The Sun. — London, England, 1834-07-31 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF JOURNALS. The Reform Bills are gradually coming into opera tion.. A most important debate and division occurred last night in the House of Commons on the Irish Tithe Bill, on an amendment of Mr. O'Connell in Committee. Mr. O'Connell proposed on the third clause a reduction of forty per cent. in tithe composi tions, or two-fifths of the whole value of the compo sition. We refer to the spirited debate on this im portant amendment, which was carried against the Government by a majority of 82 to 33. The effect of this remarkable division is to extinguish 268,0001. of the amount. The present value of Irish Tithes, by the latest returns, is about 670,001., and it is now, therefore, reduced to 400,000/. ! Ministers subse quently agreed to a second amendment of Mr.O'Connell, exonerating all tenants or occupiers of lands in Ire land from the payment of any tithes whatever, and to compel the landlords to pay the remaining three-; fifths. As the measure must be recast to meet these essential alterations, the consideration of all the early clauses was postponed by Lord Althorp. A real and practical relief is at last applied to one of the great grievances of Ireland,—a distemper which, in fact, affected the great mass of the people, and greatly increased their predial tendencies. IVIr. Pou lett Scrope, in his recent pamphlet on the mode of governing Ireland, states two giant evils under which Leland has long heaved and groaned. " The first is the domination of a Protestant Church, imposed by right of conquest on a Catholic people, maintained on the spoils of the ancient Catholic establishment, and therefore necessarily looked upon by the people both as a badge of their servitude, and a sacrilegious usurpation of the rights of their own Church." We have long predicted that this monstrous and unchris tian abuse could not long be endured. From the context of the debate, and the ingenious remarks of Lord Althorp, it would seem that Ministers were reconciled to the defeat ; indeed some of their best supporters quitted the ministerial ranks. The Tories are becoming quite frenzied. Mr. Shaw and Mr. Lefroy declared their chagrin, and determination to vote against a Bill which originally received their sup port as a necessary evil. Mr. O'Connell, from mo tives indicative of his satisfaction, withdrew all further opposition to the measure. Thus a wide breach, after a long siege, has been made in the walls of the Irish Church. But after all, as remarked by Mr. Scrope, this modification of the ecclesiastical system will be only a partial and temporary tranquillization of Ireland. " The Protestant Church is a grievance, the tithe system is another ; but were tithes and the Church swept away to-morrow, the sufferings of the mass of the people of Ireland, the insecurity of their position, and the consequent proneness to illegal, combination and rebellion, would be in no sensible degree mitigated." The poor of Ireland must be provided for by the Le gislature, and time and education—meaning by educa tion something more than the mere ability to read and write--will do the rest. From what we intimated of the contents of the Report of the English Ecclesiastical Com mission, the deans and chapters, and the clerical drones who rob the working clergy of their proper remuneration, will be obliged to yield to the " spirit of the age." The result of last night's division will be received throughout Ireland with extreme interest. The Tories will, of course, now oppore the Bill. What the Lords will do is of little moment. If they cast out or destroy —in effect the same—the Irish Tithe Bill, the remain ing three-fifths of the tax will be swamped, and Ireland will be thus rid of the whole expense of the Hierarchy; and the Irish Protestants must support their Church Establishment by the " voluntry principle." Though the existence of a Protestant Church for a Catholic population can admit of no justification, and every well-wisher to his country must hail the signs of its downfall, we are far from wishing to see the Irish land lords reap all the advantage of the extinction of tithes. If, however, the Lords throw out the Bill, we fear it will be impossible to recover for the public any part of a fund which might be beneficially applied to very use ful and charitable purposes. However, we must not be too rash in condemning the Peers. They may see that by obstinately holding out against the Bill, th ey will endanger all. W e s h a ll S ee .-12 - 2 orning Chronicle. The present state of the public business in Parlia ment, though not unprecedented, reflects any thing but credit on those who so conduct the affairs of the nation as to render it necessary to legislate upon its most important interests either in the dog-days or not at all. Of the Members of the House of Commons, it is calculated that full two-thirds have left town, tired out by the apparently interminable duration of the Session ; while, of the House of Peers, only 27 could be found to vote upon one of the most interesting and important measures of the Session. Such a state of things must be any thing but satisfactory to the country, which thus sees its vital interests handed over to, and hurried through by small Committees of the Legislature, instead of being calmly considered and discussed by the whole body. For this novel state of things, unknown at least till within these few years, several causes may be assigned ; among which the late period at which the Session commences, the eternal love of talking which infects the House of Commons, and the practice of allowing so little of the public business to originate in the House of Peers, may be considered the chief. That the first of these constitutes the main hindrance to an earlier termi nation of the Session cannot be doubted. Were Par liament to meet, as it formerly did, about the same pe riod as that in which the Courts of Justice assemble, and were to adjourn for ,three weeks, or a month, at Christmas, there is little doubt that, with proper promptitude and pre-arrangement on the part of Go vernment and the different public offices, the Session might be brought to a conclusion by the end of May, or the beginning of June. But without the facilities here alluded to, even this cannot be hoped for. As it is, delay and postponement seem to be the watchwords of every public measure. Public men, like schoolboys, seem only anxious to postpone an unpleasant task ; as a.striking specimen of which it is not till the end of July that even the Budget is presented by the Finance Minister to a House of Commons, which has been sitting ever since the beginning of February. Though their attendance in Parliament is the highest and most important duty which they can have to perform, it seems scarcely reasonable to blame Members of the Legislature for their being driven, as it were, from the sense of their duties before those duties are completed, many of whom, doubtless, find, from the dilatory, unmethodical way in which the public business is conducted, that they have, in fact, little to do, during a residence of five or six months in the metro .., polis, but to write franks and spend their fortunes, while the really important business of the country is delayed till they are " over the hills and far away." It is impossible, too, not to be struck with the dan- gerous and unconstitutional nature of a proceeding which enables the Ministry, for the time being, to be almost its own Parliament and its own law-makers. Whether taken as a tired or a too willing audience. there is no doubt that Ministers have much less diffi- culty in getting their decrees registered at the end than at the beginning of a Session ; and so far they are encouraged to persist in a practice in every respect so blamable, and at the same time so easily to be avoided. Why does not Parliament itself take the remedy into its own hands, either by address to the Crown, or by regulations of its own, which might obviate its con tinuance ? There are Standing and Sessional Orders of both Houses as to the periods at which the dif ferent stages of public Bills must occur. Why should not the public business, subject to certain modifica tions, be made amenable td similar rules ? At any rate, the evil is one at this moment of a striking and undeniable nature ; and it is during the existence of the disease that the remedy and the means of preven tion are most effectually adopted.—Morning Herald. The discussion which took place on Tuesday night in the House of Commons, on the motion for going into Committee on the Irish Tithe Bill, was one of the most extraordinary that even the present extraordi nary House of Commons has witnessed. Ministers have shifted their ground upon the subject of Irish tithe about a dozen times, with the express intention of seeking a final position, in which they might hope, if not for the support, at least for the neutrality and forbearance of the leaders of the Roman Catholic fac tion in Ireland. The debate of Tuesday, if their folly be not wholly incorrigible, must surely have taught them how visionary and fallacious is any such expec tation. Ministers have proclaimed their resolution to modify the Tithe Bill now before the House of Com mons in such a way that it may include the precise amount of Church robbery which the Roman Catholic leaders demanded immediately before the announce ment of the last Ministerial concessions. Mr. Barron said that " he remembered," we quote the Times report, "that at a meeting of the liberal Irish Members, which he attended, it had been determined to press the Government to concede three points—first, the omis sion of the appropriation clause ; secondly, that there should be a new valuation in all cases in which there had been any complaint ; and, thirdly, that the reduction on tithe should be increased from 15 or 20 per cent. to 40 per cent. Now all these points had been conceded, and he accordingly considered it rather strange that Hon. Gentlemen should now offer such strenuous opposition to the Bill." We entirely differ from Mr. Barron. The result which seems so strange to him is perfectly familiar to us. When has conces sion to the Roman Catholic faction produced any other effect than to enhance their demands, and to aggravate their discontent ? When will concession to them be productive of any other effect so long as any thing re mains to be conceded ? The folly of Ministers must now surely be cured. It is impossible that they can any longer expect to propitiate the Roman Catholic faction by any measures which, either in substance or in form, stop short of the destruction of the Protestant Church, and the abandonment of Ireland to triumphant and unmitigated Popery. We have always insisted that firmness and vigour are the qualities by the display of which the British Government in its treatment of Ireland can alone discharge its duty to the empire at large, or perform towards the Irish people those indispensa ble offices from the necessity of which Government, in the abstract,. derives its whole value and its whole jus fication. And in proportion to the strength of this conviction is our regret when we perceive that, in the debate upon the Irish Tithe Bill, a power paramount to that of the law is perpetually recognised by speakers on all sides of the question, and by none with greater apparent alacrity than by the members of his Majesty's Government, the Advocates of the Bill. One of their leading arguments in favour of the Bill has been, in deed, that, if it be not passed, tithe will necessarily fall into abeyance, and that this description of pro perty will be finally lost. What is this but a coward's argument ? What is it but an admission that the law is impotent, and the violators of the law, supreme ? Is not tithe a legal claim now, as much as the fraction of tithe which the Bill proposes to respect will be a legal 'claim after the Bill has passed ? And what obedience is due or likely to be paid to a law, the chief argument in support of which is that the existing law has been overpowered by illegal violence ? The new Bill proposes to give up to the landlords of Ireland 40 per cent. of the actual value of the tithe, upon condition that they will make themselves responsible to the Church for the remaining 60 per cent. The bonus is a large one, and in any state of society in which the laws were permitted to operate, it would present an irresistible temptation. But the force of the inducement is incalculably impaired when the offer of it is accompanied by an acknowledgment that the law is powerless, and when the landowners of Ire land are told, in express terms, by men on all sides of the House of Commons, that if they make themselves responsible for 60 per cent. of the tithe, or for any other proportion, they will certainly be left to obtain their re imbursement how they can, without any effectual aid from the Government or the law. It is not upon terms like these that men are easily induced to under take onerous responsibilities. We had written thus far when we learned thatMr.o ' Connell defeated Ministers last night in the House of Commons, and gave to the Irish Tithe Bill a character so entirely new that hence forth it must be considered not the measure of his Ma jesty's Ministers, but that of the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin. Mr. O'Connell's amendment,which the House of Commons has adopted, abolishes tithe, and substitutes for it a payment to be made by the landowners to the Clergy to the amount of three-fifths of the actual amount of tithe, this new claim upon the landlord being altogether independent of any consent or compact on his own part. The humbled and crest fallen leader of the House of Commons means to adopt the sudden and arbitrary amendment ; but we think it probable that the whole of his colleagues will not con- cur in his condescension, or imitate his docility. Whe ther this amendment, and the unexpected success which has attended it, be the result of a new intrigue between Lord Althorp and Mr. O'Connell, to rid the former of some obnoxious colleague, and the latter of some inconvenient opponent, or whether it be merely a device of the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin to retard any adjustment of the tithe question, we can not at present venture to pronounce. That they must be followed by important consequences in respect to the personnel of the Administration, to the progress of business in Parliament during the remainder of the ses sion, and to the state and prospects of Ireland, it is, however, impossible to doubt. At present we incline strongly to the opinion that, for some purpose or other, the thing has been managed between Lord Althorp and Mr. O'Connell.—Morning Post. The Lord Chancellor last night took the trouble to repeat a correction which had been made on the pre ceding night by many, and yesterday morning by nearly all, the papers. It referred to the division on the first bastardy clause, which was carried by a ma jority of 38 to 14, not by 14 to 13, as stated in the newspapers of Tuesday. The Chancellor, however, was pleased to add, that the clause was " carried hol low,—most triumphantly ; as decisively and as con clusively as the aruments by whi c h i t was supported were triumphant.' We are glad that the Lord Chan cellor has thus reminded us that it is our duty to point out what the " arguments" which carried the clause so " triumphantly' were, so far as regards his speech. The following extracts from the observations that fell from him on Monday evening seem to include the whole. His Lordship said, "It had been objected to the introduction of a principle which went to punish the female who gave birth to an illegiti mate child, and not the father. Now, he would undertake to say that such was the uniform course of legislation--such was the law of the land already__ and such was the principle on which all moralists had proceeded, and on which also Parliament pro ceeded every day in the year ; and last of all, it was the principle upon which the laws of society at present stood. It was ho novelty, neither was it proposed now for the first time to the Legislature." Again, he said, Ever since the time of James I. bastardy had been regarded and punished as a crime in the woman, who was liable to lie sent to prison or the House of Cer rection, while the man was suffered to escape." Thus, then, stands his Lordship's argument. He says that it has been the uniform course of the Legislature to punish the mother, and let the father escape. From this position lie deduces the inference that the bastardy clauses should run in the same line, and not disturb the uniformity of the ancient course. Now, we concur entirely with his Lordship in his inference, and he cannot fail to concur with us when we state, tha ,e converse of his inference is also true—that if the uniform course of legislation has been to punish both father and mother, and never to let the father escape, then this Poor Law Bill should 'follow in the same line, and not disturb the uniformity of the ancient course. The only point of difference be tween us, then, is this,--namely, whether from the first statute, in this case made and provided, until the last, the course of legislation has been to punish both father and mother, or whether it has been to punish the mother only, and let the father escape. We con fess that we feel heartily ashamed to have to debate the right and wrong of so notorious a fact,-_a fact which even a careful perusal of the police reports in the newspapers ought to have made every one accu rately acquainted with, and saved all men from mis understanding or misrepresenting. However, as the first judge in the land has, through haste and forget fulness, stated that to be the uniform course of the Legislature, which is directly at variance with the uniform course of legislation from the earliest time to the present, and has declared that to have been the faw which never was the law, and that to be the law which is contrary to the law, we owe neither to the Lord Chancellor nor to bur readers any, apology for setting the one right, and saving the other from beir misled. On the contrary, as we have already 01- respectability who has said That the frail woman shall be punished, and the seducer be allowed to escape. We never yet heard of such a moralist,--and we re collect quite well that Dr. Paley, whose Moral Phi losophy contains the least possible portion of the theory of morals which will satisfy an examiner at either of our Universities, lays down a very different doctrine. We cite, in conclusion, two passages from that writer's chapter on " Seduction" : Let a father or a brother say for what they would suffer this injury in a daughter or a sister; and whether any, or even a total loss, of fortune could create equal affliction and distress. And when they reflect upon this, let them distin guish, if they can, between a robbery committed upon their property by fraud or forgery, and the ruin of , their happiness by the treachery of a seducer." " Upon the whole, if we pursue the effects of seduction through the complicated misery which it occasions, and if it be right to estimate crimes by the mischief they knowingly produce, it will appear something more than mere invective to assert, that not one-half of the crimes for which men suffer death by the laws of England are so flagitious as this And yet this is the crime which the Poor Laws' Bill passes over without punishment, and thereby offers a premium upon the practice of it.—Times. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. NORTHERN CIRCUIT.-DURIIAM, JULY 28. (Before Mr. Baron GURNEY.) John Palmer was charged with stealing, at the parish of St. Nicholas, in the dwelling-house of Mrs. Mitchell, five sovereigns and some silver, the property of James Hogg. Mr. WILKINSON conducted the prosecution, and Mr. GRANGET defended the prisoner. The prosecutor, Mr. Hogg, is a mercantile traveller, and on the 19th of July was at the City Tavern, kept by Mrs. Mitchell, in this place. The prisoner was boots at the inn. On the morning of the 19th, Mr. Hogg was preparing to start, and the boots brought down the driving-box of his gig from the sleeping apartment of Mr. Hogg to the tra vellers'-room. All was then safe. Mr. Hogg then went to the door, and saw a fellow -traveller off, and returned to his room. All was still safe. He then left for a quarter of an hour, and on his return, finding he had not enough to pay his bill, proceeded to his driving-box, which contained 40 sovereigns in a bag, and a b out as muc h more i n s ilver. He then discovered that it h a d b een opened. O n calling. the landlady and the servants, it was ascertained that no body but the boots had been in the room. The box ap peared to have been burst open with a carving-fork which was produced. The prisoner denied his guilt, but in con sequence of something that he said, search was made in a stable called the dark stable, where the money was found. The Learned CHIEF BARON briefly recapitulated the evidence to the Jury, who immediately found the prisoner Guilty.—Sentence deferred. Gilbert Dodds and Edward Holland were indicted for and convicted of, violently assaulting and robbing, on the highway between Sunderland and Bast Boden, Mr. James Temperly. Mr. Temperly, a respectable young man, was proceeding along the railway when the prisoners asked of him money to drink. On receiving an evasive answer, one of them threw him down and struck him violently and robbed him. —Sentence deferred. OXFORD CIRCUIT. —STAFFORD, Jury 28. THE KING V. HALL AND FOUR On/EA& Mr. Justice W iLuAms delivered a long address to these men, who had pleaded Guilty to an indictment for admi nistering an oath, that certain parties would not make pins under a fixed price, and that they would not divulge the secrets of the association. The Learned Judge informed them that he could not by law pass any other judgment than transportation for seven years, and that in consequence of the recommendation of the prosecutors, and on the infor mation that the association was about to be dissolved, he should not pass any judgment. The prisoners then entered info their own recognizances to come up for judgment, in ease they were ever required to do so. THE KING V. CARTWRIGHT, TART, AND ALBUTT. Mr. CORBETT and Mr. BUSBY prosecuted. The prisoners were ch arge d w ith t h e mur d er of Charles Williams. The trial conti nue d f rom 10 o ' c l oc k i n the morn ing until half-p as t 5 o ' c l oc k i n the evening. Th e J u d ge con sumed two hours and three parts of an hour in summing up the evidence. The deceased had been struck on the head with a hammer, which caused his death. It would be useless to set out the evidence at length, and the only fact worthy of remark was, that three witnesses gave such an account of the transaction, that on their cross-examina tion by Mr. Godson, the stories they told were so different, that, as the learned Judge observed, a person would sup pose that they were speaking of three different transactions. Mr. GODSON appeared for Cartwright and TART, and Mr. LEE for Albutt. The Jury found the prisoners Not Guilty, and Mr. Jus tice WILLIAMS observed, that he would not pluck a feather from a bird on such evidence. The assizes ended on Monday evening, and the learned Judges proceeded on Tuesday to Shrewsbury, where the calendar is very light. HOME CIRCUIT.—LEtvEs, Jam , 30. (Before Lord Chief Justice TINDAL) Thomas Snell, cordwainer, aged 29, and Thomas Bailey, labourer, aged 21, were indicted for having, along with three other persons, on the night of the 30th of December last, at Hartfield, unlawfully entered a certain enclosed piece of woodland, the property of the Right Hon. George John Earl De Lawarr, armed with guns, for the purpose of destroying game. The prisoner Bailey was slso charged with unlawfully wounding Thomas Lampard and James Luxford, his Lordship's gamekeepers. Thomas Lampard, examined by Mr. DARBY—On the J3aomtheosfLlausxtfDoredc,eam,ber, I was one of Lord De Lawarr's game keepers. O n the morning of the 31 st I was out with called th e L,- some d,• 'ogsh..tawu.ndemrr-ghailmsteklewepaesrt.her tN si- . S .i 'e of gsrutrihe dogs..l Theafterwards men came up to sawthemehasin,, , r a me a littleharel..ot after 12 o'clock. I was following the third dog when I I oseYve4, came up to the men. I passed them. Two other men it is our duty to do both. Well, then, to show that the fact is not as the Lord Chancellor represented it to be, but of a nature quite contrary to the description he gave of it, we have recourse to the best text book on the poor-laws for, a passage that explains the enact ments, and the reasons of them, which bear upon this question. This is a shorter mode than quoting the statutes would be, while at the same time it is equally satisfactory. Mr. Nolan in the second volume of his treatise, and in the section entitled "Of the punish ment of the mother and reputed father (of the bas tard)," which is at page 388, writes thus in describ ing the 18th of Elizabeth :—" Getting an illegitimate child was not punishable as a crime at common law. But the 18th of Elizabeth expressly considers the pro ducing of bastards as an offence ; not only the getting or bearing the child, but the leaving it to be a burden on the parish, and defrauding the relief of the true poor of it. Therefore, the justices may order a proper punishment of the parents, and also take order for maintaining the child in relief of the parish. They may do either or both, 'but the statute seems only to go to the punishment of the parents, for the purpose of securing an indemnity to the parish." This cause of the punishment—the indemnifying of the parish—was doubtless the reason of the enactment. The Legislature never looked t o th e mora lity o f either of the parties, but to the chargeableness of their acts upon the parish funds, and therefore it very properly sought indemnity from, or punished, both, as Lord Mansfield has clearly shown, Rex v. Westinean.* The parishes have ever taken the same view of the case, and this law and its interpretation and practice have existed in the statute book, and been recognized in courts of law and in the practice of parishes, from the earliest to the latest times—to the hour in which ,we write. The charging the parish with the main tenance of the child has been the whole and sole offence in the eye of the law ; and that law was in the beginning, is now, and, till the Poor Law Bill passes, will be, that the father shall be punished, not that he shall escape. The father's punishment, as we have seen, can be inflicted only in de fault of the maintenance of the child :—the same is true of the woman. The statute of the 18th of Eliza beth, so far from being repealed, has been strengthened and extended against the . father by various statutes, which, together with the original exist to this day, and are every day acted upon. The Chancellor, then, was much mistaken when he said that the uniform course of the Legislature was to punish the mother only, and let the father escape. Yet this was his argument,— one of the arguments which carried one of the bastardy clauses so _" triumphantly." Do we ask too much of him, or do we request only that which is just and fair and reasonable, when we call on him to state the facts correctly, and then to draw his inference properly ? The inference will, of course, be, that as the uniform course of the Legislature has been to punish both parties, the Poor Laws Bill ought not to let one of them —the father—escape, and visit all the punishment on the mother. Having thus disposed of the law of the case, we have merely to challenge all supporters of the bastardy clauses to mention any one moralist of credit and THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, JULY 31, 1834. came in through the gate out of the field into the wood . They had two guns. One put the muzzle of his gun to my breast. One of them said, " Which dogs are they ?" The man who had his gun to my breast went down to the dogs. and swearing, said, " They have killed two of tho best dogs. He returned, and put the muzzle of his gun close to me. I pushed him and told him to keep away. Luxford was standing by my side. One of the tall men hit me on the head with a hedgestake. I was then knocked down. It was Snell did that. Luxford then knocked Snell down. We began to fight among each other. I was struck several times. After it was all over, I found myself lying under a gate. It was then ten minutes past one o'clock. The four men came to me when I was lying in the shaw in the road. They said they had finished one, and now they'd finish another. Bailey hit me across the back and by the side of my head, and I saw the gun fall right asunder. It was a very light night. The gun" was afterwards found in its broken state. I had four wounds in my head. I conld not go to work for two months. I feel the effects of it now when the weather changes. Last as sizes I went to the gaol and identified Snell. I said I did not want to see any more. I afterwards saw Bailey at work by the river at Hawkhurst. There were 20 men. I passed a great many, and Was satisfied in my own mind that he was the man who attacked us on the night in ques tion. He put his gun to my breast. He went in a stoop ing.posture, and was lame. Oross-examined—laMas sure of one as of another. On frosty nights it is of no use going after long dogs. There was a road through the shaw leading from farm to farm. I struck with my hands, and once with the stake which Snell had. I knocked him down. James Luxford—l am an assistant gamekeeper, and was with Lampard on the night of the 30th of December last. Our attention was drawn to some dogs that were running in a field. We followed them to the cross-ways, where Lampard shot two of them. After this two men came up, one had a stick, the other had nothing. The one with the stick told the other to get one, upon which he cut a stick from the hedge, and then two more men with guns came out of a field. One went up to Lampard, but afterwards said, " Which dog is it ?" and ran to the dogs and said— " their bloods, they have killed two of the best dogs." He then returned to Lampard and presented his gun. Lampard took hold of it with his left hand, and pushed him with his right, then Snell with the stick knocked Lam pard down. I knocked Snell down, and Lampard got up, picked up Snell's stick, and knocked down one or two of them. They all then got up; and stood there for a little while doing nothing. All the four men afterwards beat Lampard until he was senseless. When I recovered my senses, Lampard was beside me, and the men had gone. I had several cuts on the head. It was the prisonerßailey who presented the gun at Lampard's breast. I recognized Snell in the gaol at the last assizes, and on the Bth inst. I recognized Bailey working, as a navigator amongst several other people at Hawkhurst. The prisoners in their defence called witnesses to prove an alibi. They stated that Snell was at a public house at Tunbridge Wells on the night in question, and Bailey was at a dance at Lamberhurst. The witnesses underwent a severe cross-examination, but their testimony was not shaken. The Jury Acquitted both the prisoners. WESTERN CIRCUIT.--ErETER, JULY 29. The commission for holding the assizes for the county of Devon was opened in this city on Saturday afternoon by Lord DENMAN and Mr. Justice PATTESON. The business is light. There are 36 prisoners in the calendar, and only 14 causes on the paper. (Before Lord DENMAN and a Common Jury.) THE KING V. BRICE AND FIFTEEN OTHERS. The defendants in this case were committed to take their trial at the Easter Sessions for the city of Exeter for having administered unlawful oaths, they being members of an illegal association. The case was removed from the Ses sions by certiorari to this Court. Mr. FOLLETT, with whom was Mr. GREENWOOD, pro ceeded to state the case. It was an indictment preferred against the defendants, who were bricklayers. They were aware that, in the course of last year, there had been a for mation of certain societies in London, and it had been the intention of thd members of those associations that branch societies should be established in different towns connected with the societies in London. This association was formed of working tradesmen, bricklayers, carpenters, and others. What the precise object of these associations was they could not tell, but the ostensible object was to keep a check on their employers. They would observe, that the way in which this was effected was, that the persons who conducted these pro ceedings in London were to give notice to those in the coun try, who were to act upon those instructions. Every person on becoming a member bound himself by an oath, adminis tered in the most solemn manner, not to disclose anything which might take place among them. He believed that the spirit which had set on foot these associations had di minished. That they were most dangerous no one could doubt ; it could not be proper that the working orders of the people should meet together, and bind themselves not to disclose their proceedings : it might be used for the most dangerous purposes as regarded the welfare of the State. The object of this prosecution had been to check in the outset the formation of these societies in this city. He believed that two of the defendants had come from London for the purpose of forming these associations. The object he had in view was to show these defendants that they were, in entering into an illegal association, violating the law, which would not permit such associations to be formed. Mr. Sergeant WILDE here interrupted Mr. FOLLETT by stating, that as his learned friend had intimated that the object of the prosecution had been effected, he had to sug gest that, as the parties were now satisfied of the illegality of their proceedings, every object had been answered, and public justice had been abundantly satisfied, and he there fore hoped the prosecution would not be pressed further. Mr. FOLLETT said there was no wish on the part of the prosecution to press the case, so that it was understood by the defendants that their conduct had been an infraction - of the law. The object of the prosecution had been answered, and there was no wish that the defendants should receive any punishment, and they might be discharged upon entering into their own recognizances. Lord DENMAN then addressed the Jury. Under these circumstances, the Learned Counsel for the defendants feeling they could not defend their conduct, they would find them guilty. The offence was an offence of conspi racy to administer unlawful oaths, for the purpose of rais ing wages, and he trusted that it was understood that the law would not permit these associations ; that it was not a legitimate mode by which the working classes could obtain any object. Although many might have become members with very fair and reasonable motives, yet they were ren dering themselves liable to the heavy penalty of the law. They would find the defendants guilty, and they would not be brought up for judgment unless the prosecutors should think proper to complain to the Court of any thing relative to their future conduct. The defendants then appeared, and entered into their own recognizances. They were then discharged. NORFOLK CIRCUIT.—NonwIcH, JULY 29. The Assizes for the county which gives its title to this circuit commenced this morning. The calendar is numeri cally light, but the character of the charges is unusually grave, there being one of murder, one of manslaughter, one of maliciously stabbinn., two of arson, and two of unnatural offences. In the Civil Court only eight cduses arc entered for trial. (Before Mr. Justice GASELEE.) THE KING V. DUNN, GREEN, LOVICK, AND CRASP. This was an information against the defendants for a.- saulting and obstructing John Madan, an officer of customs, in.the execution of his duty, on the 29th of March last. Mr. Sergeant STORKS (with whom were Mr. ANDREWS and Mr. MALTBY) stated the case for the Crown. Mr. W. COOPER defended the accused. The prosecutor, Madan, is a commissioned boatman in the Coast-guard Preventive Service, and was stationed with a party of his men on the Norfolk coast at Stiffkey on the 29th of March. On the 3d of that month the prosecutor and his men had made an extensive seizure of tobacco, horses, and carts, in that village, which had caused a great sensation there. Since that affair, he had received instruc tions from his chief-officer that he and his men should carry their cutlasses unsheathed whenever they were on duty, in order to prevent surprise from any of the very questionable characters who are to be found on many parts of the coast. At seven o'clock in the evening of the 29th of March, the prosecutor left his house in company with his wife, to go to the village in order to call out his men for their evening duties ; and while he was descending the hill, leading to their quarters, he saw the defendant Green, and his wife, advancing towards him from the village. Green asked what business that fellow had with what he had in his hand," pointing to the prosecutor's cutlass ; to which Mrs. Madan replied, that "he was a King's man, and on duty." Green answered that "he did not care a for him, his duty, or the King." He then turned round and fol lowed the prosecutor, who turned and faced him, and re treated backwards with his cutlass pointed at him. Green then made several attempts to disarm the prosecutor, and in so doing caught hold of the cutlass, which was drawn through his hand, and by which he was severely wounded. By this time they had reached the village, where Green was joined by the three other d e f en d an t s , and other persons, to the number of 50. The first thing they tried to do was to set a large dog on the prosecutor, but the animal " not taking kindly" to the office, Lovick said " he would go and get a gun and shoot the fellow ;" he left accordingly, and in three or four minutes returned with a pitchfork, which was handed to the defendant Dunn. Immediately upon receiving it, Dunn aimed a blow at the prosecutor with it, which the latter caught on the handle of his cutlass in the " seventh guard of defence." The effect of the blow WWI to bend the guard of the cutlass, and thereby to cause it to press on the hand of the prosecutor, which it also wounded, causing it to fall powerless by his side. Dunn then struck a second blow at the prosecutor, which hit him on the forehead ; this inflicted a severe wound, and at the same time felled him to the ground, where he lay in a state of insensibility. When his senses returned he found him self in the Red Lion public-house. He was then very faint from the loss of blood. It appeared, however, by the evidence of his wife, that upon his becoming insensible she got the pitchfork out of Dunn's hands and ran and hid it, and that on her return she saw Greene and Dunn beating him with sticks as he lay on the ground. A sur geon was sent for, and he dressed the prosecutor's wounds and bled him, after which he was carried to his own house, which he was unable to leave for nine days. After the prosecutor was taken into the public-house he was followed by Green, who seems to have rushed in in a very desperate and furious manner. He asked where Madan was, declaring that "he would murder him to a certainty," when he was stopped by one of the preventive men, to whom he repeated his determination to take the prosecutor's life, and that of any man who hindered him. These were the general fea tures of the case as sworn to by the witnesses for the pro secution, who were in no degree shaken by the cross exa mination. For the defence several witnesses were called, the pur port of whose testimony was, that the prosecutor was com pletely drunk on the evening in question, and that he was the aggressor instead of being the person injured. Mr. Serjeant STORKS was about to reply, when the jury intimated that it was unnecessary, and they immediately found all the defendants Guilty, accompanying their ver dict with two recommendations—the one that Crasp be mercifully dealt with by the Court in awarding punishment ; the other, that two of the witnesses for the defendants, a Mrs. Cable and John Ringwood, be prosecuted for perjury. COURT OF BANKRUPTCY. COURT OF REVIEW, GRAY'S LYN HALL, JULY 30. EX PARTE WATKINS, IN RE KIDDER. This petition asked an order of the Court requiring the assignees of the bankrupt to make over to the petitioner two shares in the Economic Assurance Office, which, at the time of tile issuing of the fiat, stood in the bankrupt's name, although the property of the petitioner. By one of the rules of this association, none but Directors are enti tled to hold more than two shares in their own name ; and it was presumed to be in consequence of this regulation that the case in question had arisen. Messrs. SWANSTON and ROMILLY were counsel for the petitioner ; Mr. MONTAGU for the respondent. The COURT was of opinion that the shares had only stood in the bankrupt's name in trust for the petitioner, and that therefore, according to the 79th section of the Bankruptcy Act, the assignees were empowered and in duty bound to make over the property to the right owner. Prayer of the petition granted; each party to pay their own costs. EX PARTE WATSON, IN RE MABERLY. This petition prayed the Court to order Mr. Maberly's assignees to pay to them the sum of 6291., the amount of notes paid into tha hands of his agent, Mr. Pellett, at Glasgow, subsequent to the stoppage of Mr. Maberly's London house, but prior to the arrival of intelligence of that event in Glasgow. Several petitions on this point have been already disposed of ; but the present case in volved a novel consideration, from a circumstance which peculiarly affected the transaction. A parcel of bank-notes and securities having been made up for the purpose of being transmitted to London to the assignees, it was ab stracted from the banking-house in Edinburgh by a young man named Chrystal, who subsequently absconded, and the property in question was never recovered. The point in dispute was, whether this parcel contained the identical notes the property of Mr. David Watson, the petitioner. Mr. BETIIELL supported the petition ; Messrs. SWAN STON and MONTAGU appeared for the respondents, the assignees. The COURT was unanimous in its decision. The claim was for the value of notes paid into the hands of the agent, and thence to the assignees ; it was therefore to be treated according to the former decisions in similar cases. Had the notes been traced to the possession of the assignees, there would have been no hesitation in acceding to the petitioner's claim ; had the notes been retained in Mr. Blythe's (the Edinburgh agent) hands until the time of the interference of the assignees, the same result might have been arrived at ; but the petitioner having failed to prove this by showing their absence from the lost packet, and the respondents having, on the other hand, proved that they were really contained therein, it was impossible to decide otherwise than in the rejection of the petitioner's suit. The parcel having been stolen on its way to the assignees, they could not in justice or honesty be charged with the deficiency, and were therefore not answerable for the value thereof. Petition dismissed without costs, but the costs of the re. spondents to be paid out of the estate. MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.--JULY 30. Before B. ROTCH, Esq., M.P., Chairman, and a full Bench _ of Magistrates.) Mary Ann Scott, a very pretty girl, aged eighteen years, was indicted for stealing, on the 9th instant, at Brentford, a pair of ear-rings, a ring, two sovereigns, and six shillings in silver, the property of Elizabeth Smith. The prosecutrix stated that she was the wife of a police sergeant of the T divj3ion, and was on very intimate terms with prisoner. On the day laid in the indictment she was visited by the prisoner, and had her company until about seven o'clock in the evening, when the latter left her to go to her aunt's at Ealing. The next morning, when prose cutrix arose, she missed the property described in the in dictment, and, oninforming her husband of the circumstance, he sent a policeman to the prisoner's dwelling to search the prisoner and her boxes, when he found the ring in one of her drawers. The prisoner's aunt, a respectable old lady, stated that the prisoner's intellect appeared very often affected, and sho disliked to go into the streets because the children called her Mad Moll. The Jury found the prisoner guilty, and the COURT sem tented her to be imprisoned one month in the House of Con rection. She will be confined in the Infirmary. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MARYL.EB ONE. Yesterday, a queer looking fellow who gave his name John Henderson, was brought up in the custody of a police constable, on the following charge It appeared, from the evidence of John Legg, 149 D, that on the same morning, about two o'clock, as he was on duty in Hyde Park-place, he found the prisoner sleep ing on the step of a door ; and, after much difficulty,awoke him, when, greatly to his surprise and alarm, he began to bark and growl in the most terrific manner, showing at the same time a set of formidable teeth. The neighbours were so frightened at this unusual noise, that many of them threw up their windows to ascertain what was the matter. As soon as the first fit of barking and howling had subsided, the constable proceeded, with precaution, to convey this ugly customer to the station-house ; but while he was taking him along, he suddenly burst out into a new fit of barking and howling, much louder and more hideous than before, in the course of which he imitated, with great ex actness, the whole of the canine race, from the shrill piercing notes of the terrier to the hoarse, deep-mantled bark of the mastiff and bull dog, snapping at the same time at the constable and passengers, who, thinking that he was really under the dreadful influence of hydrophobia, scam pered out of his way with all possible celerity. He was at length, with much difficulty, lodged in the station-house, and placed on the floor ; but, as the fit continued, a pail of water was thrown over him by way of a cooler. The only dislike he showed to that element was by throwing out his legs and arms as if in the act of swimming. He afterwards seized a poker, and threatened to annihilate all before him. At length he became quiet, and went into a sound sleep. The prisoner, in his defence, said that he was, some time ago, bitten by a mad dog ; and whenever he got a drop too much, which was the case that night, he always laboured under symptoms of hydrophobia, and conducted himself in the manner described. He was ordered to find bail. WORSHIP-STREET. A well-dressed young man, named William Priddle, anea young woman, named Mary Ann Petty, were yester day brought before Mr. BROUGHTON, charged with having robbed a Mr. George Wells, a plumber and glazier, of a sovereign and two silk handkerchiefs, under the following atrocious circumstances : A certificate from Mr. Moore, a surgeon, in Bethnal green, was handed to the Magistrate, stating that the pro secutor, from the severe bodily injuries he had received, was unable to attend to give evidence. Police constable 29 H stated that about eight o'clock on the previous evening he met the prosecutor in the Bethnal green road, who said to him, " For God's sake take my part, for I have been robbed, and almost murdered." Mr. BROUGHTON—Was he bleeding ? Officer—Yes, and such an object he was not fit to be seen. By his re quest I accompanied him to the Ship public-house, in the neighbourhood, where, among several young men there, he pointed out the prisoner Priddle as the man who first as saulted him, by knocking him down. He added that when he was attacked there were two other men with the pri soner, all of whom, when he fell on the ground, jumped upon his face and eyes, during which the prisoner Priddle put his hands into his pockets and rifled them. Witness went up to Priddle and told him he was his prisoner, and advised him to go quietly with him to the station-house, so he came out of the room, but the moment he got outside he bolted. However, said witness, on my calling out " Stop thief," he was secured, and lodged in the station-house Where was the prosecutor all that time ?—I left him at the public-house. What age do you think he is ?—About 36 years, an d well dressed. Do you know the prisoner ?-0, yes ; he is a well-known thief. Did you see Mary Ann Petty at the public-house ?--• No, she was taken into custody by a City officer. Thomas Pitch, a City watchman, said that about 11 o'clock he found the prosecutor sitting on the step of door in Half-moon-alley, Moorfields. After stating to wit ness the horrible manner he had been used, he said that the prisoner Mary Petty lived in the alley, and had robb ed him, and requested wit ness t o ta k e her into custody. In about half an hour afterwards the prisoner made her ar pearance in the alley, when witness took her off to the watch-house, where, on searching her, he found two of t he prosecutor's handkerchiefs in her possession. Brown, one of the officers of this establishment, here made a statement to the Magistrate, the substance of which was that the prosecutor had formerly cohabited with the prisoner, Mary Petty, who but a few days ago took a war rant out against him, and obtained 40s. damages. The wife of the prosecutor here entered the witness -boa, and said the female prisoner had been the cause of her leaving her husband. Being possessed of property of h er own, she in consequ ence wen t an d res id e d with her friends, at Birmingham for some time. Findirt, however, that her husband had become a true penitent, she agreed to return to town, and again lived with him, since which he had be. haved extremely well to her, but was daily annoyed by th e female prisoner, who was then living with Priddle. Wit ness here produced h er husband's shirt, which was saturate" with blood. Mr. BROUGHTON-DO you wish to say any thing Prid dle ? Priddle—l d en y th e : c h arge a l toget h er. The fact was, we met each other at the Ship, where he began aD us i ing me, and afterwards struck me a blow in my eye, s° struck him again. The prisoner, Mary Petty, said that, instead of taking any part in the affray, she merely took the handkerchie fs, which she saw th e p rosecu t or th row away, i n hi s h a t, to save for him. She intended to return them to him. Mr. BROUGHTON-But how came you to run away and leave him ? Prisoner—Seeing him bleeding made ale' am so frightened at blood. The prosecutor's wife—l have a witness whom I call bring forward, w h o h ear d h er say, w hil e my h us b an d was bleeding on the ground, " Give it to him ! kill him !" Mr. BROUGHTON told the prisoner -Priddle, that he should commit him to prison upon the capital charge , an remanded them both for further examination. THAMES-POLICE. A young Woman, nam e d S ara h S an d , a servan t in tb ,, e , employ of Mrs. Caiss, a l a dy res idi ng at N o. 12, H a rdvtio` place, Commercial-road, was charged with stealing a 9 11 tity of plate, worth t wen ty poun d s , t h e property o f h e r Inv tress, and another lady residing in the same house. It appeared that on the preceding afternoon ' the p lat y belonging to M rs . C a i ss an d h er l o d ger was collected an placed on a sideboard in the front parlour. The pro p e rtY , was seen at th ree o ' c l oc k, an d at fi ve was m i ss i ng ; a fe: minutes pre v i ous , th e pr i soner l e f t t h e h ouse for the purpe; c : as she pretended, of returning a newspaper to a pub il d house ; she had, not been long absent w h en her mistress n heard footsteps in the parlour, and on proceeding al, stairs, found the prisoner in the act of pushing open street door, which bad b een l e f t a j ar. O n e nterit: the parlour, the pl a t e was m i ss i ng f rom t h e s board; on communicating the circumstance to the prisooe she appeared perfectly unconcerned about the m atter Ii : policeman, No. 48, was ca ll e d i n, w h o b el i ev i ng t h a t t ok robbery was committed by the prisoner's connivance , t° her into custody. The only suspicious circumstance menfoned by the 5 liceman, was that the prisoner, contrary to her usual c. ng tom had brought th e pl a t e belonging to the lady occuPY l .4 the first floor, d own s t a i rs , an d d epos i te d i t on t h e s idebar with Mrs. Caiss's plate. roc The prisoner said she was innocent of the charge ; s ° , i , e thief must have tak en a d van t age o f h er a b sence with 1. newspaper to enter the house and steal the plate. Mr. COOMBE said th e con d uct o f t h e g i r l was certait;l!. suspicious ; but there was no ev id ence to warrant her o' tention. She was then ordered to be discharged. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, JULY 8°• Gilbert Abbott d Beckett, described as formerly of lig/ 1 : street, Bloomsb ur y, gent l eman, an d l ate of Stap l e Inn, °a born, proprietor and editor of the Figaro in London ai the Wag, a n d a l so l ate l y proprietor of the Evano.elic Penny Magazine, Dillin's Penny Trumpet, the rh it i' l)o° a Richard's Journal, an d t h e P eople ' s Penny Pictures, in c partnership with Th omas Littl eton H olt ; also, on hi s °s r- account, proprieto r o f th e T err ific Penny M agaz i ne , Ghos &c. ; the Figaro Monthly Newspaper, &c., and lately less ee of the Fitzroy Theatre, this day came before the C o urt. , The insolvent was no t o pp ose d on hi s app li cat i on f o r l a n: discharge, and it did no t appear t h at t h ere were any groin' ea for opposition on the part of his creditors. He had be unsuccessful in his speculation at the Fitzroy Theatre. t o Mr. COOKE, who was f or th e insolvent, observed tha t " client had greatly contributed to the mirth of the publi' I , The Learned CHIEF COMMISSIONER admitted that su e t , had been the case, but it had been done at some expens e his creditors. Mr. COOKE said th e cre dit ors were certa i n l y l aug h.n° on the wrong side of their mouths. A re' The COURT, a ft er as ki ng a f ew more questions an—. ceiving satisfactory answers, declared the insolvent eatit to the benefit of the Act, and ordered him to be disch argt forthwith. He was discharged accordingly. SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE. • VESSELS ENTERE D I NWARDS AT THE CUSTOH -- -HOUSE, Jc, / , s • al b Attilie, Schulz, fr om D antz i c; Arethusa, Simms, V(3,t, in' and Zante ; Victorine, Voel, Ch er b ourg ; Orwell, t'"oicr Harlingen ; Fame, Barfield, Harling en ; D e f t, L en don , „ r g, ningen; Alert, H um bl e , J aco b stadt ; Prince of Saxe Croll, Ladd, Rotterdam ; Elmina, Ravender, Uleaborg ; 71 3 0 - or; Campbell, Anti gua ; M arys, Lowther, Guernsey; `"b u rg' Nieuwland, W ereum ; Ch o l m l ey, Robinson, St. Peters,,rl; Friend Brodi e , G a t t b ar d Ki e l ; Russia, Krason, Charlotte, Blenk, Dantzic; Imperial, Spencer, St. Petersbu ° ENTERED OUTWARDS FOR LOADING, JULY 30•. ‘00 0, Attwood, Morfee, f or A n t werp ; Si r Th omas I " Da o' Richards, Hobart Town and Sydney ; Childe Haroldt w n; caster, Calcutta ; C oun t ess o f E rro ll , M a i tlan d , Legi r ' or ld Samuel Cunard, Jones, Rotterdam, Havre, and New 0 / 0" Ramona, Strana c k, R o t ter d am ; Columbine, Corbin/ Ar ch' burg; Active, Whit na ll, D un ki r k ; Pauline, Boyer '; tt a; angel ; D u k e o f Argyle, Thornhill, Madras and Ca le " Harby, Gibbens, Bilboa; Reliance, Sheader, HalnbUrg . CLEARED OUTWARDS WITH CARGOES JULY 30. joo M Attwood, Morfe e , f or A ntwerp ; Samuel Cunard, Havre and New York ; Time, Hobbs; Smyrna ; Josina' ba rg; helmina, Vuer, Am s t er d am ; U n i on, M ullens, St. P ete rs Elizabeth, Jewell, Bilboa. CLEARED OUTWARDS IN BALLAST, JULY 30. pie Reform, Littlejohn, for Malaga; Francis, WranglF s ' be till mel; Hand of Provid ence , H orway , A rchangel ; Ehlalot; Pearce, Uddawaller , Vriendschap, Jeffima, Wore Europe, Wood, Memel ; Legartha, Elliasen, GottenburEei B IIiTHS. sop ., .0 On the 27th inst., at Thornes House, the lady of J. i! Gaskell, Esq., M.P., of a d aug h ter . ger On the 28th in s t., a t Stowlangtoft, Suffolk, the lady o ' i Wilson, Esq., of a daughter. $ 54. ' On the 27th inst., a t H at row, t h e l ady of William Smi t h' of Montagu-squa re , o f a son. E , On the 26th inst., at Sh ep h er d' s Bush, the wife o f Joh n _....// Monkhouse, Esq., of a son. MARRIED. Ch s ; On the 28th inst., at St. Mary's in the Castle, Hasting s ' elt l —„ Allan Greenside, Esq., of Hastings, to Georgiana Ma r Y' , s Oe'' daughter of the late Captain G. F. Schaedtler, of the ging . o r , man Legion. .., On the 29th inst., at St. James's, Clerkenwell, Islitle n° 'lo l John Harri s , t o S ophia, third daughter of Wm. Powis, r•s t i" vo.' mington- square. On the 24th inst., at Lavington, Sussex, Henry Wil„liar, Jobs berforce, E sq . , to M ary, second daughter of the late oe' Sargent, rector of Lavington. DIED. W e ' On the 25th i ns t., a t East Bank, Renfrewshire, Catharin or, or well Alexander, third daughter of the late Claud Alela rl . t - Balloehueyle, Ayrshire. rel ,e r On the 3d July, at Bawtry, Elizabeth Hume, aged 83 , , w o rs°.' the Rev. Francis Herbert Hume, rector of Carlton an d la te Notts, and Prebendary of Southwell. f th e 4 On the 25th inst., at Penzance, Anne Car o li ne , relict o Gill Birt Jenner, third son of the l a t e R o b er t J e nner, Wenvoe Castle, Glamorgan. val On the 28th inst. George Sanders, Esq., Captain pe On the 28th inst., Mary Jane, the wife of Robert Wain' ~A man, Esq., of Mamhead Park, Devonshire. • On the 27th inst., Emily Rushleigh, youngest child of O il' t ward Buller, Esq., of W o b urn - square . id s° On the 29th inst., a t th e Pi azza, C ovent- g ar d e n, the - , daughter of Mr. Ed mun d R o bi ns . a • " On the 28th inst., a t Gl en St uar t, D um f r i ess hire, in A i e 7Sn aer year, Grace Johnston e , th e y ounger d aug h ter o f HenrY Douglas Esq. De r " On the 28th inst., Mr. Joseph Chu r chy ar d, of Alvas` °-r, . wilhe shire. lr• On the 26th inst., in Baker-st r e e t, R egen t' s -parn ) - A r ' • Lightfoot, aged 56. as o a r On the 28th inst., at Grove C o tt age , B rom pton, Th° ll ' . o r, son, Esq., aged 84. g olicl t On the 22d inst., at Ramsgate, Edward Daniel, Esq" aged 65. On the 25th inst., at Kirklees, Yorkshire, Mary, e 'life °f George Armytage, Bart., in her 62d year. id l est- - On the 27th inst., Mr. Henry Bingham, of B ll ' Greenwich, aged 85 G' London: Pri n t e d an d P u bli s h e d b y MURDO Y- 11 - The Sun 15See, No. 112, Strind' 1-1 of the of T i Th 12, 00 e 15, 00 4 of € deduc i 414 0ut ! s tet 'Lo co both in The 'ahem tiar ne ,, Ti eket tor erne th e 7,i, And 1)01 41 Ma rquis Jena al 113 ert „ t 1 1. y 31a~ .(ie e Kni Joh °ll a A Ro I t It 9.) b e w as as ' USer fol Esq. tlo • Win g gar a., d-str q 4are. Pi one LITI _o th Th e The u e 'Re s° , Oli ve; ter th itgk 44t hOr a i n s eStabl;sl G I ~n orne kill of th 11( plied a thr Past cltle • 4tt ed s v 1( kis* up. o St attil l eqt wj t h reve„ skill —ue ' I with „ b u''' A Alilit re .k "Y ton., 'tS D A !Int use aPPIi miry cor n , at s t c to b e the d