The Sun. — London, England, 1821-12-11 00:00:00

~' ~~~ IL:ruk r 4 .44, 171 P • 2,1'44 :113 At, 11:1 ar 1.1 I r -t 11' t,i:l7 / 7f1:1 1 :/ . 18 9 1 • DEC E BKR 11, , •• - * ,~;' R EVENPENCE. i j iCE § FOR THE SUN TITESDA . 'NtiMBER. 9146.] ADMIRALTY-OFFICE, Dec. 10, 1 641. --------- NOTICE is hereby given, that a Session of Oyer and Terminer avd Gaol Delivery, fol. the Trial of Offences committedon the High Scar, within the Jurisdic tion of the Admiralty of England, will be hid at Justice 4 ' 1 4 jitihe.Old Bailey, LondOn, on Monday, the 2131 day of 4 ,,, a nuar. , inext; at Eight o' Clock in the Morning: instead o f "i 4 V,the llth, as before advertised. _ _ J. W. CROK ER. 8.--6341. NAVY PAY-OFFICE, Isr6v. 28, 1821. OHN BISEUR, alias .BESEIPR, of his Majesty Ship SUPERB, &c.—A Creditor having applied f( "" Pa pnerit of a Debt due from the above•named Seaman, Notice is hereby given to the next of Kin or Executor, who that' apply (if instant, by Post) to the Inspector of Seamens' 'Wills and Powers, fur further inforrnution, stating the abtrri Number. CUSTOM-HOUSE, LONDON, December 1, 1821. FOR SAL t ) ( by Order 'of the Hon. the Cont r toissioners of his Majesty's Customs,)' on FRIDAY, t he 1 4th Ittslant; at One o'Clock in the Afternoon precisely, at the Commercial Sale Booing, Mincing-lane, - the FOL LOWING GOODS for which the Bonds required by law have 1(t been renewed : r c't HOME CONSUMPTION, on Payment of the Duties or i -for EXPORTATION, duty flee. Sugar, Pimento, Drugs, Logwood, Fustic, Wine, Rum, • Geneva, Arrack, Brandy, Glass, Salt, Ocbre, Barilia, Hides, and Skins, Oil, Sma;ts, &c. The Goods in Lots 1 to 350 to be viewed at the Londoti Docks; the Logwood. and Fustic at the West India Docks, and all the other Goods by samples at the East and West Cel-• l ars,.Custo►n=House; on Monday the 10th, Tuesday the 11th, Wednesday the 13th, and Thursday the 14th Instant, during the usual hoUrs of business. Catalognes• may be had at the Xing's Warehouse, Custom House,' price One Shillinz each. • A Deposit of -Twenty-6ve per Cent. to he paid at the time of Sale, and -the Remainder at the Receiver of Fines and F orfeitures Office, Custom-House, 'by Three o'Clock in the afternoon of Monday, the 30th instant, or the Deposits to I ' ) cotue forfeited ; and the Goods to he taken away by Saturday, the 30th March, 1822, or the Purchase Money to become for feited, and the Goods re•sold. PRIVATE TUITION. A: CLERGYMAN, accustomed for many - Years to the TUITION of a FEW PRIVATE PUPILS, 'Amid b e glad to fill up a Vacancy with the Sun of a Gen-, l ientari, whose Health or Education may req uire more than. timial ;mention.: Terrus , l7s Guineas per annum. Distance from London ten Miles. Letters to be addressed to Rev. B. L. Mr.Beynold's, Book seller, i 37, Oxford-street, London. VACATION, ABENEFICED CLERGYMAN, within a few Miles of London, would willingly receive a YOI7NG GENTLEMAN into his 'House, and superintend the Continuance of his Studies during the Vacation of the rubtieSchools or. Universities. Letters-to be directed for Reverend A. B. to the Care of Mr. Peal man, Library, 170, New Bond-street. LAI) IES' SCHOOL.,--To be DISPOSED OF, FIFTEEN YEARS unexpired LEASE of com- Inodious DWELLING.HOUSE, at a Market Town, 29 miles front London, which has been more than 50 years a Ladies' 'tthonl. • Fi x t u r e s , and the greater part of the Furniture he tottging to the School Establishment, to be tikeit by the pur chaser at a Usir valuation.—Possession may he bad tither at Christmas or at Lady Day, and payment will be expected at the tinte.—Addreis, post paid, to Y. Z., High Wycombe, ucks. In a few days wilt be published, in Svo. price 9s. ti'd. LETTERS of MARY LEPEL,. LADY - HERVEY. With Illustrative Notes. • Printed for JOHN MURRAY, Albemarle-street. On Tuesday, December 18, will be published, in Bvo. price 15s. SKRDA.NAPALUS, a Tragedy. The TWO FOSCARI, a Tragedy. CAIN, a Mystery. By the Right Hon. LORD BYRON. Printed for JOHN MURRAY, Albemarle-street. STATUE OF SIR JOSEPH . BANKS. AT a 4EErING, under the Patronage of his Majesty, for the purpose of paying a tribute of respect to the MEMORY of the late Sir JOSEPH BANKS, held (with t he permission of the Council) at the House of the Linkman Society, late the residence of Sir Joseph Banks,in Solio-square, on the 12th July. 1821 •, Sir HUMPHRY DAVY, Bart. in the Chair. It was Resolved, , That a Subscription be entered into for a WHOLE- L ',,ENGTH MARBLE STATUE of the late Sir JOSEPH LIANKs, to be executed by hlr.Chanttey, and to be placed in the Bill of the British Museum. That the following be a Committee for carrying the above Resolution into execution : The Duke of Bedford Sir Everard Home, Bart. T he Earl of Egremont Wm. Hyde Wollaston, M.D. The Earl Spencer, President Win. George Mason, M.D. of theßoyal Institution Sir James Edw. Smith, Presi. tad of Aberdeen, President dent of the Linnean Society of the Society of Antiquaries Thos. Andrew Knig h t' , Es q . e rhe Earl Whitworth President of the Horticultu- Sir Humphry Davy, Bart. ral Society Presidentof theßoyal Society I Joseph Sabine, Esq. That the Subscription be paid iuto the Banking House of Messrs. Drummonds, at Charing-cross. SUBSCRIBERS. N. B. December 6, 1821.—Subscriptions which may be notified subsequent to this date will be published in a future Advertisement. • Amount of Subscriptions already advertised ....,ClB7l 6 0 Alex. Tilloch, LL.D.,C2 2 0 lieut.E. Home, R.N. £ 5 0 0 Captain Henry Kater 5 0 0 GeorgeWilliams,M.D. 3 3 0 i s lath. Nicholls, Esq 5 s ' o J. C. De Boffe, Esq 5 0 0 Edward Rudge, Esq 5 5 0 The Lord Dundas 21 0 0 John Sims, M.D. 10 0 0 William Cotton, Esq 50 0 lt,_ev. John Fretwell 5 5 0 The Lord Kenyon 10 10 0 ~..5 1 r.John Parkinson 5 5 0 John Gillies, LL.D. 5 0 0 Edward Roberts, Esq 5 0 0 John Knight, Esq 10 0 0 Joseph Whidbey, Esq 5 0 0 Messrs. Manton & Son 5 5 0 !. , . 1 . Angerstein. Esq 20 0 0 John Penn, Esq 10 0 0' George Purkis, Esq 1 1 0 Joshua Brooks, Esq 10 10 0 ~_‘veorge Saunders, Esqlo 0 0 W. T. Corbett, Esq 5 0 0 ..,,w. Knatchbull, Esq 10 10 0 Earl Tankerville 20 0 0 "‘• Knatchbrill, Esq 10 10 0 The Chamberlain of "..41ries Vetch, M.D. 1 1 0 London - - 50 0 John Reeves, Esq. 10 0 0 Rear-Adm. J. Barney 2 2 0 'John Murray, Esq 10 0 0 T. L. Parker, Esq . 10 0 0 George Belzoni, Es 5 0 0 Rev. John Hailstone 5 0 0 Sir A.rch. Macdonald q 10 0 0 A. B. Lambert, Esq 10 0 0 The Earl of I'owis 52 10 0 Col. C. W. Pasley 1 1 0 ev. It. Pr o sser, D.D.10 0 0 Sir Thomas Lawrencelo 10 0 1 'lr. H. P. Hornemon 1 0 0 Rev. Stephen Weston 5 0 0 r. T. Praed, Esq 10 0 0 Sir T.G. Cullum,Bartto 0 0 Iset. Dirdley&Ward 21 0 0 Robert Cracroft , Esq 5 5 0 1 nobert Vyner, Esq 20 0 0 James Watt, Esq 10 0 0 General R. Grenville 10 0 0 Thomas Young, M.D. 10 0 0 "v. J. M. Traheruc 2 2 0 LAW INTELLIGENCE COURT OF CHANCERY, DEC. 10. BOLD V. STEWART. The LORD CITANCELLOR decided that the injunction which the plaintiffhad obtained to restrain the sheriff from proceeding under an outlawry must be dissolved. He was.of opinion that the Court of Exchequer only had jurisdiction to stay the execu- Lion of an outlawry. CARDEN V. BELL, BOLT, AND lIELSHAW. Mr. HART said the defendant, John Bell, had many years ago established a weekly newspaper, called "Bells Weekly Messenger." Some time after the establishment of the paper, Bell sold his right in two-thirds of the property' to the two de fendants, Holt and Helshaw. Bell afterwards entered -into a contract with the plaintiff, by which it was agreed that Bell should convey to the plaintiff for a consideration of 14001., one third of his remaining share, or one-ninth of the whole property of the paper. An indenture was drawn- up to that effect, but before it was signed the plaintiff was informed by Messrs. Holt and Helshaw, n, that Bell was consider abl y indebted to them, by reason of his; h a ving overdraw the profits of his share , and also having received advances of money from them. The plaintiff, in consequence of this information, refused to complete the en gagement into which he had entered with Bell, Unless Messrs. Holt and Helshaw'would undertake to relotise the share which he was to purchase from all Claims and incumbrances, so as to allow him to receive • immediate profits therefrom. That pro position was finally acceded to by Messrs. Holt and Heishaw, and the plaintiff became the proprietor of one-ninth of the paper. The accounts of tike paper were made up weekly, and Messrs. Helshaw took their share of the profits • but, in defiance of their agreement, they refused to p a y the Plaintiff any thing, on • the ground that Bell was indebted to them. But, notwithstand ing, they refused to allow the plaintiff any -profits on his share, they continued to pay Bell himself from time to time the pro fits on the shares -which he possessed. Under these circum stances, he applied to the Court to grant an injunction to re strain Messrs. Holt and Helshaw from paying to Bell any profits arising from, his shares, which are subject to the claims of the partnership.—The injunction was granted. ILLEGITIMACY. --KNIGHT V. KNIGHT. Mr. AGAR had-last Seal made a motion, having for its object the closing of the commission appointed to examine witnesses concerning the allegedlillegitimacy of the defendant, the supposed son of the plaintiff: The counsel of the plaintiff upon that occa sion objected to the closing of the commission, on the ground that several witnesses, whose evidence was believed tobematerial, had not yet been examined. His Lordship difected the motion to stand over till that day, . and desired the plaintiff in the in.: terim to specify what witnesses he intended to examine, and to state the reasons why . he had not hitherto examined them.— The plaintiff, who was in France, had not put in an affidavit, but his solicitor, Mr. Fielder, had. In thif affidavit Mr. Fiel der stated his belief that the plaintiff wished to examine Mrs. Portman, who, it was supposed, was residing in France for the purpose of avoiding examination. Mr. Fielder further stated,.. that he believed ft was the intention of the plaintiff to examine se veral witnesses, who it waathought cou ld g ive material evidence to prove that the plaintiff could not have had intercourse with his wife so as to be the father of the defendant. Those persons' were waiters at a club-house, at which it. was said it was the practice to enter the names of visiters in a book. He (Mr. Agar) trusted the Court would not allow the commission to be kept open longer upon such pretences. The club-house was in town, and there was no reason why the weittis might not have been examined long ago. A former commission had been issued five years ago, which. the Court was compelled io order to be dosed, after it had been long pro tracted b y the plaintiff'. The present commission was established in 1819. It would be most unjust towards the plaintiff to permit the waiters to be examined now, when it was not improba ble that persons were dead who might have contradicted their testimony. He had heard his Lordship say, in a cause the name of which he could not bring to mind, that 'nothing was more dangerous than to permit a commission to. be kept open for the purpose of per petuating testimony'; mid he therefore felt little doubt that the Court would see the propriety of closing that which had been sued out by the plaintiff. Mr. \WINGFIELD was for the plaintiff. He said that many of the observations of his Learned Frie nd seemed to apply to the former commission, rather than to that to which the attention of the Court was then drawn. The LORD CHANCELLOR asked whether the plaintiff had examined any witnesses under the last commission. Mr. WINGFIELD replied, that eight witnesses had been ex amined. In compliance with the direction of his Lordship, Mr. Fielder, in his affidavit, had endeavoured to explain how it was that the witnesses now proposed to be. examined had not before been examined. Ile stated, that the plaintiff had deferred the examination of the waiters until the return of Mrs. Portman from France, because he Wished them to be examined together. The waiters were employed at a club-house in Saint James's street, and he understood their evidence would shew that the plaintiff was constantly resident in London at the time, when, in order to render it probable that he was the father of the de fendant, he ought to have been with his Lady in Warwickshire. If those witnesses should be s hut out, great injustice would be done to the plaintiff. Mr. AGAR shortly replied. He stated that no witnesses had been examined by the commission for the last two years. With respect to Mrs. Portman, lie understood that she was only want 'ed to prove the christening of the defendant; but that fact might be ascertained by the examination of the clergyman who per formed the'•ceremony. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that commissions to per petuate evidence, though often necessary to the administra tion of justice, were extremely liable to be perverted to dan gerous purposes. In the case of a person who found his title to an estate endangered by the birth of a child whom he believed to be illegitimate, it was just that a commis sion should be issued. The commission would examine wit nesses,. whose evidence would not transpire until the time should arrive when the plaintiff, supposing the legal title to be in him, would take possession of the estate. So far the practise was just and necessary. On the other hand, if a party chose to advance a groun dless charge. of illegitimacy, lie had nothing to do but to file a bill, praying that he might be at liberty to exa mine witnesses by commission. The commission, after exa mining witnesses, would be shut up,' and never opened till the title should accrue.- liiery witness might then be dead, and although it might appear that all their evidence was false, yet they would escape punishment for their perjury. It was abso lutely necessary that the Court should not permit a - commission to be kept open for a longer period than the circumstances of the case justified. In this country it was easy to find persons who would—he was almost going to say, honestly—swear that which was not true. Any person who had been as long in the profession as he had, must know that it was possible, by talking to certain persons, and particularly old people, to make them swear to a story of which an hour before they did not know one word. It was, therefore, extremely necessary that evidence should be taken and recorded as promptly as possible. The reasons which had been given for not having hitherto examined the witnesses did not appear satisfactory. Under these circum stances, he felt it expedient to declare that the commission must be dosed on theist of February next, with liberty to the plain tiff to make a case for the examination of Mrs. Portman, if she should return to thii country after that time. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, DEC. 10. None of the motions which were made before his Honour to. day possessed any particular interest. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DEc. Before the Loan CH O BIUSTICE KI an N d G. a Special Jury. LIBEL THE THE KING V. NATHANIEL HIGHMOILE• This was an information filed by the Attorney-General for a scandalous and seditious libel upon the person of ins present Majesty. Mr. SHEPHERD opened the pleadings. The ATTORNEY-OENERAL addressed the Jury on the part of the prosecution. This was an information which he had been reluctantlyobliged in the performance of his duty to file against the Defendant, for an extremely gross libel on his Ma jesty. The defendant was a clergyman, who some time ago received a pension out of the relenues of the Duchy of Corn wall, but for some reason not necessary for him to state, that had been withdrawn, and since that time the defendant, for getting the respect due to his Sovereign, and the duty of a good subject, particularly from one of his profession, had conducted himself in such a manner as had obliged the Law Officers of the Crown to take notice of him. In the month of NI ay last, the defendant delivered with his own hand, at Warwick House, a letter addressed to Sir Benjamin Blooinfidd, containing e grossestliba on his Majesty, and in that ktter he had enclosed r c d ou t e i h ie ed li i b n el th rea e idn,ositlediswreasspveetferyulsutrerne there could be but. one opinion on it, and that the verdict of the Jury would convince the defendant that he must abstain from such Conduct in future. He should make no further observation :he should read the libel, and prove the publication by the defend ant, which would entitle him to their verdict. The first witness called was Thomas • Gates, one of his Majesty's footmen—He remem bered receiving a letter on the 9th May last at Warwick House, addressed to Sir Beniamin Bloomfield. It appeared to contain enclosures. The claw - idea gave his card with it. Witness marked the letter so as to know it again, and then put it in Sir Benjamin Bloomfield's private box. Sir Benjamin was at that time absent, but witness delivered it to him on his return on the same day. Witness saw‘the box opened, and the letter taken out by Sir Benjamin. Witness attended at Bow-street, and heard the defendant examined ; he acknowledged the letter to be in his hand-venting. . Sir Benjamin 'Bloomfield,. Private Secretary to his Majesty, examinedaa-Witness received the packet now put in his hands on the 9th May last, and on breaking open the seal he found the papers now enclosed. The defendant acknowledged at Bow-street that it v•!•ts hts hand-writing. Cross-examined by . the • dellaadant.=-Wittiess did not recol lect the defendant waiting oit him et-Carlton Hot/emir:. 7 flll or any conversation passing at tha t time on the sub j ect of thelde fendant's petition. He had many conversations on the subject, but does not recollect communicating to the defendant that he had shewn the petition to Mr. Adam, his Rhyal High ness's legal adviser, and, stating that there was no objection to presenting it at the levee, though such a conversation might take place. Witness had no doubt he might have referred the defendant to Colonel M‘Mahon, if it were during the time that the Co'...)nel was in office. Ile was certain he had never said that he entertained no doubt of the justice of the defendant's claim,. because he always did entertain doubts on the subject, and dd so still. He might have said he wished the defendant to make out his claim as far as he was entitled to do so. The libel was then read by the Officer of the Court. It was a letter, dated Surrey-street, May 5, 1821, addressed to Sir Benjamin Bloomfield , P rivate Secretar y to his Majesty, 'and stated that as his Majesty had by his conduct shewn the most unjust treatment to an individual, and dishonoured his royal word, he must not be surprised if the terms used in the or es di of - n a ry transactions of society were applied to such breach moral duties. The letter of Sir Benjamin Bloomfield contain ed another, addressed to " The Most Ignoble, the Lying and Cheating Duke of Cornwall, K.G. since become George the Fourth, Carlton Palace." The Defendant then addressed the Court and Jury. He went into an extensive review of the ecclesiastical laws of the kingdom, from the earliest periods, and contended that every ecclesiastical person had a right to petition his Majesty, as head of the church. Upon that undoubted privilege he had acted ; and he trusted he should be able to make it appear, in the course of his defence, that he was entirely innocent of that which was laid to his charge—of intending to cast any slur upon the character of the King. Ile then went into a short history of his early life, which he read from a printed volume* which he held in his hand. He stated, that from the degree of Doctor of Civil Laws, which he had taken after eleven years study at the University of Cambridge, lie was entitled to prac tise as an advocate in the Ecclesiastical Courts ; but the Arch bishop of Canterbury would not grant him a license, on the ground that he was a c l erg yman—whicla he conten the ded, sounda- fa from being a cause of exc e p tion against him, was fo r tion of his right. Ile had requested to be heard, but the Arch bishop had declined acquiescing in his request. He no then ap plied to the Court of King's Bench, but could obtain relief'. Thereupon he presented a petition to the Prince Regent.— He apprehended that he could shew that by the Canon Law, by Charter, and by Act of Parliament, he was entitled to the privileges which lie had claimed, and he had applied to the sovereign authority to have a hearing granted him. He received an answer through the medium of the Private Secre. tary to his Royal Highness, promising that something should be done on his behalf. rrhe defendant then went into a minute detail of the fate of his Petition, which appeared from his statement to - have been referred to the Lord Chan cellor, who reported thereon unfavourably to the pool f Mr. the defendant. He afterwar ds applied to Lord Liv, Perceval, and other official personages, for a remuneration for the injury which he had sustained in not having his case heard. He then commented on the mode of proceeding adopted against him on the present occasion. Had the ordinary proceeding by indictment been adopted, the matter must have gone before a Grand Jury, when if the alleged libel had been submitted to them by itself, there is no doubt they would have concluded the writer was insane but if the transactions of the last ten years had been submitted to them, they would have ignored the bill. He also contended that there was no publication in the present case. The letter was enclosed and addressed to his Majesty's Private Secretary. In the case of a private individual a letter addressed to himself would be no publication. The address to the Private Secretary, and " private" marked on the letter, was in effect addressing R to his Majesty himself. The ATTORNEY -GENERAL briefly replied. He thought that not a syllable of the long address of four hours which the defendant had addressed to the Court and Jury, was at all ap plicable to the professed ob j ect of it, which was, to justify himself from this gross and scandalous libel. He had ap plied to his Majesty for what, according to his own shew-. mg, lie had no right to obtain. The defendant had his tal owkedn of the promise of his M a j est y , but it was plain from statement that his Majesty had made no promise. All that the King had done was to receive the petition graciously. to a The Grand de. fendant had said that if the libel had been presented Jury, they would have ignored the bill, on the presumption that the writer must be insane, and indeed he could sc arcel y differ from him, as it was difficult to account for the defendant'snt' con duct on any other ground ; thus much he would say, coul he have restrained the defendant, and have protected his Ma jesty from continual insults in any other way, the present pro secution would not have been instituted. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE summed up the evidence to the Jury. He observed that hisreluctance to ant interrupta dd a rde fence had induced h im to permi re t the defend to them with much that was irrelevant to the case. As to the publication of the letter in luestion, that was legally completed by the sending it to Sir Benjamin Bloomfield ; that iaapplied to his Majesty no one could doubt, and it was his duty to tell the Jury that it was a gross and scandalous libel. The Jury consulted together for a few moments, after which they returned a verdict of GUILTY, with a recommendation to mercy. ti The defendant—" My Lord, I stand here for jus ce, not mercyT." h e LoRD CHIEF J USTICE -- already." ." Sir, you have been heard COMMON JURY. PAYNE V. WILLIAM JONES, ESQ. This was an recover y the plaintiff, late a Sheriff's officer of Dorsetshire, to a sum of 931. for his expence and trouble in apprehending a person named Henry White Parsons, who had escaped from the custody of the defendant, Marshal of the King's Bench Prison. Mr. NIARRYATT and Mr. LONG conducted the plaintiff's case, and Mr. GURNEY" and Mr. CA MPBELL the defendant's. The ptintiff made out a strong prima facie case to shew that the Marshall had promised to give him ten gthneas, and pay all B e expenses upon lodging Parsons in custody at the King's Bench Prison. He proved by three witnesses that he had tra velled upwards of 300 miles after Parsons, and at length suc ceeded in lodging him in custody. The defence on the part of the Marshal was, that the plain tiff's case was founded in fraud, imposition, and perjury, and that he had, in fact, been paid all that he had. demanded, before action brought. It was proved that the plaintiff had apprehend ed Parsons first on a bailable warrant, and received 51. from the Marshal for his trouble, with which he seemed perfectly satis fied ; that he again apprehended him on a Judges warrant,and brought him to London, and made out a bill for 241., which the Marshal immediately paid, and the plaintiff appeared satisfied and grateful; that the plaintifflived only three miles from where Parsons resided, in Dorsetsbire, and that he might have appre hended him at any moment without any trouble whatever : and that e had offered Parsons a moiety oi what should rechver in this action, provided he (Parsons) assisted he him in making out his case. The case went to the Jnry under the Learned Judge's direc tions, and they found their verdict for the defendant. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DEC. 10. BEER AND OTHERS V. WARD. At the sitting of the Court this morning, Air. SOLICITOR GE ERAI. addressed the Jury in reply, on the part of the plain tiffs. After observing on the eviderice which had been adduced on both sides, and the contradictory statements which had been given by the different witnesses, he proceeded to account for that circumstance by the length of time which had elapsed since the marriage of the parties, and the birth of those children whose legitimacy was now disputed.—He then alluded to the deeds which Rowland Cotton and Wm. Cotton, sen., had en tered into after the former gentleman had become acquainted with the marriage of his son, and to the oth doercuments. The m a rriage of Fledborough, hei contended, had not been satisfac torily proved, and the Jury would not suffer the property to be .taken away from these ladies unless the case for the defendant had been proved almost to demonstration. Lord Chief-Justice DALLAS then charged the Jtry. After having summed up the evid e n c e at great length, he proceeded t a ft that hew as both unable and unwilling atthis late hour, and after the Jury had been employed for nearly four days in the investigation of this case, to trouble them witivmanygobserva dons. The question they had to determine was whether Wni. Cotton (whom for distinction he should call the lunHe atic had no had been e-' born before or after the marriage of his parents ?h sitatiou in saying that from the deeds and instruments of Mr. Rowland Cotton, and Win. Cotton, which had been produced, the plaintiff's bad made out a ver y strong case. Howhad this been answered on .the part of the defendant; ? By the reputation of the family and of the neighbourhood, but especially by the pro duction of a certificate uponavhich the question for their consi deration would ultimately turn. His Lordship here entered into a review of thedeeds and documents brought forward in evidence, and observed upon the testimony respecting the certificate of the marriage, and the affidavit made to obtain the licence. Be tween the opposing testimony the Jury were to decide by their own judgment, assis fed with the other facts and circumstances dis closed in the cause. He could not help- observing, that although the plaintiff's Counsel had strongly insisted. upon a marriage having been celebrated before the birth of the lunatic, they had never theless not even once attemp ted to give any evidence whatever of such a marriage. It was clear, too, that whether. the parties had really been married or not, they had at one dine lived together as persons illicitly cohabiting ; and the very letter which theplaintes had relie d on proved this circumstance: for Wm. Cotton, in that letter, a ddressing Mr. Richardson , the cler. ym an , andiroritin g him to his house, had said, " I assure you she is my wife, although I suffer her at present not to be so esteemed; and had alleged as a reason for this conduct, that an open avowal of his marriage would be detrimental to his interest. The Jury had now the facts fully before them, and on those facts they had to decide a que§tion which, considered in any point of view, was important. After s everely commenting on the conduct of Mr. Ward , for having so long delayed he t in vestigation-of this question, by which delay .witnesses who might have been:produced (if the trial had been instituted in 1795 on the death of. Mr. Evelyn and Cotton) had th beenn prevente Jury f m from giving the}` testimony, he con cluded by ig the or the patience and attention they had so well exercised during this long and laborious research, and by recommending them to re-, tire to consider of a verdict on which so much depended not only with respect to the interest, but also to the honour of the parties. The Jury retired for about ten minutes, and then returned with a verdict for the defendant, by which the illegitimacy of Wm. Cotton, the lunatic, is established. OLD ALLEY, DEC. 10. • ROBBERY IN BERKELEY-SQUARE. Richard Jago, Thomas Beck, Mary Beck, and Henry Lewis, were put to the Bar, on an indictment charging the two first named prisoners with stealing , a large quantity of property !mini the house of William Ord, sq. in Berkeley-s it quarto have e, an the two latter with receiving the same, well knowing been stolen. Plank, the officer, proved taking the prisoners into custody, and the confession made by them. Jago's confession was then put in and read. He; scribed the whole plan to have originated with Mary Beck, ho had in duced him to, consent, by threats and menaces, to the robbery. Richard Beck's confess • ion was also read. He charged Jago with being the principal in the robbery, and that he had given him the bundles., • Jago said nothing in his defence. Thomas Beck declared by the Almighty &at lie did not know that the property was Stolen. Mary Beck - declare d that the -confession of Jar was utterly false, and that so far from knowing any thing of the robbery, she did not know where the house was situated. Several persons gave Le wis and Jago good characters ;and the Jury retired for half an hour, and on their return found Mary Beck and Lewis Not Guilty, and Jago and Thomas Beck Guilty of burglary. The Court was crowded to excess during the whole of the trial, which lasted upwards of four hours. George On Saturday night indictments agains Clarke and Susannah IT (two deluded vic• tiros of Rich. Carlile) were presented to the London Grand Jury, who, without hesitation, returned them as found true. The girl Wright having given notice of bail, attended at Judge BEST'S Chambers, to have the same Inquired into, and the sureties swearing themselves suf ficiently qualified, . were accepted. One of them, 'a radical .schoolmaster, named Jones, inveighed bitterly against those prosecutions, which he characterised as derogatory to the dignity of the State, and inconsistent with the spirit of-.the British Constitution ; and how long he would have continued in the same strain is uncertain, had not the proper officer called his attention to the payment of the usual fees. This opened a new field , for the volubility of the schoolmaster, who declared that the imposition of fees at all was a complete fraud ; but, after a little more abuse, the - fees were paid„and the parties sent about their. business. The indefa tigable industry of Carlile's infamous agents has procured another shopman, and a notification in the window states.. that they have a fresh one ready for every hour, if the vigour of their ene mies shall render it necessary .7—(llorning Paper.) MRS. SARAH BOND.— The immense wealth which this extraordinary woman.died possessed of has, it appears, caused considerable alacrity among all who think themselves in any degree entitled to be her heirs. No less than eight caveats have, it is asserted, already been entered against letters of administration being granted ; among which is one in behalf of his MAJESTY, .by Procurator-General, Sir J. NicuoLL: Other competitors for the valuable prize have, however, started in the sister kingdom. Two families living at Brown's Grove, near Castle town Roche, county of Cork, have put forward .their claim to the property, as nephews and nieces of the deceased lady. It appears that Mrs. Bond had both a brother and, sister in the county of Cork, each of whom have left families. John Bond, the brother, resided at Balinalisk, in that county, and five of his children, viz. Mar tha Ann Bond, Graham Bend, James Bond, Sa rah Law, and Susannah Knight, are now living ; as are likewise four children of Sarah Bond's sister, who married a • Mr. O'Connell .;..their names are, Harmer O'Connell, Abraham O'Con:. nell, Catherine Holmes, and • Ann Atkins.— (Morning Paper.) . • A parricide, named Jean Schmitt, was execut ed on the Ist of this month. He constantly. re fused to appeal, and assigned his reason, that he wished to spare his . mother the affliction which she would suffer in the interval preceding the confirmation of his sentence.—(French -Paper.) HORIZONTAL MOON. Ma. Eorroa—T he preset Opproach of the Planets JUPITER and SATURN affords a most con= viucing illustration of the truth of a theor'which I offered to the astronomical world sothe . montbi ago in the piges of The New Monthly iltakai . explanatory of the well known phenomenon Of the " lioriiontal Mooni" as it is called—fiaMelY, the fact which every body has witnessed, of .the iii moon appearing to the human eye much larger the horizon than in the, zenith, or in her approach to it ; whilst, at the same time, in every degree of her altitude, her diameter is really the same, if measured with a quadrant or sextant. You and yopr intelligent readers well - know that several explanations have been offered of this seeming trrystery ; but none yet offere4.will stand a mathematical test. That the density of the vapours through which she is seen when ris ing above the horizon may make her appear rather larger than she does in a very clear night, I will not deny ; because I have seen the effects of refrac tion so very powerful as to raise her lower limb so much that she has appeared of an oval shape at the full ; but that deception of the sight cs not corrected by an instrument, whilst - the apparent increase of her size, in the clearest night or morn ing, is always corrected by a quadrant," which fixes her diameter at 28 minutes of a aegree,‘ sometimes a little more, sometimes a little less, in her perigee and apogee. The theory also which refers to contrast with terrestrial objects is equally unsatisfactory ; because the phenomenon. is seen at sea as upon land—but to come at once to the point—for a plain and homely illustration. and experiment, let your, readers turn up A:tea cup, and consider its hemisphere - as the -hemis phere which we view. Now the moon's ter being about half a degree, she of course &cu.. pies the 720th part of any circle in which she may appear to be placed ; but-when in the hori- 1 zon she occupies that portion - of a very large cir cle, one much larger than the parallel concentric circle in which she appears to be placed aLan alti; tulle of 45 degrees, or at any height betwee4, nd zenith. .. r_ the horizon a. Imagine half a dozen concentric circles on the • tea cup ; it is evident that the 720th part of any: one of them must be less than of the lower circle formed by the edge of the cup on the table ; therefore as the hemispheric appearance of the heavens, produced to our eyes. by the comgion and well known laws of optics, leads us to refer the moon's horizontal diameter (I don't wean here her diameter in the horizon), at different alti tudes, to circles of different signs, consequently we suppose her to be smaller as she ascends.; though as she is still really at the same distance from us, she subtends the same angle in a qua- drant. It is the same with regard to her vertical dia meter ; because to every smaller apparent circle we imagine a smaller vertical semi-ciecle, whose vertical radius is always equal to half the hori zontal diameter of that circle. To prove and illustrate this, look at Jupiter and Saturn, when they are at equal altitudes, and not very far above the horizon. Now that refraction will give them a greater altitude than the truth, I do not deny, but that the•quadrant will not. correct : but then they also appear far the: asunder than in their approach to culmina tion, and that error the quadrant will correct, just the same as` n regard to thetheir an gular distance a all altitudes, refraction being allowed for, being precisely the same, although they appear to approach each other as ; they ascend. Indeed, even in the horizon, refraction would have very little effect upon their angular distance, in any position, unless they were both to rise, or nearly so, upon the same . prime ver tical. The same will hold good wit h an y two remarkable fixed stars, if not above i or 3 de grees asunder--greater distances are not so easily measured by the eye.—YoUr's, iGNOTUS. 7 ---- , C ON VERSION OF A Jaw.--an Sunday, night a very numerous congregation assembled at the Episcopal Jews Chapel, Cambridge lleitti,:tii wit ness the ceremony of an Israelite relinquishing his own faith and becoming a Christian. The Gentle man baptised appeared about 45 or 50 years of age, his head quite bald. The Rev. Mr. _II_AIVTRY read the service in a most impressive Manner, and when the questions usually put to godfathers and godniPthers were put to the person baptised, 11 answe red with a firm and audible voice. Oa kneeling at the font, and the Minister sprinkling him with the holy water, and marking him with. The Cr6ss of Christ, he seemed sensibly affected, particularly . when the Priest said 44 . that here after he shaft' snot be ashamed to confess the faith of -.Christ crucified, and manfully to tight under his banners agaiilst sin, the world, and the devil ; and to continue Christ's faithful soldier and ser vant until his life's end." After the ceremony was finishek:the Rev.'l4r. ll,tw . raY delivered a very excellent - sermon, inivistich he alluded to the above conversion, and ocopgratulated his heareks upon the work of reformatiottithat levelling.