It says— " Whereas divers wicked and evil-disposed persons have, of late, attempted to seduce persons serving in his Majesty's forces by sea and land, and others of his Majesty's subjects, from their duty and allegiance to his Majesty, and to incite them to acts of 2nutiny and sedi tion, and have endeavoured to give effect to their wicked and traitorous proceedings by im posing upon the persons whom they have en deavoured to seduce the pretended obligation of oaths unlawfully administed." Here nothing but the administration of oaths to promote sedi tious purposes is contemplated' or glanced, and in the enacting clauses we think it would be difficult to show satisfactorily that the remedy has been extended to a mischief so much more extensive than that mentioned in the preamble as to include the oaths administered by members of Trades' Unions. But supposing the men convicted a t Dor chester w ere clearly guilty of a violation of this law, is the severe punishment inflicted on them either just or politic ? It is not, in our opinion, just, because we think those men erred in ignorance, and a law so little known became a snare to their feet. Now though the maxim is ignorantia legis neminem excusat, yet it is only just and reasonable that ignorance of the law should be taken into the account as an extenuating circumstance. Again, the punish ment is not politic, because it is calculated to excite the public sympathy for the offenders. The offence is obscured by the apparently vin dictive character of the penalty exacted, and all the benefit, all the moral influence of the ex ample is lost. Public opinion has spoken out so strongly on this subject, through the medium of the press, that ministers now seem to shrink from the responsibility of refusing all mitigation of so disproportionately severe a sentence, and they throw the blame on another quarter. The Guardian says," It appears that the poor mis guided men of Dorchester are to be really trans ported. The thing is so odious, so universally de cried throughout the kingdom, that the Ministers have endeavoured to escape from the obloquy by throwing it on their Royal Master. Can any thing b e more cowar dly or more disgraceful ? They, forsooth, wish the sentence commuted ; ' But,' say they, the King will not consent.: It is not the first time that they have acted thus.' We recollect when the execution of a man named Druitt, about two years ago, for a crime no longer punishable with death, excited the asto nishment of all London, the blame was thrown the next day by a ministerial paper upon the King. But the maxim of the Constitution is that the King acts only upon the advice of his responsi ble Ministers. We believe the imputation thrown upon his Majesty to be in both cases utterly groundless. If William the Fourth does not exercise the Royal prerogative of mercy in any case in which it ought to be exercised, it is • not from want of the principle of clemency in nimself, but because he is constrained rather to suppress his own kindly feelings than to act I against th e o pi n i on o f hi s m i n i ster i a l a d v isers...-- Morning Herald. On looking over the last number of the Quarterly Review, we find an article meant to be in support of the Corn Laws, which sets out with a quotation or two from the Times of last November and December, the tendency. of which is to warn those concerned, that if both corn laws and poor laws be not peacefully amended by legislative authority, their alteration will be forced through some more perilous agency from without, in spite of the recognized authorities of the realm, and perhaps to the overthrow of all respect for them and for our most valuable institutions. Proceeding, as we have done, with an examination of the above article, from an unfeigned desire to extract information though out of the most unpromising sources, and even to search for materials whereby to test the soundness of our own long-cherished opinions with regard to the nature and consequences of the cone laws, we are forced in despair to relinquish all such fond speculations. There is no novelty i n t h e arguments of the Tory writer ; there is nothing curious throughout his article, but the absence of all high or comprehensive views, whether of policy or eco mony, in connexion with this important sub ject, unless we make another exception in favour of the ' skill with which the most pressing na tional interests are yoked to the vilest drudgery of party, and the most upright and honoured individuals in the community dragged upon the scene from no apparent motive but that of load ing them with virulent abuse. One of the stock objections to a repeal of the corn law is the " enormous" loss which it would entail upon the English landlords. Now what is this assumed loss, be it ever so enormous, but the precise measure of the tax which they have by means of the existing law extorted from the great body of consumers for the maintenance of their own monopoly? The Quarterly reviewer asserts, that shortly after the peace, on the unrestrained admission of foreign grain, fifty million pounds were struck off from the gross revenue of the agriculturists, occasioning, through the fall of wages and of prices gene rally, a diminution of profit and income to every class of the community. Now is not this a most egregious folly ? If prices fell, did the buyers lose by it ? and buyers, we presume, form no small portion of the community. If wages fell, did employers suffer by it ? and among em ployers we take for granted may directly and indi rectly be enumeratedall classes, not excepting the lowest. The truth is, that if there existed at that day half a dozen statesmen of equal saga city and integrity as Lord Grenville, the corn law could never have been carried. Had one such man of enlightened and penetrating spirit been found in the Cabinet of 1815, he would have persuaded those of his colleagues who were not downright official vultures, to break up the Government rather than deal such a death blow to the commerce of Great Britain. During the war, while the corn trade was free, two powerful causes conspired to make us the ma nufacturers of the whole world. 1. That the war demand for corn all over the continent of Europe brought the cash price of it here and abroad so near an equality, as, combined with superior skill, to enable our manufacturers to produce their goods at lower prices than the continental workmen. 2. That the means of transport by sea were almost exclusively in the hands of England. But when peace came, what followed ? Ist. The war contributions and purchases of agricultural produce on the Continent were put an end to, and by conse quence the advantage derived from that cause by our manufacturers altogether ceased. 2d. The capture of foreign merchantmen upon the ocean by British cruisers terminated also —that is to sav, the other great protection to the foreign consumption of our commodities vanished. What then, we ask, ought to have been the policy of an English statesman ? He ought to have said, " The fall in the price of foreign grain is a godsend to British industry. It is the only source from which we can expect a counterpoise to the cessation of those advan tages which our maritime superiority gave us over foreign merchandise ; it is the means by which we may still be enabled to continue during peace the same amount of manufacturing pros perity which the nature and fortunes of the late general war had created. It is a gift from Heaven, let us enjoy it and be thankful." Such ought to have been the sentiment of an Eng lish Minister—such the spirit of his legislation. But this would not suit the owners of the rotten- boroughs. "We have thriven through out the war," said they, " from the same great cause which aggrandized the manufacturing interest, viz., the rise of war prices on the continent, and we will now take care that on the cessation of that cause the manufacturer alone shall suffer, while we go on to thrive at his expense ; the same prices which rose natu rally during war, we will keep up by unnatural means during peace, and England alone, of all the countries in the world, shall know nothing of the alliance between peace and plenty." But there was one essential element of their own prospe rity which the landlords, in their covetousness, had forgotten. They never calculated how im portant to their prosperity had been the im mense and progressive demand for corn arising from the growth of British manufactures during the war, and the rapid increase of the town population of this kingdom. They never suf fered themselves to dwell upon the facts so powerfully stated by Earl Fitzwilliam, illustra tive of the mode in which commercial capital invites the agricultural producer to market, sti mulates the culture of the soil, and raises the rent of the landlord. We are told for ever that the home consumption of manufactures is the most beneficial to the capitalist of Leeds and Manchester ; but not a word is breathed by the Quarterly reviewer about the transcendant value of the home consumption when applied to the grower of beef and corn in Essex. The whole scheme of the landlords is a rank monopoly, and it is advocated by a string of wretched fal lacies. Of these the favourite seems to be that England is essentially an agricultural country, and that the landed interest ought to be pre ferred before all others. Why, how is England an agricultural country, save in the sense in which all countries are more or less agricul tural ? Holland itself is an agricultural country, in so far as corn is grown there. But can any region be properly called agricultural which produces other things in greater abundance than corn ? England, for example, has for the last thirty years imported corn, as Holland has done, thereby proving that she cannot grow enough for her inhabitants. But England, on the other hand, has not merely supplied her own population with all descrip tions of manufactured goods, but has invariably, during a much longer period than thirty years, exported them for the use of every nation in the world. Let us ask, then, ought a people to de rive their naive from the properties in which they are deficient, or from those in which they abound ? And is not England essentially and peculiarly a " manufacturing" country,- as con tradistinguished f rom one whre tillage was pre dominant ? But the manufacturers have not the iniquity to say, " because England is more commercial than agricultural, therefore consult our interests in preference, and in detriment to those of the owners of land." They ask for nothing but equality ; they are willing, they are eager, to liberate the land from such taxes— (are there any such P)—as press on it more than on other interests ; they are even—until God shall send the landed aristocracy sense enough to see where their own advantage lies— willing to pay a considerable, provided it be a definite, duty on the importation of foreign corn. But the manufacturers are not men to be trampled on and laughed at ; and the advocates of corn laws treat them as if they were deserv ing of both.--Times. It will be seen by a paragraph which we have taken from the Cambridge Chronicle that a very considerable number of the resident members of the Senate of the University have published a declaration expressive of their opinion upon the question of admitting men who refuse to sub scribe to the articles of the church to academic degrees. The opinion put forth in this decla ration, we need scarcely say, is decidedly ad verse to that conveyed by the petition which, with so loud a flourish of trumpets, was pre sented by Earl Grey to the Rouse of Lords, and Mr. Spring Rice to the House of Com mons.- The latter was signed, it will be recol lected, by sixty-one members of the Senate ; the former has already received the signatures of 101. The latter was. carefully got up, and the names appended to it canvassed for most anxiously in Term time, when all the colleges were full ; the former has received its almost double number of prompt and eager sub scriptions during the vacation, when all the colleges are nearly deserted. The letter was stamped with the authority of men who, however eminent for scientific attain ments, and valuable aids and light to the University as a school of science, have no claim to be considered as better judges than other persons of what appertains to its moral and religious discipline -; the former has received the authoritative impress of numerous indivi duals with whom moral and religious discipline generally, and the most efficacious and salutary form of its application to the University of Cambridge, must have been the subject of fre quent and anxious study. But there is, in ad dition to all these, yet another point of contrast between the petition and the declaration, to which we allude, without intending the least disrespect towards the gentlemen whose names appear in the whig petition, and only because it is a point which, considering the general infir mity of mankind, cannot, we fear, be justly admitted, in estimating the value of opinions pro ceeding from considerable bodies of men. The petition expressed an opinion which was known to be agreeable to the actual dispensers of the immense lay and ecclesiastical patronage of the crown. The declaration expresses an opinion diametrically opposed . to the views, wishes, and purposes of those with whom every self-seeker must naturally be anxious to stand well. We think the world will not be much at a loss to decide which of the two documents is the more valuable as an authority. The anxiety manifested by Dissenters from the Church of England to be admitted to the honours of Oxford and Cambridge conveys a tribute of approbation to the course of study and the system of discipline now established in those institutions so ample and unreserved as to justify the charge of inconsistency against those who thus, in the same breath, proclaim the value - of the existing system and labour to abolish it in favour of another. Not being ourselves Dissenters from the Church inca pacitates us, perhaps, from entering into the feelings of the Dissenting body ; or, for what we know, it may arise from some unfortunate peculiarity in the structure of our mind ; but the fact is certain, that, after repeated efforts, we have been wholly unable to realise to our ima gination the idea of a conscientious Dissenter, in combination with that of a father sincerely anxious that his son shall pass several years of that period of life, when the mind is the most i s t u is s t c r e u p o t t i i b o l o n e fro f new m theCollegeimpressions,tutorisn of Oxford ce or Cambridge, faithful and affectionate sons of the church as they generally are, and that he should pass these years of youthful study, tinder this guidance, stimulated by the hope that the wreath of academic triumph may at last be placed upon his head by venerable dignitaries or zealous assistants of the Established Church of England. We believe that as co nscientious Dissenters we s h ou ld f ee l cons id era bl e misgiv ings in launching any son of ours upon a career from which we could not but apprehend danger to the faith th a t, upon the supposition, it must have been our earnest endeavour to instil into his mind. N or can we divest ourse l ves o f the notion that thi s f ee li ng must . be very gener al among cons c i en ti ous Di ssenters. I t w ill be deemed very illib era l, no doubt ; but we may a s well at once confess, that this train of thought has led us to suspect that those who cla mour so loudly for the admissibility of their sons at Oxford, and for privileges at Cam bridge greater than they can at present en,loy , are not sincere and conscientious dissenters from the church. The course they are pursuing is natural enough in men who are indifferent or hostile to religion altogether, or who pursue po litical objects under the mask of conscientious nonconformity ; but in men who have separated themselves from the Church of England, or who refuse t o j o i n h er communion upon princi s pnloets natural.haai nvn the h d gne i esr n seo g ofi to sft, hbe besides, ds wse Oxforde-8i ; t l h ataen r rdds e e l Cg i t g ora i e o itne : bo , erf i i d t_ hgo i hu milityno u r s e which, it is no reproach to them to say, cor responds but little with the b aeneral fr ame of their minds o r th e general character of their deportment. The Times, naturally enough; adopting an idea which the prayer of the dissen ters expressly suggests, asked the other day whe ther the whole kingdom was to be forced into the Church, or banished beyond the precincts of sci ence and of classical learning ? Is it the inten tion of the dissenters to admit that everythin g out of Oxford and C am b r id ge i s b eyond the -pre cincts of science and of classical learning ? Are science and classical learning unknown to the dissenting body at this moment ; and do they despair of acquiring any intimacy with either, unless permitted a passage into its temple through the magnificent vestibule of the Church of England Universities ? If the dissenters are ready to make this humiliating acknowledgment, an acknowledgment unworthy of them, since it would not be true, they manifest a higher opi nion of others and a lower of themselves than, from any part of their past conduct, they could reasonably have been expected to exhibit ; and we say of them, as we should say of any other men, thus suddenly clothing themselves in the new garb of humility, that they afford, not an inducement to accede to their demands, but the strongest ground of apprehension that their motives and purposes are not yet fully explained —that their humility is assumed for other ob jects than merely to obtain admission to the " precincts of science and of classical literature." —Morning Post. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—WARIvrex, APRIL 3. (Before Chief Justice TINDAL.) WARDE V. LLOYD. This was an action brought on a feigned issue to ry the validity of a will. The parties in this case stood in the relation of nephew and uncle, and the object of the present proceedings was to establish the will of Mr. George Lloyd, a brother of the defendant, who had be queathed to him an estate for life, but which the present defendant claimed to take as heir at law. The circumstances were shortly these :—ln 1831 the testator died at the house of the mother of the plaintiff, to which he had been removed from his own for his greater comfort, he being a single man and in years, and it being thought he could have more attention from his sister in her own dwelling than elsewhere. At the time he was first attacked with illness he was not considered in any danger, but being advised to settle his worldly affairs he made his will, wherein he gave to his brother, a man of great wealth, and who had lately been High Sheriff of the county, his real estates for life, with the reversion to his nephew, the present plaintiff. There was also a codicil attached to the will for the granting a legacy, and the receiving of certain moneys to be paid for a certain estate. At the time of the testator's illness, an express was sent off to the defendant, desiring his presence, but he did not arrive time enough to see him alive. He, however, acquiesced in the will, and for some time acted up to it, and even suggested the filing of an amicable bill in Chancery for the purpose of carrying its pro visions more fully into effect ; but lately it would seem that the defendant had different views with re spect to it, and he now disputed its validity, con tending that the testator had made no will at all, or, if he had, that the one produced in court was not the actual document. The defendant did not produce any evidence that could properly call in question the will of his bro ther, which had been drawn up and signed with every formality that the law required; and the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, establishing both codicil and will. NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—Yoax, APRIL (Before Mr. Justice ALDERSON.) This morning before taking any other business his Lordship passed the awful sentence of death upon three prisoners who had been previously con victed—namely, upon Thomas • Morrows, for a rape ; Charles Cock, for highway robbery, con nected with brutal violence to a poor fishman named James Richardson ; and William Hall, for stack burning. No hope of mercy was held out to them, and they were solemnly implored by his Lordship, to use well the time allotted to them in this world and prepare for the worst. John Parker was next put to the bar, charged with the wilful murder of Jane Ayrton, of Wigles worth, in the West Riding. It appeared that the prisoner and the deceased were seen together on the 21st of December last, after which day she was mis sing, and shortly after she was found in a shallow stream of water, with a handkerchief tied tight round her neck, and with marks of violence about her person. The prisoner was suspected, taken up, and committed for trial, but there was not sufficient evidence to bring the charge home to bins, and an acquittal was directed. Joseph Ratcliffe was put to the bar, charged with the manslaughter of a boy named Samuel Tomlin son, at Leeds, in the West Riding. " Some of the boys employed in the factory de posed that on one occasion the deceased was sent up a ladder to a loft to get some heckles down, and that in descending his smock caught some other heckles and drew them from the loft, by falling from which the points were broken against the floor. The pri soner took the ladder and struck the deceased over the back of the neck ;he fell to the ground. One witness said he staggered but did not fall. On ano ther occasion, some short time after the former, it was the duty of the deceased to screw a press toge ther, which he performed as well as his strength would admit, but the boards being loose the% pri soner took an instrument called the lay-brush and beat him violently over the back of the neck. On the last occasion a number of the boys were playing with some mats, before six o'clock in the morning, when the prisoner caught them. He took hold of the deceased, whispered something to him, and let him go. He then beat all the rest with a rope, and having finished with them, called the deceased back, put the rope round his neck, and, lifting him with one arm from the ground, threw the other end of the rope over the steam-pipe which went along the factory, about eight feet from the floor, and drew the boy up so that his feet were completely off the ground, and he was suspended by the neck, in which position the prisoner kept him, he kicking and strug gling all the while, for two or three minutes, till he was black in the face. He was then let down on the ground and beaten as he lay with the rope. After some time he went to his work, but the next day complained that his neck was stiff. He was not able to work after that, and, growing worse, was taken to the Leeds Infirmary in March 1833, where he grew worse. After remaining about eight weeks he was removed to another building attached to the infirmary, where he still continued to get worse, and was reported as incurable. He lingered for between eight and nine months from the time when the injury .was received, and then died. The prisoner put in a written defence, denying the charge, and stating that he was obnoxious to the Trades' Union, who were determined to be his ruin, because he refused to join them, and com mented at considerable length upon the variances in the evidence, and the improbability that the de ceased would not have complained to his mother, which he did not. After hearing the evidence recapitulated, the jury, after retiring for a considerable time,"returned with a verdict of Guilty. He was sentenced to be imprisoned for twelve calendar months. ' river, and it was quite impossible to see or to sus pect that it lay out at such a distance. The LORD MAYOR—I have every reason to bx lieve that the water-bailiff is now employed, together with the harbour -masters, to whom I issued orders to render every assistance in marking out the ob structions in the river, in order that immediate mea sures may be resorted to for inflicting penalties upon offenders. Mr. Cutler said that accidents very frequently occurred arising from precisely similar practices, but as they were seldom attended with loss of life no noise was made about them, and the nuisances con tinued unabated. The measures which his Lord ship had ordered to be adopted had had the effect of making the mastmakers, &c., alter the position of their spars, and place them sideways along the shore, which, if it had been done in the instance of the timber on which the boat swamped, would have pre vented the catastrophe. The LORD MAYOR was aware that some persons would not attempt to remove an obstruction until recommended by some awful visitatioss, and it was quite the custom to ascribe what resulted from their own neglect and carelessness to the conduct of the watermen. In this case it was palpable that the waterman is wholly free from blame. Mr. Pope—lt was stated at the inquest that the corporation of London received fees from the owners of wharfs for permission to lay spars in the river. The LORD MAYOR—I am convinced that such s not the case. I, as conservator of the Thames, have never consented or been applied to upon an occasion of the kind. The thing is illegal. The assertion is filse. Mr. Pope—lt was from .one of the jury. He said the city had a fee of two guineas from each wharf which wished to have the privilege, and it was not denied by any one present. The chairman of the Navigation Committee said there was not the slightest shadow of a foundation for such a report. The ruler of the Watermen's Company had thought it to be his duty to attend at the Mansion House in order to state that he had been upon the Thames forty years, and in the habit of inspecting the situation of the timber laid in the river, and he could not help declaring that the spar in conse quence of which the accident occurred had been most dangerously placed with respect to the small craft in the river. He hoped that the declaration of the juryman as to the fees alluded to was without foundation. The LORD MAYOR—If it should be thought necessary to hold a Court of Conservancy on ac count of the state of the river I shall call one at a day's notice. I have directed the water-bailiff and the harbour -masters to go down the river, and re present to me the nature and extent of the ob structions ; and I shall take care to remove every thing the existence of which may expose human life to danger, or obstruct the navigation of the river. The harbour-masters are bound to render every assistance in their power ; and if I find they are net disposed to act, why it is possible to appoint others who will act with alacrity. The ruler of the Watermen's Company was sure that, with the assistance of the Navigation Com mittee, who were disposed and able to aid his lord ship, there would henceforward be greater security for human life than the public were in the habit of enjoying. He considered it of considerable im portance that a gentleman of the experience and activity of Mr. Drinkald was now a member of that committee. Soon after the above conversation took place the water-bailiff entered the Justice-room. He stated to the Lord Mayor that even on that morning the spars opposite to Mr. West's wharf, where the fatal accident happened, had extended too far into the river for the public safety. They had been on the day the inquest was held turned round and laid alongside the wharf, but afterwards they were moved into the same position in which they were on the day the accident occurred ; not so far distant from the wharf, but still too far. Mr. West, jun., upon being spoken to on the subject, immediately altered their position, after expressing his sorrow at what had taken place, and promised that they should be always kept close to the wharf. The LORD MAYOR then asked the water-bailiff whether he knew anything about fees demanded for obstructing the navigation, to which that officer replied that no such thing had been demanded or received. He thought it necessary to state that Mr. West, jun., assured him that the long spars had been in the river no more than two or three days. Mr. West had also stated a remarkable cir cumstance. The boat, it would be recollected, overturned upon one spar, which extended much farther into the Thames than the numerous others near it. A rule had been dropped in the morning of the night of the accident into the water, and the fatal spar had been pushed out of its place, for the purpose of enabling one of the men to reach at it. The spar had not been replaced. The LORD MAYOR then gave the water-bailiff further instructions. GUILDHALL. A young man named William Stephens, was brought before Sir C. MARSHALL yesterday, in con sequence of havi ng b een found i n possession of a horse and gig, under suspicious circumstances. Sir C. MARSHALL' remanded him, in order to give the officer an opportunity to trace the owner. BOW-STREET. Yesterday Joseph Thomas Morrison was charged with plundering Mr. Walden, a printer, in Drury lane, of household furniture and other articles, to the amount of 261. He had nothing to say, and was fully committed for trial. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MANSION -HOUSE. Yesterday Mr. Hester, Chairman of the Naviga tion Committee ; Mr. Francis Flower, one of the Directors of the Watermen's Company ; Mr. Cut ler, one of the Inspectors of the Company ; and Mr. William Pope, the father of the waterman whose boat was swamped near Limehouse Hole, in consequence of which the four pe rsons were drowned, appeared at the Justice-room, on account o f what was stated at the Mansion -Mouse and at the Coroner's Inquest upon the bodies of the deceased. Mr. Pope produced a plan of the state of the spars, which extended from the wharf full sixteen feet into the bed of th e river. He was anxious to exon erate his son from all blame up on thi s d readful occasion, and stated that if more p ersons h a d b een called upon the inquest to prove, no t t h e condition of the fatal impediment to the navigation at the time the accident occurred, but the general conduct of the owners of property along the shore in accumula ting nuisances of the kind, the public would be sa tisfied that there was at all times danger to be ap prehended close to the shore. The spar upon which the boat in question run was completely shaded by Alderman Atkins's wharf, which lay higher up in the IRELAND. KILDARE A S, MARCH 29. TRIAL OF PATRICK WATERS FOR THE MURDER OF CHRISTOPHER BROUGHILL, ON THE 9TH OF JANUARY, 1833. After the prisoner's agent had challenged all that he was entitled to challenge, a highly respectable jury was sworn. There were twelve persons charged with thi s mur d er, b ut as t h ey wou ld no t join in their challenges, and as the Crown was not prepared to prosecute the whole of them, the prisoner alone was tried ; he was charged as a principal, being, with ' others, aiding and assisting in the murder. Patrick Broughill and Mary Broughill, brother and sister of the deceased, deposed to the same fact, namely, that on the 9th of January twelvemonth the deceased was in his own house, standing by the fire, between eight and nine o'clock at night, when the door was broken in, and eight or nine persons entered, one of whom presented a gun at their bro ther, and shot him without a moment's notice. Did not know any of them. Lewis Fitzpatrick, an approver, examined—Has been in gaol since the 9th of March was twelve months ; was confined for demanding arms ; was a Whitefoot ; was sworn in about a month before Broughill was shot ; was one of the party who went to Broughill's house ; Broughill was an old school fellow of his ; a few nights before he was shot the Whitefeet had a meeting ; eighteen or nineteen persons assembled, and their business was to draw lots to see who should shoot him ; the lot fell on witness, but he refused to shoot him ; their reason for shooting him was because he was a Blackfoot, and had taken some ground which was held by a man of the name of Mealy ; the party dispersed that night without shooting the man, but were all sworn by their Captain to meet again in three nights, and draw lots again ; they did meet, and the lot fell on a man named Grimes ; they accordingly went to Broughill's house, and Grimes shot him ; was standing outside looking at the shot fired ; Waters was one of the party ; he, with others, was posted outside as a sentinel. Cross-examined by Mr. H. G. CURRAN—CouId not tell where the money was got that purchased the handsome suit of clothes he had' on. Gave the man no intimation that he was to be murdered, although lie was his friend and schoolfellow. Wilt. at six robberies of arms in the course of a month}, before he was sent to gaol. Did not rob for ney, he u se d on l y to collect it for the CaP ti Did i not see a m an named Murray, nor a T ' named Keefe, the night that Broughill was sil l and was not in the house of the widow Bryan t By —Why, the t 0C be Court—What r a t night. Knows a Whitefoot named Cleary, w h( also in gaol. Told him last summer that he WO inform. Is separated from him in the gaol. ON was sworn to attend the second night of the meetil but he did not. a good fellor Was Grimes, who shot the man, —Oh, yes, he was. What was the nature -of the oath you took ? We were sworn to take arms, to beat men out land who would take it. To wade knee deep Orangemen's blood. And what was meant by an Orangeman ?"- Protestant. Was the man who was murdered a Protestant —No, only a Blackfoot. What else were you sworn to ?—Net to keel What were the Blackfeet ? —goWodhfaetlliosw. meant by a Whitefoo Paid by the Government ?—Yes , shilling whilst another wanted it, and to ne ver . vulge our secrets. tell, only that they were paid by the Governm eo for going about and finding out things. C o vernment let them go about kicking up disturbanc? of about twenty . ; . What age were you when you were sworn !'" Fifteen, m L Y ord. - 01 Were you sworn to rob 2—No ; but sworn to rob, except for . What did arms. ?-.11 04 he would have shot B ana r n o y .it ou fro m m e that we took Joseph Cleary,l: re roborated • an approver and accomplice, l a d, Fitzpatrick. Ile, too, was a young as ' 1 several robberies of arms ; that if the lot fell on 111 15 afraid of being known, and that except '' -'z' the reason , ~ii patrick would not shoot him was that h e W as ei r '' of being known. Daniel Acheson, the turnkey o f Naos other'' de; posed that when the prisoner, with others, w, brought to the gaol, he heard .• , am ongs , a conversatio . wi . o them. One of them said it was Fitzpatrici, hint was identifying. That although the I°ool on he would not shoot the man. thing Mr. CORBALLY submitted that there Was no., f to go to the jury but the unsupported testimony ° _ h e acknowledged ybuo, in(' i collecting ,itehcet x t inC w p°i that n t u h h t I hoaedttnadhetn:hyooet tth h g v i re e l sc .l , g e t si i s il t. i 1 . 1 t .151 na tw e o nd ap ed pr h o i v rn es to . himselfo the did LnoortdfeLeli Several perso m n e s rc u y 'e . re called for the def ence t° prove an alibi. The j ur y f oun d t h e prisoner Guilty b u t recoil? tioh H t is Lo ansHlP woul d f orw ard their reco mmends' e b u u e n n a d n to , 0 , but i s t o . rry H t e sentenced to b e h ange d on t h e 7th of April. •••hatighase, Between Sund ni a tgt y: dr n o i o h f av th e e be m en ost co d m ari m on Usher's-quay, in the beside_ . Mr. Home's Hotel. The shop of jY/ °lll rni ' r. to b g in h bN t etarh a ite n ii.sos d nwal M o icc n o d m aY m ere' erpetrated Fisher, the office of Mr. J. W. Talbot, an warehouses of Messrs. Thomas Scott and d h t e -.4 oar nett, were entered, and several articles of consicler. able val • amount of upwards of WI., were abstracted. The•, were in all fifteen locks opened, by the aid, as it value, including bank notes and money tire supposed, of skeleton keys, some of the l having been of a very complicated descripticroi. t al i n e o d ng the rest the locks of two iron chests, Wit h rawers within them, were opened wi r u e the exception of two or three, all the locks ` Wo r k closed again. It is suspected tochihtay.vie:vbasweeenP recollect th n. Ong of some English gang, possessed of more expero than our Dublin thieves can boast of. The robber; must have been at least four or five hours engage.b in the work of plunder, as nearly every a rticle v/ 111 e , came within their reach was ransacked, and a a gular selection made between those of value 9 , n ,. such as were not worth the troble of carrying a l°. —Evening Mail. AN AFFAIR OF cc _ morning, Seen after seven o'clock'° a hostile meetiog took place in Co enh P . Copenhagen-fields, between Mr. It--,- gentleman residing aifte Bayswater, and a milita n. officer on half p a y lt is stated that Mr. R— /1,, some young ladies, relations of his, were viewing tR , Zo ological -gardens, Regent's-park, when they we, followed by the officer, and . one of the ladies vi . a 9 „, peatedly spoken to by him. Mr. R— feeling inwt, pant at such conduct, remonstrated with him eti kti " impropriety of it, when words of an unpleasant It_en'tte, measured t a t h the a d n i d s distance n c ß e 0 1 h l 2 g paces), en t le sued, which caused the meeting. Mr. IZ--, by two gentlemen, arrived in a chaise about u part r: ci oli ß i his thigh . N ,sgtiiatel nutes past seven o'clock, and was almost immea to ' ceived the contents of Mr. R 's pistol residences. — Morning handss followed by his antagonist. They proceede viri: s.—Morning Paper. H N-coun.”—_Yestera6; field near the New North-road, and the seconds htiared, bu neffectually, to bring about a reconeilialcer re, exchange of shots then ensued, when the ° thic k fitlyh ridea ce nd were conveyed from th e groin' en th a e ft y er ng t as o v°. th -e: )10' LIBRARIES DERN FICTION. Wh f the u e ' vedly popular • en the publication o els cote menc d e at the then unprecedentedly low price „ i oca per volume, the reading world was at once ast c ' he ap• and delighted. The article was both good an d the ' re" But to no one is the public more indebted for to t he quisite combination of quality and quantity than t itle publisher of a series of works of fiction, under the un d e r of " The Modern Novelists," and of the serie,s, u 4,130 opening works also the denomination of " Irish National Tales. _ io n latter, in fact, forms a proper sequel tO, or contl,LP t l i o of, the former. Here, too, the cheapnesrsvetto; , CHEAP was also slig:voiush,oeork, W averley novels is eclipsed. They are ? g ; Pe ood par er = these are only 4s.—of a handsome s n dgold. I'll ° and print, and neatly lettered in gr N een l a ans" " The The - °w , i ore Crop---, ,, of the Bill-Hook," a who are acquaint& &c . ; and all e fac t with his powerful oductions, are aware or tn 0 _ 0 FY &c., are of Bailin', that Sir Walter Scott himself was not more at 11 0 0 1_ in Scotland than is Banim in Ireland. It is incly„,'__,' ble not to wish success to such a publication as tni' Globe. _..........e -the author of ' (Jobe , BIRTHS. lady of ° ric° On the 4th inst., in Gloucester-pl ace , the - . gs of ° tie"' Pearse, Esq., of a son. On the 4th inst., the wife of John Maplesont -.' o sq f u toh a n r e e tn , h oeefe 3d dßsoinn.r.t,.., at e O ff oh, th e On the 2d inst., at Staveley, near Knareshorou -0 n the - T r iAr Yin r ig : tf'so io ,' tol of e Yt t i F j c M‘Geachy, Etq., only son of the late Major IWG eac ht j er o f t .. 11th Regiment, to Anna Maria Letitia, eldest clang" all, 1N late Charles Clement ' gall' Adderley, Esq., of Han' on of wickshire. heov , ' • Or the O l n ate th H e endriyost, Blyth,at REisccik,moafnsßw.orritihha, Burnham, Norfolk, Ant — 'VII I ', to a i , h i!, , daughter of the late John Branton, Esq of High ain 1 rcl ~ No , t, P l"' l° thamatow, Essex. On the 2d inst , at St. Olave's, Marygr.te, : . d , r os „, Thomas Cardale, Esq., of Gray's Inn, and of pe tilcir o f O t° 3 u Qd n u g e e ien s n t s.t d; r u e ; et h t, t F e ti r noc o h f Eime D yi a lcy v h id Au r ß ucg t h a t s ,i s stw e a ll : ,;: aa, : h ter 0,,00,c0, h t grove, Yorkshire. ,„ gear, Or. ofSa Sarah , :t a b:: Wm. Hooper, of the former place. 'on — o ' l ,„ Li „ h ter On the 4th inst., at St. Pancras New Church , pub -- Horatio Pace, of the Madras Army, to Mary', only the late W. Gearing, Esq., of Kensington. A"3 DIED. , rO. On the 2d inst., at Forest.gate, West HO' aget l ; t card Martha, the wife of William W e ll s Pl ax ton, P 4 ; o antVid On the 21st September, a t C awn p or e, Lieu' on of"' ° /8 1 Chambers, of his Majesty' s 44th R eg i men t, seco° 6 s t he It Chambers, Esq., of Dorset square, Commander in Navy.e.t 63u"liter At Millburn, Renfrew, Isabella Liddell, You ng ed 16. h ay, of James Liddell, Esq., late of St . P e t er sburgh, ag At . Ayle 6 v - On the 26th ult., at Hastings, W. Bull, Bucks. he fia t ' 30 dd On the 3d inst., at Eltha m , S ara h Ursula, t 14 o ioll youngest daughter of Capt a i n J o h n Thacker, a g ed and 3 days. her -° On the 3d inst., at Lave n d er- hill, a t the hous e of widocto., t la h w e ', l J a a t Richa o r r d ri s R , oEtisiqw. ell, Es h , 7 t o ) tfhcyear,apinEiceoaran on , man of the city of London. Andon Printed and Published by AILIRDO YOU at the Sun Office, No. 112, Strand.