The Sun. — London, England, 1827-12-03 00:00:00

the main of baseless statements and ill names." After this introduction, followed by abundance of declamation in the same style, we were pre pared for, a thick and thin vindication of the Game Laws. Notwithstanding the disposition to hoax, which is generally characteristic of this Maga zine, we own we were not prepared for the im pudence with which, after a sham argument with the poachers, who, he says, alleges, "that game is provided by nature, and that, unlike sheep, horses, &c. it is as much the property of one man as another" (as if any body cared for, what poachers say when argiiing a question of this na ture), the writer proceeds to recommend the very measure which the opponents of the Game Laws have advocated, the legalising the sale of game. " Shall the general sale of game be legalised ? Our opinion, notwithstanding the manifold diffi culties which beset the question, is in favour of the sale. We have advocated the breeding and protecting of game as a matter of enjoyment and benefit to the community at large; and while we insist that the great portion of the commu nity which possesses no land, ought to be pro hibited from trespassing on the land of others for the purpose of killing game, we must maintain that it ought to have a right in law to buy game, 'if this could be granted without trenching on the rights of the other portion. Game ought -to be produced like corn, cattle, and the general produce of land, for the benefit of the whole population ; it ought to be pro perty, and it ought to be protected by the laws of property ; but like other property, it should be matter of sale and purchase. Most special and cogent reasons might make it an exception, but none such exist. The plea that to legalize the sale would be to increase poaching, would have great weight, if supported by actual demon stration ; but still it would be insufficient. The laws ought to aid to the utmost the possessors of game, as well as the possessors of other kinds of property, in protecting their property from theft ; but it ought to make no distinction in their favour. To protect their game, by prohi biting those from buying game who have no other means of procuring it, is an invasion of the fair rights of the latter, which cannot be defended. We speak thus on abstract equi table right ; but our belief is, that the lega lization would tend materially. to, diminish poaching. At present game is sold in most large places, and partly through the instru mentality of the landowner. The man practically sells his game who exchanges it with his fish monger for fish. The population, on the whole, is plentifully supplied with game. The poachers can now sell at a good price—at a higher price than they would be likely to obtain if the sale -were legal—all the game they can procure." We know of no wi her or speaker who has ever contended for more than this. No opponent of the Game Laws will refuse to subscribe to the writer's proposition, that " Game is ,property. That' sehich is bred, fed, and retained by people on their own land is as exclusively their property as any thing they possess." The opposition to the Game Laws has always been grounded on the Tery principle the writer lays down, namely, that the game of the nation, like the corn and cattle of the nation, belongs to the nation ; that it -" should be produced, subject to the laws of pro perty, for the benefit of the community as a whole." That the principle of the Game Laws is detestable, in so far as it goes to exclude the public from a right to obtain game ; that every law which is notoriously at variance with the end proposed by the social union, is unjust and ty rannical ; that the upholders of a law which jus tifies the rest of the community in violating it by, means which crowd the prison with wretches, who, in process of time, generally become hardened criminals, and are sacrificed to offended justice. We have no hesitation in saying, that an account of the souls - of the men who have been sacrificed to a wicked mainte nance of this accursed principle, will one day be demanded of those who have voted for the Game Laws,if there be such a thing as Divine justine ; that the murderer is innocent in comparison of them ; and that no man can possibly be a Chris tian who abuses the power -in his hands to pro cure such a wanton destruction of his fellow creatures, and that what the Catholics call " in vincible ignorance"—a degree of stupidity ap proaching to idiotcy—can form the only justifi cation of the Legislators who support the Game Laws. It is probable that poaching would be greatly diminished by the Bale of game, because the law must throw some difficulties, in the way of the disposal, and every obstacle must enhance the price, and thereby form an encouragement to the poacher. But be that as it -may, so long as the principle which monopolizes guile, and makes the sale penal---an antisocial 'and tyranni cal principle—is persisted in ; a principle which justifies, ex necessitate, the violation of the law— we are entitled to hold up those who sanction it as guilty of intending the destruction of multi tudes of their fellow-creatures. It would seem as if the writer in Blackwood thought the plea of 4' invincible ignorance" applicable to the class in question ; for the manner of treating the question would be an insult to any one possessed of the smallest degree of understanding. A more barefaced attempt at holding up to de rision, by assuming the imbecility of the party addressed, we never witnessed.--Morning Chronicle. ,It seems that we were under the mark in stating that the lost notes had been restored for 2,000/., and that, in fact, one bag had been ex-' changed for the other. It is now openly as serted that 2,8001. was the sum actually paid ; and, what is more extraordinary, that the nego tiation was carried cm and completed by a police officer ! If this be true, and such things can be done with impunity, what a precious system of police must we be living under ! We hear con tinually of some person who, having lost a tea kettle, 'a flat-iron, or pillow-case, on recovering it, wishing to forego the toil and the, expense of prosecuting •the offender, whom they are likewise, from the most praiseworthy motives, anxious to sa ve from the contagion . of a prison ; when the Magistrate, with uplifted hands and eyes, declares the thing impossible, wondering at the audacity of people, who can so much as dream of compouia tng a felony ! But that which is a sin, when applied to a shilling, is none, it . would seem, when a pplied to thousands ; and that which hor lifies the Sages of the Police, from Whitechapel to Mary-le-bone, if whispered in the shape of a small and venial offence, is openly connived at and saneticinetV, and the very myrmidons of the police permitted• t o employ themselves in perfecting, when the, lob becomes worthy of being ac• i l complisheu. dthis ' And is the protection for sooth, which the public eoi are to look for from our a dmirable p o li ce , those lovers of conducted ed, as it now is, under pure justice a Whig Ministry! e y e do not say that, ' vf._r e we the bankers in,this c ase, we should not have been ba k our notes at al most any haypy to have go t price. What we comp l a in of is, not su much the thing having , been done, as the channel through which it is said to, have been accomplished. If those whose duty it is to prevent crimes, and to apprehend and punish offenders, are to constitute them selves into a corrupt channel for the restitution of stolen property, what is it but, in other words, to make themselves the encouragers of crime, and to hold out, at once, temptation and impu nity for the commission of effenees ? We are curious to learn what the Home Secretary thinks of, and will do, about this matter, which, unfor tunately, is not a solitary one of its kind. This we know, that as far as the report has yet reached, people of all ranks are loud in condem tion of the affair, as one reflecting the highest disgrace upon the Criminal Justice of the coun try, and who begin to think that, they may as well be saved the heavy expellee of the present police establishment, if it is allowed to be kept on foot for the purpose, as in this case, of rewarding of fenders, and thereby encouraging them to the commission of future crimes. In short, the matter cannot rest here, but must be probed and sifted to the bottom, and its results be satisfic torily cleared up, unless those who superintend these matters wish to be themselves identified with this wholesale system of plunder.—Morn ing Herald. A paragraph, written in the worst possible spirit, was inserted in a Morning Journal on Sa turday, professsing to give an account of a trans action in which the names of the Bishop of Chester and Norwich are implicated. To all who are acquainted with the' character of the for mer eminejit Prelate, it is scarcely necessary to observe, that all the circumstances of that trans action are, in the paragaaph alluded to, entirely and most grossly misrepresented ; but as there are some (we trust but few) who take their no tions of eminent men from statements of this description, and as it is by these artifices that mischievous men endeavour to bring into disre pute institutions and persons otherwise invul nerable to the shafts of their puny malice, it may be as ivell to state what we have good reason to believe is the real complexion of the affair thus carefully and ingeniously disfigured. " Ces co quins," said Conde to the Cardinal de Retz, " nous font parler et agir cowrie ils auraient fait euxtnernes a noire place." The facts, we are assured, are these. A certain Candidate for Holy Orders presented himself, a short time since, before the BishOp of Chester, for ordina tion ; when that conscientious and learned person, rightly conjecturing that the calling of a Minister of God's word required something more than the mere wearing of a black coat, and hurrying through the Liturgy on Sundays, proceeded to examine him in those branches of knowledge, and of the duties of the 'important profession to which he aspired, which were in his opinion, and probably in that of most of our • readers, essentially necessary to the due discharge of his holy office ; in all which knowledge he found him so deficient, that he could not conscientiously look upon him as a fit ,guide and teacher of others, who. was so un taught and ignorant himself. The disappointed Candidate repaired to the Bishop of Norwich, whose facility in regard to the great responsibility of ordination has almost become proverbial, and whose habitually careless good nature, and easy indolence, are now probably much increased by the increasing weakness of age and infirmity. The good old Octogenarian Prelate had none of the difficulties which occurred to his more thoughtful and vigilant brother ; and he or dained the young man without scruple.— The successful Acolyte, blessing himself that there was at least one spot left in England where learning and wisdom were not deemed es sential to Met - nbers of the iretnMerr to the Diocese of Chester, where he is said to have expressed and exhibited an indecent triumph, within the jurisdiction itself of his pi ous and amiable Suffragan.. The Bishop of Ches ter,• upon this ; wrote, as it was unquestionably his duty to do, to his Metropolitan, complaining of so ill-judged and pernicious a' remissness in ecclesiastical discipline ; when the Archbishop of Canterbury addressed a mild remonstrance to the Bishop of Norwich ; suggesting, perhaps, that a greater care in ordaining . Candidates was expedient, at a time when our incomparable Church is attacked by so many open enemies, and so much insidious ingenuity, which happened to' reach Dr. Bathurst when he was engaged (harm lessly enough, no dOubt) in a rubber at whist. These, we believe, are the simple facts which Our contemporary has distorted into a case upon which to found an unjustifiable attack upon one of the most able and inflexibly upright of the Bench of Bishops. It is, indeed, quite conso nant with the principles of certain writers of the present day, to endeavour to' degrade and blacken all that gives dignity 'and weight to the religion of our country ; but we should think that the Government, of which the writer in question professes to be the organ, would be but little beholden to him for endeavouring to em bark them upon the same piratical venture with himself. If the Bishop of Chester has really (as this Journal asserts) " lost his hold over the King's Government," ' we are very sorry for it ; for we are certain that such a neglect of eminent talents and worth could only arise from an indif ference to the sacred calling which the Bishop of l, Chester so peculiarly adorns, and to the sacred cause which he so powerfully advocates, of which even we should be sorry to suspect them. — Morning Post. It ig curious to observe bow completely those of our contemporaries whose practice for years had been that of fulsome, eulogy of the King's' Government, have now adopted the often repro bated tone .of exultation in .the anticipated occur rence of public calamity. To such the delay in immediate accession to the propositions of the Ambassadors at Constantinople, furnished the most gratifying prognostics, while the unfavour able rumours, conveyed by the German Papers, have thrown them into extaeies of ilelight. By such persons the imprisonment or the decapi tation of the Ambassadors, ,and the massacre of all the Christian :inhabitants of Constantinople, would be well received as indisputable proofs of their sagacity. We must, however, venture to anticipate the disappointment of these pa triotic expectations. That the Sultan, superior as he undoubtedly is in energy and talent to his i m mediate Predecessors on the Ottoman throne, but still , partaking largely of all the pre judices and ignorance of the nation and religion to which he belongs, should not have readily admitted the force of those circumstances which rendered his acceptance of the offered Mediation by the three Great Powers inevitable, was a con tingency obviously contemplated by the parties to the Treaty of Lond on . Such acceptance was not, however, either impossible or improbable, still less were the accession and adherence of Ibrahim Pacha ,to the proposal of a suspension of hostilities unlikely, especially when the over whelming strength of the Allied Fleets, by which • that suspe ns i on wa s enforced, wa s t a k e n into con- sideration. The determination of the Pacha was, however, uncertain, and a battle, such as that at Navarin, was not without the range of calculation. Demonstrations more near the seat of the Turkish Government must also have been anti cipated, but the great objects of the contract ing parties will not the less be attained, nor do any of these events involve a departure from the principles laid down in the Treaty, or necessarily affect the result which that treaty was intended to produce upon the general con dition of Europe, or of the Turkish empire itself. Obstinacy or violence on the part of the Sultan, as opposed to the fixed determination of the three great Powers to effect the objects of the treaty, differ materially in probable consequences from the condition which might have arisen had its resistance been applied to the demands of a single Power. The compens - ation likely to be required for the commencement and continuance of hostilities might then have assumed a different character, and might have furnished grounds of apprehensions, which are removed by the joint interposition as at present exercised. The re sult may be delayed, but cannot be prevented, by the immediate proceedings of the Sultan ; - the change in the relation of the Morea, and the Islands, to his empire, has been ejected,, and the only probable alternative that may arise from hesitation or resistance on his part, is in the degree of connection which may hereafter subsist between Turkey and the liberated pro vinces.—Netty Times. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DEC. I. TUCKER V. THE GOVERNOR OF THE CHELSEA WATER WORKS COMPANY. This was an action to recover damages for injuries sustained by the plaintiff's horse, in consequence of falling into a hole in the highway, occasioned by the bursting of a leaden service-pipe, supplied from the Chelsea Waterworks. The Chelsea Waterworks Company disputed their liability to the plaintiff, on the ground that the broken pipe belonged not to them, but to the owner of the house which was supplied by it. It was agreed, therefore, that the amount of damages should be ascertained by re ference, and that the attention of the Jury should be confined to the question of liability. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DEC. 1. In an action against the Sheriff of Middlesex for a false return of nulla bona, a witness was called by the plaintiff, who stated that he had valued the goods of a publican at 175/., which he considered would be their value to an in-coming tenant. Among these were four butts of porter, which at the present price charged for that article, were worth 6/. 15s. each. This valuation was made in February, and a witness on the part of the defendant proved, that in March following, he had sold the effects of the pub lican under an execution for 45/. 135., and among other things the four butts of porter before named, for all of which he obtained no more than 6/. 11s. The expences charged on this sale were 21/. 125.; and it was 'attempted to be shown that the,goods sold for 45/. were the same as those valued at 175/. Mr. Justice PARK said, he should be sorry if the goods were proved to be the same. If they really were so, he must say, that it was most scandalous and disgraceful to the administration of justice, and some reform ought to be made in the Sheriff's-office. The Jury deliberated for a few moments, and then returned a verdict for the plaintiff.—Damages 1101. MOORE V. CUFF. This was an action on a bill of exchange for 19/. 17s. 9d. The real questiOu in the cause was, however, whether the plaintiff ought to be charged with 141..145., the price of a gun which the de fersk!ar .ileged lid had bought of him. In the course of the cause a great many witnesses, all gun-makes, were called to prove the value of the gun in - q ues , tion, and therstatid; than it would cost the seller about ten guineas, but that they should consider 15 guineas' a fair charge to an ordinary purchaser. lipp.rstred utterly suttiluisited at this disclosure of the profits of gun-makers. One of the grounds upon which payment for th e gun was refused was, that the stock had been broken, when it had been used only a few time s 'and-,Wit nesses were called to prove that the wood was of 4 very inferior description. rt appeared from their evidence, that when it happened' that the stock was found to be defective, or made of a bad matOrial, it was sent into the country to be made up at a low price there. ' Mr. justice PARK again expressed his astonish mentit the iniquity of this practice. Persons in the habit of using fire-arms could really never know whiin they were safe. In the course of his charge the Learned Judge said the gun-makers ought' not to sell guns of the inferior description which this appeared-tcrte. It was attended with evil in every way, for being sold, at a low rate, it was the means of• putting guns into the hands of idle persons, and might, therefore, be considered as instrumental, in a degree, in the encouragement of poaching. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, DEc. 1. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. ♦TKINSON. . This was an information filed by' the Attorney- General, at the instance of the Commissioners of Taxes, against the defendant, for having had a'grey houndin his possession in the year ending the sth of April, 1826, without returning it to the assessor of taxes, whereby he had forfeited a penalty of 501. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL and Mr. SHEPHERD conducted the 'case for the Crown, and called three witnesses, farmers residing in the neighbourhood of. the defendant (one of them being the assessor of the parish), who stated that for several years past the defendant had never been 'without a greyhound in his possession. In 1825 they frequently islkw both himself and his son followed by a greyhound ; they also observed the dog about his premises, where it appeared perfectly domesticated. The defendant in that year returned no dog to the assessor, he having merely sent in a blank return. The defendant's counsel, after observing upon the impossibility of relying upon the doubtful testimony of the witnesses for the Crown, who had only oc casionally passed by the defendant's yard, and who, having seen a , greyhound there in the beginning of 1825, and again m May or June, 1826, might thereby be led to believe that they had seen it also in that interval, But to show still further how unsafe it would be to convict the defendant on their evidence, he would prove that the greyhound which the de fendant bad in the beginning of 1825 was a milk white greyhound, and that he had no other whatever at the time; it was therefore impossible for those witnesses, if they were in the constant h a bi t , as they said, of seeing the defendant'4 dog, to be unable to' tell the jury of what colour it was, a milk-white greyhound being so uncommon and so remarkable, that they must have remembered the colour if they remembered seeing the animal at all. It would be further proved, that the defendant parted with this greyhound five or six weeks after the Christmas . of 1824; and had none other of 'any description until June, 1826, . _ . The SOLICITOR-GENERAL ' in reply, said that the witnesses on th e one s id e or the other must be guilty of perjury. The LORD CHIEF BARON having summed up, The Jury deliberated for a quarter of an hour, when they returned a verdict for the defendant. PREROGATIVE COURT, DEC. 1. COLVIN V. FRAZER. Dr. PIIILLIMO RR stated, that the party deceased in this suit was Mr. John Farquhar, of Fonthill, who died the 6th of July, 1826. Administration had been granted to the defendant, his nephew, and next of kin, on the presumption that the deceased had died intestate. That administration had been re voked, a nd the defendant was called upon to show cause why a will made in 1814 should not be ad mitted to proof. Mr. Frazer, under the circum stances of the case, conceived that he ought to call upon all the parties interested. under that will to see it propounded, in order to protect himself from mo lestation in the possession of the property. There had been a doubt, however, in the registry whether a person in his circumstances could call upon personi, to see it propounded. He (Dr. Phillimore) sub mitted the question to the Court's consideration, which would do what justice required, Dr.Donsoig, on behalf of the surviving executor under the will, thought that this question ought not to have been brought before. the Court ; he, however, left it to the Court to decree or not. Dr. PHILLIMORE,_ in reply, stated that Mr. Frazer, whose interest in the matter was to the amount o! 400,0001., was advised that the course he proposed to adopt was necessary to his interests. Sir Joan NICHOLL said, that the inconvenience of the proceeding, if any, would fall upon the party applicant. It would be expedient, in a case of this nature, to call on all parties interested to appear; it could occasion no prejudice to the adverse party. The Learned Judge directed the decree to go, and recommended that it should be in the largest terms, against all persons in general. KIRKCUDBRIGHT .V. KIRKCUDBRIGHT. This was a suit promoted by Lord Kirkcud bright, to set aside a will of the late Lord, and propounded by his Lady, Mary, Baroness Kirkcud bright. • Dr. Lt7siIINGTON, on behalf of his Lordship, moved the court to admit an allegation, the object of which was to show that the late Lord and his. Lady, about the period when the will propounded bore date, had disagreements and altercations—that his Lordship had called upon his solicitor, Mr. Bryant, of Southampton, to prepare articles of sepa ' ration—that his . Lady had stated the conditions. which would content her, &e., but Lord Kirkcud bright had quitted Southampton without completing the business. These facts had but recently come to the knowledge of his party. Dr. PHILLIMORE and Dr. DODSON, for Lady Kirk cudbright, objected to the admission of this allega tion, chiefly as being superfluous. Sir JOHN Nicnou. observed, that the history of the case might be collected from the allegations given in. The late Lord made a will on the 3d of November, 1824, nominating his wife universal legatee : .his whole property, amounting to 5,0001., ,he left to her. Up to that period, they had lived for many years together on affectionate' terms ; but at a late period of their cohabitation, Lord Kirk cudbright had indulged himself in vicious pursuits, and had formed a connexion with a cook-maid. That this was resented by his wife, was not extraordinary; and in May, 1825, Lord Kirkcudbright quitted his residence at Southampton with this servant, whose name was Charlotte Bicknell, and went to . London, where they cohabited together. In July, 1825, a further will was made, in which his Lordship be queathed the sum of 5001. to Charlotte Bicknell, for her faithful services in his family, and on account of the , contumely and aspersions. she had suffered from Lady Kirkcudbright . during the whole period of her service; but even in this will he left all the rest of his fortune to his lady. In August, 1825, he de posited this will with his banker, bat afterwards destroyed it. Under these circumstances, it was difficult to maintain that the destruction of this will was not a revival of the former. It was alleged &it there had been an attempt on the part" of the wife 'to get from him this will; but it was admitted that his Lordship returned home and did cohabit with his wife. A corres pondence had passed between them previously, in which he acknowledged he had acted improperly. In a letter dated Nov. 1825, he begins " My dear, dear Mary." In another, of June 26, he speaks of his great regard for, and anxiety for the comfort of, his lady. In 1827, he proposed to return and bring back Charlotte Bicknell; to this. Lady Kirkcud bright would not consent, and he eventually returned without her. He (Sir John Nichol]) would put it to the party if it was wise to *maintain the intestacy in favour of Lord Kirkcudbright in the face of these papers . The act of separation did net carry the case (in his. opin i on) one jot further than the pre vious allegations; he thought, therefore, that he consulted the interests of the Noble Lord himself bv excluding this allegation; and it .was •the Court's duty towards the adverse party. not to allow the cause to be further prolonged. He therefore rejected the allegation. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MARYLEBONE.— Willitl7/1 _Brett, driver of the hackney coach No.. BS3, was charged by Miss Trimlett, of No. 5, Winchester-row, New-road, with unlawfully detain ing a box of papers. • The defendant's coach, was hired on Tuesday night to take the complainant home from George-street, Hamp stead-road. He was to receive Is. 6d. extra for the carriage of some parcele, of which she gave him a list upon a card, and he promised to see them put in and delivered safe. After he had set her down a box containing papers was missing, it was leaning against one of the doors when the coach stopped, and in consequence of that circumstance, the driver, as au apparent act of civility, turned the coach round, that she might alight from the opposite side with out obstruction. The driver said he had lost his list on the road, and pretended to know nothing of the box. Miss Titimlett refused to pay the fare until she had made 'her case known at the Police-office, and desired him to call the next day for his money, which he neglected to do. On Wednesday night a violent knock was given at Miss Trim left's door. When the door was opened no'one appeared, but the box was lying upon the step with the lock broken, and it contained all the papers excepting one of no impor tance. As before-mentioned, the driver never called for his fare, and the lady did not see him again until he came before Mr. Rawlinson on Saturday to answer the charge. The driver said he dropped his card at the turnpike-gate, when he took money from his pocket to pay the toll, and knew nothing whatever of the box. The defendant's employer gave him a good character, the lady withdrew her charge, and the defendant was libe rated, after being told to profit by his lucky escape from an awkward situation, and that his fare was forfeited by his neglect. Richard Luscomb, the servant out of , place, who was robbed and ill-treated in Hyde-park a month ago, on Satur.: d a y laid before the Magistrates another anonymous letter, which he has received, as follows : cr Sir,—A few days since, a gentleman who represents himself a friend of yours, called on me, and stated that he had known, you for several years, but refused to state his n ame and address he seemed exceedingly anxious in regard to your welfare, and said his only motive for secreting his name, &c. was, he did not wish to have his name brought into question. Since the commitment of the prisoner to Newgate, I have received information of four different per sons who are coining forward to endeavour to throw your charge, which I really think will be the case. Now as I wish you well, I would advise you to let all drop, and not appear at Hicks's Hall on Monday next, or put a flaw in the bill. As an officer, I must decline signing my name, as it may be the means of my losing my situation, by in terfering in the matter. Yours, &e. &e." This letter was written in a disguised hand, like a lawyer's, and bore New Cut, Lambeth, post-mark. Mr. HOSKINS and Mr. RAWLINSON recommended the ad vice before given him by Mr. GaurviTH, and told him, after the trial, to hand the letter up to the Judge. . - HATTON-GARDEN.—Sophia Stratton; upo nwho se inforination Thomas Nicholls, pawnbroker, No. 43, Gray's inn -lane, was lately so many times prosecuted for charging more interest than the law allows, on Saturday last brought up William era, a pawnbroker, in Old-street-road, upon an information of a similar offence ; but Mr. LAINo, - in the course of the prosecution, having detected her in the act of deliberately forswearing herself, dismissed the charge. WORSHIP-STREET.—On Saturday an inquiry took place, before Mr. BROUGHTON, into the circumstances of a daring robbery committed on the e vening of the sth ultimo, on the persons of Mr. Skerret and Mr. Johnson, at the Lion and Lamb pu bli c -h ous e, in Golden-lane, a house which has lung b orne a b a d character, and known to be frequented by thi eves o f th e most notorious and desperate description. B es id es t h e front entrance in Golden-lane, there is also a b ac k entry , opening into the alleys in the rear, than which nothing can be more favourable for the escape of robb ers a f ter any depredation, the commission of or when pursu e d by p o li c e-officers. It is , however, alleg ed that the hou se has s o mewhat improved under the pre sent landlord. 1 ' ' Two powerful men, named Samuel Cotteret an d 4ohn Rovie alias .Lon, Jack, were placed at the bar on Satvr day, as principals in - the robbery -in question, and Nlr. Langston, the landlord, whose conduct in the transaction was placed in a questionable shape by evidence given at previous.exaininations, appeared on summons. Mr. Skerret, a potato-merchant residing in Whitecross street, stated, that about ten minutes or a quarter-past six, he and his friend Mr. Johnson, who have both been licensed victiallers, and had known Mr. Langston in the business, went into the Liop and Lamb to take some re freshment. Mr. Langston \vas making some alteration in the premises, by taking away a part of the tap-room to increase the sire of his bar, and took the complainants into the tap-room, to show them the works in progress. While the witness was there, an altercation took place between a stone-mason and the prisoner Rowe, or " Long Jack," as he is generally called ; and the latter, turning to the witness, charged him with having used some offensive words, and instantly struck him a violent blow between the eyes, which knocked him down. The men present immediately gathered round kim " as thick as bees," pre-- tending to take his part, and assisted in picking him up. When he was got into the bar again, Mr. Langston began brushing kis clothes, and observing that the pocket of his trousers was hanging out, turned it in for him. He found, when he came a little to himself, that he. had been robbed of his hat, his watch, and 2s. 6d.. Mr. Johnson deposed, that he was standing at the tap room door when Mr. Skerret was knocked down, and while endeavouring to get him out of the, room, he also was rob bed of his watch, with two gold seals, and a sovereign. When he discovered his lose, he went back towards the tap-room, bur the whole of the party were then gone out of the house by the back way, and the pot-boy had locked the door after them. Mrs. Skerret being sworn, stated, that in the course of the evening Mr. Langston called at her house, and said that the property lay between Sam CottereCand Long Jack, that the latter had been at work for him upon a job, for which he was to be paid lOs., but that in consequence of the robbery he would only pay him 53. at present, and the remainder when the property was restored, adding, that if Skerret would be quiet, and give something, he (Lang ston) would himself stand some gallons of beer, and the property might be got back.—This statement of the land lord's proposition was contSrmed by three other witnesses. The MAGISTRATE, after some further inquiry, said, Mr. Langston had, by his conduct made himself a participator, and should be sent to trial with the others. Mr. Langston protested his innocence, and asked to be admitted to bail, saying he could produce witnesses to clear himself.--Some of the officers, upon inquiry, said the house, had certainly improved in character under Mr. Langston. The MAaisra ATE at length admitted him to bail, for his appearance here next week, himself in 1001. and two sureties in 50/. each.—The others were remanded. Saturday, Elizbeth Cliffe and Eleanor Edwards were placed at the bar of this office before T. TWYFORD, Esq., charged by Martineau, Esq., of Stamford-hill, with► felony. The prisoner Cliffe underwent a short examination before Mr. BROUGMTOII, on Wednesday, when Eleanor Edwards, who appeared as a witness on her behalf, was, on account of some supposed prevarication in her evidence, removed from the witness-box to the bar, as an accomplice. On Satur day both the prisoners were brought up for final examination. Mrs. H. Martinea*, wife of the prosecutor, stated, the prisoner Cliffe had been cook in the family for the last three nynths. In consequence of suspicion that a system of rob bery was carried on in the house, a close watch was set for its detection, and on Tuesday evening she was called by her daughter into the hall, where they found the cook clandes tinely going out with a hand-basket apparently filled with something. She was detained, and on examination of the contents of the basket, they were found to be two slices of cold beef, two small pieces of yellow soap, a cold potato, and about 21b. of candles. - A constable was immediately sent for, and prisoner given into custody. The slices of meat were afterwards matched with a large piece in the pantry, and found :exactly to fit ; 'the soap was also rut precisely in her usual way of cutting soap for the servants, and the candles were " like those used in the house." John Martineau, Esq. said, that the prisoner Cliffe, on being detected, confessed her. guilt, and begged to be par doned. He objected, from a persuasion that he had been robbed in that way for a considerable time. One 'of the slices of meat was worth 9d., and the other 4d., the soap sd., and the candles is. 4d. Thomas Atkins, a constable, was called in to take the prisoner, Cliffe into custody. She fell on her knees before her mistress, imploring pardon, and exclaiming, " What shall I do !" [This witness produced the property, and held up, suspended between his finger and thumb, a thin cut of beef, certainly not the most inviting for 9d., while the magistrate seemed to fumble his pockets, as if in search of his handkerchief.] William Bray, a country -looking boy, said, that daring on i a l n e i n ed be ß ei r i o o w n n e , rr a aa nd id a s from' isoto the last three ner months hew w ho man the ti prisonerE'd' wards, who lived in the same house, near Stamford-hill. Sometimes he took dripping, and brought back some halfpence for it, at others he carried some broken meat, and once he remembered looking into the little basket, and seeing a slice of pudding. The prisoner Cliffe, in her defence, said, that she had permission to give away the broken meat, and dispose of the dripping. She was not going out secretly, but had re ceived permission, and had not the slightest idea that her taking a slice of cold meat and a cold - potatoe for her sister's supper, would he even thought a crime. Mrs. Martineau shook her head. Prisoner Edwards said that she. certainly had frequently, bought dripping of Cliffe; but she,did "not know it was; not allowed. As to the soap and the candles she bought them for Cliffe eight months before, from a chandler's shop-woman named Garrett, at Stoke-Newington. ' Graves, an officer of the establishment, stated that he had known the prisoner Edwards for 25 years, as a most exemplary good character. Mr. TWYFOILD observed, that no specific charge had been made out against Edwards; he should therefore libe rate her. With regard to Cliffe, the articles were sworn to by the prosecutors, and she must go before a Jury. She was accordingly fully committed for trial. UNION-HALL.—On Saturday a man named John Austin, and a woman with whom he cohabits, named Mary Giles, were brought before the sitting Magistrate, R. J. CHAMBERS, Esq., charged with passing counterfeit money.—The prisoners were fully committed. Joseph Smith, a bookbinder, residing in Kennington place, Was brought up under the authority of a warrant, for committing an assault on Harriet Frankham, a girl 16 years of age, who was bound apprentice to him by the pa rish of Lambeth. Mr. SWABEY reprobated the conduct of the defendant, remarking, that =thing could justify him in striking a girl of 16. The Magistrate then sent for one of the Lambeth overseers, and it was ultimately decided that the girl's indentures should be cancelled, and that the defend ant should be prosecuted by the parish for the assault on the complainant. MEETINGS OF CREDITORS. Commissioners, Bitanghalal-s treet. LONDON DIARY.--Tossnay, Dec. 4.—At the Court of Coles, W., Mincing-lane... 9 Oriniani, C., Blackheath 12 Davies, W. Southampton 12 Hillier, C., Salisbury Great Trinity 3 Voren, R . Frith street 'l2 Jackson and Shaw, Kin 's Litman W., Lambeth .... . . 10 Lynn ....... g 9 Finch, 11., Egli= ............ 9 Morice, ................. • ea Frost, J., H01b0rn............ 1 lane lO COUNTRY DIARY.-WEDNESDAY, Due. 5. Came, W., Penzance.—Union, Penzance — Chnstopher, w., Kidderminster—swan Stourport ll , Eyre, E. Sheffield—Commercial inn, Sheffield l2 Graham,' J., Liverpool—Angel, Li verpool Hawke, W., spilsby — George,Spilsby ll M orr efield, W., Kidderntrister—Swan, St our p ort 4 Vaughan, J., Yazor—New inn, Hereford — INSOLVENTS APPLYING TO RE DISCHARGED, Petitions to be heard at Portugal-street, Lincoln's Inn Fields, Dec. 5, at Nine o'clock, Ashdown, J., Angletey Owen, W., Anglesey Bowtell, J., St. Giles's Penman, T., Shadwell Broakman, 8., Vauxhall Revell, G., Rotherhithe • Chapman, J., Newark Shersby, S., Greenwich Clark, J. Spa-fields Still, W. Lewisham Dixon, W., Charles-mews Thorley, Northampton Horwood, W., Chatham Tolfrey, F., Brussels Mailer, W., Bradtbrd COUNTRY.—At the Court-house, at Chester, December 6, at Tea o'clock. s Battigan 8., Hanley Bratt, T., Bulworth Bates, Cf., Macclesfield Broster, G., Bollington Bebbington, vi,T., Chorley Buxton, M., Macclesfield Boayer, J., Prestbury Challoner, G., Croxton DEPARTURE OF LORD WELLESLEY.— Aware of the great interest that exists upon this important subject, and the anxious desire which so many thousands must naturally feel to give .Lord WELLESLEY safe and ho nourable conduct to the water side, we stop the Press , to announce that that event is likely to take place on Tuesday next. The oaths which the Lords Justices are to sUb scribe are actually en grossed, and were lodged this afternoon with the Clerks of the Council. At the rising of the Court of Chancery this day, his Lordship stated to the Bar that he had just received a communication from the LoKn LIEUTENANT, requesting his attendance on an early day next week; and he wished to know on what day it would be most convenient to them. It was finally fiXed for Tuesday, on which day we suppose the Lords Justi,, F will be sworn in. Their Lordships are to be, his Grace the PADIATX, the CrialrenLott, and the CuMSr Jlsb'rlc E. —.Dublin Evening Mail, SCHISM BETWEEN the LORD CHANCEL' LOR and the MASTER of the ROLLS. k Our readers are aware that a schism lies ta'ree, place between the Lord Chancellor and t he Ale° ; of the Rolls, on the subject of the appointment ti, his Honour's Secretary, which, as it affects the interest of the suitors of the Court, 15 ; matter in the settlement of which the pablic co a . l o l, but feel a lively interest. A petition was presetele to his Honour upwards of a fortnight since, in tba cause of Hayes and another v. Bagnell, praying Receiver might be appointed, under the gortglife Act. This petition was signed by Mr. Fre tler io j J Shaw, the newly appointed SecretarY, fisted in the regular way by the m as ter lit the Rolls. Upon . the petition being brclug ri der to the Registrar, that Officer, a cting L e d the direction of the Lord Chancellor, r e 'r n .o• to make an order upon it, unless it bore tbe ' 1 ;,„ 7 0 ture of his Lordship's Secretary. Applie s , t , i ltbo t made, to. Mr. Long, but that gentleman eta led he would not sips any petition which NO r; e d by the Master of .the Rolls, and which was 4, - ,d by Mr. Shaw, he not being an officer reeng a to - S ite the Court. A petition was subsequently pingt to his Lordship on behalf of the suitor, por hi' " his Lordship would make such an order at ! , wisdom should seem best to promote just,c7, enable the petitioner to proceed in his c ause. " petition was also presented to hie Lordship 04 materi!i, Mr. Shaw, praying that he may be allowed tojil as Secretary to his Honour the Master of the 10 and be permitted to receive the usual fees upd signing of petitions. tie° It was understood that the matters cont ai both petitions would be discussed yesterday, an d it cordingly the Court of Chancery was crowde excess. At half-past eleven o'clock the Cbea ce • took his seat on B then rosé and said, that h@ bad t' n r petitions of very great importance to b r ing ma d tt e er consideration of the Court, one in the Hayes v. Bagnell, and another from gr. F re l , Shaw, and he begged that his Lordship w" ld day for hearing (he matters contained in they' The CHANCELLOR—Name your own day' Saurin. , g, Sr Mr. _ S AURIN—Then, my Lord, we will .- turday. too The CHANCE LLOR —M I A 'rendergast, take it 0/ --" at the sitting of the Court' on Saturday' Freeman's Journal. COUNTRY CORN MARKETS DURING LAST WEEK. - --- ""i (i tg Wheat. 1 Barl e y. Oats. .....- -___ ---.--- . tO Per Quarter. s. to S. Is.to s , s, to s. , s i . 4 Carlisle. 59 6 5 29 :12 20 29 '0 - 4 0 Hexham 48 64 30 36 20 28 w - ,,, ', IVlorpeth= 44 CO 29 34 18 31 '" ..... 61 Penrith --- 60 31 it Sheffield 47 64 32 38 22 30 56 , 0 41 4 Winchester 48 60 26 St 22 25 : - d. ° ,(l Per Bushel. s. d. sd.s. d. s.d. s. d. 8. 'il . t) 1 1 Carmarthen --.. 6 0 6 6 3 9 4 6 1 8 2 8 - 0 6 a 9' Coventry ............... 6 2 '7 4 4 0 4 6 , 3 8 5 ,, g, 9 1 i Newcastle (Staff.) 8 0 3 6 5 4 5 8 31) 4 0 " 6 (' Northallerton .......... 6 0 '7 0 3 6 4 6 2 6 3 i - a o'n 0 Stafford ..--,—,.. 80 82 54 58 50 5 6 ',- 0 50 Swansea .................... 66 69 39 40 26 g 9 ; 8 ' Warwick 60 '7 6 39 43 36 50 - 0 Per Roll. g , ~, 0 1:0 liarnardcastle......... 11 0 16 0 8 0 9 0 6 0 6 " i `o ' 0 iq O Darlington ....-- 11 0 15 0 4 0 5 3 5 0 7 6 i'n 0 'a 0 Durham...---. 10 0 15 6 8 0 8 6 6 0 6 6 ,•., 0 - Wolsingham ..,. 120 149 90 100 63 70 ''., o ol* 11.7.. The size of the measure varies throughout the co" DALKEITH CORN MARKET.—Nov. 2 2 . io r The supply of Grain at this day's market wag 1 and Fir s First 1 . 1 ht6ao Wh ea t.ilo d y, at 8 1 3 0 a2 w - r e eo d r y prices 20.( ; a t t h i an las 33s t r2, : sas e odode ek. F.::voiceo . Second . ... 50s Od 305 Od 23e Third..... 40s Od 266 Od 2°3 °d 28s ed 4 -.,...—...-_-.------=----- CORNWALL MARKETS. • t 4 9 ,BrsH.lrtoto..vita,3o.,:ouoN.sT.--NE—Wwitlawetta(ht(a:evvfir:ra.agg2ode:o)9.7222ltsßso..—ar6al.e_ay. Lilleißaoyrsa,lieliodyoe7..;:77._::o3.,nAti2l3,:ilfloo,"ispo. LAUNC esToN—Wheat (average) 21s. Od.—Barley, 108• u"' to 78. Od.—Beef, sd.—Mutton, 4itl. „, ....oS t '' Ll...T O —Wheat, 21b. to 228. 64 1 .—Barley, 11,4. ..3. , • _. _A, to 9s. Od. ,J O. sT. Cerumn—Wbeat, 20s. to 24s.—Barley,10,' and Mutton, 44d to sd.—Veal and Lamb, Od to od, it , .....0 3 Pimv...sxcE--Wheat, 19s. to 21S.—Barley, 9s. t° } ,l, l . to t)ct is. to Ss. dd.—Beef and Mutton, 4d. to tid ork, Butter, lid, per lb. .—l' . To os ' - 0 MINING INTELLIGENCE. ~ gi3 0 Quantity of Copper Ore sold at Redruth last Tie:Why ,', g j Avera?e Produce Quantity Amount o o f f s fi al n e e , C i c 6 4:per 587i. . 5 .. 5 .... 6, .. i ..._... A .. ... e .. r ... g .. e ... 5 . t . a .... ;:ta .. r . LI; . i i ris ' °I. c i t ill A loving husband once waited on a 01 5 ; o el°' to request him to prescribe for bis wife's eyes , w l ' ic' ev er ' morning sore ningin a l.e s t ma l l i l er o lv s ah th e m, ssofi)ran bran dy. tl D .d A' fete few oc weer _to' .' 0 01 the Doctor chanced -to meet the husband. Well 0, : f lo V asked he, Las . your wife followed my advise? opoote' done every thing in her power to do it, says th e o tb/ bat she never could get the glass higher than lien ri) Sheffield Courant. bOli d .. 's 0 , of ' MYSTRRY.--011C of tho se rumoit o i i id oo : I tire which in character appears to belong to e be itij of the last century, rather th an t o th e prese nt t'',"", ti t ",:e said that about four years since, th e vau lt bell:'01,0g"; borough, was opened for the purpose of i n terO e '.„' a 1/,, i ," e one of the coffins was found out of its nicke , ''' of v circumstance, s uil l7 E p ß p n e ß d tihce.K ou fl t ofaonl o r t ily it ,N s as it was imagined the coffin 0 se o „atilt' belie, opened, when several of the co ffi ns, weighiqqlsce!,; three and four cwt. each, were found out of tb el ' ly ing 1 ,,, one was standing .upright, and the others se'' ° red • confusion. The person w h o fi nd went i n , is rcP ee i la:i° , ; " have been so frightened r that he kept his bed thr tb 6t 0, 11 .1 he is positive, fromthe,,appearance of the wal ls ' l u p one has entered from without since he lasecloscu vault.—NottingAani•Paper. ............. o ge. BIRTHS. • On the 30th ult. Mrs. John Wrigh t, Bush C° oe Wanstead, of a son .. toa d R e etoiy, Suffo On the 29th ult. at Stans • .- , Dia d au ghter. :00. 1. " lady of the Rev. S. Sheen, Brook-street , MrS. pge/i• , r. Taunton, the laly of 13) of O a n so t o h . e 30th ult. in Levier B At West Follands, near .--.-'.- of a son. . oaptlapeWaer.toiocduLhlairsutsnewoetic:hkeu church, near t, ,4 , b i ye g theeastake°: ht lill':de sofatoChi Y oung, , Stiiretsq, var. MARRIED. at On the Ist December , street, W e stminster. St. kl argare es t ,: i i \ e i -g a t r il i ja i E:l e t i p el: : I, _place' On the Ist inst. at All Souls Church, L a i lf f s `J'' GeOrge Raphael Ward, Esq., son , , Jam" " ..: i' fsti' Webb, R.A., to Mary, eldest daughter of tl.. Igte W' Mr. beth , W e rdes . t il d e a n u r g y hre rea o l; f On the Ist inst. at St. John's, Hatitney, M r ' n E ov iell' Willson, Fort -street, Spital-square, to Miss Ana ' Mulberry-hall, Middlesex. , itisao ler On the lit inst. at St. George's Owen , -- tati ce' square, by the Rev. B. B ray , AL ii,, m r . W. C° l ' s o bt . Hanover-terrace, Regent's-park, to Harriette, o nlyas ' of Samuel Edwards, Dover -street, Piccadilly, E s 'i rr O . : C On the Ist inst. at Hampstead, by the Rev. •,; (a rcir sley, Fellow of Downing College, ambrdge, 0 , i• Worsley, Esq. ito H arr i e t; w id o w o f the late Anare Barlow, Middlethorp e , c ounty of York, Esq' ~ 0 / eP At Newark, M r . J o h n Adams a disconsolate Vs widower, to Miss Eli za b e th Marti ---/ n. _ -- On the 11th nit., at H tl am lE h p ur .------ 11 .after . I' oll' art i 'a t s a i g d e e d d a s t 2 ri i a T a lo u m eg as h. Goulton Hesl g eden, Esq-, an e ii l l ebe ' 'lloe'' ' ' ship-broker in that "city, highly respeted for 1 1 ° °u- o t o ,i conduct and integrity. Mr. H. was acnative of Bart a ~,, Lincolnshire, though for the last thirty yeari be /18 E At Brixton, George Dominicus, Efq. late u. co'' _ gist St leigh, Kent, and formerly of the East India House. his ,7,01` At Cheshunt, Herts, William Laurie, Fol• i ' l year. oa t"' At Chatham, en the 25th 'ult. ag ed thirteen in Edwin, son of Captain Alfred Burton, Royal 11,1arine40, _ At Cirencester, on the 25th ult. age d 47, Richd. u Esq. late a Major in the 97th Regiment of Foot. i‘lii' At Twickenham, on the 29th ult. aged 1 1 ' 0 0 1° Ingram, widow of Thomas Ingram, Esq. late of the plac e . l a it' ' in At his L Bs it t t h le y ß ea usse r, 3111-ra.trneeictikdß. l A o l o id m d s i b e u to r n y : 4 o B n ye t a h l e .o 2 3 6 f t g itlif` l servant in his Majesty's Stamp-office. IWO ' Rit.d.Hetppnilitacue: H ag e: , nl , ii . ll, on the 29th ult. Air. Rittman and PutiLISHIM by M. YOUNG , at ; IPe S11: 1 -OFFJC; NO* 112, Strand. A.NDRENV CHARLE rIPHE JIL this TheS Public to edaito tl 'thot; to lluenc e of ledge . alt s themselve 36 , :Essex son, E sfi. of N g w ; t L 1 foul Nigh SKIN z The fullov With tw o 1441.1 cct-st n'Y Strati C°7eutrli.y, Shelton, liolyl to Uijn gcach men .wick, Lea Liv e! football C Qzglet and Stn arrivea ; Ma ( Arms a SOut It'inehe water, Coach a itligl seY, S star Eheltoi Chapel Wat ven t ry, Wet Coachi Wey water, bury, 1 at a \V o l, wich, \Vo r Woodsi t un, A'. 111 oath, ~m ® E Herefo i to a ll r VO L ' derlatic Out; Ferryt ford, tatly:t Friend for an: of moi unle•rs at the Londg,