The Sun. — London, England, 1844-09-06 00:00:00

THE WRIT OF ERROR. (From the Times.) The House of Lords has given its decision in the case of Mr. O'Connell, and that decision is a reversal of the judgment of the court below, in opposition to the opinions of the majority of the judges, delivered on Monday. The majority in the House of Lords consisted of Lords Denman, Campbell, and Cotten ham, against the Chancellor and Lord Brougham. With respect to the legal points at issue, the law is in such a state that it was, of course, a toss up which way judgment would be given. It is unusual to go against the opinion of the judges, and therefore it was naturally expected that the House would agree with that opinion. As it is, they have disagreed with it. The matter appears to stand thus :—On the great merits and substance of the case there was no doubt and no difference of opinion amongst our judges. It is quite clear that under one count or another in the indictment, a true legal offence was described, and that on the proof of that offence judgment was given against Mr. O'Connell. This is the common sense view. On the other hand comes in the legal diffi culty. The indictment contained bad and unsound matter, as well as good and sound. The judgment was given upon the indictment; the judgment was given, therefore, upon bad counts as well as upon good ones. Here is the point. The bad invalidate the good, say Mr. Baron Parke and the minority of the bench ; the good turn the bad out of the field, say Chief Justice Tindal and the majority. Judgment is given upon a mixture, says one side; judgment supposes only the sound ingredients of the mixture, says an other. This is one of the main questions; the other relates to the appointment of the jury, and the vicious list out of which they were selected. There is legal remedy in this case, says one side of the judicial bench ; there is not, says the other. Who shall de cide when doctors disagree ? A majority of judges on one side, and a minority on another, was still a division of opinion ; and the Lords had a right to de cide between the two. So thought Lords Denman, Cottenham, and Campbell. They conceived also that they had a perfect right to entertain a coincidence of opinion on the matter with Mr. Baron Parke, and un doubtedly they have. Mr. Baron Parke, as we have acknowledged already, is a luminary of the law. No one can dispute the right of the Whig law Lords to entertain his view; and they have, as we see, not failed to entertain it. A curious mixture and per plexity of justice ensues upon this decision. Going upon the substantial merits of the case, Mr. O'Con nell has confessedly been condemned justly: going upon the legal question, the majority of the law Lords say he has been condemned unjustly; and he has al ready actually suffered part of his sentence. He can proclaim the injustice of a now so decided illegal sentence of imprisonment. On the other hand, an opponent may tell him that what was prospectively illegal was not prevented by that circumstance from being actually at the time legal. The law put Mr. O'Connell in prison, and the law has taken him out. The law is his enemy and his friend ; but it is law in either case. A legal interpretation acts subse quently to its promulgation, but cannot antedate itself. What was done before was done then, and not now ; and Mr. O'Connell's imprisonment is present illegality but retrospective law. However, Mr. O'Connell is now out, and at large, or will be in the course of a few hours. It remains with him to select the character that he will play on so important and triumphant an occasion as the present. Will he be serene and majestic, or indignant and threatening ? Will he pity, or will he storm? Will he smile, or shake his fist ? Will .he astound all Ireland with quiet magnanimity, or immediately commence retail.. ation ? We have no doubt he will duly revolve and debate the part he will play. It is a critical moment; much may be made of it by good management; much may be lost, and much gained; he must take some line that will be striking and impressive. What a crowd of political moves in posse will cross and jostle one another in his brain as soon as the triumph ant intelligence is communicated. And the choice must be made immediately; the prison doors are opening, and the excited mob are waiting outside. Mr. O'Connell should really have time for deliberation, and be allowed, as a favour, to stay one week longer in gaol. Meantime, without undertaking to prophesy what the immediate effects of the decision of the House of Lords will be, and fully aware, as we are, of the un favourable turn which such successes generally have taken in Ireland, we must yet suggest one aspect in which the present one ought to - be viewed, and which should tell anything but unfavourably upon Irish feelings to England. The Irish cannot at any rate now complain of the injustice of England : we do not decide ourselves whether this judgment of the Lords is a good or a bad one, just or unjust: but the Irish certainly cannot complain of it. English law cannot be impugned and accused of Irish antipathies at any rate in this instance. English law has set Mr. O'Connell free. Ungrateful it would ba to an excess in them to go to any other source than the unpolluted purity of English law for the favour able sentence, or even to whisper the remotest con jecture of an obligation to the political partialities of Lords Denman, Cottenham, and Campbell, for the issue of this appeal. The Noble and Learned Lords would disown it with indignation ; and there fore, they must acknowledge that it is law, and law only—English law and justice—which has done this. Or even supposing a shade of party—a mere touch of the politician coming in, in the business—we men tion it as the barest hypothesis —still the learned Lords are not the House of Lords. The House is Conservative, and this is the decision of the House. And though it may be said that custom prevents any but law Lords voting, and that therefore this is prac tically only the decision of certain law Lords, this only removes the conclusion one step further. The fact still remains that the House has committed itself to this decision, and that the supreme tribunal of England has given a most gratifying judgment for Ireland. Whether that judgment is right or wrong, we do not say; it must at any rate be a pleasing one to the Irish ; and they are not, therefore, the persons Ow to complain of English injustice a n d partiality. (From the Morning Herald.) " The glorious uncertainty of the law" has had a new triumph. The judgment of the Irish Court of Queen's Bench, in the case of O'Connell and others, though approved of by seven out of the nin2 judges free to offer an opinion upon the subject, and by the Chancellor and Lord Brougham, has been, reversed by the votes of only three Noble and Learned Lords —two of them ex-Chancellors of Whig promotion, and the third a nobleman whom we dislike to find in such company—though fourteen years ago he was a Whig —Lord Denman. Let us marshal the autho rities on each side : FOR THE JUDGMENT. AGAINST IT, ' IN IRELAND. Chief Justice Pennefather. Mr. Justice Burton. Mr. Justice Crampton. Mr. Justico Perrin. The Chancellor. Lord Brougham. IN ENGLAND. Lord Cottenham. Lord Denman. Lord Campbell. Mr. - Baron Parke. Mr. Justice Coltman. Chief JustiCe Tindal. Mr. Justice Patteson. Mr. Justice Williams. Mr. Justice Coleridge. Mr. Justice Maule. 111 r. Baron Gurney. Mr. Baron Alderson. Such is the state of the law that five judges, neither higher in judicial rank nor otherwise, have the power of overturning the judgment of thirteen; an arrangement, in appearance at least, not very honourable to the administration of justice in this country. The question naturally occurs to every one —why, if the votes of Lords Cottenham, Denman and Campbell must be paramount in any case, were the circuits delayed—the prorogation of Parliament post poned—and the traversers detained improperly six weeks in prison ? Why were the judges consulted at all if it was predetermined, as manifestly it must have been, that the opinion of the majority of them should go for nothing ? Is this the way to make the administration of justice respectable in the eyes of the people ? A question, in some measure connected 'with the last, respects the attend ance o f th e l a y L or d s . If these Lords were to give efficient votes, their at tendance is intelligible enough, and the exercise of their privilege of th voting would go sonic length in explainin g for, even though t e he opinions of the judges were called . aw . Lords might have resolved to disregard tese because, instructed by the opinions and thellenaNFtest-d; abreguments of the judges, most educated laymen as competent to form a sound decision as an equity. pleaderno more con versant with Crown law than the ex-Chancellor he Cot tenham, or than the noble and unsuccessful p j c os o ecutor of Frost, Lord Cardigan, Mr. F eargus and so many others; but the lay Lords were not permitted to vote, and one can hardly imagine a slight passed upon any men more humiliating than the detaining their Lordships from their country seats, their relaxations, and the society of their families, merely to look on, like the g uar d s at an execution, while Lords Cottenham, Denman, and Campbell should snub eleven out of thirteen Irish and English Judges. As to the consequences of the decision, the only ill-Consequences that we ap prehend, in addition to those which must attend every perversion of law and justice, is the new force that this decision will give to the too prevalent conviction that "there is one law for the rich and another for the poor." The judges, law Loris, and all who have had the matter before them, unanimously edmit the moral justice of the punishment of, the . Repealers, though some on one technical crotchet, some on another, have concurred in withdrawing the offenders from that merited punishment. This acknowledgment of the real substantial guilt of Mr. O'Connell and his accom plices is on one side good, because it reduces the tri umph of the lib erated convicts to the triumph of suc cessful wickedne ss and f rad, but it is on the other THE SUN. LONDON, FRIDAY MORNING i i SEPTEMAER 6, 1844 sideffraught with immense evil. There is not one cs the miserable creatures, for example, now suffering under sentences imposed at the late special commis. sions in South Wales and elsewhere, who, seeing the escape of Mr. O'Connell and the rest by dint of petti. fogging and of party influence, must not feel that if h( had the means of paying for the necessary amount o pettifogging, he might as confidently bid defiance to law and justice. We deeply regret to find Lord Denman mixed up in this discreditable decision, and regret it scarcely the less because we believe that his Lordship has been acting upon a misconception unworthy of him. The noble Chief Justice of England founded his decision to reverse the judgment of his Irish brethren chiefly upon the alleged fraud in the construction of the jury list—in this taking a view different from all the English judges without exception, and from three of the four Irish judges. Now, that there was fraud in the matter we firmly believe, but by whom was that fraud committed ? Not by the officers of the Crown, for not one of them ever had access to the jury lists; not by the officers of the court, for they had little interest in the affair, and have, besides, completely purged themselves by affidavits ; but there were some who had access to the lists who have never purged themselves by any affidavit; and who had a a deep interest in stealing the lists, because the stolen lists contained a majority of Protestants; and thus, in the first place, improved the chances of the traversers, and because, secondly, an exp4sure of the fact that lists were stolen might upset the judgment if the traversers did not get a jury to their mind, as in fact it has done—for these—the only persons who had access to the lists, and an interest in stealing the lists, and who purged themselves by no affidavits— were the servants of the traversers' attorneys. (From the Morning Post.) The country will learn with astonishment the re sult of the proceedings, yesterday, in the House of Lords. The judgment of the Irish Court of Queen's Bench has been reversed, and Mr. O'Connell is, once again, virtually a free man. By its course of action, yesterday, the House of Lords has, voluntarily, re nounced some of its most important functions ; while the amiable Lord Wharncliffe and his colleagues have betrayed the interests of the Queen's loyal subjects in England as well as in Ireland. Lord Lyndhurst and Lord Brougham, it will be perceived, concurred in opinion with the judges of England, as well as with the Irish Court of Queen's Bench ; while Lords Den man, Campbell, and Cottenham argued in favour of a reversal of the sentence which has been passed on O'Connell and his fellow conspirators. The opinions of these three Learned Whigs would, however, have availed little with the House, had not Lord Wharn cliffe entreated the lay Peers not to vote on a ques tion which Lords learned in the law ought to decide. The doctrine of Lord Wharncliffe in this matter is not the doctrine of the constitution. Even Lord Campbell disclaimed, for his order, any such ex clusive privileges as Lord Wharncliffe thrust upon it. The ex-Chancellor of Ireland denied, in short, that in the House of Lords, sitting as a court of appeal, the constitution recognises any dis tinction between the law Lords and those who have not received their education in Inns of Court. The "conciliatory" doctrine of Lord Wharncliffe was, in fact, treated with infinite contempt by a Noble and Learned Member of that political party which the doctrine in question was designed to serve. For once in his life, Lord Campbell has given utterance to a great truth. The constitution recognises no distinc tion between lay Peers and law Lords when the Upper House sits as a court of appeal. Lord Wharn cliffe has, in fact, betrayed his brother Peers into an abandonment of some of their most important con stitutional functions. If his Lordship's doctrines be sound, the country no longer possesses a court of ap peal in the House of Lords. No ; our highest court of appeal is composed, exclusively, of the lawyers in the House. Let this fact be known to the country ; and let the name of the House of Lords be no longer mixed up with the movements of the lawyers who belong to that assembly. The House of Lords has agreed, we repeat, to throw away some of its most important constitu tional privileges; while, almost contemporaneously, the House of Commons has tried to usurp the func tions which the constitution has denied to it. The House of Lords, assembled as a court of appeal, does not presume to controvert the opinions of the three Whig law Lords. The House of Commons, with out possessing any right to reverse the proceedings of 1 any court of law, has attempted, on the other hand, within these few years, to exercise as large a mea sure of control over the judges of the land, as it might over the door-keepers of St. Stephen's. The lay members of the House 'of Lords were, as we have stated, assured by Lord Wharncliffe that they ought to leave the matter at issue to be determined by those of their number who were learned in the law. The law Lords of the House were never, let it be ob served, designed to be other than advisers of the House, in its charaCter as a court of appeal; and it may not be forgotten that the House has, in this case of O'Connell, sought advice at the hands, not merely of the lawyers whom it contains, but of all ' the judges of England. Nearly all these judges are, it so happens, op posed to the opinion expressed by Lords Denman, Campbell, and Cottenham. It is, indeed, a remark able coincidence that all the noble lawyers who voted for the emancipation of O'Connell happen to belong to O'Connell's political party. When, therefore, Lord Wharncliffe counselled the House to leave the matter to the decision of those learned in the law, he ought to have qualified his advice, and urged the lay Peers to leave the matter to the decision—not of all the judges, nor of those judges who, by position, must be comparatively free fro:n political bias, but of the few judges who are involved in all the heats of party strife. The effect on the country of this renuncia tion of their privileges by the lay Peers of England will be most disastrous. The power of O'Connell will be incalculably strengthened. Last year he openly defied the law and Government. This year her Majesty's " Conservative" Ministers have enabled him to trample on the administrators of justice in Ireland. Lord Wharncliffe and his colleagues have, in melancholy truth, offered the highest con ceivable premium on disaffection of the most deep and dangerous kind. By disregarding the opinion of the great majority of the judges of England —by re ferring, in fact, the decision of this great question to three law Lords, whose political sentiments do not differ widely from O'Connell's —Lord Wharncliffe has contrived to play O'Connell's game better than he and his colleagues could have done by the ma chinery of a Royal visit to Ireland. To pardon O'Connell would have been, to a certain extent, to degrade O'Connell. Now O'Connell has no need of pardon. Compensation is, in fact, due to him. We trust, therefore, that Lord Wharncliffe will move in Parliament that compensation shall be tendered to the loyal gentlemen who have for some months past been compelled to share in the gaieties which have distin guished the Richmond Penitentiary. Lord Wham cliffe's movement is the most effective that any man has yet attempted in the direction of repeal. Whatever increase of force the repeal agitation may hereafter require, must assuredly be placed to the credit of her Majesty's Ministers. It is impossible to forget with what reluctance Ministers proceeded last year to enforce the law against O'Connell. " Monster meeting " after " monster meeting" was allowed to be held with im punity. For months Ministers resolutely refused to take any step to vindicate the law, or to protect the Queen's loyal Irish subjects from the effects of a sys tem of intimidation more frightful than any attempted since the days of the French revolution. That sys tem of intimidation Ministers, we repeat, approved themselves unwilling to check. That system of inti midation Ministers have - now virtually re-established. It is time that those who desire to prevent the dis memberment of the empire should think seriously of the present aspect of affairs. The Repeal agitation will speedily be renewed with tenfold fervour. How long will that agitation be opposed by Sir Robert Peel ? To how many of his professed principles has that Right Honourable Gentleman adhered in defiance of long continued clamour ? In early life he was the champion of Protestantism. In 1829 he betrayed the Protestant cause. He was, in a sense, the founder of Orange lodges. In 1836, he lent himself to their sup pression without attempting to defend them. In 1839, he was the champion of British agriculture. In 1842 he openly adopted the principles of the Anti- Corn-law League. Will he always oppose the clamour for a repeal of the union ? (From the Morning Advertiser.) We congratulate the State prisoners—we congra tulate the people of Ireland—we congratulate the lovers of justice throughout the world on the event which yesterday took place in the House of Lords. Contrary to all expectation, after what had occurred in the same place on Monday, the judgment of the Irish court.has been reversed, and this evening O'Con- 2,--, nell and his fellow-prisoners will be walking the SHOCKING MURDER.—A man named Pont, who streets of Dublin as free as any of her Majesty's sub- had been Deputy-Mayor of Epinay-sour-Senart (in the jects. The reversal of the sentence which doomed Seine-et-Oise), was tried on Saturday at Versailles on the Irish patriots to twelve months' incarceration, has i a charge of having poisoned his wife, and afterwards excited an extraordinary sensation in London. What murdered a young woman named Louise Montcneau. It will be the excitement it will cause in Ireland, we ' e appeared from the evidence that the wife of the prisoner leave to be guessed by those who know the state was much older than himself, but he was induced to of public feeling in that country. In the ex _ I I marry her because she was much richer, and that in cess of the peoplc's • joy, in their boundless exul- i order to come into the sole enjoyment of her property, tation, - see trust that nothing will occur to afford he, in January . , Hee l administered arsenic to her, and I deprived her of her life. A short time after her death a handle to the enemies of their country. The ,he took a fancy to Louise Mon teneau, then only twenty question will i now suggest itself to every mind, i years old, and purchased her of her mother as his mis -1 what reparation will be made to O'Connell and tress, by settling an annuity upon her. She became carceration they have suffered ? Another question his fellow-prisoners for the three months' in- ! pregnant, and, to relieve himself of the embarrassment reparation . can be made will occur—what adequatethe child might cause him, he induced her to take means 1 them ? None. The Injury on them is too deep, the injustice done them too g reat for procuring an abortion. These failing lie determined to get rid of his mistress and child at one blow. To injustice which has been inflicted I to admit of a measure of reparation which coul the merits of the case. That, however, is no reason meet ' effect this purpose, he, in April last, led her into the 1 forest of Senart, and there first shot her with a pistol, and then set her clothes on fire, in the hope of destroy ng looking why some atonement should not be made. In cass 1 ing all traces of his crime. Her body was found litf-• of Use imprisonment—even for a fe'w hours —at the calcined. The evidence against him was circumstantial, instance convincing. Pont, e instance of private individuals, the party sufferi however, throu hou a t ho to is b a e m co a nfid m ent of the injury can obtain ready redress. It will be very escape. g The' juryy e declared him g guilty, and the presi extraozdinary if the constitution, who excellences dent pronounced upon him sentence of death. we are in the habit of lauding t o th e s ki es , d oes no t ' provide the means of reparation for individuals who have suffered three months' false imprisonment at the hands of a vindictive Goveinment. The prosecu tion of Mr. O'Connell has been a most unfortunate step from the first. As it began, so it has con tinued, and so it has ended. Blunder succeeded blunder on the part of the Attorney-General, and even on the seat of justice, until all law and justice have been made ridiculous. It is impossible for any man, after what he has witnessed in our courts of law, and on thb bench of justice for the last six months, to entertain in future any respect either for the proceedings of lawyers, or the dicta of judges. We wish that our observations were applicable only to the Bench and the Bar on the other side of the Channel. Unhappily they also apply nearer home. What a melancholy exhibition was made on Mon day, in the House of Lords. Ask any hundred men you meet in the public streets of any town in Great Britain, what they conceived to be the crowning offence which Mr. O'Connell com mitted in the eye of the law, and for which he and his fellow-patriots were incarcerated in Richmond Bridewell ? Ask them this question, and ninety-nine out of the hundred, if not the entire hundred, will answer that the gravamen of the charge against the prisoners was the circumstance of their holding the monster meetings, by which they intimidated her Majesty's subjects, and endangered the public peace. How will such persons be sur prised when they are informed, that though the counts which the English judges found to have been ille gally framed, or on which the jury returned defective findings, are those very counts which charged Mr. O'Connell with intimidating her Majesty's subjects, and endangering the public peace, yet that a large majority of these judges came to the decision that the sentence passed on the prisoners ought not to be re versed ? Judicial minds may be able to reconcile such extraordinary anomalies, but we suspect very few else will. To the public the decision of the Eng lish judges, and the affirmation of the sentence of the Irish court, will for ever appear at irreconcileable vari ance. An outrage, as we have already said, has been offered to the sacredness of justice ' from the initiatory step taken in these prosecutions, down to the closing act of the judicial drama. The law, too, as far as unprofessional persons like ourselves can compre hend it, has suffered violence in various stages of the State trials; but we are sure we only speak the una• nimou.s conviction of men of all parties, when we say that this last exhibition of judicial inconsistency, legal absurdity, and injustice, will do more to bring the English bench of justice into disrepute than any thing which has occurred fur many years past. For tunately, the more enlightened, more rational, more constitutional view of the question taken by Lords Denman, Cottenham, and Campbell, has interposed between Mr. O'Connell and the effects of the extra ordinary law laid down on Monday by the seven judges, who affirmed the sentence of the court below. But see how accidental this was. Had one of the three law Lords whose names we have men tioned only happened to take the same view of the case as the Lord Chancellor and Lord Brougham, or had not the. Lords, " not learned in the law," ab stained from voting, the law of the seven judicial Solons alluded to would have continued Mr. O'Con nell in prison for nine months longer, and subjected him to the intolerable annoyance of being on, what in legal phraseology is called, his " good behaviour" for seven years more. We hope that the progress and conclusion of these trials will prove a salutary lesson to Sir Robert Peel. We are much mistaken if he has not by this time had enough of them. Out of evil cometh good. Mr. O'Connell and his fellow prisoners have been sufferers, but the public and the great principles of constitutional liberty will be incal culable gainers by the Irish trials. The result is not of a nature to inspire future Governments, any more than the present Administration, with any undue pas sion for State prosecutions. (From the Morning Chronicle). The great case of the Queen against O'Connell, which has interested and agitated the British empire for several months back, and which has excited so many hopes, fears, and conjectures, has been brought to a final termination at last. The House of Lords, after a discussion of surpassing interest, have decided that the judgment which had been given against Mr. O'Connell should be reversed, annulled, and holden for nought, and that the said Daniel O'Connell should be restored to all things which he had lost by the said judgment. The debate—if such it may be called —was commenced by Lord Lyndhurst, whose speech was clever, but general ; not entering minutely into either the facts or authorities, entering not at all into the principles of a larger kind which ought to regulate such a decision, but contenting himself with appealing to a general usage, and with criticising the judgment of Baron Parke. Warmly insisting upon the propriety of acting upon the opinions of the majority of the judges, who thought that the judgment ought to be affirmed, he moved that it be affirmed accordingly. Lord Brougham, of course, followed on the same side, and in very much the same strain. Lord Cottenham, Lord Campbell, and Lord Dentnan, voted for the reversal of the judgment. The first of these Noble Lords con fined himself entirely to the subject upon which the difference of opinion existed between the judges, but went most elaborately over the limited space which he occupied. Lord Campbell addressed the House at greater length, and expressed his opinions upon every part of the case. With regard to Lord Denman, we want language to express the feelings of admiration with which he was listened to by ourselves, as well as the whole of the assembled audience. The large and elevated expansion of his views beyond the technical boundaries of his mere profession, the heart-warm sincerity with which he vindicated the right of every subject of the realm to a fair and impartial trial, the noble indignation with which he denounced the fraudulent and illegal prac tices which, if sanctioned by authority, would convert trial by jury into a " delusion, a mockery, and a snare"—the general purity and elevation of his senti ments, expressed with an eloquence which was heightened by the graceful dignity of his presence and demeanour, and receiving utterance in a voice of extraordinary beauty—all this presented in our judg ment one of the noblest exhibitions that ever adorned a legislature or a tribunal. And thus the monster sentence of the monster trial is reversed. The h ague long indictment, the more interminable pleadings, the insinuation of treason under a mere accusation of misdemeanour, the plainest objections and claims of right over-ruled, the straining of law and the perversion of justice—all have come to nought. What use will he make of the new and tremendous power which this unhappy prosecution has bestowed upon Mr. O'Connell ? This question, which now flies from mouth to mouth, is the best comment upon the policy recently pursued. After all our vigorous government of Ireland, are we to hang on Mr. O'Connell's lips to learn the fate of that country ? Is this the triumph of a Government too firm to truckle to agitation ? We must confess we see little reason to hope that the reparation, necessarily tardy and imperfect, which the law now makes to Mr. O'Connell for the wrong done to him, will check the activity of the repeal movement. On the contrary, the agitation is likely to go on with increased force under the stimulus of events, which will add to the pungency of every popular exhortation. The difficul ties in Jae way of governing Ireland, will be found as formindable as ever, and to remove them some new scheme must be tried. In the pre sent state of Ireland, Ministers cannot stand still. Conciliation or coercion they must try, on some new and great scale. They have paltered too long with the integrity of the empire. The evil was felt vividly ten days ago, and no one can say how soon or how long it may be before the cloud now disappearing darkens the horizon again. A heavy responsibility lies upon that Minister who ex poses the country to a concurrence so menacing as that of foreign war with intestine dissension. Every consideration of prudence, as well as of justice, now urges us to consolidate the union with Ireland. Is the session really to close without contributing any thing to this end ? That it will so close is but too probable. The commission to prorogue has been ap pointed for one o'clock this day, almost the very hour at which the House of Commons is to meet, as if for the purpose of preventing even the slightest expres sion of opinion on the seriousness of the present exi gency. Ministers, we fear, know not what to do, and will do nothing more than let events take their course. They have neither the courage nor the com prehension requisite to grapple with the difficulties of Irish government, and they are equal to nothing better than looking idly on while the connexion be tween the two countries is exposed to the shock of a new agitation, SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. i FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY. GLOBE.—On the very day it was announced that O'Connell and the repeal leaders were to be prosecuted by the Government, we commenced an article in the words of the Eastern apophthegm—" Begin nothing of which thou bast not well considered the end." The difficulties which would attend the course of such a prosecution ; the dangers of success, no less than the dangers of defeat ; were manifest to all. We counselled Sir Robert Peel to pause ere he commit ted himself to a policy surrounded by such perils. We insisted that the Proclamation against the Clon tarf meeting ought to have been the commencement of a new era. If the public peace were perilled —as it was assumed to be—by th e "mo ns t e r meetings," the proclamation, if obeyed, would put an end to the apprehensions ; if disobeyed, the force which the constitution places at the disposal of the executive, might have been lawfully employed to enforce obedi ence. Those who called the meeting, as well as those who persisted in assembling, after the prohibition was issued by the Government, would have been liable to the pains and penalties which the law provides to punish disobedience to its commands. The Government had connived at the previous meetings. It had thus induced a belief in the minds of the people that they were within the protection of the law. Every act of the Govern ment tended to this conclusion. The removal from the commission of magistrates who attended the meet ings, and other summary. acts of the prerogative, by which the executive expressed its disapproba tion of proceedings it had not the power to pre vent by the means vested in it by the constitution, gave encouragement to the repeal leaders. 'Week suc ceeded to week, and month to month. One " monster meeting" after another, to the number of nearly a hundred, was held. No actual breach of the peace was committed at, or followed, one of those meetings. A new light suddenly broke upon the councils of the Govern ment. The Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland was dispatched from London with headlong haste, with a copy of the pro clamation against such assemblies in his pocket. Upon his Excellency's arrival in Dublin, a meeting of the Privy Council was instantly convened ; and, while the multitudes were on their way by t h e var i ous roa d s to t h e place of meeting, printed copies of the proclamation were posted at the various approaches to the spot. A formidable military force, consisting of cavalry, infantry, and artillery, took up the best-selected positions, to act against the multitude, if it did not instantly dis peree. The prompt obedience paid to the authority of law, and the quiet dispersion of the people to their homes, prevented the calamitous consequences which even an accidental collision between a single peasant and a single soldier might have occasioned. The prompt and earnest efforts of O'Connell, and the influence which his name and character exercise over the popular mind in Ireland, prevailed. He prudently dispatched messengers in all directions to meet the people on their way to the meeting. A printed ad dress, hearing his well-known signature, informed them that the meeting was prohibited by the authority of Government. He exhorted to obedience, and was obeyed. We do not suppose that the Government, by delaying the proclamation to the latest rnoment, contemplated, much less desired, a collision be tween the ropealers and the military. But we do say, that had not O'Connell interfered, large numbers of the peasantry would have arrived on the ground, without knowing of the proclama tion ; and that some act of unpremeditated violence between individuals might have led to an attack, in which life would probably have been sacrificed to a lamentable extent. The obedience thus paid by the people to this su ddenly-determined on, and clumsily-enforced, interference of the Governmert with the long-permitted monster meetings, was a pledge and earnest that there was no disposition to hold such meet ings after they were denounced as illegal. The Govern ment had thus asserted its authority in a legal manner ; its proclamation was obeyed, and its purpose was effected. Had a conciliatory policy been adopted, simultaneously with the suppression of the " monster meetings," there would have been hope for Ireland. Instead of this, the evil genius of the Cabinet c ounselled further a c t s o f coercion; was listened to ; and prevailed. The Arms Registration Act was introduced. The prosecutioh of O'Connell and the other repeal leaders followed. At every step, this ill-advised proceeding involved th e law advisers of the Gov e r nme nt in disgrace, through the blunders they perpetrated in its management; and the Government itself in difficulties, contempt, and odium with the nation. The proceedings were fraught with glaring inroads upon the securities with which the l aw surrounds accused parties while preparin for and upon their trial for alleged offences. The dignity and so lemnity of a court of criminal jurisprudence were out raged by the highest law officer of the Crown. The proceedings, from their commencement to their close, were calculated to b r i ng the administration of the laws under suspicion, rather than to strengthen th e i r hold upon the aff ec t ions an d obedience of the people. A verdict of guilty was returned—as every one knew it would be returned—by the partisan jury which had been secured for the purpose of obtaining a conviction. The motion in arrest of judgment was re fused. The indictment, in every count, was pronounced perfect. Sentence was pronounced; and O'Connell and his co- defendants consigned to a goal for various periods; ordered to pay heavy fines ; and to enter into still heavier recognisances, at the termination of their re spective terms of imprisonment, .ere they could be re leased. The House of Lords has reversed the judg ment. At the moment that we write, O'Connell and bis co-agitators are at liberty. His political in fluence in Ireland—heightened, as it was, by the State prosecution against him—is enhanced to an incon ceivable extent by the reversal of the .judgment, and the triumph it has conferred on him, and on the cause of which he is the leader. Repeal was indebted to Sir Ro bert Peel's accession to office for animation ; it derived strength from every measure of his Government ; until it filled Ireland with its converts; dre w th e revenues o f a Ger increasing num b ers an d influence of its confederation; which were d a ily increased for m an th p e rin publiccipa l i ty safety to its fr c o o r, ffe r thes ; and e xc it e d appre h ens i ons by the impolitic measures of the Government. Sir R. Peel at length assented, rather than cordially agreed, to the dangerous counsels of those who thought that to in carcerate O'Connell was the best way to encounter Irish difficulties. The experiment has b een ma d e. I t h as f a il e d. Defeat has succeeded to disgrace. Sir R. Peel, who declined in 1839 to undertake the government, and assigned as an apology for relin quisung the undertaking—" My eh iefdif ficulty was Irelands" has now to meet that "difficulty," increased, by his own acts, in a tenfold ratio. That h e w ill b e able to encounter that difficulty, and to overcome it, we deem impossible. 'We scarcely think he will have the . temerity to try. One f a l se step may environ the nation with peril s , an d convu l s e it with apprehensions. That O'Connell will employ his ac knowledged powers of effective p ersuas i on , and now multiplied force of influence, with hi s f o ll o wers, to re strain them from any violent outbreak, we have reason to believe. His conduct in th e f ear f u l cr i s i s create d by the Proclamation against the Clontarf meeting affords ground for believing that he will now be prudent—we will add, patriotic. The course which Sir R. Peel will take is far more problematical. That the Government has felt the shock of this defeat of its coercive policy, is plain. It was announced at th e meet i ng o f t h e H ouse of Commons this morning, that Lord Stanley has ac cepted the Chiltern Hundreds. What does this indi cate? Is the Cabinet about to break up? All manner of rumours are afloat. LAW INTELLIGENCE. HOUSE OF LORDS, Sept. 4. APPEALS. After the decision of the case of " O'Connell v. the Queen (in error)" yesterday, Lord BROUGHAM proceeded to give judgment in that of BYRON V. COOPER, in which the only question was, whether the rector of a parish in Lincolnshire was entitled to receive his tithe in kind, or bound by the existence of an alleged modus. The Court of Exchequer, from which the appeal was brought, had decided against the•modus. The House of Lords now reversed the decree as to some of the lands in question, reserving to the clergyman, if he thought proper, the power of having an issue directed from the court below, as to whether the remaining lands were subject to the modus or not. DRUMMOND V. MAUN. The LORD CHANCELLOR moved that the judgment of the court below should be affirmed with costs. CREED V. CREED. In this case a decree of Lord Chancellor Sugden had been appealed ag a i ns t, t h e quest i on b e i ng w hether some annuities charged upon real estate had or had not priority over other legacies charged on the personal estate. The Lord Chancellor had held that the an nuities were entitled to priority. On the motion of Lord COTTENHAM the decree was reversed. TAYLOR V. CLEMSON. This was a question as to a tenantcy of land under the Manchester Railway Act. Lord BROUGHAM, and Lord COTTENHAM were of opinion that the judgment of the Exchequer Chamber must be for the defendant in error with costs. MURRAY v. MURRAY. This was a question upon a private Act of Par lament. The judgments of Lord BuouctrAm, Lord COTTEN.. lIAM, and Lord CAMPBELL were that the interlocutors of the court below must be affirmed with costs. STIRLING V. EWART. Lord BR OUGHAM, L or d C OTTENHA M, and Lord CAMP BELL This was a gave judgment in this case, affirming th e j ud g ment of the court below w ith co s t s. KNIGHT V. BOUGHTON, BART. question upon the provisions of a will. ' The LORD CHAN CELLOR moved that the decree be affirmed without costs. Lords Brougham,Cottenham, and Campbell concurred, STOCKTON AND DARLINGTON RAILWAY V. DARRATT. The LORD CHANCELLOR delivered the judgment of the court in this case, in which the question was, whether the railway company could demand the higher or lesser duty upon coals exported or shipped from Stockton upon-Tees. His Lordship moved that the judgment for the defendant in error in the court below should be affirmed with costs. THE EARL OF ROSSLYNT V. AYTOWN. office o rl f died, and of afterwards c Chan- In the year 1780 George 111. granted to Sir James St. Chair Erskine, afterwards Ea rl o Rosslyn, the office the office to of Director of Chancery in Scot land, for his natur al life. In 1830 the Earl appointed hi s eldest son, Lord Lough such whether c the Aytown, the two survivor Scotland. them, ln to Earlpresentdefendant. gran t questionsarose,anto party persons jointly ; and secondly, whether a who only director held his own office fur life could appoint wen office for the life of another person who might survive him. The Court of Session had decreed that the late Earl had no such power. Lord CAMPBELL now delivered judgment, affirming the decree of the court below. SEPTEMBER 5. Their Lordships met to-day at ten o'clock, for the purpose of giving several judgments. The Peers present at the time were the Lord Chancellor, Lord Brougham, Lord Cottenham, and Lord Campbell. ADAM V. FARQUIIARSON. BLAKIE V. Their Lordships affirmed the judgment, with costs. CARRICK V. BUCHANAN. The judgment in this case was also affirmed. LINDSAY V. THE EARL OF ABOYNE. The judgme►►t of the court below in this appeal was affirmed with costs. WATERS V. GROOM. This judgment was ordered to be affirmed, with costs. KNIGHT V. THE MARQUIS OF WATERFORD. In this appeal their Lordships ordered the judgment below to be reversed, and the bill to be retained for a limited period, leaving the plaintiff., if he could, to establkh his title at law to the tithes, the subject of the suit. CHARTER V. TREVELYAN. The judgment of the appeal was affirmed, with costs, ROSS V. THE DUKE OF SUTHERLAND. The judgment in this appeal %vas affirmed, without costs, COMMISSIONERS OF BANKRUPTCY. Lord BROUGHAM, in the course of the morning, moved for a return of the number of days the Commissioners of Bankruptcy had sat fur the last three months, distin guishing the several months ; and also for a return of the amount of revenue for the Customs of Excise for the current quarter, up to September. In moving for the first return, the Noble Lord st a t e d th a t he hoped his Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack would take an early opportunity of remov ing one of the greatest grievances which the suitors of the City of London were subject to, namely, the Com missioners of Bankruptcy only sitting for two or three days at most in a week, crowding twenty seven or thirty things into one morning's sitting. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he had NO authority over them. Lord BROUGHAM—Oh yes, you have, by the last Act. He had great satisfaction in moving for the last return, as it would show there was an increase at the rate of a million a year in the Customs. That being the case, and freight having risen 30 per cent. within the lost two months, such was the admirable and satisfactory state of the trade of this country, that it made him grievously regret there should be any people in the world so insane as to wish for war. Lord CAM:. BELL said he only abstained from making any observations on what had been said by his Noble and Learned Friend, on the ground that it might be detri mental to the suitors, by preventing their Lordships from giving their judgments in the different cases 13,fore them. Lord BROUGHAM was sure his friend did not mean to say he was for war. Lord CAMPBELL--No; I should point out the best mode to preserve peace. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that as to the Commis sioners of Bankruptcy, they had enough now before them in deciding questions on his Noble Friend's Bill. Lord BROUGHAM said the Commissioners chose to crowd twenty-seven or thirty cases into one morning's business, in order to get away to their villas in the neighbourhood of London ; and as to his Bill, they put the most wrong and erroneous constructions upon it. CARRILL V. GLEESON. In this case the judgment of the Court below was affirmed with costs. SEAFORD V. MORRIS. The decree in this vase was affirmed as to the copy hold property, and reversed as to the freehold, with liberty to enter another appeal. THE CASE OF MR. O'CONNELL. Lord CAMPBELL moved that the retvons given by their Lordships in giving judgment in the case of the Queen v. O'Connell, be printed —Agreed to. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. (YESTERDAY.) GUILDHALL. Wednesday Mr. Alderman Wood was occupied a considerable time in investigating a charge of stealing about 741. in gold, silver, and notes, from an Irish pig dealer. The charge was made against William Franklin, a young man lodging in Hoxton, and also said to be a pig-dealer. The facts of the case have already been reported. After hearing additional evidence, Mr. Alderman Wood said he had no doubt of the prisoner's guilt. The stolen notes were traced to his possession. The prisoner was committed for trial. 'VARY LEBOIVE. Wednesday Henry Wagstaff, residing at No. 23, Harrow-road, was charged on a warrant obtained against him by Rachael Wagstaff, his wife. Complainant stated that she had been married nearly ten years to defendant, and that they had lived apart since June last, when he attacked and broke three of her ribs, for which offence he was fined a; on the 20th of last month as she was going from home, he followed and threatened to annoy her wherever she went, at the same time vowing, as he was determined upon being revenged, that he would cut her up into quarters, grill her bones upon a grid iron, and broil her heart at the back of the fire, in spite of any attempt which might be made by mortal power to prevent him. Defendant—l deny the truth of the greater part of what my wife has alleged against me. I have no in tention whatever of injuring her. Mr. RAWLINSON ordered him to enter into his own recognisance in the sum of 201. for his keeping the peace towards complainant for twelve months. CL E I? KEA IV EL L. STABBING.—John Ueren , a stonemason, residing at No. 23, Eagle co u rt, St. John's-lane, Clerkenwell, was charged with stabbing Jane Ueren, his wife, so as to endanger her life. It appeared that the prisoner returned home be tween nine and ten o'clock on the previous night. His wife had supper prepared for him at the usual time, seven o'clock, but it became cold whilst he was squan dering his earnings at a neighbouring gin-shop. He, in consequence, applied very gross language to her, and she endeavoured to soothe him by putting the food on the fire for the purpose of heating it, when seeing him seize a knife she ran towards the door, but the prisoner overtook her and made a thrust with the knife at her body. The knife entered the thick part of her arm. She cried "Murder," and a lodger called in a policeman. The prisoner by the force of the thrust bent the knife against the bone of the arm, but having made it straight, was eating his supper very unconcernedly with it when taken into custody. Mr. IVilliam Walker, a surgeon, deposed that the wound was three quarters of an inch in length and an inch and a half in depth, the knife having pene trated to the bone. Mr. COMIIE (to the prisoner)—What have you to say to the charge ? Prisoner—That it's true. Mr. Combe remanded him. Mr. G. Stephens Murphy, residing in Spencer street, Northampton- square, was brought before the magistrate, charged with causing the death of John Rogers, and injuring three other persons, one of whom (Elizabeth Bignall) is despaired of. Inspector Froud, of the S division, announced that an inquest had been held that day at the Whittington and Cat, Holloway, before •Mr. Wakley and a 'jury, on the body of Rogers, and a verdict of Accidental Death was returned. Mr. Murphy (whose face was plastered in several places) was about to leave the court, when Mr. COMBE said—Pray remain a while, Sir; as you have been brought before me I must hear some evidence before I can discharge you. Mr. Murphy—But I have been discharged by the coroner, and he told me there was no charge against me. Mr. COMBE—I cannot say what the coroner may have told you. The coroner has no power to take a prisoner from the magistrate's jurisdiction. He has often tried it, but he never could succeed. In the present case one person has lost his life, three others have been injured, two of them seriously, and I can not part with you until the matter undergoes inves tigation. What was the evidence adduced at the inquest? Inspector Frond—Two witnesses only were ex amined, one, a Mr. Duckworth, of Finchley, with whom the prisoner dined on the day in question, and who proved that he was sober when leaving his house ; and another gentleman, who saw the horse running away a short time before the cataitrophe. The fore man of the jury asked questions of the Bignalls, two of the sufferers. who said they believed it was acci dental. Mr. CoiußE—Well, I must say that is the strangest way of obtaining evidence that ever I heard. Sir (addressing Mr. Murphy), you must be bound over to appear here to-morrow to answer the charge. Recognizances were entered into, and Mr. Murphy left the Court accompanied by his friends. One of Wilson's omnibus drivers on the Holloway road was charged with furious driving, and thereby en clangoring the lives of her Majesty's subjects. The number of the omnibus is 3,871. Police-constable, 175 N, deposed that on Sunday morning he saw the omnibus going from Holloway towards th. , City. When the prisoner reached the Blue coat Boy he began to lash his horses violently, and gal loped down the road at the top or their speed, in order to get before an omnibus in advance of it. This, by dint of hard driving, he effected. The road was crowded at the time with persons going to Divine service, and they were running on to the pavement in order to avoid the vehicle. The witness, in answer to a question from the Magis trate, said this conduct had become habitual with the defendant.—He was fined 11., and costs. WORSHIP-STREEP. Francis Crocker, who stood charged with having fraudulently obtained the sum of 155.; and a gold wedding-ring from a young servant girl named Mary Judd, under the pretence of prosecuting at her suit a young man named Abel, for breach of promise of marriage, was brought up for final examination. At the former examination the prisoner positively denied having assumed the character of a solicitor in the transaction, but represented himself merely as an agent, and in that capacity delivered the papers he had received from the prosecutrix, as the ground work of the action, to the clerk of a solicitor named Hutson, who had neglected to carry on the suit, Mr. Hutson, the solicitor, now stated that he had I not the slightest personal knowledge of the prisoner, but he had ascertained from his clerk that the prisoner had left some papers at the office relating to the mat ter, but no money had been received from him ; and it being the opinion of a pleader, before whom the documents were laid, that they did not furnish grounds sufficient fur an action, no proceedings what ever had been commenced. Nothing was at that time known respecting the presentation of a wedding-ring to the proseeutrix ; for had that fact been divulged by the prisoner, it would, no doub', have been deemed sufficient to constitute ample grounds for the contem plated proceedings. Mr. BROUGHTON then ordered the depositions to be taken, and the prisoner was fully committed. LAMBETH -STREET. THE LATE CASE OF CRUELTY TO A CHlLD.—Wed nesday Elizabeth Pollen, alias Webb, was again brought before the Hon. G. C. Norton, charged with dreadful cruelty to a child. Previous to the case being gone into a gentleman handed a sovereign to the magistrate for the mother, and said he was requested to present the money by the lady of an Earl, who did not wish to have her name published. Her ladyship wished it merely to be acknowledged under the initials " S. N." Mr. NORTON said he had also received a letter on the subject from Mr. George Robins, the eminent auctioneer, who wished to know if there was any charitable institution in the metropolis which would meet the case of the poor woman ? If there was he should be most happy to hand a handsome subscrip tion to the Secretary; and if there was no such in stitution he would subscribe towards the formation of so useful an establishment. The gentleman then said with the kind permission of the magistrate he would take the child and buy it a pair of shoes. The gentleman then took the child to a ready-made clothes warehouse, and completely clothed the little fellow from head to foot. Mr. NORTON directed that the mother should be brought in, and Police-constable Hands informed his Worship that he had made every inquiry into the character of the mother, and had traced her to seve ral places where she lived. No female could bear a more exemplary character, everybody described her as a meek, kind-hearted creature, and a most honest and industrious woman. The. MAGISTRATE then informed the poor woman that he trusted now her ill-usage and suffering would terminate, as several benevolent individuals had al ready exerted themselves on her behalf. He then requested one of the ushers of the court to hand her 10s. for her immediate use, and said that with the subscription, perhaps the bette.• plan would be to place her in some little business. The mother, with tears in her eyes, begged to thank the Magistrate for his humanity, and to return her thanks to the charitable individuals who had be friended her. Hands, the officer, then brotreht up the father, rind he was placed at the her beside the eetnale pr sorer. The officer said that the father ens ie a sad p!igh, as his Worship might rereeive ; but this was occasioned by the workmen at the shop where the male prisoner worked administering to him what they termed a dose of " Lynch law." The fellow having had the teme rity to show himself among his comrades, was taken betbre the foreman for having brought scandal upon his fellow-workmen by his shameful conduct. He ss as regularly tried by the laws of the society, found guilty, and the foreman condemned him to be tarred and feathered, which was carried, with hearty good will, into immediate execution. Mr. NORTON—If I understand rightly, Hands, you took this case upon your own responsibility ? The Police-constable—Yes, Sir. I demanded to see the child, which was at first denied ; the female prisoner then said it was her own child, and at that time I did not know that she was not married to the man at the bar. Mr. NORTON This is a case of unheard of cruelty, and your conduct is highly merito rious. The parish have declined to prosecute ? The constable informed Mr. Norton that the board of guardians refused to take the matter in hand, although at the request of his Worship. Mr. NORTON—The case shall certainly go for trial, and let the depositions be forthwith sent to the Home office, with the request for the Home Secretary's per mission for the constable to prosecute. John Lewis then deposed that both the prisoners came to lodge with him in the month of April last, and were in the habit of most cruelly ill-using the poor child. The female would frequently keep it without food for two days together. Both the father and the female, with whom he lived, beat it in a most dreadful manner with a thick whip. The child was not allowed to play with or speak to other children. The prisoners only lodged with him for two months, during which period the poor little fellow had fre quently two black eyes. The child was invariably beat two or three times a week, and the father would frequently come home late at night, wake it out of its sleep, and give a most dreadful beating. Witness has known the child to be kept so long without vic tuals, that he has gone into the street, and picked up pieces of cabbage-stumps, and eaten them in the most ravenous manner, for which the female beat it with a whip with the greatest cruelty. Another witness proved that the father was present when the female beat the child in a most horrid man ner. She had, also, on several occasions taken the child in her arms, and thrown it from one wall to the oter with such frightful violence that it was a mercy his brains were not dashed out. The mother here stepped forward, and informed the magistrate that the poor little thing was not suf fered to go down into the yard, and the female pri soner, on two occasions, made the child eat most revolting filth. Mr. NORTON—WeII, here is a horrid case of cruelty, and yet the parish and the board of guardians decline to prosecute. I am, however, determined to send the case to the sessions, and I shall make the constable the prosecutor. The police-officer was then bound over to prosecute, and both prisoners were fully committed. Mr. NORTON acknowledged the receipt of 20s. from an anonymous quarter for the use of the mother. MARLBOROUGH -STREET. Mr. William Colin Smith, of No. 10, Victoria-grove, Kensington, barrister-at-law, was charged (as entered on the police-sheet) with being drunk and riotous, and assaulting the police. Police-sergeant John Wells, No. 185 of the C division, stated that between one and two o'clock this morning, as he was proceeding on duty through James-street, Haymarket, he saw the defendant in a very drunken state holding by some area railings. Two dirty, low prostitutes were with him ; they took him by the arms, and were endeavouring to get him away. One of them seeing witness approach, called out, "Ellee, here's a b--y peeler corning." He then went up to the defendant, and acquainted him with the cha racter of the company he was in, on which the defendant said " You're a d—d, infernal, lying scoundrel—one of them is my wife." The witness, having done what he thought to be his duty, to put the defendant on his guard against being robbed, was walk ing on, when he followed him, made use of grossly abusive language, and eventually assaulted him by taking him by the collar ; on which witness took him into custody. The defendant was proceeding to cross-examine the witness in a very loud and violent strain, when he was reproved by Mr. lIARDWICK for his intemperate and unbecoming mode of conducting himself. The defendant said that he was perfectly sober. He was, in fact, returning from a professional consultation. He was certainly speaking to two very young unfortunate prostitutes, who had accosted him, soliciting charity. He gave them a shilling. He had a serious charge of misconduct against the police, which he should instantly prefer in the proper (marten Mr. HARnwicK asled Inspector Aggs, of the C divi sion, if there could be any doubt of the defendant being in an intoxicated state?—The inspector said he was beyond all question drunk—extremely so. Mr. Hartnwicre said he believed the statement of the police-sergeant, and should, therefore, fine the de fendant 40s. A friend of the defendant immediately paid it, and he was discharged. UNION-HALL. Ann Waters and Jane Roberts were charged before Mr. Cottingham with stealing a diamond pin from Au gustus Palfroi, a foreigner. The complainant, who spoke English imperfectly, stated that on Tuesday he arrived from Ilatnburgh, and the same evening, as he was walking along Fl ee t- street, he was accosted by the two prisoners. They spoke of being in his country, and made themselves so agreeable that he was at length induced to accompany them over the bridge to a house near a theatre. At the time he entered the house he had a valuable diamond pin in his neck handkerchief; which was admired by the prisoners, who desired him to be careful of it, or he would lose it. One of the prisoners (Roberts) then pretended to fondle with him, and for that purpose clasped her hands round his neck. Immediately afterwards he missed his diamond pin, and accused the woman of taking it. She, however, denied it, and on his threaten ing to call the police both the prisoners threatened him with their venge a nce ; b u t he gave an a larm, a police man entered, but the diamond pin wa;: not found, they having had ample opportunity of getting rid ot it. Mr. COTTINGHAM said that it was i very audacious robbery on a foreigner, and that he should remand the prisoners, in order that the case might be completed against them. SINGULAR COAIDAT.—Last week a hawk was ob served, on an inland lake, on the confines of Strothglass, , to make a dart at one of a brood of wild ducks. The hawk missed his intended victim, and was instantly as sailed by the old duck, which flew, tartar like, from some weeds in the neighbourhood, and in her devotion to pro tect her offspring, the fond parent nearly suffered mar- , tyrdom. The savage bird instantly sezed and was about ' to land her, when a heron in the vicinity uttered one of those screams of terror for which it is peculiar when in danger. Curiously enough, the hawk forsook his pros trate victim, and attacked the heron, and although the duck rallied and courageously came to her assistance, the relentless assailant exacted from the poor heron the satisfaction of death, and retired with a peculiar air of triumph, not even deigning tO scalp its fallen enemy.— Bos-shire Advertiser. CORN AVERAGES. . 14 , GENERAL AVERAGE PRICES OF BRITISH COn.dil For the Week ended August 31,1844, made up r' from the g,t7,:i01 the Inspectors In the differe n t Citi es an d rowns in Ea 1 Wales, per Imperial Quarter. Wheat 504 lid. Oats ..... Id., 8eanr.......... , .. 54 14 Barley... 11d. I Rye ...... 34s 2d - - - AVERAGES OF THE LAST .IX WEEK'S. .O.S Weeks ending . WHEAT. I2ARLEY . I OATS. RYE. MEANS . July 27 52 9 34 2 20 In 1 3.3 9 37 4 si Aug. ;i 10 5B 10 34 6 !.70 1' 35 9 35 17 50 11 31 Il 7 34 2 37 24 4O 4 33 3 20 4 36 8 35 iu " 31 IMPERIAL AGGREGATE AVERAGES OF THE SII "40 Wheat... ...... Us. 6d Oats 343 3d 1 Rye ...... 355. 81 Pea5e........ 0 "' DUTIES ON FOREIGN CORN. I'. 0 Wheat Barley n i tY) MARKET NEWS. ( YESTER.- SAY Nta.miETS. . 4 10; SmiTimELD.—Coarse Meadow H a y, 31 15s t?„ to Useful ditto, 416 s to 4/ I2s ; fin e Upl an d ditto, 4 , s p) 5/3s ; Clover Hay, 4/ 103 to 616 s ; O a t St r aw ! 1 6.4 1/ 8s ; Wheat Straw, I/ 8s to 1/ lOs per loscb. bo o moderate supply and a st ea dy d eman d. Prices 11 stationary. CumnEuLANn.—Coarse Meadow Hay, 3116 s to —, ; ! 16 .te Useful ditto, 418 s to 4/ 16 s; fine Upland ditto, 41 1l 51 6s ; Clover Hay, 41 16s to 6/ ; Oat Straw, 1185 to 10s; Wheat Straw, 11 lO s t o 11 12 s per load• ply tolerably good, and trade dull. 0 .. 4 1 WIIITECH 7 t APEL.—Coarse Meadow H a y, , iAS BSJ Useful ditto, 4/10s to 41 15 s ; fi ne Upl an d ditto, 41 1 I I 5/ 3s ; Clover Hay, 41 15s to 6/ lOs ; Oat St r l l d , 6s to 11 Ss ; Wheat Straw, It 8s to 11 lOs Pe r. Trade throughout dull, a t the above quotations. MEAT MARICETS. tr ITAILSHAM, SEPT. 4.—The general demand bey fr o day nas heavy, and prices were not supported. Ba e ~-.4 6 (1 11 , 2s 6d to 3s 10d; Mutton, 2 s 8d t o 4 s; L a mb, 64 4s 6d; Veal, 3s 4d to 4s 2d ; and Pork, 3 5 to per Blbs. Car ARUNDEL, SEPT. 3.—Prim e D owns so ld at rencies. In other kinds of stock next to notbiag s aa doing. Beef, from 2s 6d t o 3 s 10d ; M u tt o n, 25 04 4s ; Lamb, 3s 6d to 4s 4d; Veal, 3s 4d to 45.; Pork, 2s 6d to 3s 6d per 81bs. 0 4 ! CHICHESTER, SEPT. 4.—W e h a d a ver y dull this morning, at barely lat e ra t es . B ee f, from 2 5 i tol 3s 10d; Mutton, 2s Bd , to 4s ; L am b, 3 s 6d to 46 Od;, 4 101 3s 4d to 4s; and Pork, 3s t o 3 s 8d p er 8 1 b s . Si''7o Calves, 18s to 30s; Quarter-old Store Pigs, 165 W in o and Mitch Cows, with their Small C a lf, 161 to 17 each. SOUTHALL, SEPT. 4.—Owing to the supply 4 o ol kind of stock on sale to-day being l a r ge the a was throughout heavy, and prices h a d a dovit,gl tendency. Beef, from 2s 6d t o 3 s 10d ; Mutton, ' 4 l; to 4s ; Lamb, 3s 6d to 4s 8d ; Veal, 3s 4d tot./ and Pork, 2s 6d to 3s 8d per Sibs. SuPriio; Beasts, 54 ; Sheep and Lambs, 3,048 ; Calve s ': Pigs,' 57. ROMFORD, SEPT. 4.—With the exception a_ t f lti l primest Old Downs comm an di ng a stea dy sae "!fil prices, the demand here to-day was heavy, on tli 0 i ; $ 01 lowing terms :—Beef, from 2s 6d to 3s 10d ; I s , 2s 8d to 4s ; Lamb, 3s 4d to 4s 6d ; Veal, 3 c 3 4liii 4s 4d ; and Pork, 2s 4d to 3s 6d per Sibs. 011 ,„ - '10g Calves, 18s to 32s ; quarter-old Store Pigs, 166 ,7 0c ,), and Milch Cows, with their small Calf, 161 to 19' HORTICULTURAL SOCIETI t. The first meeting for the autumn season 0 5 .44 on Tuesday afternoon, at the rooms in R ege nt-s o ? Colonel Fielding in th e c h a i r . S evera l ne w med were elected, amon gs t w h om were the Mara Titchfield, Lord Salt oun , Si r F. G oo d r i c ke, An, tbs W. Guise. The most prominent collection Pi' )11 , room was that of pine apples, one of which, fro'. d Mills, gardener to th e B aroness d e R o thschil e sl Gunnersbury Park, weighed 14ilbs., being the lis o bi' ever before exhibited ; a P rov id ence p i n e was. bited from Mr. List, o f E as t B arne t, w hich vve i g il i e s! and another of 71bs. from the same party', the Marquis of Bath exhibited three g10b t ,14 6 weighing Gibs. each. Fr o m th e gar d ens o f A. u j oef Esq., of Enfield, were some fine Muscat of gefl andria grapes, a bunch of which weighed 1113 ', 6 40 1 and there were some peach e s an d nectarines of quality, notwithstanding the unfavourable nature season for this description of fruit. From the gale/ of the Hon. Mr. Cli ve , a t O a kl ey , were son s tp sorts of apples, amongst whi c h was a R us sian vr o o called " the yellow transparent," and which een country can be seen through lik e i ce , a p I I lse which it does not possess here ; and there o w° • 0 41 exhibited from the garden s o f a co tt age r at rt h , c h a ir j in Norfolk, a new seedli ng r usse t a pple, Iv' ge peared to have the desideratum of being a of keeper. From Lieut. Tilley there was shown, 0' interesting series of demonstrati ons in vegetab le tomy, which excited much commendation• t oes exhibition of flowers, although small, ' 4)11 0 0 a good many specim ens o f cons id era ble iP 11 0 amongst which were some orchidaceous Poor from Sir P. G. Egerton, Mr. Rollison derson (of Pine Apple-plac e ), M rs . 14arrYa Amongst the miscellaneous collections w!r e ne , admire' specimens of fuch s ia from Mr. Pa Great Berkhampstead, and a series of the sailL e Latel in the cultivation o f w hi c h t en diff ere nt ". per were applied, the effects of whi c h Nvere a t onae o f ceptible. The prizes awarded were the larg i Lk s iSa, medal to Mr. Mills, for hi s pi ne app l e ; 0 ' medals to Mr. Henderson, gardener to the lk f3O B Bath, for globe pine apples ; Mr. Corbyn, for; specimen of Lilium aucifolium with white l and Mr. Parsons, for Muscat of Alexandria 4.; and certificates of merit to Mr. Jones,__ for P" fo r the cottager at Platting, for apples ; Mr. Don, fst fine specimen of achimenes; and Mr. Reddmje gusmania tri-colour. The extract from the Ma gical Register kept at the gardens, from 6th 0 7 e to 3d September, gave—barometer, highest, ‘ , 0 ,35 1 ' ber 1, 30 376 inch.; l owes t, A ug ust 14, to Thermometer, Septemb er 1, 84 d eg rees F. ; lot °' August 23 and 27, 38 degrees F.; and q rain, 1.18 inch. MELANCHOLY SUlClDE.—Tuesday morning $ p lancholy suicide was committed by Mr. J. Bal,; 111 :0 0 :: landlord of th e Ship p u bli c -h ouse , i n the e ; r ek; bridge road. He rose at the usual time, OP A t tr good spirits, and went down to attend his busines9 bar. Shortly afterwards, however, he went S u l L I P again ; and his wife wondering at his absenee . ....• th at to look for him, and was horrified at discoveruat u eni had eut his throat with a razor. He was a wan "i r stov" spected by his neighbours, and the cause of the 14641 act is not known. lasto# , THE WEATHER •---THE CROPS.—For the the weather has been most favourable for harve l d 'oe„, 9 " and we learn with much satisfaction that it I:0 b ig ' rapidly through the country, districts. The / I ' is' vest is nearly everywhere finished, and the Yie oo d 1. scribed as being productive, and the crop 10 g l iott aj d dition. Indeed the complaints of anacvptuseo:of character to cause uneasiness orpprene vino should we be favoured with a continuance of t i b i e w ol,, genial weather, everything promises to goo e ' 5 0 40 agriculturist in the south of Ireland.— k ore Reporter. Ilt* REPRESENTATION OF NORTH LANCASII hope a Liberal candidate will b e immediately t.esso tr come forward for the vacancy created in the r e c c4tse , tion of North Lancashire by Lord Stanley's 1 of the Chiltern Hundreds. tel Ladies travelling, or temporarily subie i c porj 41 , deviation of equable temp e r a t ure , will find dOr igi tl Kalydor a renovating and refreshing auxi h Voihaiug ling the cloud of langour from the cool) otea immediately affording the pleasing sensad ° , l r i e sing Aso restored elasticity of the skin. rihe disc are ol* oiefh unsightly varieties of cutaneous eruptioo 0,170;J -its promptly eradicated by the Kalydor. Se f ield ona freckles, discolourations, and sallownest,Pthoe- t 005 nf specific qualities, and are succeeded by transparency of the skin, giving rise to sny grt p erof utmost pleasure and surprise. Its univer'fioPl‘` - c er mand excites the cupidity of unprincipled 5 sco le who give the title of " Genuine" KalYde r „„"; deleg 9 . l o o° pounds of their own manufacture, of the rie - t i 0 , u erlY Atu rill ear , character, containing mineral astrin"° - c oo r 's to the complexion, and by their repellan t I ur cbss e ing health. It is, therefore, imperative on p are on, see that the words " Rowland,s K oydoi !I ; wrapper. All others are fraudulent counterw____/ the net. On the 31st ult ,at C B lar l k ß sror in . Stirangs," „ al ly 0 , ~ shire, , ~_ , Major R. Gardiner , ' of the Hon. East India Co ull' th° vice, of a daughter. toll , On the 2d inst., at Bittern-grove, near Southall* of lady of Alexander Hoyes, Esq., of a son. On the 3d inst , the lady f Solomon Lazarus, 944 Carlton-villas, Ma.ida-vale, of a daughter. cO rilgr road,On 3tihrees.44Tttlhhloiinnulssatts..,,i'aiitLi'iiherarnS.tialimu,ford-street, 1311 I. 10' Barton,,, of a son. On th Bury Capel, of a son, still-born. l. v On the 4th inst., at Heddes6on, HleVratsit,hta:esitl:; 11'. Stokes, Esq., of a daughter. _-------- . ,to MARRIED. el • lb ''.. 0 On the 2d inst., atLeamington, Captain Mere& 'olio Marian D'Oyley, widow of the late J. B. Hog; o f ° PP° hill-park, Southampton. On the 3d inst., at St. George's, Camkerwell.,l°bsll.lsl6 Rogers, M.A., Oxford, of the Inner Temple, barlis ter- f CO ' t b o er ll , !a ei rr g , r e , l ‘ d e e , st s d u a rr u e g y h . ter of William Hichens, E s ' 7 " ° ,th _,_,lfill• 4 ' - r On Cie 3d inst., at Leamington, Captain vv("'"olf li i Regiment Madras Native Infantry, to Mary A_nr ie ', - 1.1 13 viving daughter of the. late Rev. Wilton ilen r) e ll Rector of Clarendon, Jamaica. VI 5s On the 3d inst., at St. George's, Hanover-stlu sre 'to 14° 1 Martyn Riccard, Esq., of South Molton, Dec °l3 ' (IP" ' Ann, only daughter of the late R. Hamer, E S q .' of nidgton. .r.. .4, On the 3d inst., at St. Marylebone Church, Jai n— An der' Morgan, Esq., to Mary, second daughter of Joseph '' Esq., of the Holme, Regent's-park. DIED. ~, O' uil'- On the Ist inst., Mrs. Parsall, of Patriot- q' bridge-heath, aged 76. % 54 " On the 24th ult., at Dover, John Parker Notts° , ~ Exor, of the Yeoman of the Guard. rru'll /IF On the 29th ult., at Sydenham, Oxfordshire, --- -I - ' of Mr. J. Atlee, aged 41. bff 41°t On the 30th ult., at Guernsey, Sibella, the lady 0 Stirling, of the Bombay Army. land, JAIIIB6, On the 31st ult., at Houghton Hall, Cumberr,.o sil,i Robert Grant, Esq., eldest son of Sir J. R. Grant, 0 1 b' Carlisle. _______-------- 1:1r 1G;f London : Printed and Published by WIRD() 1° III; No. 112 rand, Printer, at Tice Sus OlDco9enlifo 01 Strand, ins he Precinct of the Savoy, in the ``- lktiddlegez, Friday, September 6, 1844. Ci-R 4 ,„„ Ate hal..p, kir ogi i ................ r t ilE 6 1 : 11 at a s L na ld at tor foi "°ba oti n tor s , 0./01 ,1 th, to therti n ata The R e c l„ oilen tor th Ittk Dr V 4 444 . 1 „