The Sun. — London, England, 1839-12-13 00:00:00

MORNING EDITION. COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL Yesterday a Court was held for the dispatch of business. Mr. STACEY called the attention of the Court to an article which appeared a few days ago in the Globe Newspaper, on the subject of the prosecution against Mr. Rock and others in the Mayor's Court, for hazing carried on business in the City of London, without taking out their freedoms, and also accusing the Cor poration of extravagant expenditure. After afew observations on the subject, Mr. LAURANCE said that he supposed the next course the Court would adopt would be to summon the printer of the Globe before the Court, and deal with him according to his deserts.—(Laughter.) The Towx-asai said that he had applied to the attorney who conducted the prosecution for the particu lars of the case, and that as soon as he received the documents they should be laid before the Court. ROYAL EXCHANGE COMPENSATION COURT PROCEED. INGS. lAs soon as a Report from the Royal Exchange Committee upon some subject of no moment was brought up, Mr. FRENCH (of Cornhill, whose premises were burnt down along with the other buildings connected with the Royal Exchange), rose and said, " I have, my Lord Mayor, to complain of a gross falsehood which was charged t against me i n a recen t t r i a l w ith th e Ci ty . Si r V 4 illiam Follett, who was Counsel for the City, proved by one of my wit nesses th a t I was a mem b er of this Court, and as such ought to know and did know, that my house, No. 86, Cornhill, which I bought from Mr. M'Cabe, would be required for the improvements, and therefore 1 bought it w ith an i n t en ti on t o d e f rau d t h e City. As the City called no witnesses my Counsel could have no reply. I therefore myself, on Sir Wm. Follett resuming his seat, char ge d th a t L earne d G en tl em an with having promulgated a falsehood with regard to me, and having argued on those premises to my prejudice with the Jury, when the Learned Gentleman, in the most hand some manner, showed his brief to one of my Counsel and myself, and said, pointing to the lines, ' Such are my instructions.' At that moment the Chair man of the Committee was referred to, and he said " It as notorious as the sun at noon-day that he did know," and in consequence of that the Jury are not disabused of the fact, and I have therefore lost a clear 2,000/. I declare now, as I declared before, that the whole was a direct and positive falsehood, and I chal lenge all the lawyers about this Court, the Chairman of the Royal Exchange Committee, and all the members -of that Committee individually, to disprove that asser tion. What are the facts, my Lord Mayor? I hold in my hand a check for 1,0001., which I gave the day after the fire for the house, 86, Cornhill, on condition that I should get possession on the same day, which posses sion I did accordingly obtain. My check is dated the 12th January, and indorsed to Robert M'Cabe. and was passed by that gentleman through the Bank of England. The remaining 1,5001. was paid on the 22d, when the writings were complete. This Court was not called together till the 18th, for the purpose of forming a Committee for consulting with the Mercers' Company as to the best steps to be taken with regard to the re building, at which period I had been in possession six days, and the Committee did not make its report until the Bth of March ensuing, I have refunded 3,300/., since the fire.took place, on the leases, No. 86 and 80, Cornhill. The Jury have, in consequence of this most detestable falsehood, only awarded me 1.282/., by which >-o• u will see that I have incurred a dead loss of more than 2,000/. This is the most awful tyranny to which any roan can possibly be subjected. Mr. STEVENS said that Mr. French evidently felt that his character was at stake, and it was not to be wondered at that he expressed himself strongly. He felt that he was injured in his person, but he felt more deeply that there was a reflection upon his character in th e eourse pursued towards him.—(Hear, hear.) In fact the 41010 matter ought to be investigated by the Royal Exchange Committee, and who could ascertain and state from whci7rt the information as to Mr. French's knowledge of the Matter imputed to him pro -1 ceeded ?—(Hear, hear.) Alderman COPELAND said that it would be rather too much for the law officer of the Court to put in his brief, which had no foundation in fact, and was not borne out Ny his instructions. He would put it to Mr. French w hether it would not be advisable in him to go to a su -1 p er i e r sour t witk the question.—(Hear.) He (Alder man Copeils:nd) was willing that the matter should go to a Committee :o ascertain why such a charge, calcu lated to injure Mr. Fre:.7ch's character and property, had been made against him. .I"' , e circumstances most cer tainly ought to be investigated. ,I;Ic happened to be accidentally acquainted with the circtirn.... t ance.,? l Fr. French's negociation about the house :: Mr. M'Cabe, and would bear testimony to the fact that the negociation took place in the manner de scribed by Mr. French, He should move that it b e referred to the Royal Exchange and Ores ham eztaimittee to examine and report under what circumstances the instructions were given to Coun sel in the case of French against the Royal Exchange. Another touching the knowledge of Mr. French that his house in Cornhill would be taken ; and whether the reprosentations made on the authority of the instruc tions diminished the just compensation he would have other write -veceitTed. Mr. LAURANCE was titwe that the Utimmiitee would not sanction such a proceeding as that described. Mr. FRENCH ----It is due to myself to say, that I have been grossly abused. I shall first clear my character, and then I shall try whether I cannot obtain justice in o ther respects.—( Hear, h ear. ) I shall apply, if neces sary, to the highest authority in the land, without caring about the expense to which I may be subjected. —(Hear, hear.) After some observations from other members of the the Court, the motion was unanimously agreed to. ---- . ROYAL EXCHANGE. Mr. STEVENS said he had a petition to present to the Court, the language of which must astonish many of the members, considering the length of time which had elapsed since the occasion arose for it. All would remember that when the plans were submitted to the three eminent architects, eight designs were selected, to three of whom the prizes were awarded as being the best of those which came within the instructions of the Committee, although they at the same time rep rrted that gone of them were fit to be carried into execution. The Petitioner obtained the first prize of 300/. ; an en deavour was then made to refer these three selected designs to threes eminent architects, so that they might make one out of the whole, but they refused to undertake the enviable office. They were then referred to two atl'er eminent architects; but they likewise refused the job ; ~, : el now it had been agreed upon that a reference should be :nade, to one, architect, Mr. J. Smith, the architect of the .o..fercere Company. It was expected that, at all events, wrieln a reference was made, all the five plans, but most certainly the three which had gained the prizes, would have been those referred, but how great was the surprise of all when it was found that not one of them were so referred, but that three plans were laid before that gentleman, which, in the Report of the Architects, were said not to be within the instructions of the Com mittee. The Petitioner had petitioned to be examined before the Committee, but no notice was taken of it, and he was obliged to have recourse to that Court for redress. The Hon. Gentleman then presented the pe tition, which, after reciting what had been done re• specting the designs, went on— " That the report of the said three architects, while it named your Petitioner's design as the best, did, never theless, accompany such honourable distinction by re marks as to its impracticability, inadvisability, and inca pacity of being made a durable edifice. " That your Petitioner, therefore, immediately after the publication of such their report, sent in a petition to the Honourable the Gresham Committee, praying to be all assertions, and to prove that a buildin g according to such his design could be erected without any difficulty, whichct'e sho u ld b e a sa f e , practicable, and durable edi ; but your Petitioner is sorry to add that to this petition h© h as not 4, That yo ur yet received any answ e r . w,aichstill Petitioner , in conseq ue nce of such as sertions,fetter his design, in common with other desig ns , with s imprac ticability, inadvisability, the charge of la and incapability of bei n g male a durable edifice, professional friends , and alserferr e d w ith several of his of whom unhesitatingly pronounce e several dur a b le i builders e %,, e al r all his de s i g n as very practicable, and perfectly sound and part of its construction. competencyl " That your Petitioner, therefore, fearlessly challenges an investigation and impartial examination into the - --m6-es rits and practicability of his design, and his to carry the same into execution, and submits exclusion from such investigation is highly injurious to at an professional character and reputation of your Petitioner.the " That your Petitioner farther states that the de submitted by him for the rebuilding of the Royal Ex change is not liable to any of the objections mentioned in the said Report, but that on the contrary in your Pe titioner's design every wall has its prope r bearin g ; eve ry room has its fireplace, with provision for the carrying, up of its flue ; every room and every part of the building is well and sufflcienCy lighted, and that with due regard 1 to correct architectural appearance ; every room, with .one exception, is rectangular, and has access thereto from passages or corridors, avoiding the necessity, so glaring in other plans, of having to pass through othes• rooms to gain access to the same ; every portion of the building held as a distinct tenement 15 fire-proof in itself ; every accommodation required by the Instructions has been fully worked out, even to F. the approval of the parties proposed to be accommo -1 dated ; every attention has been paid to rental, and your Petitioner has no hesitation in stating th at the arrange -1 raente provided in his design would secure a far greater 1 rental than most and an equal rental w ith an y other design offered to the Committee ; and, lastly, every )tare has been taken that the amount stated in the In structions, as the excess intended to be expeaded,should not be exceeded ; and here your Petitioner begs to re , mark, with respect to his estimate, that the quantities were taken off by an eminent surveyor, that he received estimates from two highly respectable builders who au thorise his stating that the building, according to its present arrangements, can be erected in the most substantial manner for the sum stated in the particular or description which accompanied his design, viz. : 144,7501., leaving the balance from 150,0001. at the disposal of the Committee for alterations or additional ornament as the Committee might judge most expedient. " That your Petitioner therefore cannot be charged with having committed any error whatever in the pre paration of his design, unless your Petitioner was wrong in rigidly attending to and carefully working out the Instructions he was required to adhere to, " That notwithstanding the 14th Resolution of the Committee's Instructions expressly states that " all Designs shall be excluded from the competition which were not in strict conformity with the Instructions in every respect," your Petitioner has been informed, greatly to his astonishment, that the Committee have selected and referred certain other designs, which ar e not in conformity with those instructions, and which d o not provide the accommodation required, to the Archi tect of the said Committee for examination and revision_ and to report thereon, with a view to the selection o one for execution, but that the said Committee have not so referred either the Designs of your Petitioner orf of any of the persons who obtained prizes for their de signs for the said Exchange. That the great inducement for entering upon so labourious an undertaking as the preparation of such a design, was to obtain the full benefit implied by the 10th Resolution of the Instructions, the which your Peti tioner was led to believe would be conferred on the party obtaining the first premium, provided such a party were of known respectability and character. "Your Petitioner, therefore, humbly prays that this his Petition may be duly considered in this your Honourable Court. " That your Petitioner's design may be referred to the said architect, in common with the said three other designs, to report thereon. " That an impartial examination may be instituted respecting the merits, utility, and practicability of your Petitioner's design and your Petitioner's competency to carry the same into execution. " That your Petitioner may at least have all the same privileges and opportunities afforded him of testing and proving the merits, utility, and practicability of his said design, as are acceded to others. " And that your Petitioner's design, if found to possess superior merit, and advisable for adoption, may, as in justice due, be carried into execution as implied by the loth Resolution of the Instructions. " And your Petitioner will ever pray. " WILLIAM GRELLIER. " 20, Wormwood -street, Dec. 12." He moved that it be referred to the Royal Exchange Committee to inquire and report. Mr. G. BRYCE seconded the motion. The United Gresham Committee had published to the world that the design of the petitioner was the best.—(No, no.) He said Yes—for they had awarded him the first pre mium—why then did they now wish to draw back. If they had committed a blunder, let them come forward and manfully acknowledge it, and retrace their steps. At present they were charged with injustice, not only by the petitioner, but by the public, and it was the duty of the Court to recommend them to do justice not only to the petitioner, but to all the other architects who had sent in designs. If there were any difficulties in the way, let them boldly state them, and they might reckon on the Court, and the public, to extricate them from them. Mr. LAURANCE denied that the Report, which was not that of the Committee but of the architect, stated the three designs which obtained the prizes to be the hest— they were the three best of those which could be con structed under the cost of 150,0001. It expressly al luded to a better class of designs, but that th e ex p ense would be mu c h over t h e allotted sum—that was the reason the premiums were awarded to the other de signs. He could assure the Court that the Gresham Committee had no secrets. They discussed nothing that they would be ashamed of all the world knowing. The difficulties which had arisen were thrown upon them by the petitions referred to them by the Court. Some of the excluded parties denied that their designs would involve an expense above the 150,0001., and three of the first class had been referred to Mr. Smith, so that he might report as to the practicability of building them for the exact sum. He was anxious for every inquiry, and would support the motion for sending the petition to the Committee. Mr. JONES had expected to have heard from the Hon. Member some reason why the petitioner bad not been called before the Committee. The Commit tee, or their instruments, the architects, had selected the design of the petitioner, but they said it was im practicable, and could not be carried into effect. He wished to show that they were in error in that conclu sion, but the Committee refused to hear him. Now, of fink he had a good right to complain. He only asked fair play, and it was denied him. He ought to be al lowed to show that his design might take a substantial and durable building at a cost less than 150,000/. Mr. J. L. JONES said the reason that the petitioner was not called before the Committee was, that they had called no one. He was of opinion that no resolu tion of the Court would alter the position of the Com mittee with respeat-te the dosigua.-- Theis-4.visit_ fes p, m k to the course taken by the Committee, prejudicing the petitioner, did not believe it would. • The same bad taken place with respect to London Bridge, and the architect there, so far from being prejudiced, rose rapidly in his -profession, and he trusted that would be the case wihb the young man then before the Court, who had certainly shown much talent. Mr. TAYLou said the Gresham Committee had acted according to the wishes of the Court in trying to ,and which of the best designs could be executed for the sum of 150,0001., and how could they do that without the assistance of eminent architects? They would indeed be blockhea.ds, had they attempted to decide upon 38 designs of such importance without competent professional assistance and advice. The Logo MAYOR hoped the Court would under stand that the Report said the designs in the second class were one and all unstable and unsafe, irrelevant of the expense. They had got into great difficulties, and the question now was how to get out of them. He had unfortunately always been in a minority in the Commit tee, and be regretted that many of the suggestions of the Chairman bad met with so much opposition. He had daily complaints of the want of accommodation for business, and of the delay. He was aware that there was only one desire in the Committee, which was, to have a building that should be worthy of and an orna ment to the City. He trusted some opportunity would soon offer itself to the Committee for putting an end to all difficulties, and proceeding with the building. After a few words in reply from Mr. STEVENS, the : , e4ition was referred to the Committee, _ _ _ I,4untE slid the Lord Mayor had convinced him that. the C:.'ruCittee did not know what they were about, nor did he think y good would be done until the whole matter was left in u . hands of some eminent architect—( Hear, hear) —until it wa,s taken entirely out of the hands of the Committee and I-intrusted to Mr. Barry, or some equally eminent man. He had a petition to present from Mr. Wyatt, one of the gentlemen who sent in a design--lie was one of those in the first class ; and were his designs to undergo the inspection of Mr. George Smith? It was a diAgraeu fo,the City of London that two years had been suffered to 014 se and nothing done towards affording accommodafian far the merchants of this great City. It had even become the subject of caricature—a bill was put upon the ruins—" To let for 99 years, and after that probably an Exchange may be built."—(Laughter,) This petition was also r e f erre d to the CommitteC, OBERLIN INFI'ITUTION. The Report from the Finance Committee, to whom the petition of the Oberlin Institution was referred" was read, granting them 200/. in aid of their funds. Ihe object of this Institution is the education of the white and coloured population of America, and the ultimate extinction of slavery in the United States. It was then moved and seconded that the Report ht , received. Sir PETER LAURIE opposed the reception of the ite , port. The Corporation of London had no right to in• terfere with the internal regulations of another country. Mr. RODGERs moved an amendment to the effect that the Court, while it expressed its abhorrence of the slave system, and its desire to exercise its influence for the ex tirpation of slavery, was of opinion that to grant a dona tion in aid of the funds of an institution in a foreign coun trv, the o perations of which appeared to he inconsistent with the existing laws of that country, would be an un: warrantable intermeddling with the affairs of a foreign an d a diversion of the funds of the Corpora t c i o o u n n ; tr) at .' id therefore the Report ought not to be agreed to. Mr. Alderman T. WOOD, in a very able speech, supported the grant. He ridiculed the idea that the gra n t o f 2001. would be an interference on the part of the Corporation with the internal policy of America or that the objects of the Institution %v ere re Oberlin inconsistent r with th e l aws of the U n i te d States. stitutio n was situate in Ohio, and had received a Char ter from t h e Government o f Ohio. But he could nice o t l i f o a nos other teuir u m freio e e ro n u nd s tlyre i i ttstances in which the Corporation had interfer e d, as i t was called, with the i nterna l regu l a ti o n! , countries, terms T with h e Clu Corporation to support and protect the Poles, and yet this countr; a, ton did not hesitatt• . i Mr. BURTON would oppose a grant of 2001. to an y foreign institution, however praiseworthy the object of it might be. Mr. Pewtress, Mr. Richard Taylor, a n d Mr. Norris, spoke in favour of the Report. After some further disc • "'ion, a division took place, when there appeared-- For the report ............... For the amendment .................... 38 Majority in favour of the ;tn e . . d;7 ...... 42 ment The ttknendment was then put as a sub , tantive re'o lution, hut the previous question was moved and carried without a division. The LORD MAYOR then said, that at that late hour THE StTN, LONDON, FRI DA Y, DECEMBER 13 1839. (half-past four o'clock), be would not proceed with the remaining business, but would appoint a Court day for that purpose one day next week. The Court adjourned. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. Parliament met yesterday pro forma, pursuant to prorogation. Shortly after two o'clock the Lord Chancellor, the Marquis of Normanby, and Lord Duncannon took the►r seats as Lords Commissioners. The House of Commons was:then su►umoned by Mr. Putman, the Deputy-Usher of the Black Rod, to hear the Commission read, and in a few moments Mr. W. Lee and the officers of the House of Commons appeared at the Bar, when the Commission was read at the table by the Clerk. The Lord Chancellor then, in her Majesty's name, declared the Parliament prorogued to Thurs day, the 16th of January, the❑ to be holden for the despatch of divers urgent and important affairs. LA.11 7 INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CILINCERY, DEc. 12. This case came before the Court upon appeal from the decision of the present Master of the Rolls dis missing the plaintiff's bill with costs. The plaintiff William Thomas Hill, claimed under an indenture exe cuted by a person named Deans, time whole of the pro perty left by him at his death. The plaintiff is the son of a person who previous to his death carried on the business of an agricultural instrument maker, in Oxford-street. He was on terms of great intimacy with Deans, who kept the Seven Stars, at Starch Green. Deans having no children, bec ame muc h attached to the plaintiff, and in 1818 he executed an indenture, by which he gave the whole of his property to his wife, and at her death it was to go to the plaintiff, to the exclusion of his own relations. The defendants alleged that the instrument had been fraudulently ob tained from Deans, who, being an illiterate man, was wholly ignorant of the effect of the transaction that had taken place between himself and the father of the plaintiff. The arguments in the case had not concluded when his Lordship rose, st half-past one o'clock. ROLLS' COURT, DEC. 12. ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. IRONMONGERS' COMPANY. This case came before the Court upon exceptions to the Master's Report. The information in this case was filed in Michaelmas Term, 1825, against the Ironmongers' Company as trustees under the will of Mr. Thomas Betton, dated February, 1723, praying for an account of the trust estates ; that a moiety, which was by the will directed to be appropriated to the redemption of British slaves in Turkey and Barbary (there being now no such objects) might be applied to a charity as near the original object of the donor as circumstances would permit ; and for a reference to the Master to approve of a scheme. When the cause came on for hearing before Sir John Leach, it appeared that for some years past the Ironmongers' Company had been in the habit of applying that portion of the fund which was ❑ot wanted for the redemption of slaves in Turkey and Barbary to other purposes of charity mentioned in the will, viz., to the support of schools and the support of decayed freemen of the Ironmongers' Company ; and in the order of reference to the Master to approve of a scheme, &c. there was a direction that that appropria tion should be continued pending the inquiry. The Master in his report stated that a large fund had accu mulated from the unapplied portion of the income of the testator's estate, there having been but few objects of the charity found ; that 7,0001. should be set apart for the purpose of redeeming any English subjects in capti vity in Turkey and Barbary, should such objects arise, and that the remainder of the accumulation should be applied to the other purposes of the testator's will. Exceptions were taken to that report, and when the report came to be argued before Sir John Leach, his .Honour expressed a doubt whether he had any jurisdic tion at all, because he thought that as the objects of the testator's bounty had altogether failed, it fell to the Crown to appoint by sign manual. The case having stood over for consideration, the Attorney-General of that day appeared in person before his Honour, and stated that upon investigation into the authorities, he was satisfied it did not fall to the Crown. Sir John Leach ultimately came to the decision, that one of the objects having failed, the Court had no jurisdiction at all over that portion of the property. On appeal to the Lord Chancellor that part of the decree was re versed, and an order was made, referring the case back again to the Master. The Master in his report, stated that he had been appliel to by dif ferent parties on behalf of Lady Mico's Charity, Greenwich Hospital, the Royal Naval Benevolent So ciety, but that Lady Mico's charity approached nearest the object of the testator. To that report the present exceptions were taken. Lady Mico's charity was ori ginally established for the redemption of slaves in the West Indies ; but since the emancipation of slaves the trustees of that charity had appropriated their funds towards the education of Negroes in the West Indies, and the establishment of " Normal" schools ; and it was therefore agreed in support of the exceptions, that that charity was not at all analagous to the intention of the testator, and that the first objects having failed, the accumulations ought to be applied to the other purposes mentioned in the will, namely, the schools and the poor freemen of the Company, of which the testator himself was a member. Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT : Mr. KINDERSLEY, and Mr. SUTTON SHARPE, appeared for the Ironmongers' Com pany, and in support of the exceptions. Mr. PEMBERTON and Mr. ANDF.RDON for the de lators, and The ATTORNEY-GENERAL and Mr. BETHEL'. for Lady 'Mica's Charity. VICE - CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Dire. 12. RAWSON V. SAMUEL. The VICE-CHANCELLOR gave judgment to-day in this else, in which the bill was filed by the plaintiff for the purpose of preventing the defendant from proceeding at lax to recover a large amount, which the defendant al leged was due to him in the transactions that had taken place between them. His Honour granted this injunction to stay execution, but refused to stop the proceedings in the action. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, DEC. 12. 'Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Guildhall, before Lord DEN, MAN and a Common Jury.) FALSE IMPRISONMENT—WEBB V. MEADE. The parties in this case were neighbours residing in the Kent-road, and the cause of action arose from the defendant Meade having put up a post or rail before the plaintiff's window, and on his property. The plaintiff conceiving the defendant had no right to put up a post there took it away. Upon that 'Webb gave the plaintiff into custody on a charge of felony, and he was taken before the Magistrates at Union-hall Police-office, who at once dismissed the complaint. Lord DENMAN said both parties had taken consider able pains to put themselves in the wrong. The de fendant had no right to put up a post on the property of another without his consent, nor had the plaintiff anv right to remove it clandestinely. His remedy should have been by an action of trespass. There was clearly no pretence for charging the plaintiff with a felony for having removed the post, and under all the circum stances the jury would award such damages by way of compensation as the plaintiff might he deemed entitled to., The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Da mages, 15/. NEW GAs LIGHT. The Count Val Marino, LT gentleman from the South of France, has been eagag, , ecl for some time in making gas by a new and economical process, and having ob tained a patent for the invention, as well as for a new species of gas burner, he exhibited both last evening at a temporary gas factory, in the neighbourhood of Fetter lane. The gas is made f rom pit c h, or o il , or any fat or bituminous substance, mixed with a considerable proportion of water, and is said to have these peculiar advantages—it has no offensive smell--is entirely free from smoke—the light is fully more brilliant than the coal-gas light—it is not liable to explode, and can be produced at 25 per cent. less cost. The principal agent in its production is water. These are statements for which we cannot vouch farther than that the light is very beautiful and brilliant, and accompanied by considerable heat,more powerful even than that of the common gas, and, as far as we could judge, it does not soil any thing exposed immediately above the flame. The great. merit of the invention appears to be in the exact proportions in which the ingredients are combined, which have the effect of ,:onsuming every particle of smoke. A great improve nent in that respect has been made in coal gas, and the nventor proposes to carry this still further by means of .he new gas burners. If he succeeds, he will confer a ,teat benefit on the public, and, we hope, a still greater enefit on himself.' XTENSION OF THE METROPO LITAN POLICE. (FROM A CORRESPONDENT.) It is understood that the Commissioners of Police lye been recently actively engaged in making arrange :ents with the Secretary of State for carrying out, as , eedily as possible, the clause in the Police Act autho sing the extension of the present limits of the Metro )litan Police District to a distance of fifteen miles from 'haring-cross. At present the districts which are not :eluded, but which are within the district, are placed in very awkward position, as in many of them a police is !ready established, and they are not aware what steps !le Commissioners will take with regard to them, whe ther they will be broken up altogether or merely incorpo .-ated with the metropolitan district, and placed under the jont rol of the Commissioners. Some of the places where regular police has been established have memorialized the Commissioners not to be placed within the metropoli tan district, on the ground that they have already an effi cient police, and do not require any change. It is not likely, however, that these memorials will be successful, because it is well known that a great objection exists to having separate jurisdictions of police within the metropolitan districts, and that this was the main argu ment of the supporters of the measure to incorporate the polite of the City of London with that under the control of the Commissioners. The superintendents of the different police divisions of the outskirts of the me tropolis have been actively engaged for several weeks in surveying their extended line of district ; and it is be lieved that an Order in Council will very shortly be promulgated, placing the whole circuit of 15 miles from Charing-cross under the Commissioners. THE NEW YORK LOANS- From a Letter on the Commercial Relations of Greai Britain with the United States. BY A CITIZEN OF NEW YORK. The State of New York commenced her system of " internal improvement " in 1817, and her loan system at the same time. To meet the interest on her debt about to be contracted, she pledged her revenues then derivable from her salt springs and auction duties, and some other minor sources, and the same funds and her then untried faith, for the redemption of the princi pal at stated periods. She was, I believe the first State of the Union that appeared in the markets of Europe as a borrower ; and then, as now, attempts were made to cast doubts upon her integrity and ability ; and then, as now, the objects for which the money was to be expended were vehemently opposed by a powerful party at home, who predicted bankruptcy and ruin to the State, and loss to the hapless lender who should hazard his money in schemes so wild and visionary. The statesmen of that day, however, were not deterred by the difficulties that beset them—they persevered, and mark the result. To guard against the most remote chance of any violation of the public faith from any sudden change of popular opinion, they incorporated into the amended constitution, adopted soon after the works were commenced, a provi sion, by which the tolls of 'the canal, at their then high rates, were irrevocably and unchangeably pledged, for the interest and principal of the debt, until the whole should be paid or provided for. The canals were commenced in 1817, and completely finished and in full operation in 1825. Their effect up on the general prosperity of the whole State was like magic. Their most sanguine friends found all their esti mates of benefit outstripped by the reality, and a diffi culty of an unlooked-for character soon arose. The provision in the constitution just alluded to prevented any application of what is called the " Canal Fund," (the surplus of these various sources of revenue over —exptodii urea), except to The payment of thealabt,That r: -debt was not yet due, and could not be paid wittour the consent of the holder. The means of payment were accumulating so rapidly that it was foreseen the whole sum would be r,!ady long be'ore it could be le gally tendered to the creditors, unless the revenue could be diminished by reducing the tolls, or appropria ting the funds to other objects, and this the constitution forbad. On the one hand it was desirable to relive agriculture and internal trade by reducing the cbarges on transportation, as it was evident that it could be done with safety to all parties; while on the other, any departure from the, strictest letter of the contract with the public creditors. (known to be almost all foreigners) was not to be thought of. It was resolved to offer them their principal before it was due. Notice to that effect was given, but few or none availed themselves o it. The difficulty still remained, and to relieve them selves from it, resort was had to an expedient which, as it had no example, so it will probably have few imi tators elsewhere. The public creditors were informed that if they would condescend to receive their money before it was due, they should have a premium for so doing, and those who chose to accept the terms, re ceived their principal and interest, and a bonus of, I be lieve, five per cent. The fund still went on accumulating, and when it had attained a sum that insured the punctual discharge of what remained of the debt for which it was pledged, and not before, the tolls were reduced ; nor would the people, upon whom all this depended, relieve themselves from burthens acknowledged to be unnecessary, until all the obligations of honour and good faith bad first been effectually discharged. During the progress ot' the preceding events, political power had passed from the party who had originated the canals, and were the authors of the s ystem of finance which had proved so successful, into the hands o their opponents, who had deprecated the whole scheme and predicted the most disastrous consequences from its 4i.ipption, They, however, never for a moment en tertained the thought of violating the plighted faith of the State or of changing the disposition which has beau made of the public funds, but carried out and fulfilled to their utmost obligation all the engagements of their predecessors. Whorf 111 1837 the banks, pressed by an overpower ing heeessity, liuspended specie payments, (became bankrupt, if the plainer phrase be preferred) and when, moved by their conviction of what was the true character of that necessity, the Legislature so far lega liAed the Act as to allow then to retain their charters, did the Mate attempt to evade her obligations and ten der in payment of the State debts the same paper in which the necmities of the times compelled her to col lect her own revenues? Far from it ; the public cre ditor received specie or its equivalent at his own option, and the im ?PO borne by the debtor State.* So much, then, for the past. It is thus that New York has redeemed her faith ; and in the absence of all evidence to the contrary, it is but common justice to believe that she will continue to ho governed by the same PrinciPle4 Nture. •In the year above.mentioncsd, one million of the prin_ einal of the debt became duo, which was paid in New fork pity bank notes, at one hundred and nine for every hundred . dolhiaz pr atoa, and these notes in a Of months after were equivalent 0 irt4o, RURAL POLICE.—The following comparison of the number of men and their gat / ri es , adopted in three counties, m a y n ot prove unintere s ti ng :-.-Essex, population 317,237-1 ft hiplgonstable 4001, 15 super :ntendents 80/., or if keeping P r horse 100/., 100 con ' 4, 1 1,4 0 ,3 a ; total officers 110 ; total salaries 632/. population 479,155-1 chief constable 000 j., 1 deputy ditto ON., 11 superintendents 751., 85 con stables 52/. ; total offleers p 8 : total salaries 522/. Norfolk, population 390,054-,1 chief constable 500/., 12 superintendents 1001., 120 constables ;74/. total ~fficers 133: total salaries 652/, The decision with re :ard to Kent took place at a very numerous meeting ‘ .f the Magistratei for that county at Maidstone, on he 26th ult. Col. A usten moved the adoption of the .orce for the division of uMop-at-Hone, and Mr. 3erens moved an amendment for the establishing the , I stem throughout the county upon the Scale above ,jiottit) ; 28 voted for the amendment and 24 against it. the speakers in favour of the system were the Hight Hon. J. C. Herries, Mr. k i ewin, Mr. T. L. Hodges, Mr. E. Rice, M.P., Mr. T. B en tl ey Mr, W. M. Smith, ' Viscount Marsham, and Mr. J. T. bridges. A sinst it, Sir E. Knatchbull, the Rev. G. Davies, and Mr. Deedes. A Committee was appointed. A memorial was presented from Tunbridge Wells, praying exemp tion limn the operation of the Act, i n the garden of Mr. John Daniel Vauer, in the parish of Llanidan, there are at present three goose berry trees having fruit of the size of peas, and flowers upon them.-117elsk Paper. TAYLOR V. SNELLY. This was an action brought by the plaintiffs, Messrs. John, Henry, and William Taylor, mustard and choco late manufacturers, of Brick-lane, Whitechapel, against George Snelly, who had been managing clerk in their establishment, for a breach of contract in having left them without due notice. It was alleged by the plain tiffs, that the defendant having procured a more advan tageous situation, left them suddenly, giving only two or three days' notice, by which they were put to much inconvenience, and an expense of about 50/. For the defendant it was urged, that he had mentioned to one of the partners his intention of leaving, and the reply was, " Do as you like," which might be construed either as an assent or disapproval of the step, and also that a balance of salary, amounting to 25/. was due to him by the plaintiffs. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiffs, da mages, 5/. Lord DENMAN— Gentlemen, your verdict is some satisfaction to me, for I had just recommended to the Counsel on both sides, to take a verdict by consent for that sum. SCOYLES V. NEWMAN. This was an action to recover a sum about 401. for work and labour done by the plaintiff, a wheelwright. Mr. Sergeant ANDREWS stated the case. The plaintiff, who resided at Chiswick, was employed by the defendant, Mr. Newman, a gentleman living at Newing ton, to build a carriage of a peculiar construction. It was to support a body of unusual size—in fact, such a vehicle as a family could travel about and live in night and day, and thereby avoid the expense of hotels.—(A laugh.) The length was to be 20 feet, the height 10 feet, and the width 9. While the carriage was in courso of construction, Mr. Newman directed an alteration, by 'which 5 feet were added to the hind part of the carriage. A sum of 25/. had been paid on account, and the action was brought to recover the balance amounting to about 40/. James Ravenall, a wheelwright, deposed that he worked for the plaintiff in 1837. He built the car riage ordered by the defendant, who was on the pre mises several times, suggesting alterations. The car riage was then removed to Turnham Green. Heard Mr. Newman say he would not keep his (plaintiff's) money an hour after he had got the carriage home. He expressed himself perfectly satisfied with it. Cyrus Glazier, a coach-spring maker, did the iron work of the carriage—it was all done in the best style, and the prices were reasonable. Two persons in the trade deposed that the carriage was well worth from 711. to 73h Mr. RICHARDS addressed the Jury for the defen dant. He would show that there was a specific bar gain and contract between the parties, by which the carriage was to be built for a specific sum of 30/. Witnesses were called to show that there was a con tract to build the carriage for 301., out of which 5/. had been paid in advance. Mr. Sergeant ADAMS replied, and the Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff.—Damages, 35/. 17s. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, DEC. 12. (Sittings at Nisi Prin s , ,befo ldhall.)re Mr. Bar on A LDER3ON, a Clui MARSHALL V. TIIE GENERAL STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY.-SPECIAL JURY. Sir F. POLLOCK (with whom were Mr. Creswell and Mr. Martin) stated the case to the Jury. The plaintiff is a shipowner of L on d on, carrying on business under the firm of Marshall and Sons, and the defen dants are the General Steam Navigation Com pany, who have steamers sailing from London to all parts of the world. The present action was brought to recover the lacteal amount o f the damage sustained lay the plaintiff's vessel, and BOROUGH OF SOUTHWARK. 'TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN. read with pleasure on Saturday last, in your valuable Journal, an account of a meeting which was held, on the night before, in this borough, called by the friends of Mr. Walter, inasmuch as it showed pretty plainly how that Tinies-servinggentleman stood, as well as the utter hopelessness of his ever becoming the re presentative of the electors of Southwark. I perfectly agree with the observations of the worthy Chairman, that the result of that meeting would be to strike terror into the camp of the enemy, and who in deed can now doubt the fact of its having done so, when we see the Times, in a very state of rabidness, making assertions the most false, namely, that the parties pre sent were non-electors, when in reality he, the writer, must have been aware that the contrary was the fact, as they (Mr. Walter's friends) had with them a list of the electors, and took good care to ask for each party's name, and then to examine the list. As regards Mr. Bowler, there is another departure from truth which plainly shows the animus which directs them. The gentleman who was at that meeting was Mr. Wm. Bowler, of the firm 6. Bowler and Son," one of the most respectable firms in the borough. AN ELECTOR. December 12 , 1839. - - - - [W e have taken the liberty of curtailing t! is letter of some sentences which have little reference to the elections, and which might do more harm than good.] ROBBERY OF LOVE LETTERS. A strange occurrence lately formed the topic of con versation in the saloon of the Italian Opera. Some years ago, when, still under the influence of the inge nuous sentiments which, even in these goat-bearded times of ours, accompany the entry of a young man of family into the world, M. de - preferred rich and elegant drawing-rooms to his stables, and the company of laughing and pensive girls to his race-horses or hounds. He had attached himself to the daughter of an eminent personage, whose fortune, too inferior to that he was sole heir to, rendered a marriage between them hopeless. They did not think so at that period, and in the vehemence of their secret affection they contemplated flight, and even suicide, if insurmount able obstacles opposed what they called their happi ness. But time had cooled this effervescence, and six months ago M. de -'s tender friend had put an end to the romance of first love by marrying one of our principal manufacturers. So far all was right, and M. de --, too much of a man honour to let even any regret be suspected, had eagerly attended the marriage ceremony. But a gloomy thought as sailed the bride. She had formerly kept up a corres pondence with M. de --, who had kept possession of these tender epistles, and though she knew he was in capable of making an improper use of them, she would have given anything to recover them, Unable to em. ploy anybody to ask them of him, she wrote to him. The answer was soon returned. M. de --, at the same time that he professed the profoundest respect for Madame N--, declared that he set too high a value upon her letters ever to part with them, assuring her that he had not ceased carrying them with him upon his heart. Such was the case. The letters, four in num ber, had remained with Madame N-'s portrait, in a pocket-book, which was continually in the breast-pocket of his coat. A few evenings ago M. de --, desert ing the Opera, of which he is an habitue, went to see a piece in vogue at another theatre. On entering a balcony stall he deposited his great coat in the hands of the box opener. At the end of the play, when M. de -- was putting on his great coat, he was hustled by a cluster of persons rushing in in a contrary direction, and, when they had passed, he found that an incision had been made on the left side of his coat, and that his bre itt pocket and his pocket book, containing a I,ooof. bank note, had been carried off. At supper he told some friends of his mishap, which he considered an or dinary theft : but, on going home, found that a sealed parcel had been left for him at midnight, and that the bearer had recommended its being delivered to him only. 1-1 e opened it, and, to his great amazement, found that it contained the pocket book, bank note, and all his other papers, save the four letters and portrait. It may well be supposed that M. de - has not laid any complaint on the subject before the police.—Gazette des T-,ibunau.r. Her Majesty's marriage will take place at the Chapel Royal, St. James's. The heads of the various departments have been to the chapel to make the preli minary arrangements. FATAL ACCIDENT IN OXFORD-STREET.— On Tuesday a labouring man named John Sutherland while at work in the sewer, now making in Oxford street, at the end of Rathbone-place, was crushed to ,icath in an instant by a heavy mass of earth falling in upon him. GAME CERTIFICATES.—In our July number one of our correspondent s pointed out the necessity of some alteration in the game certificates, those in force only enabling the holder to kill game from the time they are issued (in July) till the sth of April ensuing, and 'if course, precluding the shooting of young rabbits or leverets in May and June, without subjecting the pa:ty to penalties, and at the same time enabling the poacher to take liberties which the gamekeeper, from not having his certificate, is obliged to wink at. Since the appearance of that article the following notice as to the time at which game certificates expire has been issued from the Stamp Office in accordance with our cirrespondent's suggestion :—" Notice is hereby given that by the third section of the Act 2d and 3d of Vict. cap, 35, it is enacted that all certificates for taking or killing game, granted in full force at the time of the passing of the said Act (July 20, 1839), and all such certificates granted after that date, and before July sth, 1840, instead of expiring on April sth, 1840, shill continue in force until July sth 1840 ; and that all such certificates which shall be granted at any time after July sth, 1840, shall continue in force until and upon the sth of July next after the time of issuing the saine."—Old Sporting Magazine for December. MR. VV;NOLLES.-This gentleman has been dismissed front hut- Majesty's Constabulary. We need only state that his dismissal has not been caused by any circumstances connected with the investigation commenced this day before Mr. Brooke.—Dublin Eveninp . Post. The inv es ti ga ti on re f erre d to i s an in quiry or ' dered by Government into the charges preferred by Captain Vignolles against Chief Constable Fitzge rald. 'The case was postponed in order to give Mr. Vignolles an opportunity to establish his charges, and of rnakii... b such application t o Government as be might Le advised. Mr. Vignolles is reported to have said— " I will take no further tr)uble in the matter. If the Government wish to proceed they may do so ; but I feel I have done my duty by the public, and to the Go vernment, whose officer I was for nine years." How To CURE A REIsTER.—On Saturday last, a cart-horse, laden with coals. stuck fast while as cending the Southgate-brae, nearly opposite to Mr. Mundell's shop, and sorely tried the temper of the driver. When coaxed it ran frul of the curbstone, and when drawn to the opptiote, side and severely punished, refused to budge a single inch further. Other carters came up, who " laid on" most unmercifully, but all without effect, until one of the tribe, wiser than the rest, advised the driver to get mounted on its back in posting fashion. This advice the man followed, and when fairly seated, with the reins in his hand, the animal took to its work, and went on as quietly as if laden simply with a fourpenny letter. From this circumstance we infer that the horse in question had been used in its better days to coaching, and felt all the aristocracy of its nature revived when honoured by the stride of an cut-rider. But there is another reported cure for "a reisted horse." An animal, galled by the weight of its load, made a dead halt while ascending the ship-wrecked more tolerable Candle maker-row, Edinburgh ; and, althou g h fl ogged beyond tiatienn continued appeared t mariner, his swimming powers exhausted, fi n d s i t l ess exertion—justc ons dc r a beating as the painful to sink, w ith no hope of r e li e f at hand, than buffAing continuously rebellious waves. While the poor carter was thus puzzled, an Irishman passed, who whispered in his ear—" put dirt in his mouth." " Dirt !" said the ether, " what, good would that do ?' " Try and you'll see—for if no better, you can be no worse." Accordingly, the carter stooped down, an d gather i ng something from the nearest gutter, thrust it between the jaws of his rebellious steed. And the effect was ma gical ; instantly the animal went on his way, and the driver smiled concurrence, when the Irishman exclaimed Didn't I tell you, a horse has only one idea in his head at it time, and if you can change that, or drive it out, he becomes your servant, and not your master."— Dionlries Courier. Ott Saturday the fish pond of Patching was drained in the preSPPCC of the Earl of Surrey and Lord Fitzallan, and an immense quantity of fish was caught, principally carp. There were also two very fine pike, weighing about 101bs each, and eels in abundance ; ail of which, with the exception of the pike, were liberally distributed among the bystanders and the poor in the neighbourhood.--Brighton Paper. AIORNING EDITION. I the loss consequent upon that damage, by having been I run foul of by a steamer belonging to the Company on the evening of the 13th of January last. The collision, I it would be proved, had taken place without any rea• sonable excuse for negligence, cod could only be ac ' counicd for by a goad look out not having been kept. The plaintiff's vessel, the Mary S:uart, tv,ls employed in the coal trade, and at the time in question was on a voyage from Newcastle to London, with a cargo of coals. The Clarence steamer was proceeding from London to Leith. The position of the vessels just before the collision was off the Spurn Lights, at the mouth of the Humber, about twelve miles from the lights. The wind was blowing in a westerly direction from the shore ; and the brig, which was going from the north to the south, had a favourable wind on the starboard quarter. The steamer was observed at a distance of about two miles, and was seen by her light. The master of the brig immediately gave directions to steer her so that the light might be kept free and clear,and as the steamer approached,the brigveered off a little to the lift, and by this manoeuvre would become, of course. more visible to the steamer, it being a starligbt night, The brig, having turned out of her course, it was the duty of those on board the steamer to take the neces sary steps to avoid a collision, but instead of doing so, she continued to come towards the brig. The Captain of the brig called out to them to put their helm on the other side, but no attention was paid, and the steamer came down, and struck the brig on the starboard bow with such violence as to leave a considerable indenta tion, and knocking the figure head of the steamer in pieces. Two of the sailors immediately jumped on board the steamer, and were shortly afterwards brought on board the brig again, accompanied by another person, who refused to give the name of the steamer. The Captain then collared the stranger, in order to detain him, but he contrived to make his escape and regain the steamer, but not without leaving some part of his coat behind him. The steamer then left the brig in utter ignorance of the extent of the damage which she had sustained, her name being unknown. The painting of the steamer, however, was observed, and she was afterwards recognised, having on board the individual to whom allusion had been made as having been on board the brig, who turned out to be the second mate. Re paration was asked for the damage, but a threat was held out of a cross-action, and a criminal prosecution for piracy on the high seas, in having seized a man's gar ment, in which there were a considerable number of sovereigns, and causing him to leave it behind him. This threat, however, did not deter the plaintiff from proceeding, and lie now brought his action to recover the amount of damage sustained. William Caithness, the Master of the brig, was then called by Mr. CRESWELL, and, in answer to the first question, replied, " Yes, my Lord."—(A laugh.) Mr. CRESWELL—NO, that's my Lord (pointing to the Judge). Mr. Baron ALDERSON—He only is prophetic.— (Loud laughter.) The witness then detailed the circumstances of the case, as stated by the Learned Counsel, and was corro borated by the Mate of the brig and some of the seamen. Mr. THESIGER (with whom was Mr. CLEASBY) then addressed the Jury on the part of the defendants. if it were not for the almost proverbial difficulties which de fendants had to encounter in a running -down case— difficulties which were not diminished when they hap pened to be the owners of steam-vessels—he should have little doubt of obtaining a verdict for the defendants in this case ; and although his Learned Friend had ad- verted to the threat of a counter-action, and supposed that to be a contrivance to reduce the plaintiff to forego his claim, it was not a quite unprecedented thing for parties who had suffered by accidents each to bring an action, and each to succeed in obtaining the verdict of a jury, and the reason was plain ; a plaintiff had the ad vantage of impressing the jury with his view of the case, and supporting it by evidence ; and it being natural for tie human mind to come to a conclusion, and not to like to have that conclusion disturbed. they reluctantly took an opposite view of the circumsta nces , an d therefore if they could not disbelieve the witnesses, they endeavoured to reconcile their statements with those made on the other side. With respect to the facts of the case. It was ridiculous to suppose that any threat of proceeding for piracy had been held out ; the individual who de tained the mate's property merely having been threat ened with a criminal proceeding if he did not restore it. The conduct of the crew of the collier was so outrage ous and violent, that it quite accounted for the refusal of the mate, if he did so refuse, to give the name of the steamer. This he was unable to contradict on account of the absence of the mate, who was now at sea. This had, however, no bearing on the question, whether the accident was attributed to the negligence of the defend ant's vessel. A party could only be rendered liable where his negligence alone was the cause of the accident, and if there was any negligence on the part of the corn p!aining party he could not r ecover ; w hi c h he submitted was th fact in the case now before the Court. There were two points on which both sides were agreed—first, that the vessel of the plaintiff was turned to the east ward by starboarding the helm ; and secondly, that the helm of the steamer was ported, which turned her head to the eastward ; and the principal question would be, at what particular period and under what circumstances these manoeuvres were performed in the different vessels. He should prove there was a rule that where two ves sels met in the direction in which these met, the vessel on the larboard tack was expected to give way. He ad nutted that the early part of the night was clear and star light, but shortly before the accident it became hazy and overcast, so that the brig could not be perceived at the distance of more than half a mile ; and he would prove that at :hat time the mate was on the look-out on the poop ; that there was a man at the helm, that the third mate and carpenter were on the forecastle, and that there was a boy to communicate orders to the engineer below. The Mary Stuart was observed by the steamer half a mile distant, about a point and a half on the larboard bow. The course of the steamer was N. by W. ; the wind was W.N.W. The brig was bound to get out of the way of a vessel meeting her on the starboard tack. The steamer had nothing to do but to put her helm to port to clear the sailing vessel, arid she did so ; and if she had starboarded her helm the probability was that she would have struck the brig in midships, and every soul on board would have perished. The steamer did everything to avoid the collision by by stopping and backing the engine, but under the cir cumstances it was quite unavoidable. It would be proved that if the sailing vessel had kept on her course and not gone to the eastward, the accident would not have happened, and under these circumstances, as she had been guilty of negligence, the owner was not en titled to recover. MISSION OF LUNACY. fuesday a commission of lunacy was opened before Mr. Phillimore, the Chief Commissioner, at the Ca dogan hotel, Sloane -street, Chelsea, to inquire into the state of mind of Henrr Robert Pearce, Esq., of Car digan, in Bedfordshire, but late of Blacklands House, Chelsea. S. C. Whitbread, Esq., was first called, and depe, se d that he h a d b een acqua i nted with Mr. Pearce for a Atatm_ ber of y ears , an d t h at i n 1836 he observed th Air. Pearce appeared stupid, and that there was an alteration in his conduct : one day he %could join in the sports of the field and mix with_ society, and the next he would shut himself up and refuse to see any body. The first thing witness more par titularly observed was about January, 1837, when Mr. Pearce lighted a fire in the front of his house in the garden. From that period it became necessary for his own safety that he should be watched, and when he could bo in duced to spend his evenings with witness he would frequently complain of seeing on his way home two kites flying in the air with lanterns attached to them. M, Pearce continued to get worse, and on the 26th of Mar, 1837, it was deemed advisable to remote him to Dr. s a _ the. - land's asylum at Chelsea. Witness had no ia',:erest whatever in Mr. Pearce's property. All that. he desired property was to serve hi m as a f r i en d . A good deal e.,t' his. might have bee n save d h a d h e b een restrai.ned a fewnaonths o years before from sq uan d er i ng it away. For the last tw and three quarters there hat' been. no c h ange for the better in Mr. Pear ce ' s mintl, and his delusions had in creased. Among the principal delusions that belaboured under was, that all his friends were dead, and that their houses had fallen down. He had stated that witness was dead, and when he accosted Mr. Pearce afterwards, the unfortunate gentleman became horror-stricken, and appeared to fancy that a ghost was speaking to hir j. Before he was restrained he used to squander his me' Aey away in the collection of useless things, and he } ,ad a great passion for buying fire-irons. Witness wa a quite sure that if Mr. Pearce had twenty guineas r a aaa d at his disposal, he would expend it in the purel., se o f ar ticles of no use to him before he got to the top of Sloane-street. In the month of Apa;il Mr. Pearce was removed fr m Dr. S u therlaa,d's, a s it was thought changed : scene might, be attended with beneficial results. He was placed at the house of Mr. Blood, a surgeon, in North Audley-street, and on one occasion 'ne contrived to affect his, escape, and he proceeded to the Annuity Office, w a d drew 37/. out of it. He also gave direction s revel...j ag the powers of witness to manage his property ; 2 't/. of the money he received he presented to Mr, Bloa,d's go verness, and the remainder he squander e d away. He had accused witness on several oec esi.ons of having robbed him, Lnd there was not th e slightest doubt, that he had been incapable of managing himself or his affairs for five minutes toge,cher since the 26th of March, 1837. At times he would converse rationally respecting former occurrences, and particularly, /60,3. Lady Hester Stanhope, with whom he was acquaire,ed, and who was shipwrecked with him. Several ether witnesses having been same to th e. saa effect, Dr. Sutherland stated that be first visited nr. Pearce at No. 2, Alpha-road, on the 28th July, 1'837, and he found him labouring undhe:rinlio)ianrtarloydtiue a g g e e n , tleza s n unsound ness of mind. n yfoeratrn examined of upon the principalappear, appeared to b e , and and his arismers suet, conduct ;ully confirmed ed to the Writes adduced j a n b u o er Ti v, e the testimony that had bee.4l given. The Learned Commist;ioner liming,. summed up, the Jury returned a yer!det, " That Hern-y Robert Pearce 'And, and incapable of managing himself a is nd ol' h u is ns e o ff7. d rs, ll and that ho Ilas been so since the 27th of Marc,:a 1837." CI The Learned Gentleman then called several witnesses in support of his statement, after which Sir. F POLI.OOK replied. his LORDSHIP then summed up the evidence to the Jury. If they were satisfied that the accident arose from the neglect or unskilfulness of the steamer, they would find for the plaintiff. If. on the other hand, the injury had arisen from mutual misconduct, they would find for the defendant. The Jury immediately found for the plaintiff—da mages 1651. 10s. 6d. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DEC. 12. (Guildhall Sittings, before Mr. Justice MACLE and a Special Jury.) LIBEL.—INORAM V. LAWSON.—" THE TIMES." Mr. KELLY (with whom were Mr CHANNELL and Mr. HENDERSON) stated the case for the plaintiff. It was an action a g ainst the p u bli s h er o f t h e Ti mes f or a libel, which h a d in its effects been most injurious to his client, Captain Ingram. In 1837, the plaintiff had become possessed by purchase, for 17,000/, of the ship Larkins, 700 tons burthen, which he advertised in the Times for a voyage to Calcutta, with freight and passengers. In the same paper containing the adver tisement appeared a letter to the Editor, professing to be written by a person actuated by humane motives, and a desire to prevent the loss of life, and represent ing that the ship had been bought by Jews for carrying out convicts, and had in its last voyage from the East Indies been compelled to put in at the Cape, to take in 20 additional hands to pump the vessel, in conse quence of many and dangerous leaks by which its safety was endangered. Now this statement was absolutely, entirely false. And the Jury might easily imagine that the publicati on o f suc h a lib el in a paper with so unpa ralleled a circulation as the Times, must have done the plaintiff great damage, though it would be very diffi cult, indeed impossible, to give specific proof of parti cular instances. The letter was signed by "B. T.," and the responsibility of the libel had been assumed by the defendant, who had justified the truth of the state as mit, thereby identifying himself with it, and being the person in law answerable for the consequences. Several witnesses were called, who stated that the Larkins was a well built vessel—constructed of teak— the most durable material—that in 1837 it was perfectly seaworthy—though there was a small hole, which could easily have been stopped by " a tree-nail"—and by which a little water had been previously made—but which was effectually remedied before the vessel had been adver tized for the Calcutta voyage. The amount commonly received for the passage money out was usually 3,000/., and home, rather more. But the voyage, following _:harles Lamb said of a b arr i s t er ' s fi rs t brief— the libel, the amount received was only 1 , 400 /. Mr. PLATT (with whom was Mr. Hu Nt pu ßE y EL ‘ ) " Thell great first cause least understood." addressed the Jury for the defence, urging that there THE WAy TO BREAK DOWN AP . had been some grounds for the charge of unseaworthi- has been justly said that an independent press rents on ness, and that the editor had no t connected himself with a firmer basis for support than one of a contrary chi.. the letter by any remarks, so that it was not a case r acter ; and it has been supposed difficult to break downcalling for heavy damages. such a press. There is a way in which it can ' doe .one„, The LEARNED JUDGE told the Jury that upon the however. And how does the reader think this work evidence un c ontradicted by th e defendant, the question can be e accomplished? By telling all sorts earning No. of lies "'a wns only one of damages. The publisher of a rea ~? No. By took upon himself the responsibility of false statements getting a N hi o re e linF fir i the special purr .de of writing it which appeared in it. And it was no justification to down Liy , t iscon .act , o a unprincipled po allege the absence of malice. He who did, or allowed laical post.',nasters No. But tails is the secret :to be done, that which clearly must (as in this case was Let P iarge number of its subscribers conclude that plain) injure another seriously, could neither in law nor because the business la' good the editor is not in want of common sense, excuse himself by pretending rather that he tl 1 .itt.e sums the: f severally owe;let its friends habitually did it without a motive—indeed it w as _„ 6 - ra - delay the fuf2,ment of their promises and contracts with vation for such a grievous injury th at the edit ,r, and the most prosperous establish(nketzanterinicatahel recklessly commit it by the 1 - a man should thing, without i— • ..eedleSS publication of any- world must d come down at last.—Raleigh Slandar —yuiry, to up his columns. Nor I " could the defendant, in fact, allege negligence even as I I a palliation, for clown to the last moment he had, by I I pleading th e j us tification, asserted the libel to be true,. .4, The Jury retired, and, in half an hour, retur with a verdict for 9001. _ SIIERIFF'S COURT, DEC. 12. .5 EvERARD V. LYON. In this ease the plaintiff, Joseph Everard, is a baker, residing in Arnwell-place, Pentonville, and the defe4ll; ant, Wm. Lyon, is a gentleman of fortune, residing in Claremont-3quare. The action was brought for the .11 purpose of recovering the sum of 2/. 15s. for bread' supplied to the defendant's wife. To this the defendant pleaded never indebted. _ _ Mr. Macphael, for the prosecution, said, the defend ant was a man in good circumstances, holding several offices, and possessing considerable property in Brighton and elsewhere. There had arisen differences between himself and his wife, which had ended in a separation, although they continued to reside in the same house in Claremont-square. Witnesses were called to prove that though the de fendant had given notice to furnish no more bread, he' had paid bills since the notice, and had also partaken of the bread delivered by plaintiff. The Jury, after “n absence of two hours, being un able to agree on their verdict, a juror, by consent of the parties, was withdrawn. COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Diec. 11. COMMISSION or INQUIRY.—The Committee sat at the usual hour, Mr. Justice Erskine in the chair. The Inquiry is rapidly advancing, and a variety of returns have been ordered to be furnished from the Courts of Bankruptcy and Insolvent Debtors, particularly relat ing to the number of persons applying for certificates and discharges, the amount of debts proved, and of as sets divided in each case, and the exp enses attending the same. An immense variety of suggestions have come in from several quarters, the . more pr om i nent o f w h ic h we have every reason to believe are as follow :-1. Assum ing that the two Courts are to be united, they are to be armed with all the powers of a Court of Record, and, of course, to be enabled to compel the attendance and production of persons, papers, and records, upon pain of committ a l f or con t emp t. 2. Of th e ten Commis sioners of Bankruptcy and Insolvent Debtors, to keep Westminster, and or four cons t ant l y i n L on d on an d and locate the o th ers i n t h e c h ie f commercial districts. 3. To empower the registrars in each of the respective Courts to hear all unopposed claims and proofs of debts, but an appeal always to lie to a Commissioner, who is to be constantly in attendance, and in the event of an ap peal from his decision, then the appellant to go before three Commissioners ; and, if still dissatisfied to de posit the costs of such appeal, which is to lie either with the Vice-Chancell or or t h e L or d Chancellor. as the case may be ; always, h owever , provided that if the appeal be decided in f avour o f the appellant, then the costs to be returned to him. 4. It is almost an universal recommendation that the Court of Review should be altogether abolished, with liberty to the Judges of the Court to accept the located Commis. sionerships, if indeed they might not think the doing 9-, would be infra dignitateia, and then of course to r-, t i re upon a moderate pension. 5. With a view to remove the extraordinary anomaly in the proceediegs of r .Athe Bankruptcy Court, where the certificate Protects a ll fu ture acquisitions of the bankrupt i P..ind of the Insolvent Debtors' Court, where a disch? - .g e , even after the must serious term of imprisonmeni, never does protect such future acquisitions of property, it is proposed that the certificate or discharge shall, with consent of credi tors, bar all claims upon future acquisitions of pro perty, and that in cases where creditors may not seem so be satisfied with the amount of dividends or gene ral assets of a bankrupt or insolvent debtor, it may nevertheless be in the power of the Commissioner wh•, has heard the case to grant a certificate to pre•,,eet the party who may have so satisfied him from perscnial ar rest, until other arrangements be provided by t ) :ie Legis lature. The obtaining signatures to certificates is now attended with considerable expense and delay, and it is supposed the proposition now made will greatly tend (if adopted) to the prevention of litigation, and the harm_ sing annoyance of b an k ru pt s an d insolvents. 6. Wi.ien a party being called upon by one or more credite,rs for a certain amount of debt, states his inability to pay, then the creditor or creditors to make. such state ments before a Commissioner, who thereupon shall issue his summons for the attendance of the debtor before him, and upon compliance with such summons, he is to have his protection until the next attendance, at which time he shall furnish a list upon oath of his debts and credits, stock, furniture, &c., when (upon the cessio bonorum principle) an officer of the Court is to take possession of them ; their value to be realised as soon as may he profitably and practically possible, and ie such cases the bankrupt, or inso:vent, to be entitled to his certificate, or discharge, without any further 7. No person, whose assets do not amount to 501., to go through the process of bankruptcy or insolvency . and, 8. The expenses to be neither 61. or 81., as in ~b: taming a discharge in the Insolvent Debtars'Court„ nor nearly 1001. for working a commission in the Ce,urt o f Bankruptcy, but a I - neje: ately reasonable sum on ly to be allowed in both. Up to the present time the fore going are the suggestions which are likely to be acted upon, and with respect to the total wa it of efficient jurisilletion in the Court of Bankruptcy, eve r y day's experience furnishes some fresh example. =11.1.=/••••• •- 31 • left r at giss ,and the the ouse C oo, i t to ,cted glee the Dial lads rrol ries, the o at .law 1 his rot lay's villa it to it in sses itolh itsl lice; yip bich t t se the the re 11• the toe 'eat ,rd. [,il reo I DI(1