The Sun. — London, England, 1842-01-18 00:00:00

EVENING SUN SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. Paws TEM EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY. GLOBE.—" Sister, you can't be pretty —you had better be odd"—said a beauty to her homely relative. The Times would seem to have come to the entice conviction that it can't write like a Christian or a gentleman, and had better be as black guard as possible. Without dealing in mere com pliment, we must really congratulate our Con temporary on the complete success with which he baslately realised his beau ideal of blackguardism. One would have thought the approaching baptism of the Prince of Wales was not an occasion which the soi-disa n t " l ea di ng j ourna l" o f a Christian and civilised country would exactly choose for extra out pourings of u tt er ly un p rovo k e d scurrility on . Christian brethren, an d c i v ili se d ne i g hbours. Dzs alder visum. The river-gods of the neighbouring Fleet ditch cer tainly spare some portion of the " deeper sable" where with they deli g ht t o " blot the silver flood of Thames —as contributions to the late baptismal effusions from Printing House-square. The Times has been run ning amuck at everybody, in Malay or Mohock style —from the humble sect, which could nevertheless boast such a member as Robert Hall, to the proud State whose European rank was fixed by Frederick the Great of Prussia. The Times has made itself rather remarkable lately for its Puseyite tendencies, and its recommendations of" aggressive policy" to the Govern ment on the side of the Church militant. We sup pose those recent articles are a sam pl e o f t h e sort of aggressions which the Times thinks decent in High Church politicians against all other Ch r i s ti ans . Hi s Majesty of Prussia has fallen out of the Times' good graces already, by his i m p er ti nence i n presum i ng to sibscribe for an Anglican Bishop in partibus. Lu theran aid was utterly inconsistent with Puseyite pre latical purity. We should not wonder if Lutheran presence were a desecration of Church rites ! What next ? It is satisfactory to find the constant assailants of the late Government, for their alleged want of sin cerity in the cause of Protestantism " all over the world," throwing off the mask in this extravagant manner, on the eve of the arrival of the great re presentative of Continental Protestantism, to do honour to a solemn and Royal ceremony of the An glican Protestant Church ! It is tolerably evident what sort of Protestantism was that of the partisans who who were hallooed on against Liberal administration by the cry of " Down with O'Connell!" They were Pro testants only after the pattern of the ex-Grand Master of Orangeism—Protestants only while Protestantism found them some party to injure or insult. The Pro testantism of the King of Hanover was the sole form of it congenial to these worthies. The Protestantism of the King of Prussia is Anathema Maranatha—a hissing and a curse. COURlER.—Supposing the claim of the United States in behalf of the legitimacy of such property to be allowed, and that under the peculiar circum stances it is taken out of the special category of British constitutional or common law, which decrees instant liberty, and refuses the recognition of bondage, we may next have to deal with the question in another shape. The Virginian planter may voluntarily bring his household slaves into our land, and claim in like manner to have them identified in the light of property sacred and intangible in this very capital of the empire; so that should the unfortunate beings assert their free dom, and quit their master, the British Government, as on the present occasion, might be held responsible for their evasion and in like manner menacingly appealed to for indemnification of the loss. In the case of a vessel, with other destination, laden with goods pro hibited by law in the country on whose shores driven by stress of weather, we know that the fact of such distress and compulsory deviation from her course would, as it ought, protect both vessel and cargo from the fiscal penalties to which otherwise liable, and to such extent the analogy of circumstances would seem to plead in favour of the claims set up by the United States. But in such a case there is, and there can be, no international misunderstanding as to what should constitute property. A cargo of tobacco er of cotton cloths counts for property anywhere and everywhere by common consent. But no such common consent can be pleaded in regard of human beings. So far as the British isles are concerned, the notion of property as attaching to them has ever been utterly repudiated, just the same when Great Britain had slave-holding and slave-dealing colonies as now, when slavery is not a word to be breathed, or a slave to be found within her dominions. lad the Creole, with her 150 slaves, been driven on the coasts of the British isles, it is quite clear that the question, so far, would not have admitted of a moment's hesitation or debate. The slaves on kissing the soil would have started up free men, as the Titan of old was refreshed by tho touch of mother earth, and no human power would have been suffered to re-impose their fetters and carry them eff to bondage. PROGRESS OF DISTRESS. (From the Tablet.) The winter has now set in in earnest ; and the poor, in addition to short work, or no work at all, and scanty food, or positive starvation, have to encounter the mi sery of intense cold, and a still further diminution of em ployment consequent on the frost and snow, and short days which now encompass them. We have again be fore us, in the same fashion as heretofore, long statis tical details of distress in various portions of the island —chilly from Dundee and the surrounding districts, and from Gloucester and the west of England. Wo might fill our paper with tables, and figures, and lists of suffering and misery, but we think that %hat we have already printed in this way will suffice. If our readers will be at the pains to select any ono of the tables we have before presented to them (the worse the better), and will substitute the name of Dundee, or of Stroud, or of any of their neighbouring towns and villages, the detail will be accurate enough. It is, literally, a case of starvation to hundreds and thousands, not merely in the county of cotton-mills— the Budded growth of a time of factitious prosperity— but in every corner of the land in which anything in the shape of a manufacture has presumed to show its head. Some are cut down because they are too now, some because they are too old ; some because the process they employ is too thrifty of labour, and too prodigal of art ; some because they have not been sufficiently thrifty in en couraging the cost of production • some because they have adhered too blindly to old modes and traditions of manufacturing ; some because they have too greedily adopted the new; but all are cut down, or are being cut down, one after another, by an invisible hand, against which neither enterprise' nor skill, nor capital, nor prudence. uor human foresight, can struggle suc cessfully. The destroying angel smiting the first-born of Egypt gave, perhaps, a sharper and more startling 31v:di, but hardly produced a deeper and more wasting agony than this unseen devastator of cities is planting in every portion of this island. And let not those who are determined to shut up their bowels of compassion hug themselves under the belief that these thing s are the idle stories of bustling demagogues, or the dishonest creations of the press. For our readers, at least, there must be a deep significance in such a man as Lord Stour ton—a man removed from the pettiness of faction, if any such there be—high-minded, cautious, experienced— coming before his fellow countrymen in the beginning of wiuter to tell them, that "this distress pervades wide districts, and prevails in some with an intensity . I have never, to my mind, seen equalled in this. kingdom, covering our roads with artisans in search of employ ment, and exhibiting itself in our towns under appear ances the most calamitous and frightful." These are not the words of a trading agitator, nor of a rash enthu siast, but of a man of sober and practical good sense, who truly discerns the evils of our present state, and grieves over them. Nay, the facts are becoming too black and too certain, as well as too dangerous, to be wholly denied or concealed by those who would run all lengths to deny Or conceal them, if it were possible. Briar whkt tlra Standard now. tells us of the condition of Paisley— • " We regret to learn that the distress at Paisley not only continues, hut is actually upon the increase. We have seen it letter written by a gentleman well ac iluaintcd with that town, from which we quote the fol lowing appalling' extract ;—"The number of claimants upon our funds is on the increase. The people are actually dying of starvation—no beds to lie on, no covering even ; the boards only to rest upon. These are facts.'" We wilt venture to lay before our readers an extract from a private letter bearing on the same subject ; the writer, whom we known intimately, is the wife of a gen tleman of property in Stockport,and the most perfect re fiance may be placed on her statement. We do not e give it as containing .4 More shocking statement than other accounts which have already,been published, but becalm we, as well as. everyone else, attribute a rather higher importance to facts which we can ourselves verify, than,to the more abstract statements which crowd in upon us from other quarters. " I must tell you a little of the Stockport `distress, for it is awful ; no description can equal it. Last Thursday was rent-day there, and T— did not re turn till lat e , w h en h e told me one of the tenants, named a draper, was late in coming to pay his rent Tiro reason was, he was one of the, Relief Cominittee employed to seareh into the distresses of the poor, prior to their being relieved from the fund of 2,000/, which has been collected for them. He has been, out all day, and such were the sights of dis tress he had witnessed, and so unable were they to re lieve them, that it made him ill, and he could not ea t. He even felt inclined to give up business, and leave a neighbourhood where charity could alleviate so small a degree of misery. Such a tale induced my husband to go on the fo l lowing nsornisg and see for himself, taking H— with him. I must tell you what they saw, and don't tire 'of it, for we are sur rounded with it, and it ought to be known. Io one house, three stories high, on the first floor, were six people preparing to dine off one pennyworth of potatoes. In the next story lived another family, sand in , the third (one room) lived'. fourteen persons, nut any appearance of a bed, or anything to lie lop , le another room, which was not seven feet , PAW slept seven people. A widow owned two cot tages ; in one she lived with her son ; be was out of work ; she could not get any rent. Her furniture kept going till nothing was left, and she slop' on pack sheets. She had 31. of pawn-tickets ; and this woman, the owner of two co tta g es, was g rateful for a sixpence. Parents and children huddled round the fire, with not a mouthful of food in the house ; and they were gra dually pining to death. One man was fretti ng sa dl y over a child he had buried the day before. He had bad no, solid food for five days. One youngish woman stretched out her arm, which, from want of clothing, was bare to the shoulder, and showed them how thin it was for want of food. Little children, mind this, were waiting for some oatmeal and water for breakfast, which was nearly ready for them ; they had not tasted food that morning, and it was near twelve. One man had worn two pairs of shoes out in seeking work, and found none. There are about eighteen cotton•mills stand ing in Stockport and the neighbourhood, and these are the workpeople, with the addition of poor cobblers and the like. My husband, you may be sure, did not pass them by without attempting to relieve them ; but these are people who want no charity, if they might only have work." I In all this, awful as it really is, there is nothing pecu liar, nothing which has not been said a hundred and a thousand times. But the truth is, no description can equal the reality of these things. All that can be told of any given moment of time—" we have bad no food to-day," " we have had no solid food for five days," and the like—makes but a small item in the great account which weighs the man down. He has had no solid food for five days—shocking, truly; But how did he live before the beginning of that five days ? The five days of abstinence of which he tells you were but fol lowing up a long series of days of the same kind. He began his forced experiment in fasting with a half-empty stomach, an enfeebled constitution, a wasted frame, and above all, with hopes blighted, and spirits sunk, at the long period during which ill•luck has pressed her heavy hand upon him and his. Of all this wearing and tor turing anguish, which hangs upon and haunts him every moment of his life, he says not a word. He' speaks only of the last five days, and few of his hearers take the trouble to mount back to the fifty which preceded them. Meantime, what is taking place here in London? The Workhouse regulations seem to -be growing de cidedly unpopular, especially among that class who, having no settlement, though they may have resided in [ London for a quarter or half a century (perhaps been born there), have nonlegal title to relief, and are offered the delightful alternative of famine or a pass to their own parish, which knows them not, and which they know not. Accordingly, bands of these men are be ginning to parade about the street, and to knock tumul tuously at Workhouse doors. Some of them, in de spair of finding any yielding metal in the breast of a relieving officer, march off in array to a baker's shop, and send in a deputation to take loaves by the strong hand, and thereby secure at least a breaking of bread among the famished multitude. Arrest follows as matter of course, and is not resisted ; for even in prison a man who makes a profession of fasting is provided with gruel and water, which are not always to be had out of doors. _ . _ And while the poor are in this state, what are the rich doing ? Above all, how is that aristocracy demean ing itself which steadfastly denies them food, and all for the good of these starving wretches cripples trade, makes corn dear, and employment scanty, with the avowed objeet of keeping rents above their natural pitch ? What is Lord Stanley about—that profound statesman who sees the welfare of the country brought about by an artificial encouragement given to grooms and fancy gardeners, as a panacea for the general dis tress ? A recent number of the Liverpool Journal will tell us. This Noble Lord and his associates having, we suppose, as many grooms and gardeners as they can well employ, are directing their philanthropic energies to a cognate manufacture—that of gamekeepers and poachers. Then follow certain details of the distress now preva lent in Prescot and St. Helen's. " It must be evident to every one that a community so situated must, at any time, but particularly with food at the present high price, be suffering the most horrible distress, nor could the frequency of crimes against property excite any great surprise. But to po verty, •as a source of demoralization, we must add the game-laws, which tend directly to give crime its most dangerous and sanguinary character. For miles round these towns, once hives of industry, now dens of despair, the land is one great preserve. Demesne succeeds demesne, flanked by covers, and guarded by keepers, lodges, and armed watchers. There is scarce a thicket without a bare, or a coppice without a phea sant, and in the middle of them all men are starving by thousands. A perfect mania for preserves has possessed the gentry, to the exclusion of anything like fair old fashioned sporting. Lord Stanley, we have been told, by laying the Knowsley and Latham estates together, and influencing some smaller proprietors, can now tra vel 15 miles in a straight line, over a country on which not a gun can be lawfully fired without his permission. The consequence is, that the peasantry over the coun try are pretty generally becoming Poachers." " Alas, where now are the Hengista and Merles of our still glowing, still expanding Europe ; who, when their home is growing too narrow, will enlist, and, like fire-pillars, guide onward those superfluous masses of indomitable living valour ; equipped, not now with the ba►tle-axe and war-chariot, but with the steam-engine and ploughshare ? Where are they ? Preserving their Game !"—(Carlyle's " Chartism.") In a little time, is a few weeks, these frightful symp toms must be encountered by some better remedy than that of pheasant-breeding, by some better answer than doubts as to whether John Nokea really died of star- %ration, and references to the increase of Savings' Banks, which increase may just as well be owing to the increasing poverty of those private depositaries of the poor man's savings, who enjoyed and merited his confidence before the Government took this trust upou itself. It will not do, then, to deny the want of food, or to boast of the facility with which men from the dregs of society can vault to the loftiest pinnacles of honour. Yet a few weeks, and neither quackery, nor trickery, nor sophistry, nor rhetoric, nor candour, nor impudence, nor tactics, nor delay, will serve the turn. These things have had their day. The party game has been played out. The national game remains to play ; and a stern and fearful game it is. It it is a hard thing to reason with the master of ten legions, it is sometimes not less difficult to reason with millions not a unit of whom is , master of anything but an empty belly. With haggard countenances, rough aspect, and peremp tory voice, these men—for they are men after all—will, in effect, if not in form, thrust themselves into the sanc tuary of the constitution, stand face to face with the Prime Minister, and ask him what remedy his wallet contains as the fruit of the " comprehensive view" of affairs which he has been taking for the last three or four months. Woe to him if he has then nothing to offer them but a bottle of patent quack medicine. LAW INTELLIGENCE. VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURT, Jun. 17. (Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR Of ENGLAND.) TFIF. CORPORATION OF Fl/I,RTISIJITTH V. HOLESWORTH. His HONOUR, in giving his judgment, said that the ease for the plaintiffs went on the assertion that six of the aldermen, at the meeting at which the bond was 'granted, had misled by false representations theremaining two, thereby inducing them to sign the - deed. There was, however, no evidence whatever to prove that each of the six Aldermen had made these misrepresentations • and it would not be enough to show that they had been made by one or two of the parties, because those who brought forward a charge of fraud, should be held to the strictest proof of such charge. The allegations of the plaintiff were not sustained, and he should therefore dismiss the bill with costs. (Before Vice-Chancellor BnucE.) FANNING V. DEVEREUX._ In this cause, Which came before the Court on bill and answer, the plaintiff, Richard Fanning, claimed as the personal representative of the testator's next of kin. The testator, James Fanning, was possessed of an estate in France called La Roche Talbot, and of considerable sums of money in the French Funds, and other property in France, all of which was confis cated at the time of the French Revolutien, in consequence of his being a British subject. In January, lev), he made his will, and thereby, after giving a certain annuity, he be queathed to his kinsman, J. E. Devereux, of 'Carigrnendu, in the county of Wexford, and to the Reverend Daniel :11‘Cartity, whom he also appointed as his executors, all his wordly substance, and directed that it, at the decease of the annuitant, should go as the rest of his fortune to those execu tors. Another executor named Edward Christian, was also nominated executor by the testator. In a subsequent will, dated ItiO4, the testator, after expressing a confident hope that he would be indemnified for the confiscated French estate, and for the seizure, during the Revolution, of hit plate, linen, household furniture, and other personal property, bequeathed his iroperty in the following manner:—One-third part for cha ritable purposes, for the relief of the poor of Waterford and other: places in Ireland ; one-third part to his relation, J. E. Devereux; and the • remaining third to his cousin, Jannuius Fanning, of the city of Naples. The whole of the property thus devised was to be subject to an annuity of 601., to - be paid to the testator's niece, Catharine Al*Namara. In a paper left - with Devereux the ' testator confirmed this will in everything except the nomination of the Reverend D. M.Macarthy as one of the- executors: That nomination he revoked, and named the Reverend Dr. Walsh, of the Irish College of Paris, and Mr. Devereux, as his executors. Januarius Fanning died during the lifetime of the testator, and 'the third portion of the property be queathed to him became lapsed, and vested in the testator's next of kin, Catharine M'Namara. She died intes tate in lill7, and the plaintiff had taken out letters of adminis tration of her estate and effects, and now, as her personal repre sentative, brought forward his claim to the lapsed third por tion of the property bequeathed to James Fanning. The cause had on a former occasion come before the then Lord Chancellor, on a petition, which had been dismissed with costs by his Lordship. . His HONOUR thought. that he was bound by the weight of the late t.ord Chancellor's authority, who intimated an opinion adverse to the cause, to dismiss the bill, but not with costs, and thus the question would be left open to appeal. (Before Vice-Chancellor WlcaAlt.) JONES U. HUGHES. The arguments in this cause were brought to a hear ing. his Ho'.4;oVß commented upon several of the points which had been raised at the bar, but deferted his judg ment till Wednesday. THE EAST INDIA COMPANY v. THE COOPERS' COMPANY. Mr. BuRGE opened this ease at great length for the plaintiff;. The prayer of the bill was that the Coopers', Company might be decreed to grant to the plaintiff* it I formal li c e nse i n wr i t i ng i n pursuance of the agreement entered into between them and David Trinder in the bill mentioned, and that it might be declared that the plain tiffs were entitled to demise, assign, or underiet, the pre inises in dispute. The Learned Counsel said that, by the Act of the 4th Wil. IV. e. 85, the East India Company were directed to close their commercial busi ness, and for that purpose to sell all their warehouses, tenements, hereditaments, and other property, which were not necessary for the government of the territories in the East Indies. Part of this prop ty consisted of certain premises at R a t c liff e , upon which were erected the Saltpetre Works of the East India Company. They held these premises for the residue of a term of 260 years, which had been granted to them by the Coopers' Company, by an indenture of lease of the 30th of Octo ber, 1770. In and previous to the year 1770 a . person of the name of David Trender had been in possession of the premises, as the assignee of two indentures of lease, bearing date the sth of February, 1760, and granted by the Coopers' Company to a person of the name of Hatt. In the year 1770 an agreement was entered into be tween the East India Company and Mr. Trinder, by which, in consideration of the sum of 3,9201, Mr. Trinder agreed to surrender the residue of the term to the East India Company, and to procure a grant by the Coopers' Company to the East India Company of this term of 260 years, at an entire rent of 1551. ; and the East India Company, in consideration of this, were to grant to Mr. Trinder the lease of a parcel of land adjoining the wharf, being part of the premises to be included in the lease from the Coopers' Company to the East India Company. 200 years were to be added to the term of the lease, and Mr. Trinder agreed that he would deliver up to the Coopers' Company the two indentures of lease, and the Company agreed to grant him a portion of the land comprised_ in that extended lease, at a yearly rent of 165 L, piyable quarterly. The bill stated that Mr. Trin der entered into the agreement with the East India Com pany with the privity and consent of the Coopers' Corn , pany. The whole of the negotiation on the part of the Coopers' Company and the East India Company was carried on by Mr. Trinder, and the Coopers' Company must be taken to have been fully acquainted with his au thority to act on the part of the East India Company. On the 30th of Oct., 1770, the Coopers' Company exe cuted this indenture of lease to the East India Company for the term of 260 years ; and that lease contained a covenant that the East India Company should not part with the said demised premises without the license and consent of the said Coopers' Company first had and con tained in writing for that purpose. The plaintiffs en tered into possession of all the premises except that portion which was demised to Mr. Trinder. The East India Company had regularly paid to the Coopers' Com pany the reserved rent hr the whole of these premises. In the beginning of the year 1836, the East India Com pany proceeded, in obedience to the directions of the Act of Parliament, to sell this portion of their property. The British Gas Company first proposed to become the purchasers ; but, discovering in the lease this covenant against leasing or assigning without the license of the Coopers' Company, and not being aware of what had passed between Mr. Trinder and the Coopers' Company, making the latter parties to the agreement, they offered 500 L for a license ; and that offer being rejected, there was au end of the negotiation. The Coopers' Company, being aware of the situation in which the East India Company was placed by the Act of Parliament, and having it, as they supposed, in their power to prevent that sale, by not granting a license, they being in the possession of the only evidence of that license having been originally granted to Mr. Trinder, it occurred to them that they might make a bargain for themselves, and they °tiered to become the purchasers of the premises for the sum of 4,0001. They afterwards extended their offer to 4,5001, but that sum was refused. It was quite clear, from all the circumstances, that the Coopers' Com pany were seeking to avail themselves of the obligation imposed upon the East India Company by Act of Parliament, to compel the latter to sell. The interposition of the Coopers' Company, and their refusal to grant a license, originated entirely in the passing of the Act, making it obligatory on the plain tiffs to sell; and it was to protect themselves against such conduct that the:present.bill had been filed by the plain tiffs. The Learned Counsel insisted, at great length, on the right of the plaintiffs to have a formal license granted. The property had been sold to Mr. Ward for the sum of 5,5001.; but the Coopers' Company had refused to enable the East India Company to complete the sale. He con tended, that upon all the evidence and correspondence in the cause, the plaintitTh were entitled to what they asked by the bill. Mr. LLOYD followed on the same side. The further hearing was postponed at the request of the parties until Friday next. The VICE-CHANCELLOR directed the attention of Counsel to two points—first, to the manner in which it was sought to be proved that there was an agreement to ' permit an assignment contemporaneous with the grant ing of the lease which expressly forbade it, which must be a matter of great difficulty ; and, secondly, as to the relief which could be given against the lessors, when it did not appear that they had threatened to eject the plaintiff, even supposing that there existed an agreement to permit the lease to Trinder to be granted, it not be ing the rule of the Court to make any merely prospec tive declaration of the rights of the parties. The Act of Parliament directed the East India Company to sell their commercial property, but it was difficult to argue that it gave the Company a right to come into a Court of equity for help, in order to carry the Act into effect. COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Jan. 17. (Before Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD.) IN RE WILLIAM HITCHCOCK. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) State the names of those houses you referred to Cook and Ce. since that period ?—Messrs. Hollington and Warwick ; Leaf, Smith, and M‘Dougal ; Messrs. Smith and Thompson; Messrs. Lindsay and Patterson ; and I should think a great number of others. Mr. MAROON said he did net think it necessary to ask the bankrupt any further questions, as he intended to examine the parties referred to Messrs. Cook and Co. by the bankrupt. Mr. HEIIFILEY asked if there was any other statement be fore he entered upon his cross-examination ?—No. By Mr. BUTT—Was there a proposal of a loan of 7,000/. in May, 1840, between you and Messrs. Cook and Co. ?—Yes, about that time. What terms were agreed upon between yon for that loan ? —They offered to lend me 7,0004 for ten years. Was that loan first proposed to be secured by a bond, and your brother, George Hitchcock, proposed to be a security for that amount ?—Yes, he was. Was it arranged that you were to give your brother a bond to indemnify him against loss ?—it was. Was that proposed originally between you and Messrs. Cook and Gladstone /—I am not sure. In consequence of this arrangement did you cause a bond to be prepared between you and your brother ?—I did. Was that about the time of the arrangement ?—lt was. Mr. Mardon, the solicitor, prepared the bond for you?—He did. Have you got the draft or copy of the bond so prepared ?—I have. Produce it. This was not executed, can you state the rea son ?--Yes. When I gave instructions to my solicitor, Mr. Mardon, to prepare that bond, I had not stated to any one in the City that I had not given any such bond but on one occa sion. Subsequently, I inadvertently stated to a house, that I had not given any bond to my .brother, nor to any other person. On consideration, after making this statement, I felt that I could not execute such bond. That was the cause of its not being completed. Does the word " subsequently" in your last answer refer to the time of the agreement for the loan and the preparation of the bond ?—No, but subsequently to the order which I had given to Mr. Mardon for the preparation of the bond. The bond was here read. Mr. llumF !LEY again asked the bankrupt if there was anything he wished to say before he cross examined him ?—Yes, I have. The bankrupt then made an application to the Court, which he said was necessary to place him before the public as an honest and upright man. The application was, that as he had been examined as to the parties he had referred to, Messrs. Cook and Gladstone should be brought forward, in order that they might upon their oaths say what the character was that Messrs. Cook and Gladstone gave of him. It any gentleman should not be able to attend, as he expected, he hoped the Court would allow a letter frown that gentlemen to be put in, and which would be sworn to. He was sure that his Honour must have noticed that he was very much indisposed during his examination, and therefore was incapacitated, from his exhaustion and excite ment, to give that attention which he had since done, and on that account he wished to make an application to the Court respecting an erroneous statement in the Times, which he wished corrected. The COMMISSIONER said the Court could not allow him to refer to any report but that upon the files of the Court. The Bankrupt then stated, that Mr. Ashurst, in his exami nation had involved various points in one question, and thereby embarrassed him in his answers, by which he was easily led into an error in his answers, and this was the reason he wished to refer to the Times' report. At another opportunity he ' should address the Court respecting this. . - Now, referring you to your examination of December 13th, where you were asked " Will you swear, to the best of your be lief, you had disclosed everything relative to your estate," was that answer true?—l considered then it was true. Had you pawned plate at that time which you had not dis closed to the assignees ?—I had pawned plate which I had not disclosed to my assignees. The Sat was opened in my estate about December 20. Shortly after and about the period that I began to reveal my transactions with Messrs. Cook and Gladstone to my assignees, I was subject to a great many heavy expenses. In the first place I have a wife and seven children to support, some of them in a very de hcate state. I had also been told that it was necessary for me to employ an accountant in the preparation of my balance-sheet, or I could not pass my examination. Relying on the information that it was necessary for me to employ an accountant, and who was recommended to me by the official assig nee of this Co ur t, I slid employ one. Now, at thi s moment I ha d no funds where with to pay such an accountant, except the 5/. which you have kindly allowed me for the support of my family. Five pounds a week, you mean ?—Five pounds a week. This I found to be insufficient to pay even the cost of my balance sheet, for I found that his charges were, for himself ss. per hour, far his clerk, 2s. 6d. per hour. Even supposing that he worked eight hours a-day at my balance sheet, that would have entailed an expense upon use of 31. a-day : and, as I had not been my own clerk, I found it quite impossible to under stand or explain my books, without engaging and paying him his salary. There were also many other expenses incidental to my then situation, and which expenses I was obliged to bear. I felt myftseielnfisutnwiblluintg still at fends I must have in thato rder moment to apply to a n y of to pass this Court. I therefore did not hesitate, e knowing that I had some plate whi ch b elonged to my children, and which was, therefore, not the property of the assign e e s , to pl e dge such plate. I did SO to the amount of 16/. lOs., and which money was spent in expenses necessary for my appearing he r e. I believe, also, that about this time Mr. Cook, who was then one of my assignees, objected to my receiving a n y a ll owance f or m y ma i n tenance. 1 will, how ever, say, that the other assignees were willing to allow me the amount, and that Mr. Cook, finding himself thus placed, made it a matter of grace to sanction it. Now is that the only reason far swearing you had given up the whole of your property when you. had not?—That was my reason, and my determination was to bring any tickets at my last examination, which I was told was usual. Then, according to your own account, you said that you had delivered up to your assignees all you had, and yet at the time you had in your pocket duplicates which you had not disclosed. Is that so Yes, and for the reasons 1 have before stated. Now, you said yen had plate belonging to your children. • Will you swear to having pawned none belonging to yourself ?—I will not. The Court will remember that my wife and . family were at the Isle of 'Wight. When they THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, JANUARY lB, 1842 • left town for the Isle of Wight my plate had been r inventoried and mortgaged to Mr. Buzzatte, and we decided only on taking that plate which belonged to my chil dren. It appears now, however, that after such inventory and mortgage had taken place, my wife considered it neces sary to have a few articles for the use of the family. On our return from the Isle of Wight I understood that that portion of the plate belonging to myself was given up to Mr. Buzzatte. It appears now that some few articles were taken from the parcel brought from the Isle of Wight, and that some few articles belonging to my estate, but which were of trifling value, were retained in the parcel containing my children's plate. About the time this plate was pledged, I was very much harassed and engaged in the City all day from an early hour to a late hour, and it was on one occasion that, when I went home without the means to go through the next day, that I asked my wife for this plate, alluding to my children's plate, which had remained tied up without my having seen the contents. 1 certainly, therefore, took the parcel from my wife, and handed it over to another party, without ever knowing the number of article:, to pledge, and this, I think, will account for any having sworn in the way in which I did. I am not asking you now to account for pawning it ; but whether, on the 13th of December, you knew that those tickets in your pocket referred to articles of your own ?—I did not know that those articles were of my estate till within the last week or ten days. I will read to you the artieles—Salt-spoons, &c. Which of these articles belong to your children ?—I am incapable of saying, unless I have a list at home. Ten table-spoons, one cream jug. You can't tell without referring to a list whether these are yours or not ?—I can say that the milk pot and jug were engraved with the names of my children, and put with the spoons. What spoons, table or desert, or what ?—Some of each, or it may be the whole of them. Mr. Hustrasv read the whole of the articles over to the bankrupt. When you were examined on the 13th December did you be lieve that these were articles belonging to you or not ? I did not see the duplicates' for weeks together. I never gave it a thought. Although I had the tickets about me I never looked at them, nor was I acquainted with the number of articles till a few days ago. Immediately on my discovery that there were some articles belonging to my estate in the lot which was pledged, I came forward, without waiting till the day, and made it known to the assignees. When was that ?—One day last week, and I stated my readi ness to receive a list of such plate to take it home to my wife and ascertain what small portion belonged to the estate. Have you, or any person on your behalf, pledged any other plate belonging to your children, or not?—Not that I am aware of. Why were these pawned in the name of Churchhouse?--Be cause 1 felt that I should disgrace my name by putting it in a pawn-shop. Who pawned them ?--I don't know. When did you first get the tickets ?--I should say the day subsequent to their being pledged. I believe on the morning after such pledge from Mr. Churchhouse. Now I want to ask you, can you tell us, by reference to any book, what money you drew out on your own account between the Ist of July and your bankruptcy ?—I cannot, exactly. I don't want it exactly. What books do you refer to ? —The cheque-book will show it. I never kept any private ac count of my own. You said that Messrs. Ovington and Co., and some other names, referred to Cook and Gladstone between June and July; now will you name to me any firm which supplied you with goods to so large an amount as Cook and Gladstone them selves ?—I cannot, and for this reason, I had not given any security to any other house for goods supplied, and I had to Cook and Gladstone for all goods supplied; and this I think is a reason. Now you say that Cook and Gladstone had security. To what amount was it ? Name what they are T—First, security of 3,0001. to Mr. Wm. Cook, senior ; 7,0001. to the firm. They held the lease of No. 118, premises of mine, on security for goods sold. What do you value them at ?—1 submit to the Court whe ther that is a fair question. The only answer I can give is, that it cost me 12,000/., and this is about one-third. What do you value the third I—l am not competent to value it. There has been at least 3,000/. laid out upon this part of the property. Is there any other security for their accounts ?—I gave them Mr. Buzzatte for 500/., and no other. Will you tell me, in the month of July, what was the state of your accounts with Cook and Gladstone T—l will tell you in the morning. Will you swear it was not more than 19,000/. ?—I believe it was 22,0001., but I can't tell without reference to m y b oo k s , and that has been over-ruled. Had any security been given between January and July ? No ; but they had been increased. Was there any other security between January and July, 1840 ?—Yes. But lam enlv prepared to say upon probability, and that is the security of . my brother, which I challenge them to deny. To what amount ?—For 2,0001. When you say you increased the value of your leases, were they ever increased beyond the value you have now put upon them of Assuming this to be the case—the whole amount of the 6,5001.? --No. My brother also gave security f or 750/. securities, you say the debt was upwards of 20,000/. Now had they security to the amount of their debt in July ?—No. But they had more security in proportion when I tailed than they ever had before ; that I will prove. I am taking the month of July, when you owed them a debt 50001. above the securities. Now, was there any other cre ditor had advanced between June and July as well as these gentlemen ?—Yes. Whom; name them?—Messrs. Lewellyn and Co., Smith and Thompson, and Leaf and Ce. ; in this way these houses, whose names I have mentioned, had increased their account upon Cook and Gladstone's representation, without any security, whilst Cook and Co. only increased their account in proportion to the securities which they held. These houses to whom I have referred had therefore increased their risk, whilst Cook and Co. had not increased their risk, only in proportion to the se curity. Taking the securities at their utmost value, were not Cook and Gladstone unsecured to the amount of 5,0001. in the month of July 1.-1 can't answer that question to 1,0001. without my books. To 1,000/. then ; were they not unsecured to the amount of 4,0001. or s,oool.—Yes. Can you tell me Ovington's account in July by referring to your books ?—Yes ; to the bought ledger. I think it is about 5501, to 6001. And how much have you paid to them between those times ? —Nothing. Now tell me the amount Messrs. Lewellyn supplied you with in the same dates ?—From 650/. to 7001. Turn to Smith and Thompson?—About 400/. Leaf, M'Dougal, anal Co. ? What quant it y b y th em ?—Th e amount of goods supplied, I should say, about 1,3001. Any other name that supplied you with a large amount I will take, if you please ?—Sheriffs and Co., 700/. What amount did Cook and Gladstone supply you with in the same time ?—I should think 4,0001. Did you deal with Brown and Co. during January and July, and to what amount?-1,3501. Now, who are the largest creditors for goods supplied be tween January and July besides these ?—Lindsay and Patter son, 5501. in two months. Well then, Wreford and Co. ?-400/. or 500/. What is Goubien and Co., of Paris ?—The invoices are not posted up, but they are about 1,2001. It being now past four o'clock, the further hearing of the case was postponed to eleven o'clock on Friday next. INSOLVENILDEBTORS' COURT, Jan. 17. IN THE MATTER OF JOHN GOLDWYN. The insolvent, in this case, was a market gardener, and extensive farmer, in the neighbourhood of Brent ford, in Middlesex, and applied on his petition to be dis charged. He was supported by Mr. Cooke, and opposed, on behalf of Colonel Lyster, by Mr. Woodroffe. It appeared that he had held a large quantity of land under the opposing creditor, and having gone consider ably in arrear in rent, was arrested between three and four years ago, and remained in prison ever since. His debts and liabilities were considerable, but the principle creditor was Colonel Lyster, who had since taken pos session of his farm and gardens, with all the improve ments previously made by the insolvent. Mr. Commissioner BOWEN ordered the case to stand over till to-morrow. IN THE MATTER OF ALEXANDER WEBB. The insolvent was an officer on half-pay, and was op posed by a clerk in the employment of Messrs. Smith, the ale-brewers, of the New Kent-road. The insolvent stated that he had lost a large sum of money which had been invested in ono of the United States banks at a very high rate of interest, the conse quence of which was his present insolvency. The Learned COMMISSIONEft said the tact of the pri soner having lost so much money by the failure of the American bank was in some degree an excuse for his difficulties, and he should therefore order him to be dis charged forthwith. IN RE MUSTAPIIA ALL In this case the insolvent was described as a general dealer in foreign merchandise, and applied on his petition to be discharged. No opposition having been offered by any of the cre ditors in his schedule, the COURT ordered him to be dis charged fhrthwith. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. CROYDON POLICE. R e A i d , p A e person i s n , a c m u e r d ri I saa c d e s r u ic t / h4e l attended o before e r M a e n s srs. in formation laid under the Police Act, by C o lli er , th e n speetor of Police for this district, charging that he being the keeper of a place of public resort, did unlawfully sal:- low persons of notoriously bad character to assemble in his house. This was the first information of the kind that ,has hitherto been brought forward, and it will be seen that it involved a question of some importance as to whether the Police Act a pplies to such cases. Mr. Robe r t R usse ll atten ded for the defendant. From the testimony of the Inspector and other officers, it ap peared that Crick keeps a l o dging-house, or place of resort for vagrants, and other disorderly persons, and that from the disturbance constantly going on there it was a complete nuisance to the neighbourhood. On the occasion which led to the present pro ceedings, upon an alarm being given, the police went to the house, and found 37 persons, many of whom were convicted thieves and prostitutes, drinking and gambling. In some of the rooms a number of boys and girls were in bed together, and the scene altogether appeared to be one that required the interference of the public authorities. This was about one o'clock on Sun day morning, and soon afterwards several of the party take up were turned, very drunk, into the street, when they commenced fighting and creating a disturbance, and the police were obliged ultimately to take them to the sta tion-house. their abOde there ; In answer to questions from the .Bench, the Inspector said that the defendant's house was open at all hours, and could not be done persons were stationed at the door to induce parties to away i . ind any one who chose to apply was admitted. . Mr. Russell then.addressed twheithßebnycshumatmsoamryeplreoengetshs,. i a m u e p n o t n , and tiio and contended that houses of this kind, though a nui sance,was within the meaning o f the Act The Bench, having consulted together, came imani bmool‘jurmsrlp.yri;sntsheeeldl conclusion that the house of' the defendant e s t o o f strongly Pari fsoair stud, month Mr. they adjudged him to pay a' fine of 5/., and in default to point that he should appeal, an d try the question at the Quarter Sessions. . . The BENCH said, they were very glad that power of appeal was given. These lodging-houses were a com plete nuisance, and it was understood that the clause iu question was expressly introduced into the Police Act to enable Magistrates to do away with them without the trubl• and expense of au indictuient. If the Nagle trates had the power they would certainly exercise it, but as it was a novel and important question, it would be satisfactory that an opportunity should be afforded to have it fully argued, before a final decision was come to upon it.—The usual notice of appeal was then given. PROSECUTION FOR BLASPHEMY. At the Bristol Epiphany Sessions, before Sir Charles Wetherell, Recorder, Charles Southwcll, late a Socialist missionary, was tried for writing, printing, and publish ing certain blasphemous libels, in a work callerl " The Oracle of Reason." The libels were certainly some of the most gross which have ever appeared in print, and the defendant consequently has excited but little sym pathy, as he himself appears now to feel, for it was not a mere right of publication of opinion, but he wished to establish his right to fly in the face of the laws, religion, and feelings of the whole community ; still considerable interest was taken in the proceedings, and the ball was filled during the whole of the lengthened period they oc cupied. The trial commenced at half-past twelve o'clock on Friday, and was adjourned at nine till ten the following morning, and was not concluded till half-past four. Mr. J. G. Smith and Mr. Skinner were the counsel for the prosecution; Southwell defended himself, assisted by Mr. Hetherington, of London. Mr. SKINNER having opened the pleadings, Mr. SMITH stated the case. The defendant stood at that bar to answer for the publication of a series of blas phemous libels which had appeared in a work published by him, entitled " The Oracle of Reason," of which he was the editor, printer, and publisher. As far as he had been informed from papers put forth by the defend an t since the preferment of the indictment, his defence would not be a denial of the publication, but very much in the nature of the libels themselves—that he would impugn the law—condemn this prosecution as most impolitic, subversive of liberty, and particularly of the liberty of the press—endeavouring to excite in their minds, and those of the auditory, a contempt for the law and all the authorities of the country. The defendant appeared to take his ground on the right of all men to publish their opinions on all subjects, without the slightest control. Would, however, he would ask, any man of ordinary ob servation say, that writing as the defendant had, with the objects which he had avowed, was a fair discus sion of opinions ? Was it not obvious that his in tentions were mischievous and wicked, calculated to lead to deeds of violence, and every evil work ? And what an absurdity it was to impute to the law which restrained such conduct the title of being oppressive. They talked of liberty, and, for sooth, of religious liberty. Liberty! how was that name abused by those men; their application of the term meant absolute independence, which ' was inconsistent with liberty, and destructive of all the links that bind society together. Liberty was not absolute indepen dence, for to be absolutely independent a man might go into the street and knock his neighbour down at his own will, or force his way into any man's house, because it was his pleasure to do so; but this was not liberty, for liberty was reciprocal. A man wishing to have his own rights respected must respect the rights of others. True liberty must be within bounds, and the man who broke them was no longer a freeman, but a pest to so ciety, who would destroy that very liberty of which he speaks so loudly in praise. But were there no other dangers by which liberty might be menaced but physical ones? What was there more powerful than the press? What a material influence had it in training up and instructing the young? How necessary was it, therefore, that it should be properly conducted, and how dangerous it would be if, instead of its being used as an instrument for the instruction of youth in the paths of virtue, it should be employed to promulgate all that is evil. Why, it would be calculated to break down all the barriers of virtue, and to introduce the grossest delusions. If there was any one depart ment of civil liberty which more than another required proper restrictions, it was the freedom of the press. He trusted he should not be mistaken, no one venerated the freedom of the press more than he did, but he still thought that if it was not kept within its proper limits, instead of being one of the greatest benefits to mankind, it would become an instrument of torture. The Learned Gentle man then alluded to the libels in the indictment (the language of which is unfit to be repeated, and to which we shall only allude by saying that they denied the ex istence of God and the blessed Saviour, and calumniated the Bible, the Prophets, and Apostles, in the most coarse language), and said, if sentiments such as were contained in those libels were permitted to be propagated as being true, what would become of society, what would become of the sanctity of an oath, and of all the forms under which justice was administered? The defendant had divested himself of all moral responsibility. This was his teaching of philosophy forsooth ; but he (Mr. Smith) would ask what was to become of society, if such doctrines were allowed ? With such doctrines, if he could escape the punishment of human laws, what hold had they on any man ? What hold was there on him who insisted on his absolute right to do as he pleased, and that he feared neither God, Devil, nor a human tribunal ? What was it that ren dered sacred human tribunals, but the belief in a re sponsibility here and hereafter—the belief in an Omnis cient Eye watching over us, and the powers of ton science ? This was the foundation of all civil Govern ment ; for if once individuals were brought to believe that there was no God, no future state, that man is of the same nature as the brute, and that, when he dies, he sink into the grave a nonentity, what was there to restrain such a man within the paths of virtue ? No thing 1 What was there to check his bad passions but the mere fear of human punishment ? It was well known that thieves and others calculated on the commis sion of crime by the chances of impunity, but did they know how many there were whom the fear of punish ment hereafter restrained ? Let the Jury look at the danger of the introduction of such doctrines -- Into - tVlrliiiiiilies and schools—teaching the . youth of this country to believe that their fathers, in inculcating Christianity, were knaves and tyrants, and they who could believe them, fools, dolts, and idiots. What sort of children would they have—what sort of schools—what sort of clerks and shopmen? Such a course would lead to the grossest delusions, and be destructive of all moral restraint. What confidence would they place in the inte grity of such a man? What a state of ruin, and misery, and crime would ensue. Would there be any of that vir tue—that liberty he speaks of ? No. Man would be hating man, and hateful to each other. He would, there fore, call confidently upon them for a verdict of guilty, in order that all that the law allowed might be done to pre vent the contamination of the public by the further pub lication of such blasphemies. God forbid that it should be thought that he sought to persecute the defendant. No such thing; if he could be stopped from the commis sion of such offences, he should be glad if he were at once allowed to return to his home. This, however, could not be done; and he therefore called on them, in the name of God, in the name of justice, to do every thing in their power to put a stop to such a torrent of blasphemies as had been published by the defendant. Stephen Rogers, clerk to Messrs. Brice and Barges, jun., Clerks to the Magistrates, deposed to having pur chased some copies of the libels of the defendant at his shop. _ _ Cross-examined—l am not here to say what is or what is not a libel, but I think a libel is that which is not true. William Reynolds, Mayor's officer, and Harry Bur gess, a police- sergeant, also proved the purchase of copies of the libels. The libels were then read, which closed the case for the prosecution. The defendant then rose to ask the Court whether it did not think it right to stop the case, as not a tittle of evidence had been given of his having published a blas phemous libel ; it had not been defined what blas phemy was. The RECORDER said the Jury were to judge from the perusal of the matter whether it was a libel, and whether it was blasphemous or not. The objection was there fore disallowed. The defendant then commenced his defence, and said he fully agreed with the Learned Counsel for the prose cution that they were living in an age of comparative enlightenment and civilization ; there were no longer any secret tribunals, and he would freely own that it was the privilege of every man to have an open, fair, and honourable trial ; he spoke thus l es t it m i g h t be said that he did not prize, as he really did, the privilege of trial by jury. It was the custom, and on these occasions More especially, to appeal to the passions and to vulgar prejudices ; he regretted that the Learned Counsel had not stepped out of the custom, because, when they were excited, reason was lost--engulphed, as it were, and men did things which, in their cooller moments, they would shudder at. Ho trusted, however, that they would cast prejudice aside, and, giving him a calm and patient hearing, judge of his intentions and motives by his general conduct, and he was sure, if they did so, they would honourably acquit him. It had been truly said that prejudice was the spider of the mind ; and he might add that, like the spider, it wove its web in desolate and worn-out habitations. Tho defendant here quoted the authorities of Jeremy Bentham, Pitt, Burke, Ers kine, &c., on the duties of juries, contending that they were to be the judges of the law and the fact, both of guiltiness and non-guiltiness. Proud was he of these authorities, because civilisation would be checked, and they would have nothing but a mental and physical despotism were the power of Juries abridged or de stroyed : he called on them, therefore, to Judge him calmly. If they thought his teaching bad, did they not think that, instead of persecuting him, they would remedy his bad teaching by better teaching ? If they thought this they would accord him an acquittal. Before he proceeded to another portion of his defence, he would briefly allude to the means which had been taken out of doors to raise a prejudice against him. First, there was a Rev. Gentleman—a Rev. Mr. Bromley, he believed—who, while he was in his cell with this trial hanging over his head, had the good taste to deliver a set of lectures, prejudicing the public mind against him, which lectures were heralded forth by placards in sonfe such words as these—" The Rev. Bromley will deliver a lecture on the Infamous Blasphemies of Chartes South well." But perhaps, the Rev. Gentleman had two ob jects in view ; the one, by prejudicing the public mind to increase his (the defendant's) punishment—the other, to fill his own pocket. There was another gentleman who had been also most anxious about his trial, who had used every means in his power to excite prejudice against him—the Editor of the Anti-Socialist Gazette (and anti social enough it was), who had even the audacity to ad dress a letter to his Lordship on the subject of this trial. The COURT—What is that ? addressed a letter to me any letter had been brought to me on the sub ject I would have thrown it on the fire. The Defendant—lt is a printed letter, my Lord. The COURT—Oh well, I have never seen it, nor was I aware that there was such a thing in existence. The defended was aware, if his Lordship had seen it, his sense of justice was such that he would have, acted as he had said he would. la that letter he (the defend ant) had Ibeen' denounced because he had said that Ro bert Owen was the man who 'first awakened in him the wish for free inquiry, &c. Attacking him, the writer thought to kill two birds with one stone ; to punish him, and through him to inflict a stab on the social sys item, of the principles of which he was as i gnoran t as a sucking babe. It was true that he (the defendant) had so spoken of Robert Owen, who, whatever were his reli gioustocomm opinions, en t oh wase remarks decidedly of the ee Learnedof the most Counsel ben whoevo - lent and moral of men—one from whom h e h a d ever learned a reverence for truth and a hatred o f f ase h oo d . The defendant d we lt a t some l eng th on M r . O wen ' s opinions, an d th en sa id h e wou ld now at once proceed was opposed to him. He had asserted that he (the de fendant) thought all men who were opposed to him dis , honest men ; he denied, he repudiated such a charge, and he defied that Learned Counsel to point eut a sin gle line in any of his writings that would justify him in making it, for there were many Christian writers whom he honoured and revered for their talents, learn ing, and their sincerity ; he abhorred only the med dling hypocrites, who went about from town to town, and village to village, engendering strife ; he loved all all good men of any creed or of no creed at all, and who, if there was a work of God, were the noblest works of God. He could admire talent, he could admire virtue, whereever he found it. He now much wished to dis abuse their minds of the impression which the Learned Counsel sought to introduce, viz., that he was a vain, conceited person„who thought himself a great philosopher. He thought himself no such thing ; but he did think himself an honest man, and he thought that was the happiest state of society in which the people had paid more attention to the laws than they did to the lawyers. The Learned Counsel had said that his intentions were to oppress and destroy. He denied it. He had never in his life oppressed or destroyed, nor had he wittingly ever hurt a living thing. Such were not not his objects, and in publishing the " Oracle of Reason," he only de clared in favour of the rights of man and free discussion, If there were 1,000 religions, 999 of them must be wrong, and the whole thousand might be. He only claimed the same right which the. Unitarian did, which the Christian did, which the Quaker did—the right of free inquiry and of expressing their honest convictions. It was said by Mr. Smith that he might publish whatever he thought proper, but then the law was to pounce down upon him, so that if what he had done was morally right it might be legally wrong; he would, however, contend that what was morally right ought to be legally right. The Learned Counsel said that he wished to reduce men to a level with the brutes. Nothing could be further from his intentions; he wished to raise them from their present position, which was almost on a level with the brute, to their proper situa tion. The poet had said, " What a piece of work is man! how noble in reason, how infinite in faculty! in form and moving how express and admirable! in action how like an angel! in comprehension how like a God—the glory of the world, the paragon of animals." This was what man should be, but never yet had been. This was the rank to which he would raise him, and if learning, if instruction was to brutify, then he would brutify him, but not otherwise. For, show him an ignorant people, and they showed him an enslaved people. He was charged with a wish to destroy society, and to bring about scenes similar to those which disgraced the French revolution. The Learned Gentleman but little understood him, or he would not have spoken of him as he had that day—his mind was so cribbed, cabined, and confined, that he could not understand him (the defendant). The Learned Gentleman clung to his own principles, but would not allow him to exercise his. The Learned Gentleman loved Christianity—he loved philo sophy ; and although the Learned Gentleman thought it impossible for there to be any virtue without religion, he (defendant) thought there might be a race of moral ists as far above the present race as giants were above dwarfs. What I did the Learned Gentleman so debase the human race as to say that there was no love of vir tue—no respect for morality—no hatred of oppression, unless by religion ? Who would not die for the wife of his bosom ? Who would not serve his friend ? Was there no one who would do a single good act without the hope of reward or the fear of punishment hereafter? He (the defendant) knew it to be far otherwise, and if it had been necessary he could have produced for himself a character for morality and integrity which, perhaps, would have stood as high as any. But let them not suppose that, while thus he professed his love of nature, he would for a moment strike down law. No 1 he was as tremblingly alive to it as was the Learned Counsel ; society would be de stroyed without laws; but it was one thing to have laws and another thing to have good ones • and while it was necessary to respect the la ws , an d those who uprightly administered them, there was a duty that they owed to themselves, that of resisting bad ones. Supposing that Luther, Calvin, Knox, Socrates, Aristotle, and a hun dred others—supposing they had acted on the principle that laws are not to be resisted, what would .have been the results ? If Luther had not acted as he did, he (the defendant) would not have been standing in a Protestant country, and yet he was to be persecuted for holding his opinions ; and, because he held some which were inimi cal to the opinions held at present, he was to be swept from the earth. For the free expression of his opinions they had no more right to hurt his little finger than they had to cast him into a dungeon or send his body to the stake. Their cruel fathers, the Catholics, sacrificed whole hecatombs of men in Smithfield an d elsewhere, in the name of religion, for the service of God, and because their opinions were held to be detrimental to society ; and, in more ancient times, the best of men had been sacrified—religious men—if, to be religious, meant to act righteously and well, to love truth and hate insincerity ; and they, the Jury, would be imitating the conduct of their cruel forefathers if they punished him for the exer cise of his opinions—he contended for the entire free dom of thought and opinion. Supposing they thus per secuted him, they might force him to hold his tongue, but that would make him thug his opinions closer to his heart, and cherish them the more they wished tn ein. them from him. The -way to maintain good opinions was not by persecution or prosecution, but by intro ducing better arguments. Mr. Southwell then quoted a great number of authorities, ancient and modern, and at nine o'clock, there being no probability of his closing his defence for several hours, the Court adjourned until ten o'clock on Saturday morning. On Saturday at ten o'clock the trial was resumed, and the defendant proceeded with his address. He con tended that he had as much right to the enjoyment of his opinions as any other member of society, though he did not agree with any of the existing systems of religion. His opinion was, that to be moral and honest was to be entirely just, and that was all that was necessary to guide their conduct. His opinions were the same as some of the noble Greeks and Romans, who not only disbelieved in all the religions then taught, but had none at all; yet their characters were held up evenin modern times as examples of what men ought to be, and were as honest men, and as little disposed to do mischief, as any one of the Jury. He then entered into a disquisition on the vharac ters - of Males, Epicurus, Aristotle, Zeno, and Others. They were, in fact, Athiests, as he was, for all men were Atheists who contended for the eternity of matter. The defendant contended that a great many learned and scientific men of modern times held the same opinions, only they thought it prudent to withhold those opinions from the uneducated and vulgar, and hid behind a thick veil of mystery the opinions they were compelled to en tertain. The Learned Counsel had laid to his charge an inconsistency which he should be ashamed of, in stat ing that he had said the universe was an effect. What he contended for wasp thn same as Aristotle had held, that the universe is necessarily something not produced. It was others who said it was an effect. Whatever opi nion they might entertain of his prudence, they could not doubt his honesty and sincerity ; for he declared most solemnly that he had never in his life wittingly told a falsehood, nor ever in his life knowingly given pain to any human being. The difference between him and the per sons of whom he had been speaking was, that he thought expression ought to be given to whatever he considered truth. They liked the light for themselves, but kept the people in darkness : he wished the light to shine on all alike. And it was impossible any longer to keep knowledge boxed up in cabinets, as it were ; it would cut out a road for itself, and there was no resisting it, and therefore it was folly to be persecuting a man for the publiCation of his opinions in the 19th century, as they did in the dark ages of the 10th century. The clergy were sufficiently numerous and well paid to contend against error, and the proper way to put down bad opinions was to combat them by good opinions, and not by the halter, the dungeon, and the scaffold. The defendant, after pro ceeding in this strain for some time, quoted extracts from No. $7 of the "Tracts for the Times," in support of pre destination, and said that he could plead the same justi fication for entertaining and publishing his opinions. If their doctrines were sound, then there was no merit or demerit in whatever opinions he might hold, and he would beg the Jury to reflect on the fact, that these doc trines were spreading, and that if a junction should take place between the Puseyites and the Roman Catholics- which was far frOm improbable—let them consider they themselves, as Protestants, might be placed in the same situation he then steed in ; and, if they condemned him, they either did not understand the principle of Protest antism, or they did not act upon it. He proceeded to enter on the subject of religious fanaticism, and to make large extracts from various works on this subject, and then to endeavonr tojustify the descriptiOn he had given of the Bible iii the libel. He read extracts from certain parts which he considered exceptionable, and after re ferring to the laws relating to blasphemy, he concluded by making a powerful appeal to the Jury to honourably acquit him, and thus set an example which would set at rest at once and for ever the system of persecution for opinion's sake. The Learned RECORDER having charged the Jury in a short address, they retired, and in about ten minutes re turned with a verdict of Guilty. The defendant was then sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment in the first class, and a fine of 1001., and to be further imprisoned till the fine be paid. The trial lasted altogether fifteen hours, and the speech of the defendant occupied nearly ten hours. THE LATE RAILWAY ACCIDENT.—,The Di rectors of the Great Western Railway Company intend, it is said, to appeal against the verdicts of the two Berk shire juries, upon whom it devolved to inve s ti gate t h e circumstances connected with the late accident a t Son ning-hill. The well known leaning of the superior Courts may excite the railway management to this de termination, but in our opinion they will do well to pay the deodands without litigation, and allow the matter to rest as quietly as it may. . The more the occurrence is discussed the less likely will the undertaking be to regain its former position in the confidence of the public. That such confidence has been exceedingly shaken will be evident to any one who examines the weekly returns o f traffic before and after the accident. T en t i mes t h e amount of the deodands imposed will not meet the loss which has fallen upon the Company through this occur rence ; and the longer the reeollootioli of its details is kept alive by aremeuta and atuternente in Courts of l aw , th e ftwther will such loss extend. We never heard of a railway accident concerning which public opinion was less divided than in this instance. Generally and unequivocally the arrangements of the Company with respect to the conduct of, at least, their third-class trains, have been condemned, and, as we think, condemned not without cause. Railway Times. EVENING SUN SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. TA TTERSALL'S—YESTERDAY. There was a better attendance yesterday than we have seen at the corner for some time, and business, if not brisk, certainly exhibited symptoms of improi*e ment. The only bets laid against the favourites wer e 200 to 50 agst the first two, and 500 to 50 twice agst Chatham, with offers to lay 8 to 1 agst each in one bet- Robert de Gorham found favour for a pony, and 2, 000 to 60 was taken so eagerly about Wiseacre, that his advance to a more prominent station may be looked upon as certain. Joanna colt and the Artful Dodger were also in demand, the first at 50 and afterwards 45 to 1, and the other at 50 to 1 ; the lion of the day► however, was Auckland, whose supporters were se numerous, and at the same time so fond, that the layers shut up, and although 33 and 35 to 1 were laid to small amount, we very much question if 30 to 1 could have been obtained when the room closed. The finishing prices were as follow : THE DERBY. 4 to 1 on the field agst two—taken 100 to 10 agst Sir G. Heatheote's lot 10 to 1 agst Col. Peel's Chatham 25 to 1 agst Lord Verulam's Robert de Gorham -4' 33 to 1 agst Lord Westminster's Auckland—taken 2,000 to 60 agst Mr. Wreford's Wiseacre—taken. 4,000 to 110 agst Mr. Ramshay's Moss Trooper--t. 40 to 1 agst Mr. Bowes's Meteor 45 to 1 agst Lord Jersey's Joanna colt—taken 50 to 1 agst Mr. W. Scott's The Artful Dodger -4 500 to 10 agst Mr. Treen's Defier—taken 60 to 1 agst Mr. Cooke's Palinurus 1,000 to 15 agst Duke of Grafton's Canadian—taken ORDINATION. On the 9th inst. the following Gentlemen were ea' matted into Holy Orders by the Lord Bishop of Ripou: --- DEACONS.—OF OXFORD.—William Baldwin, 8.A., St Edmund Hall ; Robert Marshall Martin, 8.A., St. .r,u mnnd Hell; Samuel Browne Harper, 8.A., New ' 1 011 , Hall; George Antrob us , B.A. Brasennose College, b i letters dismissory from the Archbishop of York. - OF CAMBRIDGE.—ReginaId Joh n Mapleton, "13AS ° John's College ; Ch r i s t o ph er Greenside, 8.A., St. Pete O . College; Alfred Bligh Hill, 8.A., Jesus College; Mid Swabey Oxley, 8.A., Queen's College. OF DUBLIN. Irwin Lloyd, 8.A., Trinity College; Thomas Henry Manning, 8.A., Trinity College. LITERATE.—CharIes Henry Sinberry Nicholls. PRIESTS.—OF OXFORD.—Rev. Frederick Edwin .i. 4000, 8.A., St. Alban's Hall, by letters dismissory from the Bishop of Exeter. OF CAMBRIDGE.—Re V . H enry Bailey, 8.A., St. John's • College; Rev. Samuel Pagan, 8.A., St. John's College; Rev. Thomas Harvey, 8.A., Clare Hall. OF DUBLIN.—Rev. Thomas Briarley Browne, RA' , Trinity College; Rev. Benjamin Luke Poyntz, Trinity College. THE MARKETS. PRICE OF BREAD. the highest trice of Rre.,(l the Itletroolis Is 10d, for the AID. Loaf. Good Bread may be had at Bd. PRICES OF SEEDS. Per Cwt. I Per Quarter ..1 Blew English Red C10ver...76s 953 St. Foin —s --.. Old Ditto Ditto —s —s —s 'Rye Grass —s 25s 1 1 C , ,s New Foreign Ditto......—s 70 s 92s Pacey Grass —s - -4 ou Old Ditto Ditto —s —s —s Linseed, f or feeding ...,..3 510 7 4 4 New White Clover 56 s CO s 70s DWI), for sowing .—s 60 ' bp Old Ditto Ditto — s s—s Ditto, Ter crushing ....—s MI a , New Tre ; oil —s 20 s 408 Hcmp —s 4 6 " '''s Old Ditto —is 20s als Canary — s 96 6111 Trefolium --s —s —s Per Bushel. Cd English Carraway —s 50s 52s White Mustard .... ) Os Od to 1 4 , 6 4 Foreign Ditto —s 46s 50sRrown Ditto 12s Od to 1 5 2 a Coriander ... —s —s — s Tares Si Cd to l'"" PRICE OF TALLOW, SOAP, &c. per 1121 b. 0 Town Tallow £2 12 6 Melting Stuff XI 1 , 0 Yellow Russia White ll 0 0 Graves Soap Ditto 0 0 • Good Dregs 0 6 PRICE OF RAW FAT, per stone o . , s. 1 14 Price of Tallow (as stated by the Tallow Melters) f Sibs PRICE OF OIL. Rape Oil, brown, per ton Xhl 0 Ditto, refined Linseed Oil Linseed Oil Cake at the Mill (per 1000) l3lO Rape Cake, per ton 7'lo COAL MARKET. Ships arrived since last market .day, 16. A Bell, Robson & Co. Hartl e y I L 0 Walls End Hilda. ... r vIS 2r'v Buddle's West Hartley l7 9 W a ll s End Stewart ' s Holywell Main l7 6 W a l s E.. d Tees .. ........... Uv• 0 Original Windsor's Pontop 17 3 W a ll s E nd W est Tees. ... . .... i lf • i Walls End Hedlcy 2O 0 Blythe.. ...... ...•. ........ ........... .- FATHER MATHEW.—A MIRACLE.-- 1111 ft e following extra or di nar y statement i s from the .Lilner'k Chronicle, a p a p er o f O range pr i nciples, and therefor e , not at all lik e ly to di ssem i nate anything of this sort I°r , an object : — "Th e R ev. Mr. Mathew arrived in this Cl,; last evening by th e C or k mail, en route to Loughrea, al put up at Moore's hotel. Immediately after his arri v ; s became known, hundreds of persons visited hill' ; -- r the hotel, where he administered the pledge. One c : cumstance which came within public observation we 11 mention here, as illustrative of the effects of breahOrn, the tmperance pledge :—A man named Moyneh%. a teetotaller, who worked at the Butter %Veto house, got drunk on Christmas-eve, and next (JO' or came paralyzed, his left arm, side, and thigh, being P; fectly inanimate. He was removed to B a rri ngt he Hospital, and re ma i ne d t h ere un d er the care of ,„0 surgeons, without imp rovement , unt il l ast evening,, Whin his friends, having heard of Tather Mathew's arrivni Lio town, went to th e h osp i ta l an d b rought hi m ou t of 1 . 1 , bed on a m an ' s b ac k to w h ere t h e R ev. M r. M a thew 1 7; staying : a crowd h a d co ll ec t e d roun d th e d oor , w h e n w , unhappy in va lid was b roug h t i n t o hi s presence, an d t h e ire Gentleman administered to him the pledge again .u:j kind and impressive manner, and the man instantly st: he up, was a ss i s t e d by his friends to dress, and, to ;it , astcm ohms-Ant e.P home, followed by a crowd of people." (1) EXTENSIVE CONFLAGRATION.-,We 0 to announce the complete destruction, by f i re, of l u e r t : Duffield's extensiv e p rov i s i on stores, i n James's-street/ The fire broke ou t l as t n i g h t b etween ten an d e leve n o'clock, and, at th e ti me we went to press, presented the most alarming aspect—th e w h o l e range f ront ing ' e street being one mass of flame. The fire seems to commenced in the rear part of the store, and qui e t + , extended over the whol e o f thi s extens i ve an d vidu.,ol' building, notwithstandin g th e exert i ons o f the diffelLt, fire-engines which were speedily brought to the 0 ,..re That part of the b u ildi ng f ac i ng J ames ' s - street is Ina a hundr e d an d fif ty f eet i n length, and three stories o height ; and, wh en i n f u ll bl aze, presented a grand ill, pearance. Th e store was full of hams and other pr°.olo sons ; but as to the pecuniary extent of the devastati ot we have no means of knowing at present. We littvo i , ll t learned whether the p ro p erty was insured.—fleV-1 News Letter. ..,, MASONIC ANECDOTE..--It is now so m e g 6 .” ,--ri f years since, that C a pt. E— , l ate a member of one of °re,- University Lod ges , was travelling in Egypt. The Poo sent liberal ruler, Mehemet Ali, had not at the time „,0 power he now p ossesses, and the English eharacter;ie not so well un d erstood in that country. The ~I tain was accompanied by his servant, an active g intelligent young man. They were attacked in the deg e i by the Arabs; the Captain made a very resolute st n t, and slew two of the robbers. He was, with his servi l b , soon overpowered, and they were conveyed to the r t e iet i bers' retreat, when they were separated. It was se t tee so that the Capt a i n ' s lif e s h ould b e forfeited, and 0 awaited his cruel destiny , with as much fortitude 33 brave man could fe e l. I nstea d of th i s awful sentel.l-,e, 0 , he was, however, a greea bl y surprised in the mor roP by his servant's app roac h ; w i th the joyful inte lligelle o, that this sentence was not only remitted, but that h ew . f , T o at liberty to res ume hi s j ourney, and this retr ibu d justice was acc om p an i e d b y every iota of the propertY be which he had b een previously plundered. Is it to wondered at that hjs gratitude to his servant end ed to his taking early steps to claim a nearer assoc iation, f him as a brother in the craft? For by the exchange. ° b the myst er i ons secret, the robber of the desert kept fas t , with a brother mason.--Free maso n's Quarterly Rev ' ` .- for January. -- PATENT LEVER WATCH ES This celebrated construction (the most accurate en whicP, watch can be made) is now offered at the following pri_. eg t : with the latest impreefements e. the detach e d escape nscr y , swelled in four hole., hand to mark th e secon d s, ands - taming power to continue going while winding up, SILVER CASES With deuble.bottom cases, capped £6 6 With hunting cases, capped 6 16 6 GOLD CASES. Size for Ladies, w in it d h o e u l b e i g e r b t ae g k o e l d d e d as ia e l s 1 14 2 1 1 4 2 0 Ditto Size for Gentlemen, enamelled dial l3 13 0 Ditto extra full size, capp e d l7 17 A Pamphl e t, con t a i n i ng o b servat i ons respecting the il,iooth constructions on which wa t c h es are made, with the prices..., de' in gold and s il ver cases, and a variety of sketches of 10 70'0 signs, whi c h h ave j ust b een completed in gold Chains, / 1 4 1 0. sent. gratis and p os t age f ree, on application by letter to lor SAVORY and SONS, Wat c h ma k ers, N o. 9, Cornhill, don, opposite the Bank of England. _....e. '... BIRTH. On the 16th i ns t., at Brixton-hil S l, Mrs. D. H. Durand' of a son. On the 16th inst., in Camberwell-grove, Mrs. Fred — z Besley, of a daughter. On the 16th in s t., a t El m - grove, Sydenham, the wife of T. Fry, Esq., of a daughter. d otto On the 17th inst., a t S t. G eorge ' s-place, Mrs. D IT I of a son. MARIED. • O f This morning, a t St. Pancr R as Church, Joachim Dent w l e hoe ' Esq., to Mr s . Bl ag d on, e ld est daughter of Mr. W. M. " head, of the Polygon, Somers' Town. pete r On the 13th ult., at the British Consulat e , Madeira, pq. Cossart, Esq., to Jane, third daughter of T. H. EdwariLs , c at, On the 13th i ns t., a t C u ll ompton, Devonshire,• gO' Esq., youngest son of W. Upcott, Esq., to Mary Ann, t he cond daughter of Robert Sears, Esq., of the same place' 14 1 ' On the 15th inst., at St. Augustine's Church, Bristol to ward, only son o f E. Harley, EN., of Portland-silo' Of Mary Arm, youngest daughter of Arthur Palmer, J 611 4" Park-row, both of the same city. Ed visfe On the 17th inst., at the New Church, Brompton, „„bias Dacre Roper, Esq., of the Madras Army, to Louisa youngest daughter of the late William Dance, Esq. DID. On the 28th ult., at Halifax, E Nova Scotia, Jane Franern the wife of George Reany Young, Esq., aged 25. , Joseph On the 2d inst., at Gloucester-place, Kensington William Henry Parkes, Esq., aged 61. th On the Bth inst., a t Pl ymouth, Walter Scott, the on of late G. Scott, of London-reet. stre e . t ' On the Bth inst., Mr. T. st Jackson, of S ou th Audio' wfirr iet On the 9th inst., in Albany -street, Regent's-park• f eny tovb youngest daught er o f t h e l ate T. Mutlow, Esq., of C P Alonmouthshire, aged 36. 14" I Oa the 17th ins t., at Alpha-road, Regent's- par k org' Charlotte, the wif e o f T . M ose. On the 11th inst., at the Rectory House,. Ask ersvirof the Rer. John Colmer, M.A. bO r On the 13th inst., at Paris, Carotin: Harriet, eldest da n t/ of the late W. Walshe, Esq., of Dublin, barrister-at -low' of rusuiw°lllll4 ''' London: Printed an d P ublished by MI IRDO a ods No. 112, Stra n d, a t Th e Sum Office, No. 112. the County of Middlesex, Tuesday, Ja marl 18, 18 Catal In con °ffice„ ....._____ NE job f , hi, a pa Ind all t riagel. NA LIF E ) J • Ell Joh n Ht G eorg PrO NS3O Ac 8, -,c/T Ar iv , - T t wo-thi, 'roflts a O ther o f rite, b or e t h e k:349 tp • brt, ll : th e The j orfi for