The Sun. — London, England, 1834-08-01 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF The evils of the Tithe System of Ireland may now be considered as extinct. The important amendment carried in the House of Commons on Wednesday evening, per fected -the Ministerial measure. Much error prevails re specting thes.effect produced by the vote of the majority on Wednesday nigflit. Dean only be correctly estimated by reference to the existing Statutes, taken in conjunction with the various Bills now before Parliament, including the Bill now in Committee to alter and amend the law relating to the Temporalities of the Church of Ireland. Our readers, interested in the question of Church Reform, will recollect the substance of " Mr. Stanley's Act," in 1832, establishing compositions for Tithes in Ireland, and making such compositions permanent (2 and 3 William I V.,.ehap. 119.) By that act all future compositions were to be calcu lated on an average of seven years' tithes preceding No vember 1830, and in parishes where compositions had not been made within three months the Lord Lieutenant was invested with the power of nomi nating a Commission to fix the amount of compo sition. Tenants at will, or from year to year, were exempted from payment of compositions after the first of November, 1833, the person having the next greater es tate being made liable from that period. In all future leases from the date of that Act the lessee was to be free from tithes. Such was the substance of this Act ; but it evidently did not reach the core of the evil. The subse quent Ministerial Act last year, " to alter and amend the laws relating to the Temporalities of the Church of Ire land" (3d and 4th William I V., c. 37.) appointed an Ecclesi astical Commission to make a valuation of all Irish Church property, to suppress certain livings and bishoprics as they became vacant—to receive the sequestered funds--to ap propriate the surplus as therein directed, in aug mentation of small li v i ngs , an d to the building and repairo churches —and, in short, extensively dealing with the property and revenues of the Irish Church Establishment. Still the Tithe System continued an evil in Ireland, only partially limited by the effect of compositions, and a portion only of the Irish tenantry and occupiers being re lieved from the odious exaction. Cess or Church Rate, was, however, wholly abolished. The returns of , the amount of composition for Tithes in Ireland, registered under the Statutes of Composition, exhibit an annual total of 646,703/..55. 7/d. per annum—lmpropriate 110,9931. 15s. Oid., Ecclesiastical 501,9531. Is. ; the sum of 31,529/. 4s. 2id. not being specified in their total. We believe that these returns comprise nearly the entire tithe levy of Ireland, and the magnitude of the evil contingent on the mode of exaction—the persecution and sacrifice of the unhappy and impoverished tenants—the natural repug nance of Catholics and Dissenters to support, by the tol rance of such a nuisance, an alien and sinecure Church— may be imagined in England, though experience of the grievance could alone give an adequate idea of it. Hence the murders, frays, and outrages consequent on forcible distraints for tithe. A more odious, oppressive, or unchris tian system never existed in any country, and its evils were of course aggravated in Ireland by other social evils and op pressions. Can we wonder that political agitation pre vailed?—that Mr. O'Connell and his tribe of agitators found willing audiences when they raised their voices against such a system ? The Repeal of the Union, that desperate expedient, would not have found so many advo cates but for the exasperation produced by the incessant warfare on account of tithes. But a new era commences for Ireland ; and the Bills to abolish Compositions for Irish Tithes, to substitute in lieu of them a perpetual Land Tax, and to alter .the Law regulating the Temporalities of the Church of Ireland, are measures of immediate relief, which will be hailed with joy, especially as perfected by the amend ment of Mr. O'Connell on Wednesday night. We yester day stated the effect of the proposition, carried by a great majority evidently not in hostility to the Government—viz., to reduce the standard of tithe composition two-fifths or 40 per cent. ; to exonerate forthwith all tenants and occupiers of lands in Ireland from the payment of tithe ; and to compel all the landlords to pay the - remaining three fifths. The original Bill introduced by Lord Al thorp and Mr. Littleton offered the bonus of 40 per cent. to the landlord to assume the payment as an option ; the amendment of Mr. O'Connell makes that compulsory and general which was only op tional and partial. The pecuniary effect of this Bill, when it passes into a law, will be to relieve the land altogether from upwards of 270,000/., or two- fifths of the present amount of tithe. The church will be no real loser. Up wards of 20 per cent. of the Irish tithe being cost of col lection, never reached the pockets of the clergy ; that por tion of it will be wholly exting uished. The remaining de ficiency of 150,0001. will b partly supplied by about 60,000/. per annum, the present surplus of the Church Temporality Fund, leaving about 90,0001. at present chargeable on the Consolidated Fund or State revenue— but which advances will be ultimately refunded to the State as the Temporalities Fund increases. We do not deny that this sweeping Bill may operate as a hardship in particular cases ; and we admit that the integrity of pro perty is partially affected by its principle of reduction of 40 per cent. in favour of the landlords. But viewing the measure as a whole—considering the enormity and magni tude of the evils the Bill will extinguish—and considering also the advantage of transferring the burden and legal responsibility of payment from tenants and occupiers to the landlords, we think the balance of good is in fa vour of the peasure ; and we d o not attach much weight to the otljections of fraud on the Church and par tiality to the Irish landlords. Taking the average cost of collection at 23 per cent.—in some districts it is much less, in others more—the landlords really receive from the State but 17 per cent. bonus for their obligation of tithe payment. It by no means follows, or is probable, that the landlords will generally recover the whole additional burden of their payment of tithe by a proportionate increase of rent from their tenants ; some allowance was therefore due to them on this account. And what do the clergy gain ? The sub stitute of a fixed and perpetual rent-charge in lieu of the present obnoxious and uncertain impost—the advantage of an improved security, and the freedom from collision with the mass of the people. The State also secures 60 per cent. of the gross tithe of Ireland from the grasp of the landlords, who were evidently seeking to pocket the whole tax. Thus, the tithes being equitably " applotted," and commuted in the reduced value of a Land Tax, will be preserved for Parliament to deal with as may be here after determined ; and when the dimensions of the Irish Church are further reduced, a State fund will exist for the pur poses of moral instruction, and for the demands of emer gencies. Objections are easily made, but legislators must take all circumstances into consideration, and, like surgeons they must sometimes resort to the amputation of a limb to preserve the rest of the body. It is better that the patient should lose a limb than his life ; the Gordian knot must be cut when it cannot be untied. We also hail these measures . as important with reference to England. Scotland has long been freed from the evils of tithes, and the adjustment not only benefitted the landowner but the whole nation, which has now for two centuries been a stranger to agitation on this account. England and Wales will not rest quiet under the old nuisances of ecclesiastical imposition, and next ses sion a legislative remedy to the Tithe System of this part of the kingdom must be provided. Among the important benefits of these measures are the disposal of the doctrine of the " inviolability" of Church property. The Clergy will be what they were, as described by Dryden in his cha racter of the " Good Parson." " True priests, he said, and preachers of the Word, Were only stewards of their Sovereign Lord ; Nothing was theirs ; but all the public store, Intrusted riches to relieve the poor." The Tories and their savou r y journals may go on to rail against Church reform, but a reformed Parliament will treat the public property as a trust which the clergy only enjoy on a conditional administration. We shall return to this grateful subject ; but we must express our earnest hope that the Irish landlords, being thus benefitted, will be com pelled to maintain their poor, for no country can thrive in which provision is not made for extreme destitution. We trust that Mr. O'Connell will, in the vacation, use his great personal influence to allay national discords, and next session aid Ministers and the Legislature in further mea sures for the improvement of the social condition of the Irish people. Experience must, by this time, satisfy an English Government that Ireland, now extricated from the fangs of the Orange party, can only be governed by atten tion to the wishes of the people, and that six millions of Catholics cannot be driven to a Protestant Church.— Morning Chronicle, Among the subjects appointed f or cons i deration in the House of Commons this evening is the third reading of the Bill introduced by Lord Althorp and Mr. Baring for amending the laws relating to the land and assessed taxes. and although, from the careless manner in which this measure has been announced to the House and the late period of the Session, members would naturally infer that its provisions are of little importance to the country, yet we think the principle involved in it will be found to demand their most serious attention. From the frequent allusions made in P ar li amen t an d th e notices of the public Press, most persons are now pretty well acquainted with the great inequality existing in the assessments for land tax ; and, since Lord Althorp's notable scheme of paying the church rates out o f this tax, by which many places would be re lieved from those rates altogether, inasmuch as owing to the great improvement of property' within their districts, they contribute scarcely anything to the land tax, curiosity has been still further awakened to observe the effects pro duced in different places by the present anomalous mode of collecting this tax. The Act under which the assessments were made (the 38th George 111., c. 5) passed in the year 1798, but, although the Commissioners appointed by that Act were empowered to determine what part of the sum assessed upon each county should be paid by the parisht , s or hundreds in such county, y e t i n settling THE FLOOD AT RETFORD.—The whole of the meadow and commons in the west end of the town, together with many fields and gardens, wore on Sunday last the ap pearance of a sea, owing to a sudden rise of water in the river Idle, consequent on the late heavy rains ; and to render the illusion more perfect, sea-gulls, driven into the interior by the stormy weather, were observed flying over the wide waste of waters, and even sea-fish were caught in the river. Much damage was done to several fields of hay, which had not been before secured ; and at one time considerable apprehension prevailed lest the town itself should be flooded. The waters have, however, since receded.—Lincolnshire Chronicle. MODE OF DESTROYING DRUNKENNESS.—It iS the imperative duty of the statesman, as well as the moralist; to watch over the social habits of the people, and to prevent by every possible means the habit of indulging in spirituous liquors, to which mankind are in general so much addicted. The temptati on t o t hi s h orr i d v i ce of i ne b riety is wofully in creased by fiscal duties on such articles as cocoa, coffee, tea, sugar, & c ., an d every man who des i res to see his fellow-crea tures sober, industrious, and virtuous (for these three are na tural sequences) will aid me in endeavouring to get the taxes on the necessaries of life lightened and abolished, &c.—From Montgomery Martin's History of the British Colonies, Vol. 11., West 'lndies. FATAL MILL ACCIDENT.—OD Friday week, a joiner, of the name of Joseph Heaton, in the employment of Messrs. Nussey, of Leeds, was killed under the following shocking circumstances :—He had been assisting in repairing a tappit wheel in the race of the fulling mill; the shaft be longing to that part of the machinery had been thrown out of gearing, the other part was running, and in that state it had been formerly considered perfectly safe, and no misfortune had happened or was apprehended. In consequence, how ever, of the introduction of a new invention, all was evidently not right, the coupling box attaching that shaft with the other part of the machinery, did not leave above one inch space be tween them ; by the weight of the machinery causing the shafts to bounce, the coupling caught hold, and twice, within a very short time, the machinery, when thrown out of gearing, had started by connecting itself. John Benson, a millwright, had only quitted the other side of the wheel about two minutes, before the misfortune occurred. The unfortunate sufferer re ceived such dreadful injury upon the head and leg, that al though medical aid was promptly procured, he languished a few hours, and then expired. On a former occasion, he had the misfortune to lose two of his fingers, and to have a leg broken by machinery ; and what renders the case still more deplorable, he has left a wife, who had been for six weeks in a mortal disease, and seven small children, to lament his un timely fate. On Saturday, an inquest was held on the body, at the house of Mr. Gibson, the Horse and Jockey Inn, Hol beck, when the verdict was returned of accidental death, with a request from the jury that the owners of the mill would cause the machinery to be placed in a more secure state, before it was again run ; the coroner kindly promised to carry the re commendation of the jury to the proper quarter that evening. —York Chronicle_ JOURNALS. such quota the Commissioners were to be governed by the assessments made in pursuance of the statute of 4 William and Mary, cap. 1., so that in fact the assessments under which the land-tax is at present collected may be considered as having been made ever since the reign of William and Mary. Hence the unequal pressur e o f t h e tax , f or many places rated k ,at trifling amounts 200 years ago would, if as sessed according to the present value of the property within them, contribute a large proportion of the tax, and vice versa. Thus the parish of Marylebone, which two centu ries ago was scarcely known, and was assessed to the land tax at only 4921., now possesses a rental exceeding 700,000/. a year, and consequently contributes a very small sum to wards the tax in proportion to other places which have re mained nearly stationary in point of wealth and population. The Bill now before the House seems intended rather to prevent any increase of the anomalies than to remove the grievances arising from the .present unequal assessment of this tax ; but the preamble is so bare of recital that it is difficult for any one not acquainted with the calculating projects of the Right Hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer (and he must be a shrewd man that is) to discover what object is intended to be attained by his new Bill. The first clause directs that "it shall be lawful for the Land Tax Commissioners, at a general meeting or meetings for any county, riding, or shire, required and authorised by the Acts relating to the land tax, to be held for the purposes therein-mentioned, on or before the 30th of April in any year, if and as they shall see fit, to transfer the jurisdiction of any of the parishes, townships, hamlets, tithings, or places in any county from the division or divisions to which the same respectively now belong, together with the quotas payable by them respectively at the time of such transfer, to any adjoining or other division or divisions of the same coun t y , or t o any new division or divisions which it shall be lawful for the Commissioners to create in any such county." Now according to this clause the principle of an equitable adjustment of the land tax is conceded, because, if it be right to alter the present assess ments upon the divisions of some counties in consequence of the alterations of property, it is equally just to make the same alteration in all ; and, if an equalization be made in divisions of counties, it should also be extended to counties themselves, so that the country at large may par take of the benefit, instead of its being confined to parti cular districts. We have little doubt that the provisions of the Bill are intended principally for those rural districts where inclosures of commons and waste lands have recently . been made, and where property has thus been greatly enhanced in value ; and this suppo sition is partly borne out by the commencement of the second clause, which begins thus :—" And whereas divers open fields, commons, and waste lands, since the in closure thereof, have been rated and assessed to the land tax, &c." But why, in the name of justice and common sense, should the equalization of this tax (the principle being conceded) be confined to particular districts ? Why should not property in towns which has improved in value be liable to an altered assessment as well as property in the country ? And why should there not be introduced even in the present bill a clause to the following effect :—" And whereas since the assessments made upon the parish of St. Marylebone, in the reign of William and Mary, the pro perty in that parish has so greatly increased in value that the inhabitants pay less than a farthing in the pound for land tax, whilst other places pay three shillings in the pound. And whereas a certain Greek patriot, named Joseph Hume, who resides in the said parish, has deemed it a great injustice that he should be required to pay less than a farthing, while the oppressed tradesmen of London and Westminster pay more than two shillings in the pound towards the same tax ; be it therefore enacted that the said Joseph Hume, and all persons, be hereafter rated and assessed according to the value of their respective proper ties." We confess that on the score of justice we see no possible objection to such a clause ; but what would the magnanimous, disinterested Joseph say to his protege if he attempted thus to touch his pocket ? In sober earnest however, we again impress upon Members the necessity o having some explanation respecting the object of this b —Morning Post. ' The Poor Laws Amendment Bill is still progressing (to use an American phrase) ; but the discussion which it un dergoes in Committee tends only to protract its course, the Bishop of London and the Lord Chancellor—Church and State—exerting all their vigilance and all their skill to pre serve it in its original impurity. Last night again many of the clauses underwent discussion. It is amusing to observe how pertinaciously the Ministers stick to every clause of this Bill, though it is not considered a Government measure. Perhaps if it was a Government measure they would not be so much of a mind. At all events we know, without going more than a few hours back for an example —we know that upon questions which concern the character of the Admi nistration, Members of the same Cabinet took different ways, and act as if they thought unanimity a badge of servitude. In this spirit they see their own measures defeated, and their own plans overthrown ; but once touch the Poor Law project, and pop they go one after another to defend what they all agree in stating they have nothing to do with. The Bishop of London and the Lord Chancellor again defended the bastardy clauses last night, and every clause that seemed in the least danger of improvement. Lord Lansdowne, too, was at his post, to plead the cause of Mr. Malthus and the political economists. His Lordship maintained that " the woman was only required by these clauses to provide for her illegitimate children as a mother having legitimate children was required to do." With great submission to his Lordship this is an instance of the delusion which men practise on their own minds in behalf of any favourite theory or speculation. The mother of legitimate children has a husband to assist in their support. The law does not say to him, as it does to the seducer, you may go about your business, your wife alone is responsible to the parish for the maintenance of the children. How then can it be said that the law deals equally with both cases ? As for the attempt to modify the clause which exonerates the seducer, it will have little or no practical effect. But argument and objection are in vain. The Poor Laws Amendment Bill must be carried as it was first brought into Parliament, unaltered and unaffected by the process of debate.—Morning Herald. The Roman Catholics have purchased six acres of land between Hastings and St. Leonard's, close to the sea ; and arc, it is said, going to expend 30,0001. in building a col lege, chapel, &c. Some ofthe works are already commenced. EVERY MAN HIS OWN PARSON.--On Sunday week a young man, a weaver, residing in the Spital, made his appearance in the parish church of Old Machar, accompanied by one of the other sex, whilst the congregation were assem bling for the forenoon service, when, with an audible voice, and standing in the middle passage, he gave out his own name and that of his fair partner, and signified, in the usual terms, his wish to take her unto himself for a wife ; which having done three distinct times, and asked if there were any objec tions, he took her by the hand, and declaring himself a mar ried man he walked away with his better half! It is said, a wish to save the needful, as well as his own peculiar notions, being a follower of the Southcotians--albeit he hath as yet no beard—led him to adopt this novel proceeding. —Aberdeen Journal. THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, AUGUST 1, 1834, ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE NORFOLK CIRCUIT.—NonwrcH, JULY 30. (Before Mr. Justice BOSANQUET. THE EARL OF 'WEIHYSS WRECK. Charles Oakes, James Allen, and Robert Ward, were in dicted-for stealing on the Ist of September last four boxes, two necklaces, a . watch, chain, and seals, 20 forks and spoons, four bracelets, and other property of William Pyne, Esq. William Nesbitt is also included in the indictment, but he is at present on a voyage. This case arose out of the melancholy loss of the Earl of Weml,ss, Leith smack, which was wrecked on the Norfolk coast, at Brancaster, on the Ist of last September, when many lives were lost. The trial, which excited the liveliest interest, lasted eight hours. . Mr. Sergeant STORKS and Mr. GUNNING were for the pro secution ; Mr. ANDREWS and Mr. PRENDERGAST for Allen and Ward ; and Mr. KELLY and Mr. AUSTIN for Oakes. The case, as stated by the witnesses in support of it, was met by a flat and complete contradiction by the evidence for the defence, and was as follows. It appeared that on the 29th of August last the Earl of Wemyss smack set sail from Lon don for the port of Leith, and that among the cabin passengers on board were Mrs. Pyne and her son and daughter. That lady, previous to her marriage with Mr. Pyne, was the widow of Mr. Macqueen, the West Indian, and was possessed of a great quantity of jewellery and trinkets of considerable value. A day or two before her going on board the vessel, Mrs. Pyne had packed up her jewels in the presence of a female servant, and they were thus disposed :—in a large tin box were four smaller ones ; one of them contained a great quantity of brooches, rings, necklaces, and other articles of that descriptions; two contained other kinds of jewels, and the fourth contained an expensive and curious silver Indian mull, and a bead necklace with a gold clasp. Besides these articles there were several silver forks and spoons, wrapped up in wash-leather, in the tin box ; and under the tray of one of the jewel-boxes were a number of bank-notes. The tin box was secured with a pad lock, and tied with a broad riband, which was sealed at the top and bottom of the box. The servant who saw it packed up stated that she only saw one seal on the lid of the box, a cir cumstance which became of some consequence in the progress of the trial. This box with its contents, upon being taken on board the smack. was put under the table in the ladies' cabin. The vessel sailed, and during the night of Saturday, the 31st o f August, encountered a terrific storm near the village of Brancaster, and was wrecked on the shore there on the fol lowing morning. The sea rose so suddenly and so vehemently that before assistance could be afforded the ladies in the fore cabin, and some other persons, were drowned ; and among the sufferers were Mrs. Pyne, her son and daughter. During the early part of the morning of Sunday, the Ist of Sep tember, the survivors and several assistants from the vil lage were- employed in getting out the bodies of the drowned, and depositing them in the church, and in the afternoon they turned their attention to the property on board the wreck. The prisoner Oakes is a gentleman residing at Brancaster, and he it appeared was employed on behalf of the shipowners to go on board, and see that the property of the crew and passengers was taken due care of; Allen was the steward, and Ward the cook of the vessel, and Nesbitt, who has not yet appeared, was the son of the captain. Among the persons employed to get out the bodies and the property was a man of the name of Charles Large, and it was mainly upon his evidence that this prosecution was sustained. The account he gave was, that he was in the ladies' cabin on the Sunday afternoon, and that he saw Mrs. Pyn e ' s ti n b ox found under th e ta ble, where it had been placed as already stated. Allen and young Nesbitt were present at the time, and the former cut the string with which it has been men tioned it was tied, and then pressed his foot against it and forced it open ; Nesbitt then rent the lid off, and " copped " it on the deck through the skylight. Allen then took out some silver spoons and forks, wrapped in wash-leather, and put them into the side pocket of his jacket. He then took out of the tin case the box containing the mull, and out of that he took a bead necklace with a gold clasp, which he wrested off and put into his pocket, giving the beads to Oakes, who was then on the deck. It should be observed, that this and what follows is merely the account given by the witness Large, and that it was directly and specifically con tradicted by the witnesses called for the prisoners. Allen then put the box containing the mull into a cupboard and locked the door. Nesbitt next took out one of the other cases of jewels, and left the cabin with it, and Allen returned from the cupboard to the tin case, from which he took the larger jewel-box, which_ he placed on the mantel-piece, and when he shortly after wards left the vessel he took it under his arm, and carried it to a public-house called the Ship, kept by one Mrs. Cutting, and it was never more seen. A few days afterwards the witness drove a load of goods, which had been on board the vessel, from the Ship Inn to Brancaster staith (harbour), whither the crew had removed, amongst which was the case of which we have been speaking, and Allen and Nesbitt went with the tumbril. Large called their attention to the tin case, observing, " That ere's the box you broke open down in the ship on the Sunday." To this they made no reply, but merely asked the witness, " Can you tell us where we can light of a girl to-night ?" In the course of the journey they produced each some necklaces, and Allen wanted one of Nes bitt's, which the latter would not allow him to have, observing "We can make that all right." In his cross-examination the witness said, the box had two seals on the top, and not one, as stated by the servant. He did not say any thing to any magis trate or lawyer about what he had seen for many months, but he stated something about it to two or three labourers* and the churchwarden the day after the occurrence. He also swore that Read, the chief -mate, and a Mr. Green, of the preventive service, were in the cabin at the time the box was broken open and its contents abstracted, and that they must have seen what was going on, as they stood close by his elbow. He was asked whether he had not said to one Neale and one Simms, before the trial of Reeve last spring, that "if he (Reeve) would not prosecute him for perjury, he would say, when he came to the bar, that he knew nothing about it." He denied having used any such expression. He also •positively denied having said to. Neale, in answer to a charge of having sworn falsely, " Never mind that ; I can make a flaw in the ballad, as I don't want to do Reeve any hurt." He further stated that he should have tak en th e thi ngs himself that Allen took out of the box had they been offered to him, as he sup posed they were his own, though he had " a sort of imagina tion" that all was not right when he saw him put the wet spoons into his pocket. The next witness was a boy named Cutting, who stated that he was the son of the woman who kept the Ship Inn at Brancaster, to which the crew of the vessel removed on tne day of the wreck, and at which they remained for some days. The brewhouse was turned into a kitchen and dining-room for their use, and on Wednesday, the 4th of September, Nes bitt and Allen went into it, and were shortly afterwards followed by two women. The door of the brewhouse is divided, and the lower half only was shut. Prompted by curiosity, the boy looked over the door, and saw Nesbitt break open a small box, and take out from it a quantity of jewels of various kinds. Allen handed a necklace to the women, which they examined and returned to him, and which he put into his pocket. He then produced a gold clasp, and one of the women asked, What had become of the beads ?" he answered, that "he had given them to Mr. Oakes." Allen observed the boy at the door, and desired him to "be off," upon which he retreated to the window, whence he saw Allen give some beads to Nes bitt. Upon his cross-examination, he stated that this was in the middle of the day, at the time the crew' were about to go to - dinner, and when several people were about the premises. Allen was injured during the storm, and was brought up from the wreck in a feeble state, but soon afterwards returned to it. Another person, named Fiddyman, gave evidence, that he was at the Life-boat public-house at Brancaster, on the 6th of September, when Allen and Nesbitt were there. The latter pulled from his pocket a small paper parcel, containing five gold brooches, which he showed to Allen. Allen said, " They belong to me," and Nesbitt, assenting, gave them to him. George Ruthven, an officer at Bow-street for 24 years, stated that he was employed by the Magistrates to go to Bran caster, and make inquiries after the property supposed to have been lost from the vessel, and he went there accordingly on the 20th September. On the 22d he saw Allen, and asked him respecting Mrs. Pyne's tin box, which he described ac curately to him. Allen said he well remembered its being put on board, and his being told to put it under the cabin table, because it contained valuable property. He said he did so, but did not remember seeing it any more, and that Mrs. Pyne had told him to take care, after the ship was in peril, of a small brown paper parcel, which she carried under the mat tress of her bed, in the event of any thing happening to her, as it was of great consequence. He added, that he had given the cook (Ward) leave to search the cabin for bottles of beer, and that he had found the mull and its box in the locker there. Three days after this, Ruthven was walking past the staid', when Allen called to him, and said he thought he had found the box he had been inquiring about ; a light was then pro cured, and upon searching the store-room in which the goods brought from the wreck had been stowed, they found Mrs. Pyne's tin box much battered, with the lid broken and gone, and a good deal bruised. This closed the evidence for the prosecution in this remark. able case. It being considered that there was no evidence upon which to call upon Oakes and Ward for any defence, they were forth with acquitted. Allen declined saying any thing, leaving his counsel to call his witnesses. The chief mate of the Earl of Wemyss, David Read, was the first witness called. He said that Allen was considerably injured by the dashing in of the waters during the storm, and ' that he was carried ashore about 9 o'clock in the morning, and that he came back in two or three hours. He could not say if he (the witness) was in the fore (the ladies') cabin at all during the whole of the Sunday, but " if he was, he saw no box broken ;" with respect to Mrs. Pyne's tin box, he swore that he never saw it at all till to-day, and he was positive he never saw Allen break it or any other box open. In the afternoon he saw Allen leave the ship, having a box under his arm ; but that box was not Mrs. Pyne's, but his own cash box, in which he kept the passage money and other cash received on account of his employers. It was a lightish box with a handle, and was certainly (from the descrition given, for it w as no t p ro d uce d) as unl i ke the box whichjLarge swore lie saw Allen take away with him as any two boxes could well be. He did not see Allen in the fore cabin, and did not remember being there himself during any part of the day. Allen had borne an unexceptionable cha racter ever since he had known him. John Oak was employed to "scuttle" (bore holes to let the water out of) the vessel on the tide going down, and was after wards in the cabi ns taking down the furniture and breaking open the drawers in order to get out of them the property be longing to the ship, that it might be deposited in a place of safe custody before the return of the tide. In contradiction of what Read stated, this witness swore that that person was in the cabin a very long while during the Sunday, and indeed was the fiat te) go to him in the cabin and ask him to break open °)P!' of the drawers. When Orik had broken open one of the drawers, Read took thereout a small paper parcel, observing, " I've got my money, and the drawer may go and be d—d," and 'Allen was standing by at the time. Charles Neale and Law Simms, whose names have been already mentioned, were called, and stated that the witness Large had made use to them of the words about becoming a witness for Reeve, which he had denied on his examination in chief. Simms is nephew to Reeve, and Neale, who is the keeper of a beer-house, had been twice fined for being drunk. One of these conversations was stated to have taken place at a public-house called the Hare, and the. witness, who admitted that he was "fresh, but not so drunk but what he could stand," could not say that Large and another man did not lead him home on the night of the supposed conversation, on ac count of his inability to walk home without support. He was much pressed on this point, but could get no further than that he was not so assisted to the best of his recollection. It will be borne in mind that the boy Cutting deposed to a scene he was supposed to have witnessed in the brewhouse of the Ship Inn, on the 4th of September, in which Allen and Nesbitt, and two women, bore prominent parts. In order to contradict him one of the women was called. She stated that true it was she was at that place on that day, but that she had gone with the other girl and Nesbitt, and that they were not for a moment in the brewhouse in company with Allen, who did not enter it till they were quitting it. In addition to this she swore that she never saw the boy Cutting till last Sunday, and that neither Allen nor Nesbitt, nor any other person, pro duced any jewels of any description to her in the brewhouse, or at any other time or place. The other woman was not called. Mr. Reeve deposed he found in Mrs. Pyne's reticule, which he took from her person as she lay dead on the deck, monies and Exchequer bills amounting to 4481. 35., which were given to Mr. Pyne. Two persons were also called, who had known the prisoner for a great many years, and had intrusted him with large sums of untold money, and who spoke in the highest terms of his honour and unimpeachable honesty, and of the general character he bore. The above is a faithful outline of the evidence on the one side and on the other in this singular case, which we have noticed at considerable length in consequence of the respecta bility of the parties accused, and of the remarkable nature of the case itself. Mr. Justice BOSANQUET summed up the evidence with mi nutess and perspicuity, and the Jury returned a verdit of Not Guilty. OXFORD CIRCUIT, SHREWSBURY, JULY 30. The commission for this county was opened yesterday, and the business commenced this day at half-past 12 o'clock. The calendar contains twenty-six prisoners, two of whom only are charged with serious offences ; but the cause-list is consider able for this county, there being twenty-two causes, and five of them special juries. The following case has occurred this day : (Before Mr. Justice WILLIAMS.) CRIM. CON.--BUTTERTON V. BURGESS. _ _ Mr. RICHARDS opened the pleadings, and Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD addressed the jury. —The plaintiff was a farmer, living at Batchacre-hall, in this county. He married his wife in 1816, who was the daughter of a respect able farmer in his neighbourhood, and brought him some little fortune. They had a family of nine children. The plaintiff took the defendant into his service as a bailiff. He was a per son of strict sanctimonious demeanour, and had thus an oppor tunity of insinuating himself into the good graces of the plain tiff's wife. Some reports were spread abroad relative to their conduct, which came to the ears of the plaintiff, who taxed his wife with it, but she so satisfied him at the time that the plaintiff, believing the report to be a calumny, proceeded against a person who had spoken against her. However, on Lady-day last the plaintiff's wife went off with the defendant. I do not call upon you, said the Learned Sergeant, to give extravagant damages against the defendant, but I do expect that you will give such a verdict as, may, as far as pecuniary damages can, compensate the plaintiff for the loss he has sus tained in the seduction of a wife, the mother of his nine child ren, by one who had gained his confidence by the length of his employment. Richard Parr) , Jones produced a copy of the marriage re gister from Adbaston, 19th February, 1816. Mrs. Butterton was a Miss Yardley. James Goodall,the plaintiff's uncle, stated that they lived to gether happily afterwards, and had nine children. She was a steady woman in her manners. Elizabeth Thursfield said that defendant was a servant in the family for six years---a kind of bailiff. I don't know where she is. She quitted the plaintiff in March. I saw her last in November with her husband. I had heard of something wrong before she went off. She is not quite 40. The defendant is about her age. Mary Bradborne.—l lived at Cheswardine. I am Mrs. Butterton's aunt. She came to me at Lady-day, four miles from her home, on Saturday. She went away on Monday, returned on Tuesday, and went away again on Wednesday. Defendant had lived nine or ten years in plaintiff's service as a bailiff. Plaintiff has a large farm. Defendant called on Wednesday. . . Sarah Turner, plaintiff's nursemaid. Last year I went with plaintiff's wife to Cheswardine, and then to an inn at Drayton. Defendant was there. I can't tell where defend ant slept. He was in Mrs. Butterton's bed-room quite late at bed time. I left him there with her and both the children. We went to Almington. Burgess went with us. He said one of the children should sleep with me, because he was so tedious the other night they could do no nothing with it. I saw the bed where Mrs. Butterton had slept. I could not tell whether two persons had slept there or not. They went away together in a chaise. Mrs. Butterton sent a message by a boy to her husband. By the JUDGE—There was not more than one bed in the room at Drayton. I did not observe the bed next morning. I don't know whether he had another bed-room or not. I live with plaintiff now. Mrs. Butterton has never returned. Bur gess has not been there since. John Felton—l served the writ on defendant on the 30th of March, at a house near Newcastle. I told him I had a writ against him at the suit of Mr. Butterton for seduction. He replied, " lam very sorry that such a thing should happen ; it is not my fault." This was the case of the plaintiff; the defendant did not ap pear, the attorney not having delivered his brief in time. Mr. Justice WILLIAMS expressed great doubt whether there was sufficient evidence of the fact of adultery having been com mitted; whereupon the following letter from the defendant to the plaintiff was then put in and read : • April 2. " Sir,—As you have proceeded in an action against me of tres pass, I now proceed to state to you the reason of my conduct in doing as I have. You first gave me encouragement for doing so, by saying you would not be as I was, so much afeared of a woman, and said that you had too much of one, and that I ought to assist you. Secondly, after Mr. Yardley's death, you abused her so as to cause me to interfere between you and she, so as to destroy the peace of the family, and you have since openly declared that neither of the last children were yours, and have since said that she is with child with me, and have many times told her to go with me, and have many times abused her ; and she could no longer stay, because you caused her life to be in danger. Sir, it was not my desire to cause you and her to part, neither knew I any thing of it until sho sent me word that you was parted, and she had the two children with her. When I knew that all had been caused through me I was determined to go with her, let the result be what it would. I was sorry to see you so hill-use her on the Friday before she left you, by kicking her on the back, as since to cause her to miscarry. She was so unwell she could not turn herself in bed. Sir, I have taken a house and am now in Castle, and as your wife has got out of pastur I consider it my duty to give her sheltur, and shall think it right to do so as long as I have it in my power. I shall wait. the result of a trial, if you like to proceed. I shall then more fully state the cause. But if you like to meet me at Newport on next Saturday send me word, and I will meet you at Mr. Stanley's. I have no more to say as she is as well as she can be expected after having had so bad a time of it. " Your well-wisher at a distance, " WILLIAM BURGESS." Mr. Justice WILLIAMS then summed up the case to the Jury, desiring them to say whether they were satisfied that the de fendant had had criminal intercourse with the plaintiff's wife. The plaintiff ought to satisfy the Jury of the fact. They might have called the chambermaids of the inns where they slept, or it could have been shown that the plaintiff's wife was now living with the defendant : however, he put it to Jury to de termine whether the letter amounted to an admission of the fact. If they found that fact, they were to determine the da mages, though they had no very clear account of the case. Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 501. MIDLAND CIRCUIT—WiRwIcr, Jura- 30. The commission was opened here this morning. After at tending divine service in the cathedral, the Judges proceeded to take their seats in their respective Courts, Mr. Justice TAUNTON presiding in the Crown, and Mr. Justice PARK in the Civil Court. The Calendar contains the names of 78 prisoners. Of these, two are charged with arson, and one with murder. Almost every variety of offence may be found attached to the names of the remainder. On the civil side there are twenty causes on the list, so that there is enough of business to furnish agreeable occupation to the gentlemen of the long robe, after the almost uniform lei sure they have enjoyed, at all the other towns on the Circuit. Richard Falford, aged 21, was indicted for having feloni ously stolen one sheep, the property of Charles Hughes the younger. The evidence against the prisoner amounted to this—that he was seen to go to the place where the remains of the sheep were concealed, and carry some of it away, as if it was his own property. In his defence he called his nephew, a boy 11 years of age, who swore that on the night specified in the indictment, the prisoner had slept with him, and had not left his bed until after seven o'clock. -- -;- The jury, however, disbelieved his story, and returned a verdict of Guilty. Mr. Justice T at wroN concurred in the propriety of the con viction, and sentenced the prisoner to transportation for life. • 1 (Before Mr. Justice PARK.) CLARK V. STOCKER. This was an action brought to recover five pounds, as com pensation for damages done to the plaintiff's gig and horse by the defendants, Alexander and William Stocker, of Birming ham. On the 12 th of September l as t th e defendants went to the establishment of the plaintiff, who keeps a livery stable in the town of Birmingham, and hired a gig and horse to take them to Darlaston, a distance of ten miles. On their return, in the evening, the plaintiff discovered that the shafts and splinter-bar of his gig had been broken, and that his horse h a d been injured by excessive driving, and by some external violence. On observing this, he said to the defendants, " Yon have broken my gig, and if you are gentlemen, you will pay for the damage you have done." To which they replied, We have had en accident, and certainly we shell make it right." Upon application being made, however, it appeared they had changed their minds, as he found himself obliged to have recourse to this action. The ostler proved the delivery of the gig -and horse, the sub sequent injury, and the promise of the defendants to make all right. — A. blacksmith of Darlaston, who repaired the gig for the de fendants, so as to enable them to reach the stables, stated that they were very much intoxicated, and that the horse had been driven to excess. Verdict for ti;e plaintiff—Damages Three . Guineas. HOME CIRCUIT._LEWES, JULY 30. (Before Lord Chief Justice TINDAL) Thomas Foster was indicted for forging the acceptance of one John Norman, with intent to defraud one John Henry Norman. Mr. HOLLEST conducted the prosecution. It appeared that the prisoner's wife and her sister were entitled to some pro perty, which Mr. John Henry Norman, the prosecutor, had entered into a contract to purchase, and for which he had paid part of the purchase money: but a difficulty respecting the title having arisen, the remainder had not been paid, and for it the two sisters had made application through the prisoner, who had proposed that Norman should give an acceptance, which he had declined doing. The prisoner, however, went to Messrs. Smith and Co., of H ast i ngs, bankers, and produced a bill for 901., upon a London banker, and begged them to discount it. This they declined, and their clerk advised pri soner, who had stated that the prosecutor, Norman, owed him money, to draw on him, and get his acceptance payable at Norman's bankers, and on that bill they could make the ad vance, and they wrote for him the body of the proposed bill. The prisoner said he could get his wife and sister-in-law to be the drawers, and then he was sure Norman would accept. A few days afterwards he returned to the bank with the forged acceptance of John Norman, instead of John Henry Norman upon the bill, which the bank immediately discounted. Mr. Norman swore that he never gave the prisoner any authority to make use of, or sign his name, and that the signature, John Norman, was not his handwriting. The Jury found the prisoner Guilty of uttering the note, knowing the acceptance to be forged. Lord Chief Justice TINDAL immediately sentenced the pri soner to be transported for life. (Before Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE and a Special Jury.) CAUDLE V. SIR DAVID SCOTT, BARONET. This was an action of slander brought by the plaintiff, an apothecary in Brighton, against the defendant, a Magistrate of the town. Mr. TURNER opened the pleadings, and Mr. Sergeant AN-. DBMS stated the case. A charge of assault was brought by a Mrs. Pritchard, an inhabitant of the town, in January last against the plaintiff, whose solicitor, Mr. Faithfull, appeared for him before the bench of Magistrates. The accusation was, that the plaintiff had kicked Mrs. Pritchard, and the defence was that it was entirely accidental. A discussion arose whether it was possible the plaintiff should conduct himself in the manner which Mrs. Pritchard had described, and the defendant, who was present with his brother Magistrates, said, " I am of opinion he has, and for that reason I have not taken part in assessing the pe nalty. I had occasion, in consequence of some gross act of severity, to call on Mr. Caudle, and to remonstrate with him. He flew into a violent passion, he called me a rascal and a vil lain, and said that I had no right to interfere ; that I was always meddling between him and the poor. Several persons were then collecting round the door ; I was on horseback, and there fore rode quietly away, not being at all offended at what es caped from so low, so vulgar, so uneducated a man as Mr. Caudle ; and he must also know that I, in common with other Magistrates, took great pains to prevent his practising in this or any town, as he was not bred to physic; but, luckily for him, the Act of Parliament preventing uncertificated persons practising in medicine passed one year after he entered into business. Every one who knows me must be aware that I never could harbour any resentment against so low, so vulgar, and so ignorant a man, as Mr. Caudle." The Learned Serjeant commented upon the words, which, coming from a gentleman of so high a station and character as the defendant, spoken in so public a manner, were calculated to do the greatest injury to the plaintiff in his profession. Whatever passed before the magistrates at Brighton was sure to be caught at with the utmost avidity, and, as might be expected, the consequences were most serious to the plaintiff; still, however, if the defendant would make an acknowledgment that he had been betrayed into the use of hasty expressions, the plaintiff would be satisfied. Edward Wood, of Lewes, stated that the plaintiff practised as a surgeon and apothecary as far back as 1807, and attended his family until 1819 ; at one time he was parish surgeon. Richard Terry, a native of Lewes, remembered the plaintiff living at Lewes, and practising as an apothecary. Cross-examined.—Did not recollect whether plaintiff was ever a schoolmaster ; at first he did not pretend to be a doctor ; witness did not know how plaintiff then got his living; he was intimate with him, but could not ask him that. Mrs. Caudle first told witness that plaintiff was a doctor ; plaintiff left Lewes about 1821 or 1822 ; witness was not sure that plain tiff's family were removed to East Grinsted. Henry Sutton, Surgeon at Brighton, knew plaintiff prac tising at Lewes nearly twenty-five years ago ; he came to Brighton in 1822, and still practises there. - Angelo Bennett and Barclay Phillips, both reporters, took notes of what passed at the sitting of the Brighton Magis trates. Mrs. Pritchard made a complaint against the plaintiff for an assault. Several Magistrates were on the Bench, and and amongst them Sir David Scott. The Magistrates had not agreed to any penalty before defendant spoke. The wit nesses then proved the words, nearly as stated. Mrs. Pritchard attended, was sworn, and said plaintiff had hired two rooms of her, for a sick female. There had been disturbances in her house, and in consequence her husband had given defendant notice to quit the lodgings on the following Monday week. Defendant did quit them, and took away all his goods, excepting a bedstead and a few other articles, and gave up the key. On the Tuesday morning he came for the bedsteads, &c. Mrs. Pritchard told him he could not have them then, as the room was locked, and her husband, who had the key, was out. Plaintiff, however, went up stairs, shook the door, and said he would break it open. Mrs. Pritchard said he should not, on which he used some offensive words, and committed the assault ; and Mrs. Pritchard then showed her arm, with the marks of a kick upon it. The plaintiff's attor ney told the Magistrates that the plaintiff had kicked her accidentally. - Mr. Serjeant SPANKIE submitted that the plaintiff must be nonsuited, as the defendant was a Magistrate, and was so act ing, and a notice of action had not been proved, as required by statute. Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE reserved the point, and gave the defendant leave to move. Mr. Sergeant SPANKIE then addressed the Jury, and con tended that the defendant was acting as presiding magistrate, on a complaint for an assault preferred against the plaintiff, and was speaking in a privileged situation ; and was, therefore, justified in what he had said. The Judges of the land were protected in what they said, and so in some degree were coun sel. Every word used had a bearing upon the case of Mrs. Pritchard. He had never in his life heard a surgeon or apothecary that would not rather have sunk into the Tartarus of his own medicine chest, than appear before a bench of magistrates charged with kicking a helpless and defenceless woman ; but he should not venture to express his indignation on that point, because he had no desire to furnish materials for an action of slander. The case the defendant had to decide upon, from the evidence of Mrs. Pritchard, depended in a great measure upon the probability whether the plaintiff was such a man as could be believed to have conducted himself in the manner described ; and none but a low, vulgar, ignorant, uneducated man, could have done so. The words complained of were therefore relevant to the case, and were spoke with reference to the case, and not for the purpose of defaming the plaintiff. Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE—Words might be justifiably used on some occasions which would be actionable at others, as in giving characters to servants, or in addresses of Counsel to Juries, &c. The defendant was giving judgment on a charge made by Mrs. Pritchard ; he, however, certainly, in some respects, did deviate from the case before him. The Jury would judge whether the words applied to the plaintiff per sonally or professionally—if they thought they did not apply professionally, there would be an end of the case ; but if they thought that the defendant took advantage of his situation to launch out invectives against the plaintiff's professional cha racter—or if they thought he was actuated by malicious mo tives, they would give such damages as the case required. To render the words actionable, the Jury must be of opinion that they were spoken of the plaintiff's professional character. The Jury retired for about half an hour, and then found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, One Farthing. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MANSION-HO USE. A journeyman tailor, named Edward Plank, was summoned to answer the complaint of Mrs. Frances, the keeper of a cookshop in Norton- Falgate. Mrs. Frances said that on Monday the defendant, who had been in the habit of annoying her by entering her shop when full of customers, and asking for plates of stewed cats, grilled monkeys, and other dishes which she never sold, walked in tipsy, and ordered a pound of stocking-feet puddings. Sh e civilly told him she had none. " What !" said he, " can you tell such a lie, when it was only this blessed morning you bought the stockings off my feet to boil your pudding in ?" The ALDERMAN—You never could have had any dealings of the kind with him. Complainant—Never, my Lord, with nobody. So he takes up a piece of plumb-pudding . I just weighed out to a young woman, and he puts it to his nose, and says h e , I'll g i ve my oath that 'ere pudding was boiled in my hose. The young woman walked off, leaving the article behind, and I took up a pint of beer I had just had in, and throwed it at his head, upon which he seized me by the shoulders, and shaked me so wiolently that I thought I had fairly lost my skin, and I'm sore all over from my neck to my toes ever since. The ALDERMAN—WeII, defendant, what have you to say in answer to the charge of having first injured the trade of this poor woman, and then having assaulted her ? Plank—Please you, my Lord, I'm in the habit of getting my wittles in this lady's shop, for she sells good things now and then, only sometimes she an't just quite particler as she ought to be ; and, you know, if people an't nice in such fuzzy weather, it won't keep sweet. well, my Lud, when I went in, says I, " Mrs. Frances, do you steam your oven with gas ?"—" No, you blaguard tailor," says she. So I sees a stocking laying on the counter, and, says I, " Maybe you make pudding,bags of old stockings, and I can tell you, if you do, you shan't have no , custom of mine." Upon that she ups with the pot, and flings it at my lead. It's a. common thing -with cook-shops. There an't one on e'm as don't sell stocking-feet pudding in e ti 4 days, and it's a rascally shame. h use. Complaina n t—l d on 't care w h o sees t h e coo ki ng in DV -e to Plank-_I never know'd one of you as liked for a personen look into your pot or your oven. I won't sa what's beb missing. so often from the houses all round ? but e I believe t_.. neighbours an't kept awake all night by the cats, poor creettro Complainant—l' m a f ra id o f my lif e o f t hi s man , pleas e Y ° my Lord, I hope you'll send him to Noogate. Plank—l w on 't d o h er no h arm, my Lord, I throved her, down a penny for the pudding, but she would not deal nie, I said all thes e h ere s h eps oug h t to sell to poor peop l e , orthel ought to shet up for ever. The ALDERMAN—And what would you have done with t • t pudding ? Plank—Done ! Why I'd have just ate every of it. The ALDERMAN—Now that con v i nces me th a t you wish ed e i do this poor woman an injury ; for if it had been what youyou stocking-feet pudding, you would not have touched it. must find bail to answer for this assault. The complainant said she should be satisfied if the defend al promised never to enter h er s h op aga i n . He might talk as as he pleased of her trade, but the fa c t was th a t s he defied ; $ 5 man to pass by without stoppi ng s h ort , t h e sme ll o f what" - going on was so delightful. The defendant was then b oun d over to k eep the v esce towards the complainant. GUILDHALL. Yesterday, a lad named Joseph Hutchinson Chapman , was 0 brought before Mr. Alderman Pirie, charged with stealing sovereigns and a gold watch, from his grandfather. c Henry Boonick, a lad who lodges in West-street, wt a bou t field, stated that the prisoner was a schoolfellow, and 4 ,. $ to five weeks ago he accepted an invitation from him to 11" 0 Brighton, and stay a few days. They rode down by the paying 4s. each. He saw the prisoner had about 12 s overe in his possession, and was surprised at the circumstancef4 did not ask for any ex pl ana ti on . Th e pr i soner su b s eque os told him he had got some money from the old man, which the way he usually spoke of his uncle. Mr. Alderman PInIE asked how they spent their time the money ? The witness said they sometimes took a boat, but tiler le , all the rest of th e money i n eat i ng an d d r i nk i ng. They Brighton in a wee k, an d came b ac k to London, vithell;ed slept at ni g ht i n W est - street , an d wa lk ed about the wes"hic, of the town in th e d ay , occas i ona ll y rest i ng at the PL'es, houses. The prisoner seemed to be very miserable scone and laid he was ve r y sorr y h e h a d ro bb e d hi s grand f at her z he hoped it would be the means of his being sent to sea "co uncle or mother. Witn ess p awne d a go ld r i ng f or t h e pris ° - for 3s. at Brighton. Mr. Chapman, of Holiday-yard, Blackfriars, said the soner was his grandson. O n th e 27 t h o f J une h e fotaL„, prisoner alone in hi s b ac k p ar l our , an d h e went awa y in t diately, saying he should return in an hour. As al i t / he i he was gone, wit ness wen t to hi s d rawers, an d fowl" two had been broken o p en ; an d a r i ng , twenty sovere i g ns, half-sovereigns, and a seven-shilling piece had been at ° .. t o He did not see th e p r i soner aga i n unt il h e was ta ken l" custody. The - prisoner was committed for trial. d Mr. Reeve, a pawnbrok er , i n R e d cross-street, appeare the answer two informations f or t a ki ng a penny per mon th as interest on two loans of 3 5 ., th e l aw a ll ow i ng only °— farthings per month, on sums not exceeding 3s. 9d. „A to The complainant, Mary Th omas , w h en s h e first apP":er, the Magistrate, stated that she was not a common inforw co but she took this course because she was treated with insole when she went back to the shop to get the error rec tified., fa r A summons was granted, w h en M r . W oo ll er appeare,.° a ld the defendant, and o bj ec t e d th at a f orma l information 040. have been filed, before the summons was granted. The plaint was therefore stifled on that d a y ; b u t M r s. 1 raised 10s., the fee to the lawyer for drawing an inform and Mr. Wooler again appearing for the defendant, objet . p that the Magistrate who received the informations, bad c)/11 :11 ted to sign his name to a - recital of that fact, at the end of information. t the Mr. Alderman ANSL EY a ll owe d t hi s o bj ect i on ; bu,'„ere forms were returned t o M rs . Th omas to b e amende d , a nd s ° re-filed free of expense. pe* The third hearing no w came on b e f ore Mr. Alderman t i i o et and Mr. Wooller obj ec t e d t o th e i n f ormat i on, that it net set forth that Mr. Ree ve carr i e d on t h e tra d e of a pawn he at the time the pledge was made. It only stated that 0, did so at the time of re d em pti on , w h en the offence was e t er. mitted ; and if this o bj ec ti on were over-ru l e d , h e had a° gr. Upon the intervention of the magistrates, however' g ia Reeve consented to give the woman no farther trouble; fit the amount of co m p ensa ti on s h e s h ou ld rece i ve (con sider 7 the expense she had been put to) was fixed by Mr. Alder i n er Pirie at 40s , which Mr. Reeve a ccor di ng l y pa id . The °I charge was 2d. MARYLE B ONE. 1,0 Yesterday, John Broderick, a sullen looking youth, a p eighteen years of age , was p l ace d at the bar, before Mr' to 014 FUNS, charged with h av i ng ro bb e d hi s own father, a Pe°halt man, upwards of 70 years of age, of five sovereigns and a 0 , 0 which he had been scraping together for years, and whi ch all the property he possessed in the world. The aged and hea r t-b ro k en parent b e i ng sworn , stated that he gained hi s li ve lih oo d b y se lli ng f ru i t i n the stre ets, J ot lodged at N o . 77, Ch ar l otte -street, Fitzroy-square, an d ' w itb some time ago his son obtained a situation as pot-baY nat i t . Mr. Bye, landlord of the Wheatsheaf public-house, U t r bone-place ; but, being discharged from thence for Ini s— to , duct, on Wednesday se'nnight, and having no pl a ce to go 4 , he came home, and slept in the same apartment with P,IL, cutor, who kept the money in question in an old stoe st which was placed under his pillow. On Saturday morning] to , he went to examine his little hoard of treasure, and was a il , nished to find it had totally disappeared, together with hiss t be who was seen to change a sovereign at a public-house i° n i. neighbourhood on the ev en i ng o f th e same d ay, an d o n sus,. i. e cion falling upon him, h e was , a f ter muc h difficulty, ago. hended, with two sovereigns and some silver in his posses s or , Mr. Bye, the landlord of the above house, here eant e . t o ward and stated that w h en th e pr i soner app li e d f or the si to t tion at his house, he said that his name was Wright, and „ is he had lived with M r . G urr , w h o k eeps a public-11 0 ° s ' be Duke-street, Manchester-square. Upon inquiry there'ol learned that a youth of that name had lived in the house , eo . that he bore a goo d c h aracter , an d h e, i n conseque nee, o o gaged the prisone r ; h e , h owever, su b sequent l y disnel that the prisoner, who had lived with Mr. Gurr a short 61 :04 had been discha rge d f or d run k enness and other mise°ll,..lo ~ and that he had h a d th e au d ac i ty to pass himself off I °' 00 fellow-servant, Wright, whose character was excellent. this coming to his knowledge, he discharged the Pri s° oll; who, he has every reason to believe, robbed him of t'W ° bich handkerchiefs the short time he was in his service, and ° be er' were missed soon after his departure, and had not since n os. found. He had no m o n e y w h en di scharged. It being Illirbo sible for the poor old man to identify the money f o und ° te te undutiful and hopeles s son , he was discharged after a s e ' lecture from the magistrate. George Loder, driver of the omnibus No. 158, was br e ld; before the sitting Magistrate, Mr. Hosxms, charged I:ge having carelessly and negligently driven against the ea rr re et, of Gerard Gould, Esq., N o . 28, U pper M ontagu e-st thereby damaging the same to the amount of 61. 15s. t ea Matthew Herbert, coachman to Mr. Gould, deposed tha_ Tuesday afternoon la s t, a b ou t th ree o ' c l oc k , h e was pro4 e i dj ing up Oxford-stre e t w ith th e carr i age , i n w hi c h M rs . ° g ide and some young ladies were seated, and was on the nearorcl in his proper position. On crossing over to go to Or° e gli street, the defendant, who was on th e o ff- s id e o f the ' O O suddenly drove the p o l e o f th e omn ib us w i t h great vile ir to against the pa nne l o f hi s master ' s carr i age, smashing dies, pieces, and doing other damage, besides alarming the la ha re He (witness) was quite sure that the defendant might e avoided the collision had he thought proper to have dol l as there was plenty of time for them to have pulled up. s ed Edward Luliere, a footman in the same service, &r ac e; that he was with th e carr i age w h en the occurrence too k P bet he could not say at what rate the omnibus was proceedingto , was confident th a t th e d e f en d ant m i ght have avoided the lithe dent. The defendant drove away as fast as possible afte r ber collision, so that it was with great difficulty that his nu ° could be ascertained. William Delworth, of th e Portman Arms, Dorset-styeet ; 8 4 who was crossing the road a t th e ti me , sa id that he consid er ' the defendant was in fault. 10 4 The defendant, in exculpation of himself, said that 11°04 o gone on the off-side of the roa d f or t h e purpose of Pui, down a passenger, and, h av i ng d one so , was proceeding sip a slow rate, when the carri age , w hi c h was on t h e ne ar suddenly crossed, and ran against the pole of the omnibus' of Charles Noel, the conductor of the omnibus, gave s ilTl testimony. the Mr. HosKINe, after putting some further questions t e ,, o ef witnesses, said that, und er a ll t h e c i rcumstances of the epee he considered that th e d e f en d ant was in some degree to 10 and should, the re f ore , recommend him to pay a moiety ° h it) expenses incurred in putting the carriage in repair, .54e. , was agreed to, and thus the matter ended. he late heavy rains have laid the corn in counties, but it is admitted that the benefit far exceeds tie mage. LIVERPOOL COTTON-MARKET, WEDNE- tO - _There has been a very good demand experienced for et g o to-day, and the market is firm ; about 6,000 bales have sold at extreme prices, chiefly American, from sd. t° About 1,500 on speculation. B IR TH S. lite r. of At Kempston, the lady of Colonel Green s t ree t, o f a daug, r , On the 30th ult., at Finsbury-square, M rs . H enr y Treaen a son. On the 26th ult., at Finchley, Mrs. R o b er t Hutchinson °f 1151 P. MARRIAGES. On the 31st ult., Mr. Ed war d R o b er t s , of Dowgate. - hill Maria, youngest daughter of John A nge ll, Esq., of V 11" nington-green. 00 °P/ On the 29th ult., at Leicester, Mr. John Wills, of —.ooo' street, London, to Ann, seco n d d aug ht er o f M r . Thomas of the former Pas lace ,----- r DEA. On the 27th ult., Maria, wife of THS Major Edward Brack evbOP , Skendleby-house, Lincolnshire. of Pi' On the 29th ult., aged 17 months, James, youngest sou s A. Murray, of Mecklenburg-square. / 16 , in bef On the 28th ult., in Pratt-pla c e, C am d en -t o wn, ,,, yep. year, Ann, relict of the late Mr. Al exan d er M'C a llan, au"' '.• of Beaufort-buildings, Strand. Afgrl', On the 26th ult., - at Lynn, in her 64th year, Elizabe th the wife of Lionel Self, Esq. On the 30th ult., in his 68th year, Mr. Riehara * Mcher' Lower Thames-street. London : Printed and Published by MURDO at The Sll't Office, No. 112, Strand• CoN ri KING g!" nototio,k as ere r n et a in Y_b 9 110661, AA, Co w, . cft ~lyN'4tg Pat pad l,ga " 17 U GG Ob is h r e rt Th t k qiio 14 ji1 5' 4 ' l* * ,l : re b y ‘, 1 441 4 8te k of pr N ti t.:4ll :4 l z l <h,