The Sun. — London, England, 1833-12-06 00:00:00

sion of the persons best fitted for municipal employments,—that venality has prevailed among the lower ranks of its officers as corruption among the higher,—that the bribery of the dockmasters is not only charged but avowed ; —that the police of the town is inefficient or partial,—that the administration of justice is ignorant or corrupt,—that an illiberal spirit is evinced towards persons who entertain opinions, political or religious, different from those of the ruling clique,—and that nearly the whole body of the burgesses who engross the elec tion of the Mayor and Bailiffs are accessible to direct bribes. It appears in the evidence that nearly 6,000/. a year is paid to corporate offi cers,—that nearly 4,0001. is expended on al lowances to the Mayor and the support of the Town-hall,—that immense sums have been squandered in building churches of unnecessary splendour, vthich have been supplied by ministers related to corporators,—that, though more than one half of the inhabitants of Liverpool are Roman Catholics or Dissenters, neither of those bodies have a single representative in the Council, or among the Aldermen—that four brothers engross offices, some of which should be a check on the others,—that the Council still insist upon retaining their hold over the ma nagement of the dock property, by retaining the majority of members in the Dock Commit tee,—that the proceedings of this latter body are held secret, and that a motion to admit re porters from the press has been rejected by the corporators,—in short, that peculation, incompe tency, selfishness, abuse of patronage, favourit ism, partiality to kindred, or motives of poli tical partisanship, jobbing, and collusion, per vade and vitiate the whole system, pollute the sources of justice, and lead to a scandalous and absurd expenditure of the borough funds. Yet, in answer to these well substantiated charges, we are told of the existing prosperity of Liver pool, and of the immense sums expended in widening its streets, embellishing its public buildings, or enlarging its shipping accommo dation. Can such apologists for the Corpora tion believe that improvements adopted in spite of them can be ascribed to their active co-operation, or that they can monopolize the credit of stimulating that industry or accelerat ing those ameliorations on which they have been the greatest drawback ? Liverpool owes to its situation, to its navigable river, to the coal field on its banks, and to the seat of the cotton ma nufacture in its neighbourhood, those advan tages from which the capital and industry of its citizens have educed such wonders ; and not to the wisdom, exertions, or enterprise of its cor rupt, self-elected Corporation.—Times. There seems to be a tide in the administra tion of the law of libel which is hurrying on that branch of our jurisprudence, as it now exists, to certain and speedy destruction. It is not enough for the extravagance of the libel system that its operation should be always suffi ciently doubtful to disable the most sagacious lawyer from guessing whether any given passage will, or will not, be deemed a libel by the jury. It is not enough that all those parties who may, according to the calculations of common sense, be considered possible accessories to the manu facture of a printed libel into that state in which it meets the eye of a newspaper reader, should be amenable to punishment in the form of fine, imprisonment, or damages, and that author, proprietor, printer, should one or all be victims to the torture of a law proceeding, just as the caprice of the individual who chooses to be of fended may decide. Some practical illustra tions have recently been made public of the preposterous oppression of this libel law, that our readers will find their cre dulity somewhat taxed at the description. We believe that hardly one person in a hun dred of those who constitute the educated and intelligent class of society is apprised, that be sides the writer, printer, and so forth, the newsman, who buys public journals by the scores or thousands, and sends out his messen gers to supply them to his customers at their breakfast-tables, is, by the equity of the law of England, made answerable for every iota of their contents, should those contents turn out to be that mysterious and inscrutable thing de nominated " libel." Aye, a poor fellow, who hawks his bundle of newspapers about the doors of coach-offices, at seven or eight in the morn ing, for the accommodation of early travellers, is, by construction of this precious law, supposed to have been a party to whatever libellous matter may be contained in them. Having, no doubt, had a share in their composition and publication, this poor devil might at any time be punished as a libeller, but that Mr. Dicas knows his busi ness too well, to fish for costs and damages in a pond of paupers.. This person, as was stated at the meeting of newsmen, recovered 3001. damages from a Sunday newspaper for a libel, and, not content with that, the same attorney brought an action against a newsman of the tame of Warne, for selling the same paper in the course of his business as a tradesman, and obtained 101. damages against him also, together with 851. costs ! He attacked a third person (a newsvender), by name Goldwin, and from him obtained 51. damages, with 851. costs ! It is asserted that the afbresaid Mr. Dicas has no fewer than eighty-four actions in preparation against venders of newspapers, for selling those which contained the libel that had already yielded him the redundant harvest of 3001. No man, indisputably, ought to know better the value of character than Mr. Dicas, for none has suc ceeded in getting it estimated at a higher comparative price. This, however, is an epi sode. We ask any body living, who has the least sense of justice, whether a tradesman who only sells a newspaper bearing a certain name, which all the world knows he has nothing to do with but its mere transfer from one band to another—we ask whether such a man ought to be presumed in law to have nut merely read every syllable which the paper contains, but to have had an active share in the composition, he printing, and publication of it, with a full eoptizance of its being libellous, according to the law of England ? There is horrible barba rity the continuance of such a law. It can not stand for the first month of another session : courttnartial law, bad as it is, would be more tolerable. Couple this with the grotesque ab surdity of a libel cause two days ago in the Exchequer, where the acuteness of a learned judge, the attentio n of a pains -taking jury, and that time, of which every moment wrung money out of the pockets of other suitors, were alike wasted on a critical analysis of the term " fudge," and answer, can or ought the libel law of England to be left in its actual condition ? The Mr. Dicas here spoken of is the same person who has lately figured as plaintiff in an action against the Lord Chancellor ; and the unprin cipled Tory faction, with a blindness as dis graceful as their malice, have appealed to this contemptible case as a proof, not of the shock ing state of the libel law, but of the misconduct of the noble defendant, who, it appeared, had merely followed the established practice of his predecessors (Lord Eldon among the number), and where he deviated, deviated for the purpose of releasing the prisoner, The Globe, we see, adverts to the proceedings in the cause of Dicas against the Lord Chancellor," for the purpose of showing, as an excuse for the arrest of Dicas, that it proceeded from a mistake. It is true that he was first taken in a privileged place by the mistake of the officer, for which no judge was ever yet held to be accountable ; but it appeared that he was taken immediately before the Chancellor, who left the House of Lords to see him, and gave him his instant dis charge. As to the regularity of the warrant, Mr. Elley, who was referred to in court as the most competent authority, has explained how the practice varied in the time of preceding Chancellors, and that the present Chancellor laid down a fixed rule, the operation of which gave Mr. Dicas his liberty.—Times. The Conservative Journals console themselves under the dismal exposure of corporation abuses elicited by the commission, by eulogies on the absurd and discreditable conduct of the few cor porators who refuse to obey the Royal commis sion. It was not for want of due warning and provocation to be contumacious from the Tory papers that corporations generally through. out the country wisely and cheerfully submitted to the inquiry. The Standard early proclaimed the " illegality" of the commission. Our con temporary confesses that he is c‘ both shamed and disgusted. by the little effect" of the advice of resistance tendered to the corporators, and now pronounces " that the most corrupt and vulnerable bodies are precisely those which have yielded most readily to the usurpation." As the majority of the country corporations, comprising those of Liverpool, Bristol, Bath, Coventry, Warwick, Northampton, Nottingham, Shrews bury, Cambridge, Oxford, and Hereford, have freely admitted the inquiry of the commission, this admission of the Standard would assert (what we have never affirmed) that all the corporations inquired into, with few exceptions, are corrupt and misconducted. The soli tary cases of resistance, are now held up to public estimation, and contrasted as noble in stances of patriotic principle reflecting on the municipal bodies who have admitted the powers of the Commissioners. The sum total of dis obedience referred to by the Standard as such honourable distinction, is miserable in amount. Our readers will recollect that the vaunted Town Clerk of Leicester actually submitted to two days' examination, and only refused to answer inconvenient and personally disagreeable ques tions on the subject of alienation of the public property of the burgesses. The boasted oppo sition of the Sheriffs of Norwich appears to be ridiculous, as we observe that the inquiry is not withstanding in active progress in that city, and promoted by the real Corporate authorities. The Merchant Tailors' Company have refused to admit an investigation of their constitution, revenues, and municipal management, but it re mains to be proved how they will maintain their hostile position, and how they will effec tively prevent an ultimate public and searching inquiry. We yesterday inserted a report of a Burghmote meeting at Maidstone, where by a small majority it was determined to oppose the commission ; but when forty.nine common councilmen openly declared and voted in favour of the inquiry, it cannot be doubted that the commissioners who visit that borough will have ample means of thoroughly sifting its municipal government and examining fully into the ad ministration of its public funds. We should imagine that the probabilities of integrity were exactly in the inverse ratio of what is assumed by the Standard. At Maidstone we should expect that the commissioners will meet with a rich harvest for their sickles. Mr. Ellis, a common councilman, pertinently asked " ilthere was anything to dread from honest and true answers" to the queries of the commissioners ? Mr. E. Russell spoke of " the little respect in which the corporation was held by the neigh bouring gentry," which he attributed " to the misgovernment that had always prevailed." If the Maidstone corporation, therefore, had any real confidence in their character and public integrity, they would court the opportunity of convincing the country of their integrity and of the excellence of their present municipal go vernment of the borough. But serious dis cussion on this subject is unnecessary. The objects and conduct of the commission are justly and gratefully estimated by the great majority of the national constituency and the people. The reform and improvement of the grossly defective corporate jurisdictions and municipal administration of the kingdom, have been long and ardently desired. The corporation commission has been proved to be an economical and efficient mode of enabling Parliament to legislate on the information derived from preceding in quiry. The address to the Crown for the com mission was voted unanimously by the House of Commons. It has been the most popular and substantial act of the Reformed Parliament and the .Ministry, and it is now too late for the Conservative Journals to protest against its " illegality," or to pour forth lamentations over its certain efficacy. The public and exciting results of the various inquiries in England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland, like the first dis cussions on the Reform Bills, will necessitate and insure a full and appropriate measure of remedial legislation. The occasional contu macy of a solitary Corporation is only the sub ject of amusement ; and the " Constitution" must be in a bad way when it is contended that a few bigotted and disobedient Corporators resist an inquiry thus sanctioned by the Legislature and public opinion—which involves no question of the rights of private property, but simply concerns the extensive reformation and improve ment of the municipal government of the United Kingdom. We direct the attention of our readers to the Report of the Wenlock inquiry in the Shrewsbury Chronicle, and we shall give an early abstract of the extraordinary investigation of the Liverpool Corporation, which will prac• tically illustrate the necessity of a thorough and matured plan of Corporation Reform. We do not wonder that the Conservatives should lament over the approaching demise of the self-elect, when we see to what political and exclusive purposes they have worked their power and misused the public property.—Morn. Chronicle. Next to the slavery, or rather consequent upon the shivery, of living under laws the contents or existence of which a man is ignorant of, is that of being punished for offences of which he cannot, in the very nature of things, be conscious. Of this description, its grossest sense, are th e prosec utions whi c h have - been instituted against that useful and laborious cla,s of men the newsvenders ; of which no less than 84 have been brought against as many newsmen by one and the same individual. Few persons can be unacquainted with the difficulties under which those who have the superintendence of daily papers labour—of the multifariousness of the contents, and the haste with which the public appetite must be supplied. To them, therefore, every reasonable indulgence is due ; and, in the absence of anything like malice, how slow Juries and Courts ought to be in visiting, with all the consequences of guilty knowledge, what, at most, are generally the results of mere haste or inadvertence. But if indulgence be thus due to the proprietors of newspapers, with how much more fairness and propriety, and on how much stronger grounds, are we entitled to call for actual and complete impunity on behalf of the new sven d er , w h o cannot , by p os sibility, know what are the contents of the sheet which he receives wet from the press, and hur ries away with, in the same state, to the door of his customer ? It is not, perhaps, too much to affirm that there are not in the kingdom —at all events, in the wetropolis—any persons habitually less familiar with the contents of newspapers than those who distribute them to the public ; and for this plain reason, that they have neither time nor opportunity to be otherwise. There is just one possible case—and only one— in which we can imagine that a newsvender can or ought to be held responsible for what he sells, and that case is, when any matter which may turn out to be libellous renders a particular number of a Paper an object of attraction, and the newsvender, on that account, and knowing what he is about, provides himself with the means of meeting such a demand. The case, though possible, is a Nery rare one, and the only one in which a possibility of knowledge can be imputed to the vender. To render the opposite position tenable, what must be the case but that the newsvenders must have time allowed them to read all through all the various Journals of the day before they distribute any one of them—a process which, allowing an hour to each Paper, would occupy the whole day, and put an end to their delivery altogether ? The idea itself is almost too ludicrous to be entertained ; but still, if news paper venders are to be held liable for the contents of papers which they sell, we see no other way in which they can protect themselves. And then, to complete the ridicule of the thing, only imagine some one of the public journals, on some one particular day, being declared unsaleable by the whole, or any por tion of this novel board of censors ! We put the matter in this point of view, to show at once its absurdity and injustice. Surely the press, as far as the law of libel in concerned, is hemmed round by trammels enough, without this new class of victims being offered up at the legal shrine. For what, after all, does it amount to but a bait to needy, unprincipled attorneys, who, under pretence of seeking damages for injured clients, are merely making costs for themselves ? Such a state of things—such a system of oppression, is a disgrace to any coun try calling itself free. We are glad, therefore, to see that the newsvenders are alive to the subject, and we think the press is bound to assist them in their struggle. But let us at the same time whisper one thing in their ear ; that they be careful not to give their struggle a party or political cast, as it may, and indeed must, have the effect of injuring a cause which, standing upon its own merits, is irresistible.—Morning Herald. COURT OF CHANCERY, DEc. 5. CONTEMPT OF COURT. Mr. RICIIARDS appeared on the part of the father of a ward of the Court, and produced the affidavits of Mr. Reid, which stated that he was aware of his son's marriage with a ward in Chan ceryearly in August. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he should take care in meting out punishment not to give more than was necessary. Mr. COLLINS, who appeared on behalf of Mr. Reid, ►hought he could show his Lordship that no contempt of Court had been committed. The fl LORD CHANCELLOR said that a person having charge of a ward of the Court, and know ing that an allowance was paid from the Court for her bentfit, had, without the permission of the Court, allowed his son to marry her. He had also concealed from the Court the intelligence of her marriage for three months ; and a contempt had clearly been committed by only concealing the mar riage. His Lordship thought it would be better to leave the matter in the hands of the Court. Mr. RICHARDS concurred in the opinion that it would be better to leave the matter in the hands of the Court, and said that he would wait for the Master's report. Ills LORDSHIP consented. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DEC. 5. DOE ON THE DEMISE OF WETHERELL V. BIRD. In this case, whirl► was an action of eject►nent, and which was not finished yesterday when our paper went to press, the jury found a verdict for the plantiff. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, DEC. 5. COLLINS V. GRESLEY. His LORDSHIP (on coming into Court this morn ing) stated that he had received a letter from the plaintiff in this case, which he was anxious the Counsel on both sides, as well as Sir Roger Gres ley, should have an opportunity of perusing. The writer seemed to be fully aware of the impropriety of a party in a cause addressing the Judge who was to decide it, but nevertheless had entered into a long er parte statement of facts which it was but fair the Counsel for the defendant should have an op portunity of seeing. The course which the plaintiff had adopted he did not hesitate to characterise as very irregular, very indecorous, and in every respect very improper. Once before a similar circumstance had occurred to him, and then, us he proposed to do now, and always should do on the like occasion, he immediately handed over the letter to the Coun sel on the opposite side. He trusted it was need less for him to observe that the contents of the com munication would never in any way or the other in fluence his judgment. His LORDSHIP immediately handed over the letter to Mr. Bottler, Counsel for the defendant. Mr. BOTELER (having read it over) said it was perfectly unnecessary tor him in any Way t o a ll u d e to its contents. _ _ Lord LYNDHURST.--I quite agree with you, and I shall accordingly at once dispose of the case by giving judgment. It was an application for a new trial of an issue directed from this Court to aster tain three points—firs!, whether the plaintiff, as vicar of the parish of Sullington, was entitled to all the small tithes of that parish; secondly, whether, if not entitled to all the small tithes, he Was entitled to the tithe of hay ; and thirdly, whether he was entitled to any, and, if so, what portion of t h e sma ll tithes. The issue was decided in favo ur tif the defendant, and the plaintiff not being content with that decision came forward to have the issue retried. After attentively considering the case in a ll i ts bearings he had no hesitation in saying he saw no reason to be dissatisfied with the verdict of the Jury. It had been urged on behalf of the plaintiff that no verdict had been pronounced by the Jury, because, when finding generally for the defendant, they re quired the Learned Judge who presided to endorse en the postea that they found their verdict without prejudice to the rights of the Vicar and the Bishop's award. Now what did that reservation amount to? Simply that the Jury did not mean to prevent the plaintiff from a future prosecution of his claim on better evidence. By this verdict they decided that the general right of the plaintiff to the small tithes of the parish had not been established, that the right to the tithes of hay had not been established, and that no right to any particular portion of the small tithe had been established by the evidence brought before them; but not wishing to debar the plaintiff from any future prosecution of his claim on amended evidence, they added the endorsement which had been mentioned. They wished, in fact, to confine th e ir opinion exclusively to the evidence brought before them, without in any way interfering with the abstract question of the plaintiff ii► point of law. It appeared to him that, as far as the case had been submitted to their decision, a decision had been pronounced, and, therefore, that the verdict was to be quoad decisive of the case. The application was accordingly refused. No de cision was pronounced with regard to costs. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, DEC. 5, The Rev. Anthony Singleton Atcheson applied on his petition to be discharged, and was supported by Mr. COOKE. The insolvent was Rector of a village near Oak ham, in Rutlandshire. He contracted some debts while at the University, and those creditors who now appeared in his schedule had recently obtained a sequestration on his living. He had some pro perty in the country to give up. He lived in the glebe-house, and had no family except his wife. It appeared lie had a splendid library, which had been sold in London, and only realized 361., which sum had been paid into Court for the benefit of his cre ditors; arid other sums would be forthcoming. Mr. COOKE applied to t he Court to allowhis client the surplus property above the excepted articles. Mr. Commiss►oner HARRIS considered the appli cation reasonable, and ordered Atcheion to be forth with discharged. A creditor named Davis was appointed assignee, and The Learned COMMISSIONER said this was a fit case for an active assignee to look after the seques tration issued on the living. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. WINTER CIRCUIT.—CHELmsroav, Dire. S. (Before Mr. Justice GASELEE.) Thomas Cooper, of pugilistic notoriety, was charged with robbing Edward Hawkes of a sove reign and other money at last Chelmsford races. The prosecutor had been at the races in July last, and had just left a booth, where he had been seeing a friend, when he was surrounded by five or six men, knocked down, and held on the ground. The prisoner, who was one of the party, kept his hand over the prosecutor's mouth. By struggling he managed to get the hand from over his mouth, and screamed " Murder I" While on the ground the property mentioned in the indictment was taken from him. The Jury found a verdict of Guilty. Sentence of death recorded. OLD BAILEY SESSIONS, DEC. 5. NEW COURT. Eleanor Noland, aged 17, pleaded Guilty to a charge of stealing a quantity cf wearing apparel. There were two other indictments of a similar nature against her. _ _ — Mr. PHILLIPS reminded the Court that the pri. soner had been already convicted; she was a re spectable young lady, having been educated at a boarding•school, but was seduced from her home by the artifices of an infamous old woman. In case of a slight imprisonment, her friends would send her to her native place in Ireland. The Court presented an extraordinary scene after the disposal of this case; the Jury were sitting idle and murmuring at their detention; the Learned Judges left the bench; the officers of the Court and the strangers present were formed into cluster:, conversing on the cause of the delay, while in the dock there were nine prisoners, the bills against whom had been ignored, anxiously waiting to be discharged. After a long pause, a messenger was despatched to the Sessions-house, Clerkenwell, to ascertain what progress the Grand Jury had made. The reply was, that they were still sitting, and were not likely to finish their labours in less than two hours. The COMMON SERGEANT, having communicated this intelligence to the Jurors in waiting, expressed his regret that he was still unable to discharge them, but hoped their detention would not exceed two hours. Mr. DOANE-It may be two weeks tinder the present system. You see, Gentlemen of the Jury, there is no consideration for you. You may be detained a; long as it is thought fit at Clerkenwell, without anything to do. The Jury felt much annoyed at this state of things. They were men of business, and though they readily made some sacrifice to perform a public duty, they did not know why their time should be wasted. They consulted together and agreed to present a remonstrance to the Secretary of State, which having been sealed and directed, was handed up to Mr. Sheriff Wilson, with a request that he would forthwith convey the same to the Secretary of State. The COMMON. SERGEANT observed very emphati cally that the Jury did right to complain. The Court was at a stand-still, and lie had no hesitation in saying that he joined in the complaint. Mr. DOANE—There is another great evil which has not been mentioned. Several prisoners against whom the Grand Jury have not returned true bills are not yet discharged, uor are they likely to be discharged while that body pursues their present course. This is an additional injustice, and ought to be laid before the Secretary of State as well as other complaints. Those prisoners may be as in nocent as any gentleman here. It is most scandalous. Mr. Under-Sheriff SANDALL—Those persons would have been discharged last Tuesday, if the regular mode of business had been adhered to. 'Mr. Sheriff WILSON would instantly proceed to :he Secretary of State's office. • The COMMON-SERQEANT said the Recorder felt with him that it would be unnecessary to detain three juries, and he should therefore discharge that which had been most engaged, with the thanks of the Court for their attention. Shortly after twelve o'clock the RECORDER took his seat, and understood there were two juries still detained. The grand jury at Clerkenwell were still engaged in finding bills, and as they did not, as heretofore, take the bills for the Old Bailey in pre ference, it would not be safe to discharge them all, lest some bill should be returned at the latest mo ment. One set of jurymen was then discharged. Mr. Sheriff Wilson entered the Court, and re ported that Loid Melbourne was out of town, but the papers would be laid before him as soon as he returned. The Under Secretary of State had been made acquainted with the nature of the communica tions, and had remarked that in the present state of the law nothing could be done. Mr. Clark (clerk of the arraigns) informed the Court that the grand jury had left the Sessions house, Clerkenwell, and had gone to see the inte rior of the House of Correction, and would not be discharged until their return. SENTENCES. A little after one o'clock the RECORDER took his seat, accompanied by Mr. Alderman Copeland and Mr. Sheriff Haffner, and proceeded to pass sen tence upon the convicted prisoners. Ttie following prisoners were sentenced to be trans ported for life ; —Morton Burton, Frederick William if e „l e y, Edward Lockey, Henry Wilde, John Robinson, Robert Brown, George Williams, and Mary N oon . Forl4 years :—Thoinas Cobb et t, Jeremiah Botha, Ceo. Rix, Cornelius Burke (aged 11), WilliaM Th a t c h er , Mapp, Charles Dixon, John Cooper, John Walionley, and Louisa Walt& Pheebe Skinner was sentenced to two separate periods of seven years, having been convicted on two indictments. For 7 years :—William Woodman, James Wilson, John Haynes, Mary Mullins, Mary Cornelius, Joshua Taylor, Joseph Taylor, John Williams, Mary Ann Blythe, Mary Costello, John Randall, Ann Lugg, Mary Bowen, Ben jamin Hill, James Power, William Welch (for embezzle ment), James Tolley, Thomas Ironmonger, Edward Gale, Henry Berthold, Henry Chapman, James Wright, John Darby, William Findley, William Dinney, William Thompson, John Smith (aged 14), Jehn Knight, Richard Hammond, Thomas Smith, Henry Rockholm, Edward Jones, Christopher Ballinger, Eliza Williams, alias Mary Connor, John House, alias George Washbourne, John Burke, John Haxham, Thomas Duxberry, William Hat ton, Joseph Fieldrake, John Johnson, Thomas Dorman, James Preddy, Richard Vickers, William Brown, Stephen Hannibal, George Preston, and John Williams. To he imprisoned in the House of Correction : —Hannah Townsend and Henry Miller, for one year ; George Man sell, George Rixon, and George Wright, for nine months ; Lines Ward and James Ford, for eight o onths; Christo pher Hall, Thomas Smallwood, Benjamin Underwood, Joseph Broughton, Jimes Chandler, Isabella Everingham, Mary Low, Thomas Ferney, Mary Ward, and George Lawrence, for six months ; Ann Quin, and Benjamin Ball, for four months ; Robert Stevenson, Ann Neale, Thomas James (also to be once whipped), Charles Henson, James Ward, William Gauntlet, Robert Lane, William Pullen, 'William Courtly, Charles Berber, Wil liam Huxtable, George Acourt, Catharine Davis, W. Hurley, William Mayne, and Elizabeth Nieport, for three months; Edward Murphy (the prize fighter), for two months ; Mary Arnon, for six weeks ; Mary Smith and Jane Harley, for one month. To be imprisoned io Newgate.—.William Wright, and Edward Russell, for three months; Eleanor Nolan, for one month ; John Kelly, and Frederick Grace, for fourteen days (the latter to be whipped) ; and George Henry Padwick, for ten days. Previous to passing the sentence of death, Gre gorio Guinea was placed at the bar, and an inter preter being sworn, was desired to explain the forms of the Court to the prisoner. The unfortunate man seemed gratefully sensible of the attention which the Court paid to his case. - - The awful sentence of death was then passed on the following prisoners : Gregorio Guinea (for stabbing with intent to kill), Joseph Hibbert, Joseph Kelly, Henry Eaves, Henry Jones, George Bennett, George Dybell, Jo seph Baker, Charles Blundy, John Coverdale, and Thomas Foster, for housebreaking. Judgment was respited until next session upon William Alton and Ann Dixon. The following persons against whom the Grand Jury had returned no bills, were brought up and discharged :—Thomas Sinnock, Ann Connelly, Jo seph Hughes, William Snaseby, Mary Rixworthy, Eliza Powell, John Creator], James Casler, and William Ivy. It being ascertained about half-past two o'clock that the Gland Jury mere discharged without re turning any more bills for the Old Bailey, the Court adjourned. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MARYLEB ONE. Robert Bunning, a youth about 18 years of age, of prepossessing appearance, was placed at the bar before Mr. Hosicps, charged with robbing his master, Mr. William Trail, pawnbroker, No. 14, Chapel-street, Edgware-road. An uncle of the prisoner here begged of Mr. Trail not to go on with the prosecution, as it would be the ruin of his nephew for life. 11r. Trail (hesitating)—But I must for the pro tection of the trade. Mr. HOSKINS—Do you insist on proceeding ? Mr. Trail—l do. Mr. HosKlNs—Then the prisoner is committed for trial. The witnesses then retired to the clerk's office, but the prosecutor shortly again entered the office, and begged to withdraw the charge, which request was granted by the magistrate, and the prisoner was discharged. QUEEN-SQUARE. MYSTERIOUS DISAPPEARANCE OF AN OLD MAN. —J. Arnold was brought up for final examination before Mr. GREGORIE, charged on suspicion of committing a highway robbery upon the person of an old man, name unknown, in St. Margaret's Churchyard. It appeared on the first examination that a man named Bishop saw the prisoner and two other men in the churchyard about six o'clock in the evening, following an old man, who was demanding of them 5/. which they had robbed him of. The prisoner knocked the old man down, and ran away. During the time the prisoner oas pursued it is supposed that his companions got the old man out of the way, and no trace of him could be found. Mr. Banister, the inspector, said that since last week the police had used every endeavour to find out the old man, who it was supposed had been robbed, but without success. Under these circumstances the prisoner was dis charged. DESERTED CHILDREN.—An elderly man, living at Romney-pace, Horseferry-road, Westminster, applied to Mr. GREGORIE, to order the parish officers to grant him some relief for two unfortunate boys. The lads, who appeared to be about seven to nine years of age, were neatly starved to death. Their mother was dead, and their father had run away and left them at applicant's house. He was a bill sticker, but did pot earn on an average more than nine shillings per week, and he found it impossible out of that sum to keep his own family and the two boys likewise. He had afforded them a shelter, but he could not give them a sufficiency of food. Mr. HEATHCOTE, a county magistrate, who was on the bench, remarked that one of the children ap peared to be very ill, and starving. Applicant said the boy was nearly starved. They had existed lately on potatoes. Mr. HEATHCOTE—A good slice of meat for each of them, I think, would do them more good than anything. how much will it cost? Glass, the messenger at the workhouse, would take care that the children had a dinner immediately, at the work house. Mr. HEATHCOTE—VeI y well : get them some dinner directly, and here is 2s. for them to-morrow to get their dinner. The money was handed to applicant, who thanked the worthy magistrate for his kindness. The parish authorities promised to take care of the children. HATT ON- GARDEN. Yesterday Mary Holt, one of the gipsey tribe, was brought to this office in the custody of Robert Duke, belonging to the establishment, charged by Mr. Palmer, linen-draper, of Highgate, with having enticed his servants to plunder him, under the pre tence of telling their fortunes. Mr. Palmer had repeatedly missed articles from his premises, and not knowing whom to suspect he instituted inquiries, when lie ascertained that two of his servants (girls) were in the habit of visiting the prisoner's residence, a low hovel situate in a ver y romantic part of the borders of Highgate, where she was in the habit of telling fortunes. On questioning the girls they informed him that the prisoner first introduced herself to them by knock tug at the door arid asking them to purchase tapes and laces which she had in a basket, and saying she could tell them their fortunes. Every time they visited her she assumed great solemnity of look and manner, arid informed them that they were both shortly to have young men of property as their hus bands, but they had not had an opportunity of see ing them, and many other tales, in order to raise their anticipations to the highest pitch. Each time a certain sum of money was demanded of them, until they were deprived of the whole of their clothes and wages, arid then she levied contributions upon the goods and chattels of Mr. Palmer, by tell ing them that something awful would happen to them, and she could tell them no more until they brought her articles of their master's property, which they did for some time, and would still have continued to do, under the influence of terror, had not the nefarious impositions of the prisoner been discovered. Indeed one of the deluded girls, who hail been male the greatest dupe of by her in* famous machination:, had been unwell ever since the discovery had been made, and could not be Pre .. veiled upon to give evidence against t h e prisone r A warrant having been obtained a ga i ns t the Pr t. soner, yesterday morning Duke proc ee d e d to High" gate, but found her absent from her sanctum rant' forum, but he made inquiries, and pursued her oft her route until he traced her to Muswell-hill, wher e she was knocking at doors, and inveigling servan t. to become acquainted with all thei r f uture p r ospect s in life, under the pretence of selling laces. On Duk e presenting his authority, and explaining the natur e of his business to her, the fallacy of her pretensio ns was completely proved, and showed that althoug h she had the peculiar ability of foretelling the e vent s of other persons' lives, yet she could not anticipat e her own, or the unpleasant visit of the officer. A simple-looking girl had fr e q uen tly ca ll e d on the prisoner, who made her bring various articles from her master's house, and told her that a rich young man was to be her husband. The prisoner denied the charges made against her' Mr. LAING, after a severe admonition upon the wickedness of her conduct, sentenced her to Ores months' imprisonment and hard labour in the Hous e of Correction. THAMES POLICE. CAUTION TO MASTERS AND OFFICERS OP SHIP S —FIRE ON BOARD.—Mr. Alexa n d er C ow l ey , c bie officer of the Simon Taylor West Indianian, Wr charged before Mr. BRODERIP w i t h h eat i ng cer tain combustibles on board, whereby the vessel was q c on fire, contrary to the regulations of the West I l ' dia Dock Company, by which he had incurred s penalty of .5/. The worthy Magistrate, after consulting with Mr; Leadby, the clerk, said it was a very bad case, and the defendant had been guilty of such gross gence that he should inflict the full penalty of . 54 ' and costs. The fine was instantly paid. THE MARKETS. GENERAL AVERAGE PRICE OF BRITISH CORNS For the Week ended Nov. 29, 1833, made up from the Return ! of the Inspectors in the different Cities and Towns in England and Wales, per Imperial Quarter. Wheat— 50s. 2d.1 Oats ........... 19s. ICU. 355. Od_.• Barley 2d 1 Rye 355. 7d.1 Pease...—. 40e. 60 ' I\l PERLA L AGGREGATE AVERAGES OF TILE SIX WEEKS PRECEDIN° . Wheat.,.,,..-51s. 2d. Oats 19s. 10 , 1.1 355. Barley 30s. 9d. 1 Rye 345. Si I 41s. jo.' DUTIES ON FOREIGN CORN. 355. Ad. I Oats --. 18s. 3d.1 Beans...—. 16s. 9_4' Barley 10d.1 Rye 18s. 31.1 Pease—.... Bs. ea' COUNTRY CORN MARKETS DURING THE WEEK., Wheat. Barley. I Oats. I Beans. Per Per Quarter. s. to s. s. s. s. to s. s. to Blandford 54 27 21 40 58 36 40 15 22 30 Cambridge 48 29 18 Chard 48 56 24 58 18 22 r Huntingdon 58 63 25 30 17 22 28 , Long Sutton 56 64 17 22 32 Louth 48 54 28 32 18 22 40 4 1 Lynn 5O 60 22 25 16 20 32 JA` Newark 57 60 29 40 16 22 37 4 " Nottingham 48 54 29 36 20 23 37 41 Peterborough 48 60 30 36 14 22 30 42 Plymouth 50 64 30 34 20 23 Pontefract—..—...... 67 43 27 Sleafor.l 65 70 36 38 22 28 41 4 „.; Uppingham 50 60 28 36 18 26 36 , 4 4 " Wisbech 48 62 20 33 14 22 30 a' LEEDS CORN MARKET..—Deie.3. Wheat, Norfolk and Sufliilk, 601 b. York. and Lincoln. 601 b.. 3sa. to 545. Barley, Norfolk and Su flblk Yorkshire and Lincolnshire Grinding LEEDS CORN MARK. ..—Dne 3. Wheat, Norfolk and Suffolk, 601 b. York. and Lincoln. 601 b.. 3sa. to 545. a Barley, Norfolk and Su fliilk Yorkshire and Lincolnshire Grinding Beans Oats, Potatoe —slealing, For. 12d. to 13d. Eng. 9d to 10%cl. per ' t. Shelling Rapeseed, English, 251. to 27i ...... Foreign, —l. to —l. per 122:: HULL MARKET.—Dec. 3. Wheat, Old —s. Ws. 54s New —s. 433. 5 0 ' 1 Foreign —s. 50s. 54s ln bond... —s. —s. Oats, Poland —s. 18s. 20s. ......01d,........ —s. --8. Small or Feed —s. 16s. 183 Foreign —s. 16s. 18s, - —s. „ ...,, Barley, Norf. & Su( ... —s 30s. 325. Line. & Wold --s. 2Ss :5 0 ' Foreign - I. - ' 4. Beans —s. 365. 38s. Foreign —s. —s. ---°' .... ... ~. Pease, White....... —s. 425. 465. Grey - —s. 325. 343• Tarts —s. —s. —s. Foreign --s. Rapeseed. in bona none. LI VERPOOL CORN EXCHANGE.—Dec. 3. t o WHEAT, English, White, per 70Ib. Red —. Scotch, Welch, and Manx Irish, White 7 0 7 6 Red Foreign ... . 7 6 8 0 OATS, English, Welsh, and Scotch, per .151 b.... 2 S 3 0 - Irish Foreign BARLEY, English, Malting, per Imp. quarter 35 0 37 0 Scotch and Irish, per 601bs. Feeding 3 7 3 S BEANs, English, per Imperial quarter 34 0 41 0 Irish, &c. Foreign PEASE, English, per Imperial quarter 44 0 46 0 Foreign FLOUR, English, per 2801 b. Irish OATMEAL, English and Irish, per 2401bs 2l 6 23 9 INDIAN CORN, per 4401 b. RYE, per Imperial quarter ALT, per Imperial quarter IMPORT OF GRAIN for the Week ending43l 0 00 5: u Dec. 2. ::36 0 3 MALT, Wheat.' Oats. I Barley Flour. Oatineal• Qrs. Qrs. Qrs. (Foreign, BrIL Irish, &c. Scks.l Loads. I 6,916 4,612 248 1,959 3,901 2,599 SOUTHALL MARKET.—Dcc. 4. In this day's market, which was moderately well supplie d throughout, but not very numerously attended by b u y ers , each kind of meat met with tardy sale, at the followin g p r i ce s Pe' ,. stone of 81b. to sink the °flats : Beef 3s. 2.d. to 4s. 4d. 4s. 2d, to 55. OJ. Mutton --.. 4 0 4 10 I Pork 3 0 4 4 The foregoing quotations are Veal 2d. per stone dearer than on this day se'nnight ; prices of Beef, Mutton, and Pork, star tionary. Beasts, 436; Sheep, 2,341; Calves, 49; Pigs, 97. small portion of the stock left the market unsold. RUMFORD MA RKET.—Dec. 4. A. d. tos. d. s. d. s• (I. • Beef .„ 3 0 4 2I Veal Mutton 3lO 410 Pork 3 4 4 ' Suckling Calves, 14s. to 30s. ; Quarter old Store Pigs, 12s. to 205. Mulch Cows, with their small Calf, 101. to 151. A moderate supply, and a sluggish trade. MEETINGS OF CREDITORS AT THE COURT, BASINGHALL-STREET. (From the London Gazelle.) TO-MORROW, DEC. 7. sr. p• T. i. Lancaster merchant, Cateaton-street DIVIDENDS. II• D. Currie, army-accoutrementmaker. Regent-street.. ...... .atll The French Admiral Hugon, who commands the French squadron in the Levant, has received permis sion to come home, on account of ill health. BIRTHS. On the Ist inst., at Hertingtordbury Rectory, the lady of the Hon. and Rev. Robert Eden, of a daughter. _ . . On the sth inst., at Earl's-oourt, Old Brompton, Mrs. Gunter, of a son. On the 4th inst., in Wigmore-street, Cavendish-square, the lady of John Lane, Esq., of a daughter. _ . On the 4th inst., at Lambeth, Mrs. Martin Forster, of a daughter. On the 27th of October, at Ann's-place, in the island of Guernsey, the lady of Carre William Tupper, Esq., of A daughter. On the 4th inst., in Montagu street, the wit,: of Edward Leigh Pemberton, Esq., of a son. MARRIED. On the sth inst., at St. Pancras Church, by the Rev. T. J. Judkin, M.A., Henry Davies, Esq., solicitor, Weston-super' Mare, Somerset, to Rebecca, youngest daughter of the late William Thompson, Esq., of Kentish-town. On the 4th inst., at St. Peter's, Walworth, Richard Pottiu , ger, Esq., of Woodrows, Berks, to Rebecca, youngest dausliter of the late Mr. Henry Haggard, of Walworth. On the 9.cl inst., Mr. Watson, of the Coal Exchange, London. to Jane, daughter of the late Mr. H. Howey, Esq., of Pasture* hill, Northumberland. On the sth inst., at St. Giles's, Camberwell, Mr. Thos. Jones► of St. George's-circus, Blackfriars.road, to Caroline, eldest daughter of Charles Frederick Thompson, Esq., surgeon, of the New-road, St. George's -east. At Little Ilford, Essex, the Rev. Charles Shrubb, Vicar 0( Boldre, Hants, to Charlotte Aubrey, only daughter of the lat e T. G. Bayliff, Esq., of Southgate, Middlesex. DIED, On the 3d inst., at Lees, near Coldstream, aged 39, Charle s Marjoribanks, Bart., and M.P. for the county of Berwick. On the 2d inst., at Saffron Walden, aged 36, Mary, wife °I Stephen Robinson, Esq. On the 30th ult., at l'aris, Urbantis Sartoris, Esq. On the 4th inst., at Marlborough, aged 18, Frederick Can' ham, son of Henry Holden Turner, Esq., of Percy-stree t, London. Early in July last, at Belgaum, in the East Indi?s, Lieut. Thomas Sydenhain Kennedy, Bombay Engineers, second of the late Alexander Kennedy, of the Madras establishmen t ' On the 4th inst., at Theresa-terrace, Hammersmith, W s. Marryat, aged 86. On the 3d inst., at Hotcombe.house, near Minchinghan 39 : ton, in the county of Gloucester, aged 49, Sarah, wife of Henry Fletcher, Esq., many years a Captain i n hi s Majesty's 771 1' Regiment. On the 4th inst ,at the house of hi s son , Clap ham-rise , Mr. G. Maltby, aged 0.3. PRINTED ♦ND PUBLISHED sirMURDO YOUNO ,ATT"I SUN OFFICE, 112, STRAND.! BY ) SWIFT Comr 4 ‘,, NI d ue and se' LASGO ~ / EDNESI THE All 9 dof %Ai 1 SWIFT No. I No. 2: _ No. - - In the I CO. told ii I nd pa;tl T hree Lit oth,-r MAR oxf SECOND eontaining 10 ,000 boi 4, 000 t., s, HOL of the P In the I ' l o. 404 , , kOney as E t hey will ( %key fully Th e day tll HALL, L tent. on I Ordets duly atten Half... Quarte N.B. Was sold T.' A:: rin lC gt l c fashion, t Petersham " 11 Xony 1%, ?lack or Suit of Li The r LEME I NG CI I ' 3 . No This dr LEr &hp, a LET' SIR w STER. •-__ E' " Ar Point o " Ca reer to " h original %tructiv D 1 Of xv II 11, telly E Yet gi; v ( If hie tiegan 'leant Pic De _ tin: T Lii/