The Sun. — London, England, 1834-11-06 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. In the observations which we previously made on the Central Criminal Court Act, we confined our selves to what we considered its main principle and its chief merit—viz., the salutary limitation of the ca pricious, and too often ignorant, jurisdiction of Ma gistrates in the metropolis and its vicinity, by con ferring upon a Court, where some one or more of the superior Judges will always preside, the exclusive cog nizance of important crimes. Not only do we approve of the principle of limiting the jurisdiction of Justices, as embodied in this Act, but we earnestly wish to see that wholesome reform in the system of administrative justice extended beyond the environs of the metropolis, until it becomes commensurate with the whole realm of England—not by extending the jurisdiction of the Central Court further than the present Act extends it —in that respect we think the Bill goes quite far enough—but by substituting intelligent and compe tent tribunals for the trial of the many classes of im portant crimes of which the country Sessions at pre sent take cognizance, and which, to be well tried, ought to be tried before Judges somewhat better acquainted with the laws and the principles of jus tice than country gentlemen, who come from their rural occupations or rural sports to administer a code of criminal law, as little read or understood by them in general, as by the Juries whom they are ex pected to instruct. In all trades and professions, ex cept that of a Sessional Judge in this country, it is expected that a man should know something of his business ; but though law is a science, it is thought no absurdity that persons whose minds are untouched by a ray of legal science shall superintend the prac tical operation of the laws, of whose principles they know nothing. We do not believe that country gen tlemen in the Commission of the Peace are, as a body, indisposed to do upright and impartial justice between man and man, as far as they see and comprehend the laws by which the dispensation of justice is governed. In the case of the game laws, indeed, strong feelings are but too apt to warp their judgment, and prejudice the case of the accused—and local antipathies and predilections sometimes exercise an influence over their reason, of which they are unconscious ; but where no such feelings work upon the infirmities of human na ture, ignorance of the law is the only prolific source of wrong and error, while the want of the judicial appre hension to discriminate between argument and sophistry —between a point of law and a legal quibble—tends to make the whole system of rural justice a jumble of con tradictions, and brings confusion on all legal principles. But in this matter the metropolis had no reason to ar rogate to itself any superiority over the country. The Middlesex Magistrates sitting at Clerkenwell Sessions have shown their minds to be as unencumbered with any exuberance of legal knowledge, as most of their rural brethren. We question not the purity of their intentions, but something more than honest intention is necessary for the due administration of the laws. To make the crier of the Court the impersonation of justice, had, however, the merit of originality ;—to persevere in defending it even against the Judges of the land, and in the face of Parliament, evinced an intrepidity of spirit not easily abashed. If the Clerken well Sessions, instead of being " curtailed of its fair proportions," were to be utterly abolished, there is no danger of its memory perishing from among men. It has achieved a fame more lasting, perhaps, than that which wisdom itself could have obtained for it ;—it is immortalised by its mistakes. An evening contempo rary—the Standard—takes a somewhat different view of this Central Criminal Courts' Act, from what we do. That journal considers the provision which the Bill makes for the prompt and speedy administration of justice its chief merit beyond all comparison. We give the passage : " We believe very few who consider the Metropolis Criminal Jurisdiction Bill allow the proper weight to what we esteem infinitely its greatest merits. Men see, and value, as they ought, the convenience which the Bill affords to Judges, and Magistrates, and Jurors, and Counsel. Such convenience is undoubtedly a consideration not to be disregarded ; but how much greater the fund of benefit that remains behind—the more certain punishment of the guilty, by bringing them to trial while the evidence of their offences is still fresh in memory—before witnesses can be conveniently tampered with, and while there is less like lihood of business or casualty removing them from the jurisdiction of the Court—the abridgment of the unjust suffering of the innocent—for every innocent man who is the object of a criminal charge is an unjust sufferer until acquitted by the voice of his country. Under the most favourable circumstances, that is, when he can procure bail, he suffers in mind and in character,—but in the great ma jority of cases he cannot procure bail ; and he suffers, not only in mind and in character, but in person and in purse ; or, what is worse, if he has no purse, he suffers in the ina bility to provide for an innooent and starving family." Now, supposing the Bill effected all which the Standard says it will effect, in regard to the prompt and speedy administration of the law, that in our opi nion would be quite a secondary merit, the chief ex cellence being the substitution of a competent tribunal as to a , great proportion of the cases for one notori ously incompetent. To make the law prompt in its operation without making the tribunal competent, would not be speedy justice, but rapid injustice. The more cases that are tried by an ignorant and perverse Judge, the more mistakes are made and the more wrongs are committed—good machinery is tho first thing—judicious working of it is the next. But in reality the Central Criminal Courts Bill is not calcu lated, if in consequence of its adoption winter cir cuits are dispensed with, to promote that prompt and speedy administration of justice which, when not con founded with hurry and precipitation, is so desirable. It only requires a glance at the territorial jurisdiction given by the Act to the Central Court to see that it extends over but a small portion of the Home Circuit, through the whole extent of which the administration of speedy justice has been effected for several years past, by the King's Judges holding Winter Assizes in the several counties of which that circuit consists. Now it is understood that the Winter Assizes are no longer to be held. It was so stated at the opening of the Central Court. Let us see what will be the conse quence as to the speedy administration of justice. The jurisdiction of the Court includes London and Mid dlesex, as the Old Bailey jurisdiction did ; and, be sides these, it extends to the most populous part of the county of Surrey. As to Kent and Essex, it reaches to but a small portion of each ; and as to Hertford and Sussex, it does not touch them at all. This being the case, the working of the Bill, by leading to the aboli tion of the Winter Circuit, will be, that the prisoners awaiting their trials in the places not reached by the Bill, and who were formerly tried in the month of December, or thereabouts, will have to remain—some two, some three months longer in prison, before they can be brought to trial. Thus the goals in the far greater part of Kent and Essex (for, indeed, the Bill touches upon but a very small portion of both those counties) —the gaols also in a considerable portion of Surrey, and in the whole of Sussex and Hertford, must remain undelivered for two or three months longer than would have been the case if no such Bill were in existence. Is this prompt and speedy justice ? Why should the rapid operation of the Act, in a small portion of the Home Circuit, prevent the accustomed early delivery of gaols throughout the whole of it ? If some Judges dislike this Winter Assize, that is no rea son why " the public should wish to see it abolished." The Standard also, we think, makes another mistake in describing this Act, as but a partial application of the principle of the more comprehensive plan of the Local Courts Bill. The Local Courts Bill, as the name implied, was to partition and localize the administra tion of justice, and was less of a criminal than a civil jurisdiction, while the Act in question concentrates in a single metropolitan Court the business that was pre viously distributed to several local jurisdictions. But there is a greater point of distinction in this, that the superior Judges are to preside at the Central Court ; but in the Local Courts justice was to be administered and the law expounded by inferior Judges, and if they should be ehosen with as little regard to qualification as is manifested in the exercise of much of the Govern ment patronage, and more especially with regard to the appointment of stipendiary Magistrates in general, what confidence could the public have that cheap law would be as good as it was cheap ? We only throw out this remark by the way, for we wish law to be cheapened ther.hufitb)it classes of society, and, indeed, to all cheapness does not produce an in bad law and perverted justice are k..... / ( , . -"T-7 - f''''' , Z 7 7 - • , -'' N . if ?irtor atfifick\ - loi; tr;:c.f. 7: l,,t--:.::‘,. v :,A c_ - ,11 . I›,i-.,. •,-.-,A42'1,-;,=:.*5.t;f.;,,--,,1' -I ‘. . ' it, -- ,-. -- •::•.1,/4-49 dea; at any price. We must defer some more obser vations which we have to make on the Central Courts Act and its authorship to another opportunity.— Morning Herald. Among the foremost signs of a great and power ful re-action may be classed the feeling of attach ment to the Chinch which pervades all ranks of his Majesty's subjects—a re-action satisfactorily demonstrated by the issue of the struggles which sectarians and infidels have made against " church rates." When Sir John Campbell was summarily ejected from Dudley, the liberal friends of Ministers proclaimed that it was owing to the non-concession of the modest demands of the Dissenters. Yet was the church-rate triumphantly carried in that popu lous and wealthy town, in utter refutation of the unsuccessful falsehoods of the enemies of our admirable Establishment ; and the columns of the daily press bear ample testimony to similar vic tories in other important places. Had the contests been more numerous the triumphs would have been in proportion ; but in very few places have the united forces of the levellers in Church and State dared to come into the field. At Louth (in Lincoln shire,) where, after a most arduons struggle the ene mies of the Church gained a temporary success, it is worth while to mention a few of the means resorted to by the Dissenters, means which have been severely handled by our respected Contemporary, the Boston Herald. The aged and infirm were dragged to the place appointed for voting. The Wesleyans, who have, much to their credit, in almost every other place, supported the Church, lent themselves at Louth (with few exceptions) to their and our enemies ; while one member of that community went up and gave the vote to which he was entitled as the represen tive of his deceased father, against the rate, al though his father, who then lay unburied, had been one of its most zealous supporters. The members of the Church Establishment had been, unfortu nately, too confident ; while their enemies had been silently and stealthily at work. To the credit of the Churchmen of Louth a Committee was immediately formed to prevent any inconvenience resulting from the mischievous decision in question ; and the respect able inhabitants of the town came forward in a most spirited and liberal manner. This is, however, a salu tary lesson, and will, we trust, teach the friends of our admirable and venerable Church Establishment that it is their duty to be early and late at their posts. The enemies of religion and order are ever active and stir ring, and must be met by that steady union and firm determination which will, by the blessing of God, en able us yet to triumph over those who make up for their want of talent, weight, and numbers by noisy clamour and unmeaning pretension ; thus deceiving many who should be above the reach of such imposture and delusion.—Morning Post. That the Catholic religion is -the cause of the dis orders of Ireland is a proposition which has of late been confidently maintained—no doubt but the under standing must have been grievously disturbed by heavy arrears of tithes from Catholic occupiers, into which it could find an entrance. We are ready to admit that the relations between the Catholic priests and their flocks may not be well calculated to heal the existing dis orders ; but the cause of the disorders lies far deeper than religion. No common character belongs to the different nations professing the Catholic religion. The Neapolitan, the Lombard, and the Piedmontese, the Andalusian, the Biscayan, and Catalonian, the Catholic, German, and Swiss, the Belgian, the Norman, the Breton, the Provencal, the Bur gundian, the Pole, the Irishman—all differ mark edly from each other. Government, original race, climate, nature of the country, laws—all produce their respective influences ; and though religion has also its influence, it is but one one of many elements which go to the formation of national character. Thus, for instance, the same poverty, miserable state of living, and vivacity of disposition, are common to the Presbyterian Gael of Scotland and Catholic Gael of Ireland, with the language and music. The Ca tholic Austrian only differs from the Protestant Swiss, his neighbour, in retaining somewhat more of the honesty and primitive simplicity which is a leading feature of all the Teutonic nations, from the Alps to the extremity of Sweden and Norway. The peasant of Venetian Lombardy was characterized by the most peaceful and industrious habits, while the peasant of Venetian Dalmatia was turbulent, and hostile to all improvement. But to multiply instances were end less. Professor Pillans, in his evidence before the Committee on Education, when asked— " Are you sufficiently acquainted with the state of edu cation in the German parts of the dominions of Austria, to say whether the education there given is an efficient and good education ?" answers, " Yes, I think it is very good. I have looked into many books that are published by the authority of the emperor. I have brought some of them with me, which appear to me remarkably good, and directed not to • religion only, but of a kind to imbue the children with a love of knowledge and a habit of observation—such as stories and anecdotes, striking facts in natural history, in physics, and the mechanical arts, and descriptions of objects of every day occurrence. Some of the books I speak of are intended for the schools of masters • but it proves that these are subjects that are taught to the children, because they teach nothing in the Normal schools which is not meant to be taught, to a certain extent, to the whole population. " Are the primary schools of Austria as generally attended as those in Prussia ?—I should say that they are, as far as my information goes ; and it may be inferred, from the fact I have stated, that no man can enter into any situa tion of life without having gone through a regular course of instruction, and qualifying himself to be a good citizen ; and, therefore, it becomes quite compulsory, even without a law to that effect." _ _ --- ----- The celebrated historian Muller, himself a Calvinist and a Swiss, writes thus of Austria to his brother, in a letter dated in 1793, printed in his Life : " You cannot conceive how instructive travelling is to me ; it is my true and best study, that which gives life to my other studies ; and it is at the same time a commentary on politics and philosophy, which shows me what is true, false, and exaggerated, and every people as they are, with what constitutes their actual happiness. For example, I have abandoned a number of ideas I had taken up respect.. ing the supposed necessary effect of certain forms of Go vernment, and the influence of the (formerly so powerful) Catholic Clergy, in consequence of my travels in Austria. I could point out no country in which the peasantry are so generally enlightened, and in which culture, prosperity, and joviality of character, so thoroughly delighted me as in Austria, the inhabitants of which appeared to me every thing that they ought to be." But before the reformation we have a character of the inhabitants of Germany in general, drawn by one of the clearest-headed men of any country or age—the acute and experienced Machiavel in his " Discourses on Livy." Contrasting the Germans with the Ita lians, French, and Spaniards, he says— " Nothing good is to be hoped from the countries which in our days are corrupt, which Italy is more particularly, though France and Spain also retain part of the same cor ruption. And if in France and Spain we do not witness so much disorder as we see in Italy every day, the cause is not so much to be sought for in the goodness of the people, which is far from being perfect, as in their having a King who holds them together, and enforces tolerable order in these countries. But we see in Germany that the good ness and religion of its inhabitants are great ; and hence many republics live there in freedom, and so observe their laws that no one dares to disturb them from without or within. And that this is in a great measure the result of original goodness of character, will appear from an example like that which I have given of the Roman Senate and. people. The republics of Germany, when they have occa sion for any expenditure of money on the public account, the magistrates, or councils in authority, impose one or two per cent. on the property of each individual. And after this resolution has been entered into, each individual appears before those who are commissioned to receive the tax, and throws into a chest destined for that purpose so much as according to his conscience he ought to pay ; of which pay ment the person who pays is the only evidence. Hence we may conjecture how great is the goodness and religion among this people. And there can be little doubt that the payment is fairly made ; because if it were otherwise, the amount of the tax would fall short of the estimate framed according to the previous collections, and thus the fraud would be discovered, and recourse would be had to another mode of supplying the wants of the public." When Benvenuto Cellini crossed the Alps, he was struck with the orderly and correct behaviour of the inhabita.nts of Zurich, and the other places of Switzer .land and Germany which he entered. We thus ob serve, everywhere, before the Reformation, while the Catholic religion was in full vigour, the same diversity of national character which now prevails. The causes of the disorderly condition of Ireland are many. In the first place, the native population were in the lowest 4 1 -in ti -4-I CI THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1834. state, in point of civilization, when the English ob tained possession of the country. In the next place, the English conquerors and their descendants were in dulged in all manner of frauds and oppressions perpe trated against the natives, so that the very name of Saxon is associated with everything wicked and detest able ; and now that the Government is desirous of re pairing the injuries of former times, it sees itself in a great measure impotent. If the north of Ireland is in a different situation in this respect from the rest of the country, this is owing to the low lands of that pro vince being almost exclusively planted by the Scotch, a people of nearly the same race with the English, and differing little in civilization from them ; and, from their more determined character, better adapted to manage the Irish than their southern brethren. The greater harshness of the Scotch in tolerating no Irish men beside them, is the cause of their descendants re taming the language and usages of their original coun try.—/Iforning Chronicle. We have been accused, but unjustly, of a disposi tion to shirk the notice due to the " great" meeting of Protestants in the county of Down. The accusation is unfair, because we did enter pretty largely upon the subject of that (not unimportant) meeting, and made it the text of some remarks upon that very state of public feeling in Ireland which our contemporary charges us with so much anxiety to conceal. Our censure of the Down meeting was, we hope and trust, not unreasonable, having for its foundation the obvi ous tendency of that concourse of pugnacious Protes tants to inflame still more the conflict of adverse passions amongst the Irish, which has already frightened away all peace and confidence from the most deserving portion of that ill-fated people. This journal did not deny that the bulk of the Down meeting felt the occasion to be one which justified all Protestants alive to the security of their lives and fortunes, and to the undisturbed enjoyment of their religious rights, in openly demonstrating their resolution to co-operate with each other in maintaining their common interests, and in exhibiting, as well as enforcing, obedience to the authority of the laws. But at the same time we did not disguise our suspicion, that the manly sentiments of the great Protestant body were laid hold of by the chiefs who convened the meet ing as instruments for the promotion of their own factious and selfish views. The speech of Lord Lon donderry was not a defence of the Protestant cause against the threats of Papists, or of loyal Irishmen against incendiaries and rebels—it was a tirade of Toryism against Whig Ministers—a mere signal and rallying point for the meditated expedition against Whitehall. If no notice was taken in our columns of Dr. Cook's speech in favour of the church establish ment, it was because that Rev. and worthy Presbyte rian suggested no fact or topic in his discourse which could be considered otherwise than familiar to those who know the state of Ireland. For a whole generation the Dissenting clergy of that island have acknowledged the Church for their ally, and alternately leaned upon it and supported it as a friend. Whatever in Ireland is not decidedly Popish must be politically attached to the Protestant establishment. It is our firm persuasion moreover, and we have before expressed it, that if in England any danger menaced the existence of the Church, she would find advocates among the Dissenters here as well as in the sister island. However, the Standard will have it, that the liberal journals " carefully eschew the slightest exhibi tion of " Conservative proceedings." If by this it means that we seldom " report" their proceedings, the assertion is true enough, because we do not conceive that the proceedings of those who call themselves Con servatives—being, in fact, Conservatives of nothing but abuses—ought to be regarded as possessing the slightest degree of sympathy with what is properly the public opinion. For instance—there was a dinner given a few days ago at Aberdeen to Captain Gordon, the represen tative of that county. The company was composed of the old Dundas oligarchy and their dependents, and the sentiments uttered were those of unrepressed animo sity against reform and all who had supported it. Is it from any desire to blink an exhibition of the " na tional feelings" that we have not reported the proceed ings at this Tory dinner ? What national feeling was there displayed ? Lord Aberdeen, a member of the last Tory Cabinet, and certainly for character and talent one of the most respectable among them, after declaring a sort of political idolatry of the Duke of Wellington, announced his deep regret at the Noble Duke's exclusion from office, and his hope that the time would soon come when the Noble Duke " would be again enabled to render those splendid services to his country—services which had never been equalled." Now we are quite sure that Lord Aberdeen is in capable of giving utterance to any sentiment which he does not entertain with the most sincere con viction, and we quite agree with his Lordship in acknowledging the splendid services of the Duke of Wellington, both in the conduct of the British armies, and in the not less important management of the internal policy of the empire ; but will Lord Aberdeen, or the Standard, allege that a wish to see the Duke of Wellington at the head (not of the army, but) of the government, is in accordance with the national feeling ? Lord Aberdeen states, we may say officially, the eagerness of the Duke of 'Wel lington and the Tories to return to office. Now, let us see what benefits they promise us—what price they bid for this avowed object of their ambition. There was another dinner given lately in Glocestershire— that county where Lord Sherborne complained that the Conservatives had inveighed the credulous heir of the House of Dutton, tend bribed him by offers of future protection, to desert the free banners of his paternal hall. There was a dinner given to Mr. Cod rington at Tewkesbury—a Tory party dinner—for it is the fashion now-a-days to eat one's way to the Trea sury Bench, as well as to the Bar ; and at this feast, or after it, Lord Ellenborough stood forth, to deliver his paraphrase upon the Ist chapter of Lord Aber deen's discourse to the faithful—and his biddings for place, which come in the shape of puffs on behalf of Tory principles, contrasted with abuse of the 'Whigs, are nearly as follows :—The Tories are to "re-establish themselves in the confidence of the people," by re fusing to readjust the frightful inequalities of church revenue, as they have already shown their anxiety for a practical commutation of tithe by rejecting the Irish Bill of last summer, which had passed the House of Commons by an immense majority, and would have saved the clergy of the sister church from their present desperate and cruel condition. The Tories will dish up to us everlastingly the prodigious excellence of the old borough Parliament, as compared with that Par liament which the Reform Bill has produced, and which latter, quoth Lord Ellenborough, has proved it self "in almost every respect less competent to the performance of the only obligation imposed upon it— viz. that of making good laws." In other words, the Tory party will march into Downing-street to that very same patriotic and popular tune to which the Duke of Wellington marched rather hastily out of it. Next, they do not promise any Corporation reform.' They do not promise any perseverance in the system of Law reform. They will not admit Dis senters to the Universities, nor do they promise to indemnify that body, by chartering an University of its own. Such are the pledges, affirmative and nega tive, whereby the Tories flatter themselves that they can seduce the people of England to trust once more to their political guidance. Such are those evidences of their conformity to " public feeling" which the zealous but over-sanguine Standard charges the liberal journals with an inclination to suppress. No ; we in vite the Tor:e3—we beseech them—to conf orm, if ey can, to the real sentiments of the nation. We implore them to bid, in truth and right earnest, for the people —to abjure their own exploded and irredeemable here sies—to go along with the community, whose course they may for sonic short season embarrass, but which they cannot effectually, and above all not safely for themselves, resist. Greatly should we rejoice to find the able and honourable men of that important party consent to be in smooth and faithful harmony with the English nation, and thus to provide their country (as Lord Castlereagh used to express himself) with " a second string to her bow." We have now but one, and that, it must be confessed, has more than once grated harshly on the public sense of hearing. Times. The West India Mail has been ordered to be de tained till to-morrow evening. COURT OF CHANCERY, Nov. 5. STIERRAT V. BENTLEY. This was an appeal from a decree of the late Master of the Rolls on further directions. The question in dispute arose out of the construction of a will of a very singular description made by a person named Thompson, with the assistance of the village schoolmaster. The property, real and personal, was worth about 4,0001., and the testator commenced by bequeathing the whole of it to his wife, her heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, for ever, and at the same time giving her a power of appointment in the event of her dying before him. Notwithstanding this ab solute and unprecedented bequest, the testator, in a subse quent part of the will, divided the same property at his wife's decease among his relations, and named a Mr. Allen as residuary legatee. The wife survived her husband, and married the defendant, and at her death the legatees claimed the property on the ground that she took only a life estate, the latter part of the will being construed as overriding the positive bequest of the first part. The Master of the Rolls, acting on the recognised principle of the. Court, that where there are contradictory injunctions in a testamentary paper, the latest are always to be taken as the intention and mean ing of the testator, decreed in favour of the legatees, and against this decision the representatives of the widow of the testator now appealed. Mr. TINNEY supported the appeal. Mr. TRIsLovE, for one of the parties, said that the will was, he understood, drawn up by the schoolmaster, and that he had a great number of documents of the same kind. The LORD CHANCELLOR was glad to hear that the pro fession escaped the imputation of having produced so much expensive litigation. His Lordship hoped, however, that if the schoolmaster proposed to continue his practice in this department, he would, at all events, get some one to teach him the A, B, C, of his new profession, for he had not yet got even so far as that. Mr. ROLFE and Mr. JACOB having been heard in support of the decree, _ His LORDSIIIP should take a day or two to consider the arguments adduced in favour of the appeal, although he confessed he had a strong leaning in favour of the decision of the Master of the Rolls. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Nov.s. THORPE V. POMFRET. This suit arose out of the marriage of Dr. Thorpe, the preacher at the Lock Chapel, Grosvenor-place, with the Countess of Pomfret, the widow of the late Earl, the ob ject being to make the infant children of the Earl wards of Court. Mr. KNIGHT stated that this petition of the plaintiffs, Dr. Thorpe and Lady Pomfret, prayed, in addition to the usual reference as to maintenance, that two of the infant children of the late Earl might be permitted to reside with Lady Pomfret, their mother, and that the present Earl might be permitted to spend his vacations with her. Lord Pomfret died in June, 1833, leaving four children, the pre sent Earl now of the age of nine years, Lady Anna Maria Fermor, of the age of six, Lady Harriet Fermor, of the age of four, and Mr. Fermor, of the age of two years. His Lordship made his will in 1830, of which he appointed Lady Pomfret sole executrix and residuary legatee, and sole guardian of his children during her widowhood ; but should she marry again the guardianship was to devolve on Sir F. Shuckburgh, Mr. Penn, Mr. John Granville Penn, and Mr. Borough, her Ladyship's brother. This will was con firmed by a codicil made a little after the birth of the youngest child. On the 17th of May last Dr. Thorpe and Lady Pomfret were married, and Dr. Thorpe communicated the event a few days after to the guardians. On the 12th of June Lady Pomfret received a letter at Cheltenham from Messrs. Currie and Co., the solicitors of the guardians, announcing that the latter had taken upon themselves the guardianship of the infants, and had taken possession of the family residence, and of all the property in it, and had come to the determination of making the children wards of Court. At the same time Sir F. Shuck burgh and Mr. Borough set off for Easton, where they closed the house, and brought with them to London the two children, Lady Harriett and Mr. Fermor, the latter then not eighteen months old, and placed them with their grandfather and grandmother, Sir Richard and Lady Borough, of Portland-place, where they have ever since continued. An affidavit by Lady Pomfret stated that she entertained serious objections to the children being under the care of Lady Borough, as she felt convinced her late husband would have been much averse to such an arrange ment, for he had been in the habit of using frequent and strong expressions of alienation and dislike in respect to Sir Richard and Lady Borough. Dr. Thorpe swore he and her Ladyship were in receipt of an income of 4,000/. a year and upwards, and offered to educate the younger children at his own expense. He also stated that he had been but once before married, and that his youngest child was twelve years old, and that his three step-children were settled in the world. A lady proved that she saw Lady Harriet Fermor without any person to attend her in the garden at the head of Portland-place, where the person with whom she was sent had lost sight of her. The guardians, in their affidavit, alleged that they acted under an imperative sense of their duty to infants whom they were unwilling to leave under the con trol of Dr. Thorpe ; and that they were always wil ling to allow Lady Pomfret every intercourse with her children at her mother's house. The affidavits of Sir Richard and Lady Borough stated that they never doubted of the affections of their daughter till her second marriage. In one of his letters Sir William said he received the news of the intended marriage with astonishment and dejection, and requested his daughter to defer it till two years at least had elapsed. Her Ladyship replied that she was now a widow of thirty-two or thirty-three, and competent to act for herself. They admitted that they were very averse to the marriage, and that they told her the birth and parent age of Dr. Thorpe. Another witness spoke to the late Lord Pomfret's concerns ; and that Lady Pomfret went to the Lock Hospital, and said that Dr. Thorpe was invited to his Lordship's house solely to gratify her Ladyship. This was denied by Dr. Thorpe and Lady Pomfret ; and the latter swore that any marriage of hers would be disagree able to her parents ; and, in fine, Dr. Thorpe stated he had no objections to statements as to his birth and parentage, provided they were true, as they were highly to his credit, and equal, if not superior, to Sir Richard Borough's. Upon these allegations it was submitted that the trustees had ex ercised their legal power in a rigid, harsh, and severe man ner, by abstracting children of such tender age from their mother's care. His Honour, without hearing Sir E. Sugden on the other side, did not see any sufficient case to induce the Court to interpose. There was an evident willingness to settle the matter with the greatest amity towards Lady Pomfret. There was no case for present interference with the un questionably legal right of the guardians. But is it neces sary, said his Honour, to make any provision as to future maintenance ? Mr. Wigram replied the will was explicit upon the sub ject, and suggested that perhaps Lady Pomfret would con sent to deliver up the child at present with her, 43 it would save the necessity of any application. It was understood the petition was to stand in the paper, to give an opportunity for some adjustment out of Court. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Nov. 5. THE KING V. THE JUSTICES OF KENT. Mr. PETERSDORFF moved for a rule to show cause why a nzandanzus should not be issued to the Justices of Kent, directing them to insert two names in the list of the inha bitants of the parish of Tenterden, returned to them as elected to the select vestry.—Rule granted. THE JUNG V. ALLDAY. The defendant in person, who was understood to describe himself as the proprietor of the Birmingham Baths, ap peared to move for a new trial in this case, which had been tried at the Spring Assizes for the county of Warwick be fore Lord Chief Justice Tindal. He had been tried for a libel. The COURT inquired why he had not moved at an earlier period ? The defendant said it was because he had only just come out of prison, where he had been confined for another offence. The COURT thought that they could not now entertain the motion. The defendant pressed it upon them, and said that he had lately conversed with three of the Jury, who told him that the foreman had not returned the proper verdict, as they were not all agreed. Lord DENMAN said the Court could not receive such a statement. The defendant had an affidavit from those Jurymen, and offered to produce it. Lord DENMAN said the Court could not hear it read. The jurymen ought to have expressed their opinions at the time. _ _ The defendant claimed to be heard, and asked for justice. Mr. Justice TAUNTON said that there were certain rules in the administration of justice which the Courts were bound to observe, and from which they could not swerve in this instance more than any other.—Application refused. ISAACSON V. MENNELL. Mr. KELLY moved for a rule to show cause why the verdict given for the plaintiff for the sum of 471. should not be set aside and a nonsuit entered, or a new trial granted. This was an action for goods sold and delivered. The plaintiff was a dealer in corn and flour at Newmarket, and the defendant was a gentleman who, during 1829 and 1830, kept at Newmarket a place called Phantom Cottage. In 1830 he removed and let the place to Lord Mount diaries, and did not return till 1834. A man named Price obtained the cottage at a rent of .50/. a year, after Lord Mountcharles had left it, and trained horses for Lord Mountcharles, and also carried on business as a trainer for other gentlemen. The case was tried before Mr. Gaselee, at Cambridge, and the question left to the Jury was, whe ther there was any contract between the parties, and whe ther Price was a bona fide tenant of the defendant, or was only acting as his servant. This was a misdirection of the Judge. Evidence was, besides, improperly admitted. The COURT thought that the Jury had been properly directed, and refused the rule on that point ; but upon the other the rule was granted. ANSLEY V. LUCAS. Mr. HILL moved for a rule to show cause why the ver dict given in this case for the plaintiff should not be set aside and a new trial granted. This was an action brought against the owner to-recover the value of a cargo of coals, and to recover also a sum of money lent to the Captain. The Captain had, in fact, wrongfully taken possession of the ship as his own, and had borrowed the money while he held such wrongful possession of the ship. The owner had since recovered possession of it ; and this action was then brought against him.—Rule granted. BAIL COURT, Nov. 5. ( Sittings at Nisi Pr ius before Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE and a Common Jury.) WATSON V. WHARTON. Sir JAMES SCARLETT stated the plaintiff's case. The action was brought to recover damages for a breach o f contract in neglecting to convey a lease of certain premises to the plaintiff. The premises comprised a house called " Pattinghall Lodge," and 60 acres of adjoining land situate at Mill Hill, near Hendon, which had been held by the defendant during the lifetime of a gentleman named Franks. The defendant being desirous of disposing of his interest in the estate inserted an advertisement to that effect in the newspapers, and the plaintiff offered to become a purchaser the defendant assuring him that he had a good title. The rental agreed upon was 1501., the fixtures to be taken at a fair valuation, and one quarter's rent to be paid in advance. An agreement was entered into between them in pursuance of which the plaintiff took possession of the premises in September, 1832, and immediately made various improve ments in both the house and lands adjoining, the defendant contracting to procure a lease for the plaintiff. An abstract of the title was subsequently furnished, from which it ap peared that the estate was charged with an annuity of 1501., and it was afterwards discovered that there was a power of redemption of the annuity which disqualified the defendant from giving any title to the estate. It was for this breach, of contract that the action was brought, as well as to re cover the sum of money the plaintiff had expended on the house and lands. The Learned JUDGE, after hearing the plaintiff's case, suggested that it would be better to refer the matter in dispute to arbitration, but the plaintiff would not agree to the suggestion. The case accordingly proceeded. After witnesses had been examined, whose evidence con firmed the statement made by Sir James Scarlett, The Learned JUDGE summed up the evidence, and the Jury returned a.verdict for the plaintiff—Damages one far thing ; costs 40s. _ _ _ Mr. PLATT applied to his Lordship to certify, but he re fused to do so. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 5. (Sittings in Banco ) CHALMERS V. SHACKELL. This was an action for a libel inserted in the John Bull, tried at the last sittings at Guildhall, when a verdict was found for the plaintiff, with 301. damages. Mr. Sergeant SPANKIE moved on behalf of the defendant for a rule either to enter a nonsuit (by leave of the Lord Chief Justice, who tried the cause), or to arrest the judg ment. The ground on which he moved to enter the nonsuit was that matter of inducement in the declaration describing the libel had not been proved. It was stated in the libel that the plaintiff had resided at the Rotunda, and in de scribing the libel it was stated in the declaration that the Rotunda was a place where sedition and blasphemy were promulgated ; but this had not been proved, and he sub mitted that it ought to have been. The ground upon which he rested the other branch of his case was that the innuen does went far beyond the matter of the libel. They did not simply explain the libel, but imported new matter into it. In the libel it was stated that the plaintiff had headed a de putation to the Lord Mayor to petition for the abolition of the punishment of death for forgery, and the innuendo was " meaning that the plaintiff endeavoured to procure such abolition in order that he might, if tried and convicted of the crime of forgery, escape the punishment of death." Now this, he apprehended, was a meaning which could not be fixed upon the language of the libel. The Learned Ser geant instanced other parts of the declaration as containing similar unwarranted innuendoes.—The Court would grant a rule to show cause generally. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Nov. 5. HUSSEY V. PEEL. This was an action of damages against the defendant for disturbing the plaintiff in his rights as lessee of the ferry from Pembroke to Haverfordwest. The trial took place at the last Pembroke Assizes, and the verdict was for the de fendant. The Attorney-General now moved for a rule to show cause why the verdict should not be set aside, and a verdict for the plaintiff entered, with nominal damages, or for a rule for a new trial.—Rule granted. SHEPHERD AND ANOTHER V. DALLIMORE. This was an action on a guarantee. It was tried at Wells, before Lord Denman, at the last Summer Assizes, and a verdict given for the plaintiffs, with damages 71. 10s. The plaintiffs held an acceptance of a Mr. Dallimore for 2 0 /. I Os. for rent, and when it became due the defendant wrote to one of the plaintiffs (Mrs. Shepherd) in these terms :—" As Mr. Dallimore is not able to take up his ac ceptance, to prevent any further expense I will see you paid. I shall be going to Bristol in a month, when I will wait upon you." About two months afterwards the plaintiff distrained the goods of the acceptor, and levied 151. They then brought their action on the guarantee for the differ ence, upon which the verdict was for the plaintiffs. Mr. ERLE moved for a rule to show cause why the ver dict should not be set aside and a nonsuit entered, on the ground that there was no evidence of an acceptance of the guarantee by the plaintiffs.--Rule granted. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MANSION-HOUSE. Mr. Robert Butcher, the clerk toasolicitor, was charged before the LORD MAYOR under the following very unusual circumstances : Mr. Tibbutt, the solicitor of Austin-friars, stated that the defendant, aided by two other persons, had just com mitted the most extraordinary outrage upon him and his family. He (the complainant) had been subpoenaed upon a case in the Court of Exchequer, but it had been con sidered proper by the attorney for the defendant to subpoena him a second time. For the purpose of performing such unnecessary act the defendant attacked his residence in Austin-friars, broke open the door within the hall-door, frightened his wife and sister almost to death, proceeded afterwards to his bedroom, where he lay very much indis posed, and smashed that door with a hammer and other implements. The LORD MAYOR—The cause is, I believe, one of con siderable importance to the parties, and we had better say nothing here that may affect the decision upon it. Mr. Tibbutt—lf I omitted to appear to the first sub poena which was served upon me I should be legally re sponsible ; and this outrage is in every respect one of the worst that could be attempted. My family were thrown into the utmost consternation. Defendant—l shall render it unnecessary to make any additional statement on the subject. I admit that the act of which Mr. Tibbutt complains was decidedly illegal, and I am ready to abide the consequences. The LORD i\IAYOR—I do not at all wish you to enter into the particulars. The question is whether the assault is of such a nature as required the interference of a Magistrate? Defendant—Exactly so. I certainly acted illegally, and am willing to abide the result. The men entered under my direction. The LORD MAYOR—Where are the men? Defendant —That I can't tell. They are Sheriff's officers, and lam responsible for their act. I am willing to bear the respon sibility. Complainant—This man knocked my clerk down on a former day, and he offered my servant 201. to serve me with a subpoena. The LORD MAYOR—You had better not say anything about that, for from that circumstance it would appear that you were rather unwilling to attend the trial. Complainant---I have had a clerk watching the case closely, and entertained no idea of disobeying the subpoena. I complain of this as a most desperate outrage. The defen dant struck both me and my wife. The LORD MAYOR.—He seems to think that he was jus tified in the course he has adopted for the purpose of serving you with a subpoena. Defendant.—l do. I admit the ille gality of the proceedings, but I rest my defence upon the circumstances which have occasioned it. Complainant.—lf such a violation be permitted, there is no security for any man. The offer of the 20/. to my ser vant to deliver to me the subpoena is altogether indefensible. It is an offer of blood-money to offer money to persons to break into my house. The LORD MAYOR then directed that the defendaLt should find two sureties in 201. each to answer for his ar pearance at the Sessions. The bail having been procured, the defendant was dis charged. A man who said that his name was Smith, was charged ....--....---..---;--..'..--- . with having stolen a plated curie dish out of the shop ' I Mr. Dulin , - the silversmith in the Poultry. The prisoner, at half-past six on the preceding everraill walked into the shop of Mr. Dalin, and walked out 4 1 to carrying osc with him the dish, with which he attemptecetive ape. An alarm being given, Daniel Neale'', a%tiitty officer, who has been for some time stationed in the ' bat is to prevent the public from being imposed upon bY vs. „red him.called the " Auction Rig," ran after the prisoner, a nd see -..ii a the de" The LORD MAYOR having minutely exw—ne _o,otigh tails e of the case, was of opinion that the prisoner, 31 7 t hat c s rtainly guilty, would be acquitted by a Jua n as :filiari l aaMagistrate had the power to commit top i r ssess i — on of labour for three months, a person found in ...,• s ore r goods recently stolen, he should sentence the r hi mself. riag t hat The prisoner seemed to be disappointed at he he fas to be sent to BridewelL _ o The LORD MAYon—Prisoner, I have, reasonar fo r ssk s od youl y fho o er u La w of h eß e wro t h dm e a r yAs y y ; o u n e —p a can sgoainvveeer_aynoyNu e o x ag p eo l i a n a n a t i y o n! il l y soner—No. &on' ? 14 rd T r h a e th L er o n n o n t ~ The Lo RD MAYOR—I do not wish to i nalie y- 1, tio i, MAYOR—Who oor what are you? Prisoner"' n H at a e ve yo y u o r o se g l o f. t aloliyaftaemainlyd?desppirsiesoanneyn_aiNtemo.pt o f that '' I,e Mealey said that the unfortuna te man wishe d to transported. j to ei ne The Loan MAYOR observed that prisoners s , f $ have es p a o. _r very t. inadequate idea of the hormrs of the I . lf _ e .!ires to t e rr ific that ii i s't'ta er te t ° The it ew h o a s ng b e ut in an th a e c t t re o a f tn ln i c e n ro t y t c ro on ; make that information as public as. -possible, it 0 t here transportationse e m deter rom the commission of crime ; particularlY a s t hat edtobe still would introduce them to more prospects. an impression amongst debncittedectssiobie 110 °5 His Lordship committed the urisoner for three to Bridewell. - .......- ht bro'g' Q UEEN- S Q Uif RE. Yesterday, a man named Thom Yester - . B y ford was Bbl up in custody, and placed at the barr4hefore gessci,:e I‘lr' RELL sha and GREGORIE, charged with whole sly ass° ' 4 t*Otfi Shaw, the landlord of the Tower wirie vaul s ' in the rd' pers minster-road, and several other c os. ltic l* a•iir. John for the Amongst the complainants appear son, the veteran caterer of dramatic t amusertslo°l°. last fifty years for the holiday folks, rc alowne- t v. couotrY' • c oo' mew fair, and every fair of note round the 4 his s fide O e n tia t i be fri p e r n e d vi , o m us r. afternoon Mr. Ric'bardsaf ri G n it.„"soo's tree ilil: Johnson, corn-deafer , 0 . ping 3 h ,heo New-cut, were at the Tower wine - vaul t s , eu i . c- ... s ma; ",44 of port wine, their " usual custom in the altel"-- ettoos the defendant and three other persons carne 10, oefet4Y whom was a female. Sheseate-db.eh;eegrael taming bottles, and the landlord wove. 1 .0 the bottles might get broke, requested 1 er l to t the' - eli she refused to do, and he was endeavnuri. gt° get d str u . per away when .Istrc.oani.datilift ioo,oe of , . , the defendant came behhild lei a 3 n fri lic o l' him several blows. The prisoner also it istw e l - ft 1 ° le i° blows and Mr. Johnson, and also struck tile r j a m - ui e the ti ; ; the place became a scene of coniru.sioo from cP' lence ws of the prisoner, and the police were - A t leiV s hat who took the prisoner into custody. for .fritiou ts lo' The prisoner, in reply, expressed great c:0..-- ,acing -, had occurred , and attributed his conduct to ~..cau,,i''. too much liquor before he entered the Tower t n cer)r l' e ' The MAGISTRATES, finding the prison - tent, mitigated the fine to 40s. Je° 11 a s • i_t ir e U, r hea' The veteran Richardson looked remarka °ILI his of t le r a ie vi i ng the office was congratulated by sev' erv Vt °lnc h 1. afriends. He took occasion to reinarl, lot"; v e i r his friends had circulated a number of lies a b °u ,.: t be st ated had asserted, and it was generally believed, ..t' b 3 ii e ly 5 1 0 1 put on a new garment, and he had heard it r for the on , that he had worn the same unmentionable,.• eses t hi eighteen years. Now this was all false, for 0 4 ... , a s P c i r be , ,g y menti l onableshad not been six months in w ear' w. ., a i r. T he y a e p er p t e a a in t l o any person if they were not a ticri...r. gl aje 0 . v d a a r r i k abl f e u lookedcertainlyy stia to be a very fresh -looking nr.. 0 1 0 1,0', n. of ai T w he ay e s rr w o e r a , rhinegbteblieevseadre, earcoeyoor gyeaocelo,t.ooPor, and this he rule had done for the last thirty Yeal s " - fh hit C et plained most bitterly of the trouble he haLo-,..ioi•o?efo';• pany, who vexed and plagued him in sue! , ' „bicli• bo Llt they threw him into a dreadful nervous times lasted for days. s tate , ; deal 3 f o r , He br o c ow the number of first-rate actors that he ha.u., leelb.,.,Er ward un ___ in his time, and particularly mentions , e diir rf o • thentalked a gr ea eb t _ e _likemany others he could mention, never pros o perfves fl and . always came to see him where he _.„' c ber ', A ted ing with his company. There were a uTt,os6`-o.as circulated_ r about Mr. Kean as well as himseif;,o;l 1 ; t h h : t too that M . Kean was educated at Eton lice" Auk- 5 , - i s cal l all a lie, for he was never at Eton in his o i n b oicii him thee,a little ragged boy, forty years 1111: t E P ! •n 0 ° I van. circumstance, however, occurred sot , °e V ' to l,: sv vec i d first inspired Kean and made him have himselfwere playing Tom Thuinh P, e r ec I tie j AO ' O CP ' Kean played They nt Thumb. The following '-- il the i tb a message from Windsor Castle to bring s'3l' 't I /3d Master Carey, to recite before their m a jcP es 'ocl li s hiso time he had scarcely a rag o e r s a shoe to . hi rr 'sl' e , et o 'r - to '1, 4 3), to ransack half the old cloth out any way decent, and with asbhloapcskirin bh v o i r tle fe ci r° l o; : i so tel shirt collar, he took the boy to the Castle, wil e- CO P ' 0 f he f fr ° : ,,, several pieces, to the evident satisfaction 0- 5 0-• '4 iv, his Majesty George the Third made him a Pi - tlioul - r 1 ° selfthat time he became quite a different lad, a"" "d lio ° 6 - 0 11, _ et of some importance, and studied verYillatiticiPiva , i , s Fuctions. " Poor Kean," sighed Jur. Olin' g g ra • a 3 1 )°' with all his faults, he had more titu e any of my company." -. S " • t _ otej LEB ONE. John Jenkins, a MARY native of Bedfordshire, """ e t che ..1c ifi police constable Bradshaw, of the 13 dig 4i r a ft that on the previous night he saw the Prise°,teittet Oxford-street, surrounded by a number of to oen v 'e l fi' l knowing that he would be robbed by them , Place tbedoll him to the station-house for safety, at- which IT' e ' toner gave up to the inspector fifteen sove fos reig ns ' watch, chain, and seals. f ugh * t° Mr. RAwLINsoN to prisoner — l think ° f at re you ss. for being drunk, as a caution to you i ll . r"4 :1 0 Prisoner—lf that'A your wish, I shall fe el . _ A O plying with it. iit I ShalldMr. RAWLINSON—As you ii:e so p0..,e , t you on paying the King's fee of o ne ;haling. t.berstew The countryman having auto ' ' - 10 1 / tts P if fill e t Sunday night a large barn on the I. w ea ei iob- ' " °te ire, r o s r °`" oua with corn, belonging to Mr. Barnes► of h p 0 0 , ie twelve miles from Newark, was ' discovered to "' t i e .0 0,00 : , s bc o e, o lr n y, co as mm no un h i a ea bi t t e a d tio to n th is e snteaacrksthadejoining• and fief of -, poi - o f d rsumed. There is no doubt it was the nor o . , ,ter°, • place , o r - 00 e v , small on wheat, beans, and barley, have been destroyed' "r , °- 11: 6 ' . g s i t n a g ek t_o ya M rd r. bßelaornrigvive.snabaetlnosoatonitr that dg ; b6 3 Nest t OP,, cr iidustrious cettarfl;e'llofe; herby, near Grantham, discovered to - 1 C o n heat bl', soon consumed a bean-stack, a barley-stack, ar'' 3 00 5 4 the whole produce of his little farm (about 2 8 ,,,, r 0d e t , 01 men have been apprehended onsuspicio n. • --Siser"`" loctif i ~,. o'c i s Il e. FIRE.---Yesterday morning about 10‘ . . - so ,y ;poll alarming fire broke out at Hux's cooperage, Gi l ? the j rofir, therhithe-wall, which threatened destruction frf rti . e e ir populated neighbourhood which surroundied!iceh elsieeotoor` nately there was a strong south-west wino p o o r Pearoe , The ; or flames to rush in a favourable direction. menced their labour bremoving their furniture 104, in -tea es a 0 ° safety, after which they exerted themselves conductors of two local engines, and by their uniflo the flames were confined to the premises of M r * eo gilloti, houses adjoining, until the arrival of the largf_, $ P o tsv town, which soon extinguished them, there bositlittitthe supply of water. Fortunately no lives there lost , f b at / premises were consumed. --------- or ______---- pf CV _ _ __— BIRTHS. c00te,55 On the 3d inst , at Chesterfield House, th e of i ' field, of a daughter. th 114 OnWood,thEescil.s,t ofin sat.d,auagthtNero,rsttoireboarlli:. Yorkshire, le //rot e On the o f l f s 3 t l i r n ß. st r , hlAo. a ern t r. a l daughter Il O ringnr n hentsh t e, h il e l, - st o h f inst., at St. 3ofileo'Rrgßesi,ltnover-sqtuoares, 41 ., , _ ,i• nar O d n , E th s r q oo . -asstreet,naerrGy,,oso:cilietiquillonnn,cie;strweefitiiro,.., •0:070 Esq., late s o t f h to Al a ''' On thee 4:tAhllire..nrAi.e,.ttial-Thstirteee,to,f Orford -street' / 3144669 ile' A On the sth inst in Brixton -place, in his 83d Ye ar ' siitamnnssttinradt.Lhiann.gbpamlELDodi e, ...,ypping, Thoolas or Shore, Esq. inst., On the al inst., Dorothy Aiargaret, the wife of ot o formerly in nf Bennett-c-stbraernetb, eSrstr rtfoergde-nstt.rnseetritetrat, fortse; macott, Esq., R.A., of South Audley-street. welbi.Leto ' On the 3d inst. at Torquay, Devon, Richard Earle of fifth sun so n of tho ' late Sir William Earle Welby, Bert" le, Hall, Lincolnshire, aged 55. , CA On the sth inst., lrs• Robertson, of Prince's -Pie" job garden, in her 90th year. Gr O eg n g t , h a e g 3d ed 6 in 4 s . t., in St. James's -buildings, ClerkenwiellotlVfortir. of On the 4th inst., Jane, the wife of Mr• Sam 65 Ba'.;nngthha:l-house, New Basinghall-strneel: 3d inst., Mr. John Big_gs, flyou . ,..,net . '..tchstai,' only,ag;611;1 On the Ist inst., at Clifton Hotwells, well° r,„,,IpSPJ T. J. W. Thomas, Esq., of the Hon. East India ‘,.., r e dras Civil Service, ed 3. • BEV ° On the 4th inst., Elizabeth, the wife of T. $• Klog, _AO Tower. ',I e welleL re, On the Ist inst. at Bishop' Down, Tuinatbennitb-e i___3 ,„ .r 6 ;,. Rosamond, wife of inst., at Weller, , n IrOt i-P London: Printed and Published by MV11"-7,.. at The Sten Office, Ne. 112, Strint"