The Sun. — London, England, 1833-07-13 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. When men have resolved on desperate mea sures, they are little guided by fear or shame in the choice of their pretences. That of the coronation oath, as a preliminary to the defeat of, the Church Bill, is at once a folly and a fraud. The absurdity of such a construction of an oath, as would assimilate the laws of Eng land to those of the Medes and Persians, ren dering all change to the end of time impossible, and rivetting whatever abuses and grievances have existed in any one generation upon the necks of all succeeding ones, is obivious to every body but an idiot. The coronation oath, in the mind of the Duke of Wellington, was no bar to the introduction of a law which gave to an adverse party the power, if they should so employ it, of injuring the Established Church. But now, where no new power of injuring the church is created—where the clergy themselves admit that bishoprics may be consolidated with out disadvantage—where the remedies of ac knowledged evils, and ample provision for the support, convenience, popularity, and stability of the church itself are faithfully and strictly appro priated, from means of which the church was never before in possession—is there not something that revolts and disgusts in the childishness of this attempt to bring down the King's oath as a bar to the natural progress of legislative improve ment ? What was the original object of the coronation oath now existing ? It was not to prevent the King from co-operating in the busi ness of legislation with the other estates of Par liament—he might as well have sworn to abdi cate the Kingly office—but it was to frustrate any assumption of a dispensing power—a power of illegally defeating and violating by a false ex ercise of his prerogative laws already made—a power within a state paramount to the state itself. But it is a fraud as well as folly—a watchword not meaning that which it pretends to signify ; for it is no regard to coronation oaths, or to any consideration but that of factious and sordid interests, which has led the Conservative junta to hoist their standard for the fight against this Bill. We find that their plan of action is determined. They will beat the Ministers by votes ; but they will not disarm the King of his remedial power, nor the people of their means of retaliation. The Duke of Wellington, the sage of the coronation oath, will not, it appears, come forth, in the first in stance, as a member of the projected Ca binet, nor will Sir Robert Peel be found there,—no, it will be a Cabinet on a mag nificent scale. The Speaker will be Pre mier, and who else ? Why, another mem ber will be the Earl of Wicklow—ay, " the Irish Narcissus" will be of it ; and that en lightened, liberal, and eminently successful ne gotiator, the Viscount Strangford I Such a set for responsible advisers of his Majesty in times like these ! And what comes next ? The re presentatives of the people have still a voice left . in it. There will be a call of the House o{ Commons on Thursday next, on the notice of Sir John Wrottesley, and a resolution carried by a majority, decisive of the fate of the Narcissus Cabinet, to the effect that a church reform, at least equal in magnitude to that which the Lords will have rejected, is ne cessary for the welfare of Church and State, awl praying his Majesty to provide the means of accomplishing that salutary measure. It here then be a collision, who will have caused it—the Commons, who pass an essential Bill, or the Lords, who think proper to throw it out ? We foresee in all this a tremendous con flict ; but we anticipate likewise a victory deci sive, permanent, and final, on behalf of the nation and its rights. The faction is not merely, as a whole, a feeble one, but it is torn to pieces by internal discord. All the evil passions are at work amongst them, and will show themselves on the first general clutching at the loaves and fishes. The King, too—the honest, manly King—will stand by his people, and the liberal measures necessary for their happiness. Half measures must be laid aside. The man who now fears to act boldly, can never have virtue to act honestly. The alternative is the people, and down with the oligarchs—or oligarchs, and adieu to all that deserves the name of people. Can any human creature with a particle of sense doubt respecting the result ? The Tories have dug the pit—they are already on its margin : one push of popular energy, and they are in, and for ever. What a mixture of unutterable joy, and contempt as unutterable, will attend this useful self-immolation of infatuated conceit—of incurable bigotry—of folly blinder than the mole and deafer than the adder !—Times. In the French papers of Monday and Tues day, which we received yesterday, we observe two articles on subjects in which we have ourselves taken a peculiar interest,—WC mean the regulation of the Post-office intercourse between England and France, and the opinion of the French Govern ment respecting the present attitude of political parties in Germany ; the former is contained in the Constitutionnel, and the latter in the Jour nal des Debats, of Monday last. Every atom of the information which we communicated some time ago, on the recent negotiation between the administrators of the French Post-office and our own, is confirmed by the French journalist ; in fact, his statement is only a repetition of our own, accompanied by an expression of feelings similar to those by which we ourselves had been actuated. He divides, like us, the subjects of the negotiation into six heads, and regrets that only two of them have been gained. The two thus adopted are a daily estafette between London and Paris, instead of the transmission of lettersfour times a week, and the return of misdirected letters containing money, after such an interval of delay as to warrant a belief that the persons to whom they were addressed could not be found. The other four points--namely, the optional franking of correspondence, the mutual transport of journals, the security of money in recommended letters, and the expedi tious transmission of pamphlets, or proof sheets of works in the press, which have been rejected —call forth remarks similar to those which we thought it our duty to make. Wishing to go much further than our post-office was disposed to go, it was not likely that the French Govern ment would refuse its sanction to - a treaty ‘vhieh, however imperfect, embraced two unequivocal im provements. The King has accordingly ratified the convention made between our Postmaster- General and the Director-General of the Posts in France ; and we have no doubt that these limited ameliorations will be immediately car ried into effect. It cannot enter into any esti mate of human motives which we can form, that there could occur any reason or caprice for delaying the execution of such a stipulated ar rangement, merely because one of the parties has incurred general disapprobation for not making further concessions. By this arrangetnent a steam-packet, with letters for the respective capitals of France and England, will sail between Calais and Dover every day in the week ; even on Sunday the French will send a boat to Dover, and hand a letter bag to our Post-office, leaving it to our officers to dis tribute the letters or not on that sacred day, as they shall se e mee t. Th e daily trans mission of correspondence between London and Paris, which would appear as useful and as necessary as between Paris and Brussels, or between London and Glasgow, is thus se cured for the first time by the enlightened zeal and the liberal spirit of the French Go vernment. It is surprising that any difficulty should ever have occurred on the subject,—it is surprising that the administrators of the French post should have been obliged to come to London to negotiate on so obvious a matter ; and it is still more surprising that they should have been resisted in those other disinterested projects of amelioration in which their expectations and efforts have been baffled. By the transmission of journal for journal, England alone would have profited, as one of our journals, giving a double sheet, would make as large a bulk as half of the morning papers of the French metropolis. And, surely, to any man who desires the extension of Eng lish opinions, and through English opinions, of English influence, on the continent, a more ready means could not be found than the cheap, easy, and unobstructed exchange of our periodical vehicles of information. 'We feel quite assured that his Majesty's Go vernment will soon be brought to view the matter in this light, and that the direction of the Post-office will be almost immediately rescued from that state of lethargy or corruption into which no other English institution has fallen and into which no public establishment should ever be permitted to fall. The article respecting Germany in the Journal des Debats is chiefly interesting from the belief that it proceeds from Ministerial inspiration. Its very few facts are avowedly taken from a German paper, and its single remark or argument has no pretension to novelty or discovery. Even if inspired by the French Cabinet, the language of the article, like that of other revelations, is so dark as to require an interpreter, and therefore indicates nothing but vague feelings and wishes. The Augsburg Gazette had announced a conviction that France had no right to express any opinion on the acts of the Germanic Diet, and had stated that Prussia and Austria acted on this idea. The demi-official organ of the French Ministry doubts whether such a notion could ever have been hazarded by the two chief Pow ers of the Confederation, and proceeds to assert the right of France, by the treaty of Vienna, to watch over the independence of the separate principalities of Germany. If ever the question should demand a solution, by the invasion of any of the constitutional States or kingdoms of the Confederation, by the troops of Prussia and Austria, we shall be found as ready as any por tion of the French press in vindicating the claim of the parties to the treaty of Vienna to prevent such a violation of its spirit and stipulations. We regret to observe that, from present appear ances, some of the approaching arrivals from Germany may furnish us with too early an op portunity.—Times. The crisis of our form of Government has at length arrived, and the Reform Bills begin to " work." Next week the two Houses of Par liament—the hereditary and the elective assem blies—will be in direct " collision" on the ques tion of a Reform of the Irish Church. The Tory aristocracy, their partisans, and depen dants, are determined to make " a stand," and to endeavour to repossess themselves of the reins of power. The consequence of this insane proceeding no man can foresee, and every re fleeting mind looks forward to the result with fear and trembling. This approaching crisis is no matter of party or Ministers. The real ques tion is, shall we revert to the domination of Toryism, with the additional curse of being bereft of the great objects of a reform of the re presentation ? The fate of the country depends on the " Reformed" House of Commons. Will the Representatives of the people act with be coming spirit, decision, promptitude, and wis dom ? We rejoice to see that no time is lost in taking steps to defeat the Tory plots, and to assert the power of the Commons' House of Parliament. Sir John Wrottesley gave notice last night, of a motion on Monday, to move for a Call of the House for Thursday next. The Hon. Member is an independent County Re presentative, who thinks for himself, and in whose hands such a motion is most appropriate. Mr. Wynn, displaying his chronic propensity to seek his provisions with all parties, required the reason of Sir John Wrottesley's notice—as though the Right Honourable Gentleman was really ignorant of its palpable cause. Rats always leave au empty barn, but wanting sa gacity do not always foresee the arrival of new grain, and thus Mr. Wynn made a " mistake," and when he left the present Ministry, evidently underrated their stability. There is a material difference between pedantry and judgment. Welchmen, indeed, are not always characterised by clear foresight or nice perception ; and we suspect that Mr. Wynn will now miss stays in his new tack. The Tories cannot retake the old citadel. All the military tactics of their old sergeant-major—all the shrewdness and finesse of their slippery but important leader, Sir Ro bert Peel—all the devices and false rumours of the Carlton Club—the experience of their old unhorsed whipper-in, Mr. Holmes, and the number and fleetness of their runners, cannot form a Ministry that could maintain itself against the present or a newly chosen House of Com mons. They must gain two hundred new Nlembers to their present party in the House of Commons by a dissolution of Parliament, be fore they can even face the reformed assembly ; and that is impossible. The supplies would be only granted in exchange for their value in sub stantial reforms and retrenchment. The Tories might probably bid high for the Ultra-Radicals ; but a repeal of the house and window and malt taxes, would be only a temporary sop to Cer bents. They could devise no substitute ; and after dwelling a short period in a hornet's nest, they would , more gladly quit office than they entered it. I beevils, h owev e r , o f t h e i r re t urn to office would beincalcul a bl e , and its probable fatal results make the heart tremble. The House of Com ' mons is no the b rea k water b etween th e 'lonics and revolution ; and if it should prove craven, it will sink under a load of public disgrace and humiliation. If Parliament were to be dissolved, Members would have to face their constituents, and render an account of their trust. Time Peers are their subjects, but will try to be their mas ters. The Lord Bishops —no ne o f t h e Lord ' s Bishops—will side with such party as they may suspect to be s trongest. The questi on is not now " confidence in Ministers,' but whether the Commons of the Realm or the Lords Spiritl;l and Temporal shall uphold, in all its abuses, a supererogatory Protestant church establishment in Catholic Ireland We animadverted with great regret and pain on the incestuous vote of Monday last, when Mr. Hume, Mr. O'Connell, the Right Hon. Charles Tennyson, and half a dozen Reformers, voted with the Tories against the third reading of the Irish Church Bill in the Commons. Those gentlemen, and some obtuse Members of the liberal opposition, may now be placed in a curious dilemma—that of supporting the Tory Peers against a measure of Church Reform ! The principle on which they voted was chagrin at the abandonment of the appropriation clause, and dissatisfaction with re spect to the quantum of ecclesiastical reformation. But no dispassionate or sane man can possibly deny that, moderate as the measure is, it is a most valuable beginning. It would be a curious scene to witness these few Members of the House of Commons, after opposing Ministers for an in sufficient proposition of Church Reform, back up the Peers, who refused any, even the smallest portion ! We do not doubt the discernment, tact, and good feeling of Mr. O'Connell. He has shown it on every critical occasion, and re cently in his proposed resolution in favour of the principle of Local Courts. We ardently hope that all party cabals and separate interests will be suspended, and that the first Reformed House of Commons will not fail in its duty. We repeat that the collision will not be a Mini sterial but a national question. It is the first open rupture—the first declared hostility—be tween the two Houses of Legislature ; and much will depend upon the conduct and spirit of the Commons. If the latter " play the men," the Tories cannot rule. Indeed, circumstances prematurely and reluctantly urge the Conserva tives to snatch at the seals of office ; they are not prepared ; the Commons should be, and an infamous party cabal will be assuredly defeated. The straw will be moved on Monday.—Morn ing Chronicle. At the Northampton Assizes three young men, nazted Lloyd, Newell, and Marsden, con victed of a highway robbery, have been left for execution. Their case presents no feature of peculiar atrocity. Their violence consisted in dragging the prosecutor off his horse, and hold ing him on the ground while the robbery was committed. While attempting to resist he was kicked on the side, but it does not appear that, beyond the indignity, any personal injury was in flicted. The persons, indeed, made use of very violent language ; but hard words are not hard blows. The culprits carried no deadly weapons, nor is it alleged that they carried weapons of any sort. They had life in their power, and they spared it—even the life of him who was the only witness of their crime. By the commission of a greater crime they might have destroyed all evidence of the lesser one. Under such cir cumstances, we ask if the law which sacrifices the life of the criminal ought to be carried into effect ? We impeach not the evidence—we make no question of the guilt—two of the pri soners, indeed, pleaded guilty, and were also convicted of another robbery, but unattended with any violence, on the same day. We put our objection to the sanguinary enforcement of law on the ground of public policy, which does not sanction the confounding of rob bery with murder ; for that would be to offer a bounty on the crime of blood, and instigate the robber to make sure work of his victim, by silencing his voice against him before any earthly tribunal for ever. If we err in taking this view of the subject—a view which we have not taken of a sudden, nor adopted without consideration, it is consolatory to us to know that we err in company with not a few of those gifted minds whose progress through our system has been equally splendid and benefi cent, and who have left behind them a long train of intellectual glory. We have often quoted arguments in support of our opinions from Meredith and Romilly—illustrious names among the more modern reformers of our cri minal jurisprudence, which, though considerably improved of late years, still merits the disgrace ful distinction of being the most sanguinary, not only in Europe, but in the civilized world. Let us now revert to older but not less zealous —not less glorious advocates of dispassionate and Christian legislation. The great moralist, Doctor Johnson, has handled this subject, as he did every question of which ethics formed a part, with masterly force of reasoning and capti vating beauty of expression. ‘. The terror of death," says this eloquent teacher of wisdom and virtue, " should be reserved as the last resort of authority, as the strongest and most operative of prohibitory sanctions, and placed before the treasure of life to guard from invasion what cannot be restored. To equal robbery with murder is to reduce murder to robbery— to. confound in common minds the gradations of iniquity, and incite the commission of a greater crime to prevent the detection of a less. If only murder were punished with death very few robbers would stain their hands with blood ! but when, by the last act of cruelty, no new danger is incurred, and greater security may be obtained, upon what principle shall we bid them foi bear ? The gibbet, indeed, certainly, dis ables them who die upon it from infesting the community ; but their death seems not to con tribute more to the reformation of their as sociates than any other method of reparation. A thief seldom passes much of his time in re collection or anticipation, but from robbery hastens to riot, and from riot to robbery ; nor when the grave closes upon his companion has he any other care than to find another." Again —" lie who knows not how often rigorous laws produce total impunity, and how many crimes are concealed and forgotten, for fear of hurrying the offender to that state in which there is no repentance, has conversed very little with man kind. And whatever epithets of reproach or contempt this compassion may incur from those who confound cruelty with firmness, I know not whether any wise man would wish it less powerful or less extensive." " The fre quency of capital punishments rarely hinders the commission of a crime, but naturally and commonly prevents its detection, and is, if we proceed only upon prudential principles, chiefly for that reason to be avoided. Whatever may be urged by casuists or politicians, the greater part of mankind, as they can never think that to pick the pocket and to pierce the heart is equally criminal, will scarcely believe that two malefactors, so different in guilt, can be justly doomed to the same punishment; nor is the necessity of submitting the conscience to human laws so plainly evinced, or so generally allowed, but that the pious, the tender, and the just, will always scruple to concur with the community in an act in which their private judgm en t cannot concur." Let us look to the opinions of another great mail—a much more ancient advocate of the reform of our criminal law—a man who held the office of Lord Chancellor of England three hundred years ago, and who laid down his own head on the block rather than violate the dictates of his conscience—we mean, of course, Sir Thomas More. What does he say ?—" It is obvious that it is absurd, and of ill consequence to the Commonwealth, that a thief and a mur derer should he equally punished ; for if a. rob ber sees that his danger is the same if he is con victed of theft as if he were guilty of murder, this will naturally incite him to kill the person whom otherwise he would have only robbed—since if the punishment is the same, there is more secu rity, and less danger of discovery, when he who can best make it is put out of the way; so that terrifying thieves too much provokes them to cruelty." This was exemplified in France, when, with the view of more effectually intimidating robbers, they were broken alive upon the wheel. The consequence was that they became desperate and ferocious as wild beasts, and delighted in mur dering the victims whom they robbed, with the most revolting circumstances of torture and bar barity. We want space to quote the opinions of such enlightened men as Archbishop Moreton, Sir Edward Coke, the great luminary of the law, and the unrivalled Bacon, the father of modern philosophy, also Lord Chancellor of England, who exclaimed, " Let there be no rubrics of blood." Little, stunted, and pedantic minds may boast of the ruthless bigotry with which they adhere to laws which are equally vindictive to punish crime, and inefficient to protect pro perty; we prefer the doctrines of passionless justice, consecrated as they are by the advocacy of exalted genius. But it may be said the laws are sanguinary, shall they not be executed ? We answer, the prerogative of mercy is deposited with the Crown to correct sanguinary laws ; and mercy ip, therefore, as much a part of the law as any enactment in the statute-book.— Morning Herald. A return of sinecures and offices executed by deputy, in the civil departments of Government, and of offices granted in reversion, which was moved for by Mr. Hume in February last, has been printed and publi , hed by order of the House of Commons. A transitory glance at its pages will show how the revenue of the country has been misappropriated in past times, and how much yet remains undone in order effectually to cleanse out the Augean stable. The Ellenbo roughs, Ardens, Fitzroys of all kinds, Percevals, Roses, Bathursts, Beresfords, and Seymours shine in these pages under various titles, which show the absurd and brutal ignorance of arith metic and accounts in which were the feudal but crafty " demi-savages" who invented the system of nefarious plunder called British finance. One object of it was to provide for the various second sons and daughters of the Norman aristocracy, whom their system of keeping their acquisitions entire, by investing them in the eldest son, threw in a state of naked rapacity on the world. Hence the terms Cleiks of the Pells, Pipe, Hanaper, Tally Clerks, &c., which show the barbarous manner (by scrawling the characters indicative of their extortions on hides, thrusting notched sticks down pipes, &c.) in which the hive of Norman robbers, who invented these systems of plunder, kept their accounts. This system has been al lowed, hitherto, to pass current with the hood winked public, under the ample mantle of the wisdom of our ancestors. At all events the end has corresponded with the beginning—the fruit with the root. It has been objected, on behalf of the honourable pensioners and sine curists in these returns—as it has been objected on behalf of the fair ladies and others who, for various intelligible considerations, appear in scribed on the Civil Pension List—that even were these sinecures, deputed places, and rever sions abolished, the relief to the public would be very small. If the relief would be, as we believe it might be shown (and that without re ferring to another cognate source of relief, the overpaid salaries), tantamount to a compe tency of taking off the assessed taxes, the relief would not only not be diminutive but of a most extensive and effectual character. The moral benefit of establishing an honest principle would be still more important ; and we are sure that such relief would tend more ,o satisfy the public mind, than relief of ten .. times its pecuniary amount. We are sorry to see public men, after so many professions on the hustings and on the Opposition benches, so fatally deaf to public opinion and public claims. It is, however, incumbent on us to tell the Administration plainly, and in no un amicable spirit, that the people are fully awake to the true state of public accounts, and to the true business-like mode of managing them, which cannot differ, except in degree, from that of any private merchant or tradesman. We warn them, that if they do not take some effectual steps for relieving the public burdens, before the twelfth hour strikes, some Neckar will arise under the auspices and sanction of the people, to place the public accounts in better order and keeping, and to prevent the convul sion which a blind and self-willed expenditure, beyond the real means of those who contribute to it, is calculated to produce. Morning Advertiser. All thinking men are looking forward with lively anxiety to the course about to be pursued by the House of Lords upon the Irish Church Temporalities Bill. That anxiety arises not more from a sense of the mischief which would follow upon the Bill carried than from an antici pation of the consequences which treason would labour to draw from the Bill rejected. If the question to be decided by the events of next week were one relating merely to the preserva tion of the Protestant Church in its dignities and its property, there would be enough to vin dicate no common degree of interest in the public mind ; but another question is asked upon which it is most necessary that Englishmen should be prepared to return a sober answer. Are we to retain our hereditary Peerage, or are we to con vert our Constitution into a pure democracy ? We believe that in a large majority of educated Englishmen there exists, for the present, a dis position to preserve the stability of their hereditary Throne, and to support the inde pendence of their hereditary Peerage. We know that in many individuals, of whom some are gifted with more than vulgar abilities, of whom others are possessed of more than moderate fortune, there is a determi nation to subvert both. Various are the views by which these men are actuated. There is your wily plunderer, who would do away the King and the Lords because in them he appre hends resistance to his favourite scheme of anarchy and confiscation ; there is your visionary enthusiast, who would do away the King and the Lords because he cannot find room for them in the theory he has been carefully building ; and there is your philosophical fatalist, who would do away the King and the Lords because the mind of man is always marching—because to-day is not yesterday—because circumstances are frequently imperious, and necessity uniformly irresistible. But, by whatever motives they may be influenced, these Ke w Reformers are ready to take advantage of every accident which may further their Reform. Let us watch their manceuvre, for, though they are not numerous enough to be much dreaded, they are too nu merous to be wholly despised. The House of Lords voted an Address to the King upon the policy pursued by his Government towards the competitors for the throne of Por tugal. For this the House of Lords was stu • diously represented by the Levellers as placing itself in irreconcileable opposition to the feelings of the nation. With what justice were such as sertions made ? No man ventures so foully to libel the nation as to a ffi rm that its sympathies are warmly enlisted in the cause of the baffled intruder who has for so long a time disturbed the tranquillity of Portugal. The very dema gogues who used this theme for the furtherance of their bad designs mete out to the contending brothers a most impartial measure of scorn and condemnation. They who censured the vote of the House of Lords censured it, not because they disliked the vote, but because they hated the House of Lords. The House of Lords de feated the Local Courts Bill. For this the House of Lords was again clamorously as sailed as opposed to every improvement, amo rous of every abuse. Why ? We have con versed with Tories and with Whigs, with barris ters and with attorneys, with men of various opinions, with men of every party. We say deli berately that, with whatever honour or disappro bation our present system may be regarded, the changes proposed by Lord Brougham were re• ceived by all who were in the remotest degree entitled to judge their merits with an unparal leled unanimity of condemnation. They who censured the defeat of the Local Courts Bill by the House of Lords censured it, not because they liked the Local Courts Bill, but because they hate the House of Lords. The House of Lords too will reject the Irish Church Tempo ralities Bill. And for this the House of Lords will he once more held up to popular odium as hostile to all Reform, irretrievably attached to every corruption. Once more we ask, why ? Is there any vehement expression cf public opi nion in behalf of this Bill ? Is it condemned by no man but the bigoted, the ignorant, the intolerant ? Surely Mr. Ronayne is an en lightened legislator, and Mr. Ronayne " does not believe that this Bill will produce the least good." Surely Mr. Daniel Whittle Harvey is a po pular Statesman, and Mr. Daniel Whittle Harvey " thinks it better to live upon hope than to adopt a measure so futile and inadequate." Surely Mr. Cobbett knows something of the senti ments of our tiers etat, and Mr. Cobbett ventures to tell them " this project is like all the rest that we have seen brought forward ; wild, in efficient for any good ; innovation with mis chief ; aria, y - the Lords do not sweep away the crack-brained stqfir, bit after bit, I will not say that they ought to be swept away them selves, but I agree with Lord Eldon, that they will cease to be a House of Lords much sooner than they expect." And lastly, surely the Member for Dublin is a man of the people, and the Member for Dublin " records his vote against the third reading of the Bill, and repu diates the measure on the part of the people of Ireland." They who will censure the rejection of this Bill by the House of Lords, will cen sure it, not because they anticipate benefit from the success of a measure thus execrated by those it was meant to conciliate, but, once more, because they hate the House of Lords. The struggle is for the continuance or the extinction of the legislative independence of the House of Lords. No matter what the merits may be of any question upon which it may henceforth deli berate, if only its decision be made a new point of attack. If the adherents of our good cause give way in this conflict, they will soon have to engage on some other ground, where, perhaps, they will contend with less vantage, and fall with less honour.—Morning Post. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. WORSHIP-STREET. Yesterday, an assault warrant of a serious nature came on for hearing before Mr. BENETT, in which a Mrs. Gough, of Kingsland, charged her husband with continu ally ill-using her. The complainant, who possesses a handsome person and; prepossessing manners, stated that on the day before, while she was sitting in the garden, sewing, she saw her husband deliberately take up three stones, which he threw at her head. He was then outside the garden gate, and one of the stones came with such force, as to cut her head severely. Not satisfied with having thus assaulted her, be afterwards entered through the gate, and although her little child stood screaming by her side, he seized hold of three garden pots, and threw them also at her head ; one of which inflicted a second wound, and broke her comb. _ . . vV Mr. BENETT—Have you any witnesses? Complainant— Only the child, who is but nine years of age. Mr. BENETT (to the defendant)—This is a brutal assault. What have you to say ? Defendant (striking the desk)—She aggravated me. Mr. BENETT—Suppose you had killed her ? Defendant —She is continually aggravating me, through her jea lousy. She accuses me of visiting other ladies. Complainant—And so you do. Your Worship, when we lived at No. 33, Baker -street, a child was continually brought there before me, which I was informed was his.— (Here the complainant burst into tears.) Brown, the officer who served the warrant, said that the complainant had brought her husband a large fortune, and that from inquiries he had made, he bad no doubt that the defendant was all in the wrong. Mr. BENETT told the defendant that be should not part with him until he found good bail to keep the peace towards his wife. THAMES POLICE. COCKNEY SPORTSMEN ON THE BITER,--YeSterday William Thomas, a waterman, Henry Park, a master bricklayer, and Philip Burnett, who described himself a gentleman's valet out of place, were brought before Mr. BRODERIP, charged with shooting at swans on the river, and endangering the lives of the Thames Police officers. Mr. Charles Falconer, a Thames Police surveyor, on Tuesday night, about half-past nine o'cock, was on duty on the river, above Battersea bri !ge, close to the Middlesex shore, and was looking at two large swans, when he heard the report of a gun, and a quantity of small shot came whistling about his ears and the crew of his boat. He at first suspected some one was firing among the reeds, and looked in that direction ; but be afterwards saw a boat in the middle of the river, and some smoke about it. He gave chase, on which the parties in the boat rowed away. jumped into a smart pursuit he came up w ith them, and into the boat, on which Park made a spring overboard into the water. NVitness jumped in after him, and after wailing some distance up to his middle in the water, he came up with him. Park then b-gan to strike out into deeper water, and witness threatened to swim alter him if he did not stop. He then dived under a barge, and witness followed him, and caught him under the bows. On returning to the boats, he found the other prisoners in the custody of his men ; and on searching their wherry he discavered a powder-flisk, a shot-pouch, and a double barrelled gun. The left hand barrel appeared to have just been discharged. Mr. BRODERIP inquired if either of these cockney sportsmen had injured the swans ? Falconer—Oh, not at all; the sho. did not go within 50 yards of the swans! but I and my men had a narrow escape. Thomas, in defence, said he fired the gun not to shoot the swans but to frighten them, that they might fly up : and let him and his friends see how big they were. Mr. BaonEatar said the prisoners did honour to the race of cockney sportsmen in not being able to hit two such large birds as the swans. They were excellent marks men surely. Park said the night was hazy, and he thought the swans were wild fowl and fair game.—(Loud laughter.) Mr. BRODERIP was not afraid of the prisoners shooting any thing they might fire at : but if they were allowed to do this thing again,: they might, by accident, kill some of his Majesty's subjects passing up and down the river. Ile ROYAL M ordered them to enter into their - own recognitanataltiV e l the peace in future, and pay 59. each for their discharge' lOTICE 13ITION toe open unti "i n t will MD Admiseion(frc It alovie One S ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. HOME CIRCUIT.—HERTFORD, JuLr 11. 'rliE KING V. THOMAS DUNCOMBE, ESQ. Mr. PRICE said this was a criminal information WO T. S. Duncombe, Esq., one of the unsuccessful candids i for the representati on o f th e b oroug h o f H ert f or d, f o r lit on Mr. John Pemberton, the Mayor of the borough.' l alleged libels were contained in two printed addresses culated by Mr. Duncombe, with his signature, ar electors, and they were to the following effect ; placard bore the date of the Bth of December, 1 " Against the insults and violence of a set of hired who, if they had the courage, would not scruple tt as'assins, means must be found to protect the inhabitants of this borough at the approaching as well as to teach the constituted authorities t 6 as I have yet to learn that it is the office of a, Magistrate to do as your Mayor has done, to e, the organization of this gang, by lodging them at expense." AT nesday, 24th The second count was for a second libel, in bearing date the 224 December, written from A street, London :—" It is also a source of great sat to me to know, that in any of those riots and that have disgraced your borough election, on no were my friends the aggressors. Unarmed, they themselves, as long as they were able, against a hired miscreants and vagrants, collected from evr and ditch of the adjoining counties, and who we dered such an acquisition to that cause which tl paid and fed to espouse, that your Chief Magistr attentive to his pat ron ' s w ill th an mindful of hi s of6P" ILI sanctioned their encampment on his own grounds." OFFICE The third count was for publishing the last libel in NOTI CE Herts Mercury, on the 29th December. . u .„ TEEN Q Mr. Sergeant ANDREWS, for the prosecution, said, '''') BE L T, ' , simple inquiry for the Jury was, whether Mr. Duncottar'r from the published the papers of the Sth, 22d, and 29th of tr o l comber; and if he did, whether they contained reflect' 2 10 Pers on b on the character, and tended towar ds the disparagen3eotir° for DrOre t '36tt.iree years, the Mayor, bringing his office at the same time into rii, e , bona fid e, I cule (Sr contempt. The Learned Sergeant enlarged on 'mine % th ,.._ . grossness of the libels. t ! s tireti 're°f 1 Mr. Pemberton, the Miyor of Hertford, said be d'i' Rent, Z i w , i 3 l j not take part in the election more in favour of one thati t 'ect ( ,f the said the other candidates. 2 1 'evert] a . se The pere rdt . l feelingsfor the d:f h e i n c d b a a p t ; e referred a t andMrheajtoeyd,to ele t c h t e io e n a s. cite s ?en raftnanztesnt etaaxrti times were considered a sort of Saturnalia, in which a to Wittin g ti took the liberty to indulge their particular feelings. , s ° w° by e „ , The Jury, after a long consultation, brought in a 1 77a,ttets m th l'P'Y , diet of Guilty of Libel by Law, but not with malici°' l . he N ah :_se intent. L % urtsti att Na „,„'"'s I elli ' • '"atnes , The Judge having retired to his lodgings, the jury 0 , 4 „ Puri the Ten there, and the verdict in that form was objected to. A1 , ...reti 0 ,, t ; t ilust b some further consultation, they found a verdict of 6 011 ; i al to pay but recommended the defendant to mercy. sealed a:!censt Gard of pro ps re otee "Vnai this o f t 63, Wri ty ti t , ce on td teals ; , . of A B y ruttot b e ---,fro° ~ " Motin enicEs OF HOPS.—July 12. P bill 01 , All "ell or New Ktnt Pockets (per cwt.) .... 5/ Os. 01. Os. to 61. A , . pe rm . Chi ice ........ 61 6i. 01. Os to 71, 'Link e,. "8 to East Kent---....--............---. 61. Os. 71. Os. to 01. -1,3 e co that the l Choice .—......... 71. 10s. 01. Os. to 01, ...6_ Yeria 01. ots • tits of K , nt Liag5...................... 'ow..we 01. Os. 01. Os to ,,,, , , w o , Choice --.................—.... 01 Os. 01. Os to 01. ‘ii, , ov es iout a New S .rsex P0cket5...........,,,,,,,,, 41. 16s. 51. ss. to 01. T- h ants 0 thl Superfine Ditto .....—......................... 51. 12s. 61. Os. to 01. IL e form of t The Hop Duty is es' imated at 170,000/. _........../ nereby Offer ......" pound s the further / 1 %it rnissior I PY the Barr LONDON MARKETS. PRICE OF' SUGAR. The Average Price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar, con from the Returns made in the week ending the 9th July, 1833, is 295. Ilid. per Hundred Weight, exclusive uties of Customs paid or payable thereon on the Imps thereof into Great Britain. PRICE OF OIL. 0, Rape Oil, brown ........,.356. 6s • yew** Refined ....A. , ' '0 Ltnseed Oil ..7.• I. , nseed Oil Cake at the Mill, per thousand _ 101 :.tape Cake, per ton ....•••••.".....•••••60e.warrerwwww.woor.wOra WHITECHAPEL HAY MA RK ET.—July 11. Hay —503.0 d. to 80s. Od. I Clover —.554 Od. to 100 5 ' 243 Od. to 30s. Od. of - ties for the The Rents of 'ed at the Sur It, therefore "ery Ten 111 '"be ascertain 'tu niot whieh is tit ; and no ti 'aY take r o r agair,st o less number 'nant, nor will Barr ac k tib 4)? ° f the moot The leti "al Parts " ' e el ; nor l i 'v -e s trictly a ce° 50. . ) NGLA :PRICE OF POTATOES.—JuIy 12, New Ware Middling Chats ••••••••••••••Wv Os. Od. to Is. 3d. ditto„, PRICES OF LEATHER. . Ol Per lb. d. to d. Per lb. 6 . 1 Butts, Eng1i5h................ 141 24 English Horse Hides. I ,:f . .1 Ditto, F0reign................ 14 19 Spanish Ditto .l, Dressing Hide 5............... 12 15 Per dozen. ~ 1 Ditto ........ 13 15 Calf Skins...SO to 44 1 ib. lo I Ditto, light ........ Ditto ......... 40 to 691 b. I; ', Crop Hides, light 12 131 Ditto 70 to 901 b. 21 Ditto 40 to 501 b. 121 16 Small Seals. Greenland 16 ' Ditto l4 18 Large ditt0.......--.... SHEEP Lamb 5.............. 2s. 4d. to 3s. 3d. I SKINS. Shearling Pelts Os. Od. to I' PRICE OF TALLO'Q Town Tallow 51s. 6d. Yellow 475. Od. White 455. 6d. Soap Ditto 445. Od. Melted Stuff' 375. Od. Ditto Od. ', SOAP, &c. per 1121 b. Yellow 00' Mottled _ 70* Graves Good Dregs :i ( - i 4 dait t-roal 148taff an d t ' Nide rNd ; )al "r a cknio r Pt 4 tal 8„ tled 71E ' 6 " . cir EAST Il teases m 3 „; tbi HE CO ; the 6 UNITE] 1832 : GLAND 1 i ruffiso* hereby give 1\ to berv.,„,# , That a GEN] The characters peaCeS DPIII be held at tl e i e ethA I r, the 23d it ler kind. ieir dug: tli Six in the any Cb CTOR of enco ur A ()ROE SKI] .t hie 01 ....._ , A rEW N M F(TCK a ta co %dine'," athlacti' This day, i 4 , outo 0 Deco . . defer " particular are i gans . a: Thit inorkinn , ery lar"R"s Lee, and far " --ti they wtti ' Richard rate, to° l4 " --- ---- :. nf6c 6 1 1 xi ere co PRICE OF RAW FAT, per stone ot 81b. Price of Tallow (as stated by the Tallow Melters).... PRICE OF CANDLES. The price of Store Candles, in the retail shops, is as follosil Candles, per doz. 7s. Od. to Bs. Od. Moulds, per dozen..,_:;„gt .ET.—July 12. Per Ton. 1 5 Walls End 13r0wn'5....0+ , 0 Ditto Clarke and C 0.. ., 14 Walls End Gosforth,,.... 1 3 Walls End Hotspur... , 0 Ditto Killingworth Walls End Newmarebo , 15 Ditto Northumberland. , 0 Walls End Perkins& Co. 1 4 Walls End Walker...." 0 Walls End Hetton Walls End Stewart's... , " 0 Walls End Butter KnoW I 14 Walls End Tees Walls End Selby last market-day, 11. COAL MAR Per Ton. s. d. Adair's 13 0 Beaumont l2 6 Charlotte Chester Main 11 6 Felling Main 12 0 Hebburn Main 13 0 Holywell Ord's Redhugh 11 6 Pontop Windsor 13 0 14 6 "'ownley 12 9 Willington Wylam 14 3 Walls End Bell & Brown 13 9 Ships arrived since V .1 COUNTRY CORN MARKETS DURING THE " 4 ..... :::,)r(i Wheat. Barley. Oats Befit Per Quarter. • 0 1 % „I illd• 52 58 28 32 20 25 .7, Basingstoke 50 60 22 27 17 23 I #4, Bath Bridgewater 45 52 20 26 22 2 4 ou ,„ Bristol 48 56 23 322 16 20 ')* Chesterfield 44 56 21 30 20 24 4 Derby 56 61 25 2 7 1 8 24 ;',l D orcl ester oncaster 48 60 22 26 14 22 55 23 18 0 ' Exeter.. 54 56 Gloucester. 44 56 26 30 16 22 flunger iceste ford 4(1 60 25 32 18 29 -- 50 32 20 Newbury..----.. 42 65 27 31 18 32 Romsey 56 62 23 28 16 26 Shaftesbury 54 25 1 7 Shepton Mallet 48 58 24 30 18 24 21 ;II Sherborne...---.., 48 54 22 IN 20 ' Taunton 50 52 25 27 21 34 Yarmouth 4 2 50 21 23 20 .2, ~( 1 Yeovil 52 56 22 24 20 W 4 " r % 0: Per Bushel. s. d. s. d. s. d. s. d. s. d. s. d. 8.. Shrewsbury 7 6 8 2 4 0 5 0 4 0 J2_022...1 DEVIZES CORN MARKET. —July 11. Per Sack. s. d. s. d. Per Quarter. s. Best Wheat 29 3t030 0 Barley 27 ot° Second 26 0 27 6 Oats IS 0 Thirds 24 0 25 0 Beans (per sack) 16 0 1069 Sacks of Wheat soil 26 7 t. lour (per bag).. 40 0 at the average of Bread (per ga11)i_12....... HULL M ARK ET.—July 9. Wheat, Old —s. 50s. 583 New .. . 6. Foreign —s. 50s. 54s ln bond... --g- Oats, Poland —s. 16s. 208 Old ---s• Small or Feed.... —s. 16s. 18s —S. Foreign —s. 14s. Iss Barley, Norf. & Sul ... —s. 9.15. 9.65. Line. & Wold --r Foreign - - Beans —s. 39.5. 345. Foreign ....5. Pease, White —s. filis. 38s. Grey -...5. Tares —s. 38s. 40s. Foreign -..4 Rapeseed, in isoini none. 7 .0 2 01 , 1.6 IA gentleman, it i s sa id, h a d a board 1 4 ) , on a part of his land, on which was written, give this field to an y one w h o i s rea lly contente" o ' it e° when any applic an t Caine, he always said, " Are tented ?" The general reply was, " I am." it b rejoined the gent l eman , " w h a t do you want ' 1 ; field?" IRTHS. orl' _A On the 10th inst., the la d y of C. Cure, Esq., of ta lc v On the 11th inst., at Friars's-place, near Acton , C. B. Curtis, Esq., of a son. °I 6 On the 6th inst., at Bridgend, South Wales, th e la" f 1 Harcourt, Esq., of a SOD. of On the 10th inst., at Kensington-gore, the lady Westby, of a son. ...--- DIED. 11) On the Bth inst., at Paris, T. Lube, Esq., of E,. lin Sw o, On the 10th inst., at Morden House, near in°ol. B. I. Angell, eldest son of B. J. A. Angell, Esq. , House, in the same county. On the 10th inst., Sir J. Bedingfeld. On the 6th inst., Mrs. Wason, of Liverpool.__..../ wessenterrome;mumag•mresims;lo .2" __- -- 0 PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY MURDO SUN OFFics, 112, SraArlp, Lormor. vy caLuy, l 1 l fl. 0V... MARRIED. --- i ti 1' ne , ,er o ', On the 10th inst., at Eccles Church, William Scr.' s r 141411 of Hastings, to Elizabeth, eldest daughter of TWO 1,0 4' 4 es Esq., of Baile Hill, near Manchester. u 9,1' On the 9th ins., Alexander, only son of A. Will ° 11etl• qt, -4 Holborn-hill, to Martha, daughter of the late 1 0 ' 0 1 4,....' t ; Camberwell. l' I t 6elal to 4 On the 11th inst., the Rev. W. Harding, M. A. , h i 'litt Cromwell, widow of the late Rev. C. E. 'rhurgar. 1er6. 1 .NAd..