The Sun. — London, England, 1844-01-16 00:00:00

ebtrb Malian SfIN-OFFICE, Seven o'clock PRICES OF SHARES IN CANALS, RAILWAYS, BANKS, ASSURANCE AND OTHER COMPANIES' STOCK. LONDON, TUESDAY, JAN. 16. Dtviiiend Amount Paid. Share. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF TAI = DAY. GLOBE.—When the fact became known that every Roman Catholic name had been expunged from the Dublin jury-list by the Crown agents, and the practical injustice of such an extreme application of the prerogative was pointed out, the objection was met by the Government organs with an admission, that had the Roman Catholics so struck out been excluded as Catholics, therewouldhave been grounds for impugning the act as invidious and and uf un just.the But it so happened, we are told,that the whole eleven Catholicsr s They struck out were o rejected, f th list sCatholics, Crown gent were Repea . but as Repealers. As on the trial of Chartist leaders for sedition or conspiracy, or any other offence, alleged to have been committed by them in such relation, the Crown would object to Chartists as unfit to exercise, ' with the requisite impartiality, the functions of jury men in such a cause; so, it was urged, Repealers were properly excluded from the panel from which a jury for the trial of the parties accused of conspiracy and sedition, as Repeal leaders, was to be selected. There was a show of reason in this mode of stating the question. It would have been difficult, if not impossible, to overturn the argument, supposing the assumption on which it was based to have been valid. The whole case rested on the simple matter of fact— were all the Roman Catholics who were drawn on this jury, Repealers ? Every Catholic was struck off. If any were rejected who were not Repealers, then it followed that the* rejection was in consequence of their religious creed, and not of their political predilections. The fact is now ascertained to have been—nut as the unscrupulous organs of the Government stated, bat that four of the Roman Catholics struck from the list by the Crown agent were not Repealers, and never had any connexion whatever with the repeal movement ! Driven from this refuge of lies by the force of in contestable facts, the fiction they had invented—as a temporary relief from the overwhelming odium which the bigotry and injustice of the act had provoked—being demolished, the ground is shifted. The exclusion of the Catholics, as such, is now boldly vindicated. Pro testant ascendancy in the jury-box is insolently vin dicated as essential to the attainment of a verdict of which truth should be the element. The organs of the party—which, in the country where the trial is to be had, constitute so decided a minority—take heart, and now impute to the Roman Catholics a destitution of all regard to moral obligation. Not merely the peasantry —the labourers—the lowest of the Catholic population, but the higher class of tradesmen, the first-class shop ' keepers, the merchants and gentry of the county of the city of Dublin, are charged with the deep deprave ) tion of moral principle, and disregard of social ties, which the crime of perjury involves ! Such is the foul charge which the Herald—the now back-bone advocate of all the Government says and does—imputes to the Roman Catholics, as a body. The senseless calumnies, I creations of bigotry in its dotage, and of ascendancy tot tering to its fall—which the Eldons, Rodens, and the Wetherells, with the smaller but not less virulent shoals se of clamourers against Catholic Emancipation, urged as , reasons for excluding the Catholics from the common rights of citizens--are again revived. A Roman Ca tholic will regard perjury as a meritorious act, if the interests of his religion are to be observed by its commission. "If a single Catholic had been al lowed to remain on the reduced jury list in the trial now pending between the Crown and O'Connell, that indi ts vidual "—so the Herald assures the country—" would have received a significant hint from his spiritual rulers, that his soul's everlasting welfare . depended on his loyalty to the Church in this import an t '3'i crisis !" The inference is irresistible. The ingenuity of r man—the reckless impudence of the venal Heralds of .% a Government which aspires to the bad eminence of ' l4 the Castlereaghs and Sidmouths of days we had fondly hoped had passed away for ever —cannot evade the s i s , ignominy, nor silence the indignati on , w hi c h t h e re j ect i on ' 7 ' of honourable citizens as unfit to serve on a jury, be -5% cause of their religious opinions, has produced. The o Government has branded the Roman Catholics with the o crimp of perjury by their acts ; the Government organs los• have admitted the acts, their motives, and their object, 4 by the justification they have put forth in its behalf. 5N The foul insult to a nation in its most sensitive part, the 63, creed which it professes, and to the Clergy who minister 5 at its altars, will recoil upon the Government which has dared to inflict the wrong. Public opinion, against 9 which no Government can long prevail, will speak out 5 its reprobation of a proceeding so fraught with danger to 634 the peace, because so preg nan t w ith wrong to the people, 2 g of Ireland. The suspiciously " dropped" sheets, contain s ing the sixty-three names omitted from the revised jury i• list, assumes a form vastly different from that it would 4% have borne but for the striking out the Roman Ca -8 tholics from the panel. That which would have been 5 2 received as a blunder, is now looked upon as a fraudu lent abstraction. The more the list was reduced, the sss less probability would there be of an inconvenient num -3 ber of names pertaining to the proscribed creed being drawn upon the ballot ; and consequently 1 U the greater chance of the jury being exclusively ) of the right sort. But what an onus has the Go vernment placed upon the jury, as packed by its officers ! We scarcely know whether a conviction or an .74 acquittal of the parties charged will be the most da ass maging. An acquittal will be a popular triumph, which will prostrate the Ministry in the dust, because obtained ;Is in spite of its preconcerted schemes to force a convic ) tion; while a verdict of guilty against O'C onne ll an d th e ) 3 1 1 rest of the traversers,Swill be deprived of all moral in fluence by the disreputable means which have been taken to secure that result. 3 N STANDARD.— At the aggregate meeting of Roman Catholics, which was held in Dublin on Saturday last, the 0 2 Emancipation Bill was proclaimed a nullity, because the law officer of the Crown had availed himself of the right s of challenge provided by the statute, to reject some 10 or 3 11 Roman Catholic Repealers from the panel; the attorney for the traversers having challenged an equal number on !.i his part, apparently for no other reason in the world ) than that they were Protestants and not Repealers ! It would be idle to repeat the proofs we have already ad -3 r duced, that the conduct h ere com pl a i ne d o f was not ; only perfectly proper and legitimate, but that the Crown ) Solicitor would have been guilty of a gross dereliction of ' his duty bad he act e d o th erw i se . H ow, i n t h e name of 5 ) common sense, was the panel to be reduced, if both parties ) were not permitted to strik e off the number required by iN the law ? Was Mr. Kenimis to reject the names of re t spectable Protestants, with whose intelligence and up rightness he might happen to be acquainted, for the 5 purpose of retaining some ten or eleven persons, who were 2 not only Catholics but Repealers—men who had pledged 1 8 themselves deeply on the very question they were called a upon to try ;or was it expected of him that he should 3 leave the panel in the hands of M r . Pi erce M ahoney, in 3 order that he might challenge twelve Protestant jurors 3 with impunity. "But," says Mr. Thomas Wyse, "if being a Repealer renders a man unfit to sit upon a jury, 3 why should not an anti-Repealer be deemed equally in -114 eligible?" We will answer this inquiry by another. If 'S being a notorious burglar renders a man unfit to sit upon a jury impanelled to try a gang of housebreakers, 1% why should not a pe rson w h o h as never comm i tte d t h e Pt crime of house-breaking, or shop-lifting, be considered ) as equally disqualified ? Simply, because it would be a i 34 mockery of justice to depute a man who is obnoxious to 3.% punishment himself, to decide on the guilt or innocence of !N a fellow criminal a nd, i n a ll p ro b a bili ty , an accomplice. ),§ It constantly happens in this country that men :34 of the most irreproachable character are rejected from a panel on the bare suspicion of being friendly to 14 the parties they are to try, but no on e h as ever regar d e d 1% their exclusion on such a ground as a stigma on their credibility. If the Emancipation Bill be a mere nullity because Roman Catholic Repealers are not permitted to 1% sit in judgment on each other, it is, we trust, long likely to remain so. The argument of Mr. Ford, that )34 because Roman Catholic constituencies had occa sionally returned Protestant agitators instead of 3x , representatives of their own religious persuasion, they were incapable of being influenced by religious prep - 3 dices, is hardly less absurd. A Protestant agitator is 5 often more useful in his vocation than a Roman Catholic 2 of the same political p ro f ess i on cou ld b e ; and this is 2 precisely the reason why such a man will fre -5 quently secure a preference over a moderate and 5 % conscientious Roman Catholic. Mr. Sheii's speech, o in which he did not overlook the 63 jurors acci t dentally omitted from the panel, affords a striking proof that a Protestant representative is often selected, not iN because he is a Protestant, but because he is the chatn- N pion of Roman Catholic agitation, and only boasts of 'Ys his Protestantism when he desires to give value to his % attempts to degrade and calumniate it. Mr. Steele is a Protestant ; but who ever heard him give the Church, or the community- to which he Is professes to belong, a good word ? Yet the head pacifi cator is, for obvious reasons, a greater favourite at the Corn Exchange than many Roman Catholics of much more exalted character and pretensions. In a feeble and jejune speech, stuffed with the usual number of thrice- Lls, refuted falsehoods, and presenting, in fact, a mere echo of the groans of Mr. Pierce Mahoney on the latest of his grievances, Mr. O'Connell is silly enough to invite a comparison of the probable treatment of Chartist '3 with that of Roman Catholic jurors. He has the effrontery to declare his belief that Chartist jurors 14 would not be rejected i n f avour o f men h av i ng s , no avowed sympathy with the parties prosecuted, or that if they were, they would not put up with such an indignity. We have no doubt, did Chartists often happen to be qualified to serve on special juries, that they would be equally liable with Roman Catholics to be rejected from the panel in cases in which they would be called to sit in judgment on their brother Chartists ; nor would they have reason, therefore, to complain that any stigma had been imposed upon them. Men of the slightest delicacy of feeling would rejoice • at being relieved from a position which, if they meant honestly, must be a most painful one— that of weighing the imputed offences which have originated in the very principles and prejudices by which they themselves profess to be actuated. The pre text that the right of challenge has ever been regarded in this country as conveying the slightest reflection on the character of the party rejected, is notoriously un founded. Who th a t h a d t h e r i g h t to exerc i se such a privilege, would hesitate, in the absence of a more serious disqualification, to challenge a friend, or even an avowed political sympathiser of his opponent, in pre ference to rejecting Imp-hazard some one who might be much better qualified to deal i m p ar ti a ll y w i t h the case ? Such objections are mad e every d ay i n British courts of justice without giving rise t o t h e shadow of a complaint that the credibility of the phrties so rejected is intended to be impeached. The whole t enor o f M r. O ' Connell ' s speech grossinsult to the Roman Catholic body • for treating his figment a s a f act, t h at so many as 35 Roman' Catholics were omitted from the panel, among the 63 of whose absence he makes such bitter complaint, he would, he tells us, " have beaten the Attorney-General with his own weapons." In other words, he ex presses his conviction that had he been able to secure the presence of but one Roman Catholic on the jury (for the proportion, even under the cir cumstances he describes, could hardly . have been greater), he would have been Securo of ti trullPh 1 If per ;Names of Coitn- Annum. pantos. 5f per cent. V. 4 per cent. aol. Si. 15s. IL ss. 12.. Bd. 154. 11. 10e. 541. WI. 3% 170. 6d foi per coat. il. 204 U. loc IA 3111. - ios. Lit eiary. Londa,with Sin.llcket London University Russell Ring's Co .. ******* lalseellaneons. Anglo Mexican Mint. Australian Agricultur. Brit. American Land, Canada .......... „ Upper Canada Bonds" , Capper Miners' Comp Gen. Steam Navigation Iberian Mercantile Co. Ditto Property Met. Wood Pay., ism. U. Mex. and S. American New Brunswick (Land) New Zealand Penins. & Orien. Steam Royal Mail Steam Reversionary Int. Soc. South Australian Thames Tunnel Vail Diensen's Lad Canals. Ashton and Oldham Ashby-de-la-Zouch..av Basingstoke Breckneck & AbergaY Birmingham, 1-16th sh Do. and Liverp. June Chelmer & Blackftter Coventry Crom ford Dudley Danube and Mayne Ellesmere and Chester Erewash ..,,..,........... Forth and Clyde..„ Grand Grand Union Grand Surrey Grand Western Glamorgansh., ay. cost Gloucester & Berkeley Grantham Huddersfield . .... Kennet and Avon —.ay Lancaster av Leeds and Liverpool... Leicester Leicester & Northamp Loughborough Monmouthshire Montgomeryshire . Melton Mowbray Mersey and Irwell Macclesfield Neath Oxfbrd Peak Forest 81 , Regent's (or London).. Rochdale av Shropshire Somerset Coal Do. Lock Fund Stock Staffbrd and Worcester Shrewsbury Stourbrldge Stratford .on.Avon...av Swansea.--" ..... Severn & Wye & Rail Trent & Mersey, 1 4 ab Thames & Medway_av Warwick and Birming. Warwick and Napton Worcester & Binning Wilts and Berks av Wisbeach ........ Wey and Arun Docks. Commercial Fast and West India London Ditto Bonds Bristol AV JDo.Bnds,var.amounts St. Katharine Ditto Bonds.-- Ditto Bonds Southampton Bridges Hammersmith. ...... ..... Southwark, new subs. Ditto New of 7% Pr c. Waterloo. Ditto Old Ann. of 81,. Ditto New ditto of 71. Ditto 80nd5....... ....... Vauxhall AV Assurances. Albion. I Alfred Life Alliance Brit. and For Ditto Marine ..... Atlas Birmingham Fire British Fire I British Commercial I Cler. Med. & Gen. Life I County I Eagle Economic Life ...... I European Life Ditto New Freemasons Globe ...... I Hope Life Ditto Fire. ..... Imperial Fire. IDitto Life... Indemnity Marine. ' Law Life Legal and General Life London Ditto Ship National Loan Fund Palladium Life Protector Life Provident Life Rock Life R yal Exchange &in Fire Ditto Life............ University Life Universal Life. .... Union Fire and Life Joint Stk Banks Australasi,... ...... Ditto New Brit. North American Commercial of London Colonial London & Westminstr Ditto New............ London Joint Stock Metropolitan Provincial of Ireland Ditto New National of Ireland..... Nat. Provincial Englnd Ditto New Gloucestershire Union of Australia Union of London Gaslight 6. Coke Bath British Ditto Previncial Birmingham Birming. & Staffordsh Bristol Brighton ..... Ditto General City of London Ditto New Continental Congolid Ditto New..... Equitable. Imperial Isle of Thanet ..... Independent ...... Phoenix Batelle: ......... South Metropolitan United General,,,.,„ Weatmins. Chartered Ditto New .......... Water Works. Birmingham East London Grand Junction — v . —ay Kent .... ...... Nw Riv Lon. Bxidg An Manchester and Salford Vauxhall, late S. Lond. West Middlesex......ax Yrk Buldg Co.Les.Prop Iron Railways. Birmingham & Derby Birmieg. & Gloucester Bristol and Exeter Cheltenhm & Gt. West Clarence Eastern Counties Edinburgh & Glasgow Ditto New. Grand Junction Greet North of Egine! Great Western Ditto Half Shares Ditto Fifths ....... ..... Hull and Selby ...... Leedi and Selby ...... . Liverpool & Manches tr Ditto Half-Shares....., Ditto Quarter-Shares Loudon and Brighton.. Ditto Loan Notes London and Blackwell London and Greenwich London and Birmingh. Ditto Quarter-Shares Ditto' hirds London and S. Western London and Croydon Manchester and Leeds Ditto New Shares Manchetr and Birming Ditto Extension Midland Counties North Midland Do. 34-Sh., isa. 10 dis. Northern and Eastern Ditto Scrip, iss.sl. dis Paris and Rouen Stockt 'n & Darlington South East. and Dover Ditto New, iss. 25 dis. York and N. Midland Ditto New Shares linos. Albion Copper Alten Ariglo Mex., iss.sl. p.m Ditto Subscription..... Bolanos DIM) Scrip Brazil. Imp. iss.sl. p.m Do. Mecaub. & Coc. U. Do. St. John Del Rey British Iron ........ C,andonsa. Ditto Registered Cobre Copper Copiapo Columbian, its. 54 p.m General Mining Hibernian , Imperial Slate Compy Mexican Mibing Co. of Ireland Real del Monte, Unreg Ditto Loan Notes lihymney Iron Ilantwo de Cuba United Mex., iss.2l. pm Ditto scrip Ditto New 5crip.....,.. 150 IS 0 250 20 0 100 0 20 0 s. d: 97 18 0 us 0 0 100 0 0 150 0 0i 2 a. d. - 17 100 0 0 1. 41 13 4 3] leo - O 0 too 0 0 - 02, All paid 10/. Si. Ws. 11. 41, 34.41' cent. S per cent. 4 per cent. 4 per cent. Si. 100. 5 per cent. 5 per cent. ai per cent. 4 per cent. 4 per cent. lit par cent. 11. 07. Scl. 18s. Id. per cent. 11. is. 1 108. 4 per cent. e per cent. 03 per cent. 138.6 d. pr sh U. 38. 4 per cent. It per share 5 per cent. 5 per soot./ & 30$. bds. j 5% per cent. 53i, per cent. per cent. 6 per cent. 5 per sent. 25. 6.1. 12 per cent 'l9B. 11. sti7l, bds. 14 si. 10a. 'loe. 5 per cent. 5 per cent. 6 per cent. IL Se. 1 per cent. 6S per cent. IL 4s, I per cent. 10% per cent 51. 8 per cent 8 per cent. 3 per cent. 3 per cent. 0 per cent. 0 per cent. Y per oent V per cent. d per cent, fits per share Oa. per share 10 per Cent. 5 per sent. leg. 11. Ss. 11. 7s. 5L and bs. 4j 1. and bs. Jo per cent. 4 per coat. SI Pei lb 315. p er .h 6 per cent. 5 per cent. - 6 per cent. b per rent, per cent. 11% per cent • 184. 24 104. IL 104. 24 108. toper cast. 41. 16s. 14 14a. 10s. per sh 11. 4s. 4 per cent. W. 10s. Ss. per id. Si. Ss. per sh 'ls lad per Rh 10 per cent. 236 per cent. Ds. per sh 2361. per sh. 12s. per sh. 4 per cent. 20 per cent. Je per cent. 10 per cent. 1)0. per sh 101. per ch. 11. 14a. 21. per share .3s4d per sh 81.175. pr sh /13s per sh 1/. 11. 101. 11. 51. 'l3O. U. 111. 10d. 36percent. per cent. per oeat. 0 per cent. 11. 14 IL 17.. Od. .... i • 10a. lOpeTcent. 10a. per ah. 11. 104 per sh. I/. 4s. 14 15.. (per cent. per cent. per cent. Viet. And/ he AA. bs. fpor cent. Sper cent. 634 per cent eper cent. LIST OP SCOTTISH COMPANIES' PRICES JAN. 3, 1844. Bank of Soetland Royal Bank British Linen Compny Commercial Bank Glasgow Union Bask Western Bank ...... Central Bk. of &ottani Caledonian Insurance.. , Hercules Insurance ' North Brit. Insurance Insurance Co. of Soot!. Edinburgh Life Insur. Scottish Union Inman.. I Standard Life Insur Dalkeith Railway Edin. and Glas. Railwy luzind Given. Rail. 411 d Apix 11411, (per cent. (per cent. &per cent. t per cent. 'der cent. (per cant (per cent. Eper cent. 'per Gent. 9 per cent. , tper cent (per cent. (per cent (per lent. SA pee cent. par COW t. 164% 163 220 164 1 /0 0 0 I 10 0 0 I lig 10 0 0 10% 10 0 0 I 8% 112 10 0 11k "0 0 J 2 10 0 50 50 25 0 0 14 24 9 D 22 - 33 16 85 0 115 0 150 0 12 10 140 0 125 0 145 0 79 9 100 0 46 9 50 0 19 5 100 0 100 0 78 8 B 7 10 16 -6 110 0 100 0 0 Stock Stock 147 9 0 Stock .50 0 0 50 0 0 63 2 3 50 0 0 109 0 0 70 10 3 500 0 0 25 0 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 50 0 0 250 0 0 250 0 0 50 0 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 50 0 0 1000 0 0 20 e 0 '2O 0 0 20 0 0 Stock 100 0 0 25 0 0 25 0 0 500 0 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 50 0 0 25 0 0 25 0 0 20 0 0 50 0 0 20 0 0 100 0 0 5 0 0 Stock I 100 0 0 100 0 0 200 0 0 44 0 0 be o 0 100 0 0 100 • 0 100 • 0 50 0 0 25 0 0 100 0 0 10 0 0 50 0 0 100 0 • 20 0 0 50 0 0 25 0 0 50 0 0 2000 40 0 0 20 0 0 77 10 0 50 0 0 20 0 0 20 0 0 20 0 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 75 0 0 50 0 0 50 0 0 50 0 0 25 0 0 30 0 0 50 0 0 1 100 0 0 50 0 0 50 0 0 50 0 0 50 0 • 2.5 0 0 100 0 0 41 13 4 190 0 0 XO . O 100 0 0 69 12 9 100 0 0 100 • 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 25 0 0 50 0 0 12 10 100 0 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 50 0 0 20 0 0 50 0 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 50 0 0 25 0 0 50 0 0 10 0 0 10 13 4 12 15 4 100 0 0 32 0 41 6 10 13 15 9 100 0 0 50 0 0 70 0 70 0 100 0 0 I 100 0 50 0 50 0 50 0 . 20 0. 100 0 W 25 50 0 j 0 i 50 0 4 25 0 15 0 0I 1310 100 0 0 IEO 0 25 0 150 0 21 0 25 0 15 0 75 0 7 10 7 10 40 0 13 0 55 0 20 0 6000 4 0 0 0 50 0 0 5 0 0 11 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 55 0 0 50 0 0 5 0 0 2 10 0 10 0 0 5 0 0 250 0 0 4( All paid 1 2 0 0 11. 3 0 0 341 10 0 2 10 012 2 10 ( , J 50 0 0 IS 10 0 0 1, 5 13 0 31 10 0 0 4 2 0 0 12 10 0 11 12 10 0 11 210 0 2 0 0 , .10s 1 0 0 18s 10 0 0 10 0 0 4 5 0 0 6 5 0 20 0 0 • 0 4• O 0 4. O 0 4( O 0 13( O 0 11 O 0 2. O 0 O 0 1S 10 0 O 0 4‘. - 1F 10 0 12 O 0 39 O 0 s O 0 O 0 1 Si O 0 1( O 0 2 O 0 2 U 0 2 50 0 0 20 0 0 ! 100 0 0 75 0 0 15i 62 10 0 13. 28 0 0 a 50 8 0 6' 50 9 0 81 20 0 0 '2 30 0 0 6( 39 0 0 3: 80 0 0 7( 25 0 0 21 49 0 0 10 0 0 25 0 % -~-*r O 0 5 O 0 i 6 O 0 j 6 O 0 2 O 0 O 6 1' O 0 10 0 1. O 0 20 0 0 a O 0 o 0 Bf • 0 If O 54 0 0 O 0 i 21: O 0 o'o O 0 41 O 01 11 100 0 01231 2 0 01 21 W 0 01 4 f 15 70 0 0 I 10, 30 0 0 45 40 0 0 7 0 5 100 0 0 ioe 0 0 i 6) 40 • 0 ! 45 0 ! 15 0 0 : 2: . 20 0 0 j 166 50 0 0 25 0 0 I 50 0 0' 141 20 0 0' 5 Or 0r 5 Oj 0, 3 Oi 6 o ' r. f2O 0 e 55 e 0 20 • • so—o ie 16 10 0 0 3 0 60 0 0 59 0 25 0 0 7 0 150 0 50 0 0 50 0 25 0 0 10 0 40 0 0 , 40 0 210 75 0 0' - 11 100 0 0 100 0 0 7 25 0 0 -5; - 100 0 0 t 15 10 0 • 13 30 0 0 ' 13 35 10 0 9 32 10 0 38 —1% 3 0 0 03 14 0 0 20 1 5 1 0 0 0 0 1 30 e pin 3 0 01 4 75 • 0 7 0 0 ' 4 1 2 500 . 50 0 150 10 0 100 0 50 100 o 100 - 0 0 15 0 • 5 9 0 5 0 0 10 0 10 0 C 100 0 25 0 be 0 20 0 U 40 o o i Ea% o o f 10,5 12 00 O 0 5 f4 O o 4, 0 ► 11 e 1 I THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENI NG, JANUARY 16, 1844. this be not a stigma on the body in whose praise he is so fervent, we know not what is. For the rest, the falsehoods he reiterated with so much volubi lity have been so frequently refuted that it would be worse than absurd to travel over the same ground again. Truth, instead of coming " mended from his tongue," always .requires a great deal of "mending" after he has meddled with it. There is hardly a " fact," great or " little," indeed, to which he professes to refer in his Saturday's salmagundi, which has not been either wholly falsified, or grossly distorted to suit the purposes of the moment. THE LONDON GAZETTE (THIS EVENING.) JOHN KIDD, grocer, Kendal, Westmoreland. JOHN HARWOOD and FREDERICK HARWOOD, stationers, Fenchurch-street, City. BANKRUPTS. R. S. Taylor, veterinary surgeon, Sheffield. E. Chapman, policeman, Little Albany -street North, Regent's Park. R. J. Reynolds, commiasion agent, Queen's-row,Pimlico M. Grist, livery stablekeeper, Portsea. 1). Thorne. farmer, Brentwood and Shenfield, Essex. T. Parker, grocer, Leicester. J. Saudbach, book-keeper, Edge-hill, Lancashire. T. 'Wroe, grocer, Dudley, Worcestershire. H. Webb, carpenter, Medina-place, Westminster-road. T. Marsden, licensed victualler, Hampstead. C. M. Brand, milliner, Duke-street, Manchester-square H. Clark, horse-dealer, Drummond -street, Euston-sq R. Mostyn, farmer, Amlwch, Anglesey. W. Dorlin, Fordham, Essex. J. Samuels, grocer, Kent-street, Southwark. T. Heath, engraver, Holywell-street, Strand. W. Wilks, vessel hawler, Leamonroyd-lock, Yorkshire C. Armitage, engraver, Sheffield. J. Thompson, veterinary surgeon, Boroughbridge. A. Wedd, livery-stable-keeper, Queen's-row, Pimlico. J. Fox, warehouseman, Manchester. T. Loverock, licensed victualler, Dudley,Worcestershire. J. Patchett, wire drawer, Manchester. W. Dobbin, superannuated clerk, Arundel-street, Strand. H. Delf, Upper Stamford-street. J. Bingham, laundress, Hawley-crescent, Camden-town. J. Simpson, oilman, Grosvenor-row, Pimlico. E. Casement, carpenter, West-street, Bermonsey. A. W. Shaw, landing-waiter, Stratford-le-Bow. F. Shaw, barm dealer, Rotherham, Yorkshire. J. Walker, table-knife manufacturer, Sheffield. J. B. Crafter, jeweller, Portsmouth. W. Franklin, Blacksmith, Bedford. M. Mackintosh, carpenter, Lower Crown-st., Westminst. C. F. Krafft, fishmonger, Edgeware-road. T. Pearson, jun., coal-dealer, Toxteth-park, Liverpool. J. Younge, plumber, Fincham, Norfolk. J. Baxter, clothier, Almondbury, Yorkshire. B. Rhodes, cloth maker, Calverley, Yorkshire. W. A. King, clerk to a ship builder, Rotherhithe. J. Senior, beer seller, Thornhill, Yorkshire. M. Barnet, watchmaker, Swan-street, Minories. J. Whitaker, beer seller, Halifax, Yorkshire. W. Williams, tinman, Llanrwst, Denbighshire. J. E. Oliver, organist, Queen's-road, Bayswater. E. Hawkes, bookseller, Church-street, St. Luke, Chelsea. R. Stevens, butcher, Worcester. J. Sykes, weaver, Huddersfield. H. Ellston, toll collector, New Accrington, Lancashire. W. Hollis, lieutenant in the E.I.C. service, Sussex-street, Old Brompton. J. S. Hulme, commercial clerk, Bloomsbury. C. Blenkin, farmer, Otteringham, Yorkshire. W. T. Ashton, decorative gilder, Sherrard street, Golden-square. W. Hughes, tailor, Took's-court, Cursitor-street. M. Brook, grocer, Halifax, Yorkshire. T. Thompson, Barnard Castle, Durham. W. Cock, jun., bookbinder, Maidstone, Kent. IL P. Wright, hair dresser, Great Surrey -street. G. Salter, boatman, Tipton, Staffordshire. SECOND NOTICES. F. F. Davis, Lymington, Southampton, Jan. 22, at half-past two, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Turquand, official assignee. W. Swain, farmer, Hitchin, Hertfordshire, Jan. 22, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Graham, official assignee. F. Finnemore, Great College-street, Camden-town, Jan. 22, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Tur quand, official assignee. J. P. Fryer, licensed victualler, Montpelier-row, Old Brampton, Jan. 22, at half-past twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Turquand, official assignee. R. Pitcher, sen., toll-collector, Paris-street, Lambeth, Jan. 22, at half-past eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Turquand, official-assignee. J. B. Ash, carpenter, High Holborn, Jan. 27, at half-past one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Groome, official assignee. M. Moses, furrier, Staining-lane, Wood-street, City, Jan. 27, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Edwards, official assignee. %V. L. Martin, corn dealer, Kew House-road, Rich mond, Jan. 24, at eleven,• at the Court of Bankruptcy. Johnson, official assignee. J. Belben, cattle dealer, Newton, Dorsetshire, Jan. 24, at half-past eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Lack ington, Coleman-street-buildings, official assignee. H. Castle, linen draper, Tranquil-vale, Blackheath, Jan. 24, at three, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Johnson, Basinghall-street, official assignee. W. Eveleigh, commission agent, Dalston, Middlesex, Jan. 24, at two, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Lacking ton, official assignee. J. Couch, saddler, St. Erth Praze, Cornwall, Jan. 25, at eleven, at the Exeter District Court. Hirtzel, official assignee. W. Hancock, attorney, North Curry, Somersetshire. Feb. 20, at twelve, at the Exeter District Court. Herna m an, official assignee. T. Lamping, plumber, Tavistock, Devonshire, Jan. 25, at twelve, at the Exeter District Court. Hirtzel, official assignee. W. Jones, mariner, Hamilton-street, Woodside, Cheshire, Jan. '22, at.twelve, at the Liverpool District Court. Bird, official assignee. J. Brook, hatter, Holmfirth, Yorkshire, Jan. 22, at eleven, at the Leeds district Court. Young, official as- • signee. 4.0 J. Holroyd, Mill Thom, Halifax, Jan. 22, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Young, official assignee. S. Wright, stone dealer, Kilnwick, Yorkshire, Jan. 20, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Fearne, official assignee. A. Pinder, clothier, Kirldourton, Jan. 20, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Hope, official assignee. W. Hammerton, wire worker, Huddersfield, Jan. 22, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Young, official assignee. T. Ridler, builder, Gloucester, :Jan. 23, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court. Miller, official assignee. J. Hignett, tobacconist, Liverpool, Jan. 23rd, at the Liverpool District Court. Bird, official assignee. COURSE OF EXCHA Amsterdam CF. 12 6 , Ditto, at sight Rotterdam ...2 U. 12 64 Antwerp :26 0 Hamburgh M B. 13 15 Altona Paris, 3 days' sight 25 75 Ditto, 3 months 25 95 Marseilles Bourdeaux 26 5 Frankfort on Maine 122 Petersbutgh, 3 Us._ 3611 Berlin... Vienna, effec. 11. 3 M 959 Trieste, ditto lO 0 Madrid ......... Cadiz Bilbao Barcelona Seville ....... 36 ~.VGE.—c THIS DAY.) ,Gibraltar .. 'Leghorn ... .. 30 90 Genoa Milan Venice 47 Naples 394 Palermo, per oz 118 f I isbon Oporto 62i Rio Janeiro 23 Bahia (Buenos Ayres ...... New York, 21 days sight 46i Philadelphia PRICES OF BULLION, PER oz. Foreign Gold, bars X 3 17 9 Portugal Gold Coln.. 3 17 5 New Doubloons 0 0 0 New Dollars... 0 4 9g Silver in Bars 0 4 11i • IscomE-TAx.—Persons claiming allowance for empty property, for the year ending the sth of April last, are required to make their claims on or before the first of February next, or they will not be allowed. ADMIRALTY, JAN. 8, 1844. This day, in pursuance of her Majesty's pleasure, Sir James Hawkins Whitshed, Bart., G.C.8., Admiral of the Red, has been promoted to the rank of Admiral of the Fleet. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of Kincardine shire.—Lieut.-Col. Wm. Fraser, to be Deputy-Lieute nant, Nov. 20, 1835. Commission signed by the Vice-Lieutenant of Essex. —East Essex Regular Militia—H. Eustace, Gent„ to be ensign, Dec. 28, 1843. WHITEHALL, JAN. 11. The Lord Chancellor has appointed George Hamilton Verity, of Bridgend, in the county of Glamorgan, Gept., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. BANKRUPTCIES SUPERSEDED. JAMES PIGGOTT, jun., cabinet maker, Richmond, Surrey, to surrender, Jan. 26, at eleven, and March I, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Alsager, official assignee, Birchin-lane ; Brown, Marten, and Thomas, Commercial-chambers, Mincing-lane. MOSES JAMES DYKE, innkeeper, Romsey, Hamp shire, Jan. 23, at half-past one, and Feb. 22, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Graham, official assignee, Coleman-street ; Curtis, Romsey ; Bower and Co., Chancery-lane. WILLIAM BROMLEY, scrivener, Gray's Inn-square, Jan. 26 and Feb. 29, at eleven, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Turquand, official assignee, Old Jewry-cham bers ; Wilde, Rees, and Co., College-hill. C tIARLES STEWART SWEENY, apothecary, Albion-place, Hyde-park-square, Jan. 26, at two, and Feb. 27, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Follett, official assignee, Basinghall-street ; Mawe, New Bridge street. HENRY SLESINGER and JOSEPH SLESINGER, earehousemen, Cateaton-street, City, Jan. 30, at two, and Feb. 23, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Edwards, official assignee, Frederick's-place, Old Jewry; Spyer, Broad-street-buildings, City. EDWARD HODSON, linen-draper, Thrapston, Northamptonshire, Jan. 23, at half-past eleven, and Feb. 28, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Johnson, official assignee, Basinghall-street ; Sole, Alderman liury, London. WILLIAM BAKER, surgeon, Lower Grosvenor street, Bond-street, Jan. 24, and Feb. 28, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Johnson, official assignee, Ba singhall-street; Lloyd, Great James-street, Bedford-row. JOHN CHAMBERLAIN KNILL, tailor, Glou- Cester, Jan. 31, at half-past one, and Feb. 27, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court. Hutton, official assignee, Bristol ; Smallridge, Gloucester. GEORGE PHILLIPS, dealer, Leicester, Jan. 27, at eleven, and Feb. 24, at half-past eleven, at the Birming ham District Court. Bittleston, official assignee, Bir mingham ; Henderson, Mansell-street, Goodman's-fields . NOTICES OF INSOLVENCY. IRELAND. THE STATE TRIALS. (BY EXPRESS.) DUBLIN, MONDAY, JAN. 15. It was evident, at an early hour this morning, that something of importance was to be enacted in Dublin. Few persons awoke whose first thought was not " the State Trials commence to-day." Long before the hour appointed for their commencement, namely, 10 o'clock, gfoups of persons were to be seen standing along the line from Mr. O'Con nell's house in Merrion-square, to the Four Courts, those places being the two centres of attraction. It was reported that Mr. O'Con nell would proceed " in State," to the Four Courts, in the Corporation carriage ; but if such an idea was ever entertained, it was, we think, wisely abandoned. The Hon. Gentleman was, however, ac companied by the Lord Mayor (Mr. O'Brien), dressed in his official robes, and by several other members of the Corporation. Mr. O'Connell rode in the Lord Mayor's private carriage. The moment the Hon. Gentleman made his appearance outside his own door, there was a general and hearty outburst of popular feeling manifested in his favour by the multitudes assembled, which was kept up, with out any intermission, till he arrived in the Four Courts. The enthusiasm of the people was most ardent and warm, and good wishes and prayers for his triumph were expressed from many a devoted heart. When the Hon. Gentleman arrived at the place of trial the cheering was very great in deed. He seemed in excellent health and spirits, and passed with a lighter and more hurried step than usual through the hall of the Court. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. MONDAY, JAN. 15. THE QUEEN V. D. O'CONNELL AND OTHERS. Had this Court been of ten times the size it is, it would have been filled to overflowing. When its very limited dimensions are considered, and the important trial which was about to commence in it, the anxiety to obtain a place to witness the opening of the case against the traversers may be imagined. The number of barristers in attendance was extra- ordinary ; they alone occupied the body of the Court. The gallery fronting the Bench was filled with spectators admitted by tickets. There were some, but not many ladies among them. The entrance of the jury some time before the Judges took their seats, excited some attention, and the mem bers of it appeared to be regarded with considerable curiosity, in which probably some speculations as to the probable duration of their labour largely mingled. Their box was to the right of the Bench. The box immediately opposite, that of the County Grand jury, was appropriated to the reporters of the London and Dublin journals ; the large number of these gentle men requiring accommodation in the very limited space available, might have caused consi deraable difficulty and embarrassment, but for the admirable arrangements made by the High Sheriff, Latouche, Esq., to whom the whole of the press are deeply indebted. The Judges took their seat at 10 o'clock, and the crier was ordered to call the traversers. On the name of the Rev. Mr. Tyrell being called, Mr. CANTWELL, his solicitor, rose, and with a voice of considerable emotion, said,—" My Lords' the reverend defendant has been summoned before, another judgment seat, and his soul and body are now alike beyond the power of this Court." The Counsel for the Crown took their seats first they were the Attorney-General, the Solicitor- General, Mr. Brewster, Q. C., Mr. Martley, Q. C., Mr. Freeman, Q. C., Sir Thomas Staples, Q. C., Mr. Bennett, Q. C., Sergeant Warren, Mr. Tombe, Q. C., Mr. Holmes, Mr. Smyley, and Mr. Napier. The briefs of these gentlemen were printed ones, and of immense bulk. The Counsel for the traversers were Mr. Moore, Q.C., Mr. Fitzgibbon, Q.C., Mr. Whiteside, Q.C., Mr Monaghan, Q.C., Mr. Macdonough, Q.C., Mr Q.C., Mr. Henn, Q.C., Mr. Sheil, M.P. and QC., Mr. Pigott, Q.C., Mr. Close, Sir Colman O'Loughlin, Mr. Perrin, and Mr. O'Hea. In the interval before calling the jury, some little laughter was excited by Mr. Ford, the solicitor for the traversers, causing the chair for the witnesses, which had been fixed on the table on a revolving pedestal, to be removed. He said the counsel for the defendants must see the face of the witnesses, and the further off they stood the louder they would speak. The CHIEF JUSTICE asked if the chair had not been placed as a kind of fixture ?—(Laughter.) His Lordship was assured by the officer of the Court that it could be easily removed. The LORD CHIEF Jos-Luz—Oh, no motion need be made about it yet.—(Laughter.) One of the jurors, Mr. Ben. Eaton, then appli e d t o attendance, on the had not strength to he had should the t r i a l g t hr sustaineouCn d o uhoriftmi tlthrough x; the c s e e said f td r e o nh m d be a long one, in consequence of an injury he had re ceived from a fall from a scaffolding in front of his own house. The CHIEF JUSTICE told biz: be had better wait till the traversers came into Court. An interval of time passed, during which there was no busines, the traversers not having appeared. The CHIEF JUSTICE at last reminded Mr. Ford that the public time was consumin g . The Traversers were ag ai n called, and Mr. Ste e le, 3lr.Tiernev, and Mr. Duff y, answered to their names. PROCLAMATION OF THE JURY. Proclamation of the Jury was thea made, which proved the commencement of a series of appli cations for exemption. A Mr. James Pap worth, stated that he was misdescribed his name not being James. A M r , J ames Hamilton made the same plea, his name being Joseph, not James.—(Laughter.) For several names sick certi cafes were put in from their medical attendants. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL applied to have Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Papworth called to answer to their aonfysomli if such per s ons existed : misdirection that could be dealt with hereafter. o n f a m c o e u s rs ;u e n i d f e t r h e a r P e They were called, and answered, but still stated e w n a e l r t e y that their names were wrongly given. Mr. Pap worth said that his name was Collins Papworth, not James. Affidavits and certificates, put in on behalf of those totally unable to attend, were put in and read, and the several exemptions granted. The traversers were called a third time, and all answered. They sat at the side bar immediately beneath the Reporters' box, with the exception of Mr. O'Connell, who wore his wig and gown, and sat with his counsel in the Queen's counsel seat. The Clerk of the Crown then informed the tra versers that the jury were about to be sworn on the issue, and directed the book to be handed to Mr. J. Hamilton. Mr. Moor rose, and on behalf of the traversers applied to have proof of the service of the summonses on those whose names had been called, but who had not appeared. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said—Mr. Attorney- General, you hear the application of Mr. Moore ? The ATTORNEY.-GENERAD--I have no objection, my Lord. David Ireland was then called and sworn. He served the summonses on the gentlemen on the list of the jury. He served the summons on Mr. Papworth on the sth of January, at an office, 106, Marlborough street. Mr. Moouu—Did you know his person ? Witness I did not. By the direction of the Court the witness looked at the gentlemen in the jury -box, and identified Mr. Papworth, as the gentleman standing " with hi back to the; door."—(Laughter.) He also stated that he only knew his residence from the summons itself. Wben he signed it the gentleman told him he was not Mr. James Papworth. That was the only ser vice he made. He also proved serving a summons on Mr. Hamilton, at 15, Chamber-street ; he dic not know his person. In both ases he served the sum- mons at the residence of the parties. No questions were put to the witness by the Coun sel for the Crown. THE CHALLENGE OF THE ARRAY. The Clerk of the Crown then called Mr. J. Hamil ton to be sworn as a juror ; but before the book could be banded to him, Sir COLMAN O'LOUGHLIN rose, and on the part of Mr. Daniel O'Connell put in a challenge of the array of the whole panel. He did not make any address, but at once proceeded to read the challenge which was of considerable length, and in the usual legal form. It set forth that the defendant, Mr. Daniel O'Con nell, put in this challenge of the array of the jury, on his own behalf, because that a list of the persons qualified to serve as jurors was prepared and presented to the Recorder at the special sessions for the county and city of Dublin, and duly signed by him ; but that the Recorder did not according to the enactment in that case, made and provided, deliver in a 'general list of such jurors, in the order the statute directs, but that on the contrary, he omitted so to do ; and that the said Daniel O'Connell asserts that the paper puporting to contain the names of such jurors was illegally and fraudulently made by some person or persons unknown ; and that the said paper did not contain the names of ALL the persons quali fied to serve on the jury, and whose qualification had been allowed by the Recorder, but from it had been omitted the names of fifty-nine persons whose qualifications had been so allowed. (The names were given : twenty-seven of them are understood to be Catholics.) The challenge also stated, that at the time the fraudulent writing was returned the persons so omitted were, and still are, resident in the city of Dublin, and duly qualified to be piaced on the list ; it also asserted that from the said writing, purporting to be a list of the jurors, a bock was prepared, and from the said book was made up the list of the special jury for the year 1844, and that the persons so omitted in the writing were also passed over in the Jury Book. Thechallenge then stated Mr. O'Connell's protest against and chal lenge of the legality of the jury panel, for these rea sons—it being falsified by the omissions above stated. Sir COLMAN °To - coin:lN said that similar chal lenges were being prepared for each of the other tra versers, but that they were not yet ready. The document was handed to the Attorney-Gene ral, who for some time appeared to scrutinise it very earnestly. Sir C. O ' LOUGHLIN said the other challenges would be identically the same in form, and stated that they might all be considered then, pro forma, though they were not yet completely drawn up. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that he had not seen the challenge till then—he had not heard of it, and was not aware that it was about to be made. He therefore asked the Court to allow the Counsel for the Crown a short time to consider it. He should expect, if all the challenges were to be considered to gether, that they should also all be disposed of at the same time. The CHIEF JUSTICE—Have you a copy of the Act of Parliament, Sir Colman ? Sir COLMAN 0'1;01161mm replied in the affirma tive. The Crown lawyers then quitted the Court to gether for the purpose of consulting together, and the proceedings of the Court were for a considerable time suspended. The Counsel for the Crown and traversers having returned to the Court, after an absence of two hours, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said—l wish the other challenges to be handed in. Mr. MOORE, on the part of the traversers, put it to the Court whether the other traververs were bound to put their challenges at the present moment. The traversers were there perfectly separate and distinct, appearing by separate and distinct solicitors, separate and distinct counsel. The counsel for one of the traversers, Sir C. O'Loughlin, had put in a challenge to the array on the part of his client, and he (Mr. Moore) submitted that the Attorne3-General had no right to ask that other challenges should be put in before that already put in was disposed of by the Court. CHIEF JUSTICE—That would be shifting your ground ccdsiderably, Mr. Moore. It was mentioned for the other traversers that they only wanted time to prepare similar challenges. Mr. MOORE—If that was done I do not think that I ought to proceed any further in the matter. CHIEF JUSTICE—That was done in open Court. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL---It may' be proper to enter a suggestion on the record respecting the death of the Rev. Mr. Tyrrell. His name having been included in the indictment, the proper course would be to enter a suggestion on the record, to say that he is dead. CHIEF JUSTICE—That has been stated by the gentleman who was his solicitor. A pause of considerable ;length having here takon place in the proceedings, in consequence of several challenges not being yet ready. The CHIEF JUSTICE observed that there was much time consumed in the preparation of them. Sir C. O ' LOUGHLIN_-They are all engrossed, my Lord, and will be ready in a few minutes. They are now being compared. CHIEF JUSTICE—You ought to have come into Court prepared with them all. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL--I cannot understand the course adopted. In all those cases there might as well have been joint challenges as separate ones. Mr. PIERCE MAHONY, one of the traversers solici tors, observed, they would be ;ready and in Court in less than five minutes.—(Lattighter.) The different challenges on the part of the other traversers were then handed in after some time. Mr. O'Connell—They are signed by counsel, I suppose. Mr. Ford, solicitor for the txaversers—They are. The ATTORNEY-GUN -I wish to see them. The challenges were then b; ended to the Learned Gentleman. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL th en rose to support the demurrer which had been put in on behalf of the Crown. The argument adopted by the Learned Gentleman was that the challenges put in contained no averment. There was no averment that the Recorder had not made out a list from the general list accord ing to the respective qualifications of the parties, and there was no allegation that the Recorder, or any persons connected with him, h ad been guilty of fraud with regard to the omission , )f the names , from the list. There was no averment - that he did not hand over the list so made out to the Clerk of the Peace. There was no averment that the Clerk of the Peace did not make out a proper list from the general list. There was no averment that the High Sheriff did not receive the ?jury list, and that I e did not make out the special jury list from the 717 names there was no averment that the jury was n oil: properly struck and balloted for from the special jury list. There was no allegation of fraud, contrivance, or design on the part of the Crown, or the Sheriff, or the Recorder, or the Clerk of the Peace, or with rev trcl to any person con- nected with them. Under the )se circumstances, he trusted the Court would not allorw the challenges put in on the part of the tr uversers. It was to be presumed prima facie that: the public officers had performed their duty, and all there was no dis tinct averment in them, the Court, he hoped, would not allow them to retard this ca u:3e, which was now ripe for trial. It was absurd to suppose that the entire proceedings should be rendered ntxlll because a name might be omitted from the list by some person who was not known. The Crown waF5 as anxious as the taversers possibly could be to make out the guilty person. He contended 011 the authority of a case in 4th Barnwall and Alderson, that - a challenge to the array would no .lie in such a case. Under these circumstances he trus to d the Court would be of opinion that the demurrer they took to the several challenges ought to allo wed, and that the trial ought be permitted to proceedL. Sir C. OIOUGHLEN replied (3,11 the part of the traverses, and quoted Hayes and I)ickenson's Text- book, Bacon's Abridgment. the cal.:;e of the King v, Johnson, and the case of the King and Nolan in Hudson and Brooke, 164, to show that a challenge :o the array would be in a special jury case. With regard to what the Learned Atton ley-General prin cipally relied on, namely, that there was no aver ment, the fact was, that there was as distinct an averment, as it was possible to make. They dis- tinctly attributed fraud with regard' to the jury list, and the omission of certain n; =es from it to some person, but who was the precise person on whom to fix that fraud, it was irripussible for them to say. This fraud must have been committed before the list came into the hands of the Sheriff. The ATTORNEY GENERAL did not etare to deny that the special list was illegally and fr audulently made out. They distinctly avowed that no general list was made out ; that no general list was hay WO to the clerk of the peace, and that the Recorder neg:ected to do so. The Learned Gentleman then went on to read from the chal lenge to show that the averments had been made as dis tinctly as possible, and in fact in the very words of the statute. He did not think the Crown ought to press the trial under such circumstances. It was no objection to say that the guilty person could be punished for omitting the names ; for what satis faction was that to a person found guilty, it may be, of a capital offence ? Mr. FITZGIBBON argued on the same side with Sir Coleman O'Loughlin. He said, the real question in the case was, whether the list was a good one, and he would undertake to show it was not. The,Legis lature was most precise in the language it used with regard to there being a proper list. But for this list what had been substituted ? The traversers had not shrunk from placing on their challenge an averment that they were no parties to the fraud which had occasioned the omission. The whole argument of the At torney-General amounted to this—that some in dividual had been dexterous enough to filch from the desk of the Recorder the list of the jurors, and to decimate the whole of them, for the omission of 59 names amounted to about a tithe of the number ; and that if any person had done this he ought to be punished and that he (the Attorney-General) would assist in doing so. He would assume. that it was the Recor der's footman who had done this; but did that make the Recorder's conduct more legal or proper ? The law said that the Recorder should make out, or cause to be made out, a list comprehending allthe names qual fled to be placed upon it. Had he caused this to be done ? The answer was plrin and evident that he had not. The traversers, there:ore, objected to be tried by a jury so fraudulently constructed. If he could suppose—what, perhaps, it was difficult to sup pose—a Crown prosecutor desirous of doing justice, and justice only, he would have been careful that not one of his steps towards hunting a fellow. subject into a prison should be tainted by illegality and fraud ? Would he not gladly have embraced the opportunity now offered of correcting this error ? It was not too late ; it might be easily accomplished. They had only to have • adjourned the Court till to-morrow, and in the mean time to have made inquiries of the Recorder if the 59 persons were duly qualified; and if they were shown to be so, they have said let the 59 names be put into the box again, and the jury drawn with them. The omission would thus have been supplied. He knew that every public offieer must be presumed to have done his duty till the contrary was proved. Was the contrary proved in this instance ? He contended that the grossest negligence had been proved against him, and yet they were asked to presume that he had done. his duty ? It was one of the first prin ciples of law, that fraud vitiated everything. It would vitiate a judgment of their Lordships—it would vitiate a judgment of the House of Lords. But in nothing ought fraud to be more guarded against than in the preparation of the ;list of those who were to pronounce on the guilt or innocence of a fellow-man. They had heard a great deal"of the mischief of delaying justice. He agreed as to the mischief of delaying justice but there was a very great advantage in delaying injustice. He denied what had been asserted, that the list of jurors for 1844 was to be taken froM the list of 1843. The Attorney-General had not pointed out one defect or failure in the averments of the challenge. Hs asserted that there was no aver ment that the Recorder did not hand in a list ; tainly there was not; but there was an averment that he handed in an illegal list. Had the chal lenge denied that a list was handed in at 'all they would have immediately been met by a question of fact, and full proof would have been given that a list was furnished. He contended also that the legislature gave full powers to rectify the iiat if any errors had been committed in drawing it up. And were they to have no remedy ? Why, there were there was given the power to challenge the 'array at all ! He did not cast one single imputation on the integrity of any one of the twenty-four gentlemen who had been selected. He was against the whole principle on which the panel had been constructed, and the legality of it as constructed. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL then rose. In corn tnencing his address, he regretted that his Learned young Friend has, from inadvertence, used the ex pression of a "packed jury." Such expressions went abroad, and produced an imputation most injurious, although they were groundless and unwarrantable. He then proceeded to the question of the challenge, the legality of which he supported, on the ground that there was a difference between the challenge of a jury on the ground of a want of impartiality on the part of the Sheriff, and the challenge of a jury where no such partiality was alleged against him. He quoted several cases and reports, to prove the inconveniences of allowing the challenge in such cases. He also strongly condemned the harsh terms which had been applied to the conduct of the Recorder, who was not be'ere the Court, was unrepresented by counsel, and could not reply to the aspersions. He then proceeded to notice the legal consequences of that alleged misconduct, and restated the argument of the Attorney-General, that certain averments which ought to have been made in the challenge, in order to support it, were not inserted. He argned also that, even allowing that the Recorder had been guilty of negligence the consequences of that negligence amounted only to this, that the list was not so perfect as it might have been. But it was not denied that' some list or other was made. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman was proceeding with his argument when the mail left. REPEAL ASSOCIATION. The Association held its usual weekly meeting in ;he Conciliation Hall this day. The chair was taken at two o'clock by Martin Tonal), Esq., of Limerick. The hall was thronged in every part, and the gal leries were filled with fashionably dressed females. In the course of the transaction of the ordinary routine business, Mr. O'Connell entered the hall, and was greeted by the most enthusiastic and prolonged cheers. Several subscriptions having been handed in, the thanks of the meeting, on the motion of Mr. O'Con nell, were voted to the inhabitants of Placentia, New foundland, for a subscription of 16/. transmitted by them to the Association. While several subscriptions were being hitOed in, Mr. O ' CONNELL observed that the expenses of the trials would be enormous. He would say no more for Ireland. He would be ashamed to say more. The Hon. Gentleman then handed in 541. 2s. 6d. from the grocer's assistants of Dublin; an address from whom to the Liberator was also read. The following sums from America were handed in by Mr. O'Connell :—St. John's, Newfundland, 51. 10s. Bd. ; Pittsfield, 101; Richmond County, 10/. ; Norfolk, G 01.; Baltimore, 1201. Those sums were announced amidst the most rap- ,urous applause. Mr. O'CONNELL observed that as the hour at which the Association had met that day was rather late, he would reserve the reading of the correspondence that accompanied those remittances, for Monday next, when he would ask leave of the Attorney-General to come down from the Courts.--(Laughter.) On the motion of Mr. O ' CONNELL, the thanks of the Association were passed to the parties whose names were connected with the subscription. In the course of one of the various short addresses which Mr. O'Connell made to the assembly, he ob served that he did not care one pinch of snuff for the result of those trials. He inculcated the neces sity of peaceable conduct for the present throughout Ireland, and in Dublin particularly. where he trusted the people who assembled in the street to witness his progress to the Court, would not hiss or groan at any individuals. He also guarded them against the spread of ribbonism. Several subscriptions were being handed in when our reporter left. The weekly amount of rent had not been then announced. THE WRECKED FISHERMEN.—We are glad to observe that the appeal to the sympathies of the public in behalf of the poor fishermen who have lost their bread-winners, is not likely to have been made in vain. The subscriptions advertised to-day -amount to upwards of one hundred and sixty pounds, and we know that more is forthcoming. Nor will it be unrequired. The s , un necessary to replace the wrecked boats is much larger than was at first supposed ; and, as the people can do little or nothing themselves, there will be the greater claim on the generosity of the public.— Aberdeen Herald. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. CLE.RKENWELL Yesterday James M'Grath, the noted prizefighte r ' John M ac d ona ld, a nd G eorge Hopkins, - were placed ti the bar before Mr. Greenwood, the former prisoner charged by George Fisk, a respectable-looking youl man, residing at 2, Foster-buildings, St. Luke's, with having committed a mo st v i o l en t assau lt u p on him, and the two latter were charged with inciting the mob stl" M'Grath WI assault and resist the police in the o °' cution of their duty, &c. George Fisk stated that on Saturday afternoon los t ' between three and four o'clock, he saw the prisoner, M'Grath on Saffron-hill, b ea ti ng a woman i n , a cruel manner.over her knuckles with a s ti c k, and he kicked her repeatedly. Witness remenstra,ed with him, on which he struck witness with the stick over his nose a nd knocked him several times on th e s pi ne o f th e back 10 , a violent. manner, and h a d it no t b een f or the arrive' and assistance of the police and some private individua ls be must have been kilted. Mr. GREENWOOD inquired whether the woman Was in attendance was answered in the negative. Robert Foulgeri 71, G, stated that between three an d four o'clock OR Saturday afternoon, he received informa tion that there was an outrage on Saffron-hill. On his arrival he saw M'Grath beat and kick last witness se' veral times. Witness to o k M'Gr a th i n t o cus t o dy, ! w ho he tripped witness up thr ee o r f our ti mes , an d beat an a kicked him so violently about the legs and head that h e was disabled and could nut perform his duty. He 3 1 tore his coat to piece s . M ac d ona ld s t ruc k w it ne ss and attempted to rescue M'Grath. William Hindins, a City officer, No. 271, was calle d to the spot, when he saw M'Grath violently ill-using 71 G. Witness interfered, and M.'llonald swore that be would mark witness. The prisoner Hopkins used Wet' tening language , . and incited the mob, to attack the officers. which was 0 11 " George Helder, City officer 212, corroborated this evli deuce. He was also vi o l en tly assau l te d, an d receive d a severe cut on his head from a stone which was flu" _ .. at him. M'Grath, in his defence, said he knew nothing of what took place. He had been treated with brandy' which made him quite drunk. M - Donald made a similar defence. Hopkins denied the charge against him. Mr. GREENivooD sentenced M'tirath to one month,' imprisonment in the House of C orrec ti on f or th e assault on the ,policeman, and for the assault on Fisk he eon victcd him in the penalty of 51., or to be imprisoned two calendar months, leaving him liable to be prosecuted by' , other parties whom he assaulted. Il e con victed M`Donald in the penalty of 31., or one mouth's imprison, ment ; and Hopkins in the penalty of 205., or ten days imprisonment. Hopki ns p a id hi s fi ne an d was lib e rated' but the other prisoners were taken to prison. Joseph Kipax, a Yorkshireman, meanly clad, and evi" dently destitute, was charged by the parish authorities of St. Andrew, Holborn, with refusing to work. Mr. Wilkes said he took care to have his supper, 1047 i ing, and breakfast, bef ore h e re f use d. Th ey em ployed casual paupers to work for their lodging, s u pper, an breakfast, from eight o'clock to twelve in the forenoon' The prisoner said he was a farmer's labourer, he 015 destitute, and he wished to he passed to his native place. Mr. GREENWOOD cogunitted him to the House of Co ri rection for semi days, and suggested that 'he /nig' apply to the Visiting MagistrateS to be passed. a , John Blakeman was charged by Mr. J. Ski n ner, lord of the Red Lion public-house, Warne r - s t re et, Col a ' bath-square, with stealing three brass candlesticks. The prisoner, it appeared, entered the house of 0 3 prosecutor on Saturday evening, ab ou t s i x o ' c l oc k, to asked for a light, when he slipped into the kitchen ol' observed, and tied the property up in an apron. was leaving the place when the potman st o pped 1104 , h He dropped th e b un dl e, an d h a d a d esperate str uggle with the potman, who was severely maltreated, but tn ° prisoner and the property were secured, and taken to the station-house. The prisoner denied the charge, but he was fully corn' milted for trial. Mr. GREENWOOD ordered James Phillips, the potnis li ' to be furnished with a certificate for extra expens e* and complimented him forhis courage and good conduct' Patrick !'Dermot was charged with a violent assaul t upon Charles Marson, of Rotherfield-street, Islington. The prosecutor (whose head was dreadfully injur ed and bound up) stated that on Saturday night last; b e• tween ten and eleven o'clock, he was attract e d by a noi s : in a court, in Lower-road, Islington, and on going to vo y. ness the " row," the prisoner struck him a violent ble ty on the jaw," and exclaimed, " Give him a crack," which a man struck him on the head with a quart-Pnh and another man felled him to the ground by the bloW of a .poker on the forehead, which cut him dreadful/ft and rendered him insensible, and he was carried to • a surgeon's. - . _ witness corroborated this evidence. The prisoner denied the charge, and set up an alibi. Mr. GREENWOOD remanded him for the apprehengel of the other man, but he afterwards ad m itt e d hi m to bat for his appearance on a future day. 7'HAMES POLICE. Yesterday Captain Alexander Montgomery, the m aster of the barque Superior, lying in the West India Dot appeared before Mr. Broderip to answ er t h e com p/Pie of James Macdonald, a seaman, wh o c l a i me d a Wane . of 121. for wages due to him on a voyage from Londe': to Sierra Leone, Demerara, and b ac k, un d er art i c les 2/. ss. per month. aid Mr. Wells, a solicitor o n th e p art o f t h e seaman, the gross amount of wages was 14L 10s., and he wa s willing to give credit for a month's advance in Londee and some other payments, but a claim was made tor 54 * , which had been paid on a monthly note purporting to be signed by the master, and indorsed by the man. Tb document was a forgery, and the man was ready t' swear he never gave authority to any one to issue th e note, and knew nothing at all about it. Mr. BRODERIP said if the owners had paid the money in their own wrong, they must bear the loss of it. Captain Montgomery said that 51. had been paid by the brokers of the ship on the forged document, le monthly instalments of 11. each, and the person who re; ceived the money was a female, who was at the brokers office two or three days ago. He pronounced the sir nature on the note, " Alexander Mangomry," to -be $ forgery. Mr. Wells said that his client could neither read O r write, and he made his mark on the articles. The cor Min's name was Alexander Montgomery; on the note i° was " Mangomry." The advance note given to the sea' man was a genuine document, and was directed to " Stowell and Brown, 157, Fenchurch-itreet." On th e t forged instrument, th e mone y was ma d e payable ,11. " Smith, Brown, and Co.'s, 170, Fenchurch-street." was astonished that the brokers paid a farthing. Mr. BRODERIP put it very strongly to the man who' ther the forged note had been issued with his privity et consent. Macdonald solemnly declared that he knew nothing at all about it. k Mr. BRODERIP said it was a very hard case upon th e owners, but there was not the least reason for Or posing the man knew anything about the forged monthly note. He then ordered the wages to be paid, with c osts' Captain George Barclay, the master of the ship S eil Nymph, w as summone d b e f ore M r. B ro d er i p, at the s uit of Benjamin Wheelwright, the mate, for 51. los., a ba" lance of wages. The complainant had been a voyage under articles 3!. I Os. per month, and joined the vessel in the Clyde 011 the 17th of January last. From Glasgow the ship P l°- ceedcd to Monte Video, and thence to Buenos .A3're s ' where, in consequence of some words with the CaptaiT the mate went ashore and con su l te d th e B r i t i s h Consll.: who referred him to the captain of the p or t, an d by hind he was transferred to the commander of the Daphi,! e : man-of-war, on the station, w h o cou ld d o noth i ng IT him. Th e C o n su l w as once more appea l ed to, who. rn. wised him to re t urn t o th e s hi p an d b r i ng an actit).'ci when he reached E ng l an d. When the cre w w ere pa' off the sum claimed was deducted by the master for ab' sense on shore for thirteen days at Buenos Ayres, t% days absence in th e Clyd e w i t h out l eave, and the va l ue °f some hides, alleged to have been lost by the complainant s negligence. Those facts were elicited from the cool" plainant, or to use the Magistrate's own words, " P ti g out of the man," with considerable difficulty. Captain Barclay said there was a loss of some hide s ; and he charged the mate with it, and also fifteen days double pay for absence from the ship. When the e(0 - plainant received his wages, amounting in all to 411. 65 " 1 he agreed to the deductions, and sign e d a rece ip t in 10" of all demands. Wheelwright dissented from this ; when he receive d his wages he told the captain he was not satisfied. BRODERIP said the audacity ei som e people W as remarkable. The master had only deducted what h° was entitled to do under the Act of Parliament, and th e value of the hides lost. If the captain had notpaid it would have been a question ‘lhether he was entitled to any wages at all. He dismissed the case. Bruce Janson, a weatherbeaten Scottish seaman, be' longing to the Orb, lying in the Hermitage ti er ' Wapping, complained to Mr. Broderip that he had be eo forced ashor e by t h e master before the voyage had ter minated, an d wante d to got b ack to Galway, in Ireland, where he shipped. Mr. BRODERIP—Where did you ship, an d f o r what a voyage ? Janson—Eh, your.Honour, I ken it was at , Galway, on a vo y age f rae L unnun an d b ac k to Galvvn'a or Limerick. Y e k en I' m a S co t sman, b ut my w if e an bairns are a' in Galway. Weel, Sir, on the voyage there was a piece of beef too fat, and we didna like 1 6 ; and so there was a dispute, an d w h en I came h e re tit captain ordered me ashore. Mr. BRODERIP—What, do you complain of ship beef being to o f a t ? We h a v e h a d many comp l a i n t s of lt9 being too lean, but I never heard of its being too fat. It would be a hard case for the man to be l e ft here, llu," directed Fox, a Thames-police Inspector, to make quirks, and see the captain on the subject. The master consented to take the man back to Galvrai. 13 IED. On the 29th ult., at New . York, in his 33d year, of apoPl e * William, son of Thomas Vyse, of Ilern-hill Abbey, Surrey: eR On the 13th inst., Joseph Strutt, Esq., of Derby, aged 79 On the 13th inst,, at Lake, in the Isle of Wight, LieutenaP J, H. Peel, R.N., aged -17. On the 13th inst., William Scrivens, Esq., banker, fjastt 'ngs• On the 13th inst., at Deptford, Richard Hughes, Esq. EA , On the 14th inst., Elizabeth, the w if e o f G eorge Wigg ' t . On the 14th inst., at Wargrave-hill, Berks, Lieuterta n Colonel Raymond White, late of th e E nn i s kill en Dragoons , On the 14th inst., at Kingsland, Commander Charles Chaw pion, R.N., aged 72. On the 14th inst, James Farq u h arson , e ld e st son of Mt James Dodd, of St. James's -street, aged 13. On the 14th inst., A nna , t h e youngest d aug ht er of Mr. G' Ellis, of Cumming-street, Pentonville. On the 15th inst., Mary Smith, widow of the late IVI Smith, newsvender, of Hackney-road. London : Printed an d P u bli s h e d b y AIURDO YOl.l- G, o f No. 112, Strand, at Th e Si m Office, No. 112, Strand the County of Middlesex, Tuesday, January hi, 1.644. lJ YEAR .(clear Irill be .on and Nine ar 8, M( GI GENE UthFe ) Electioi litho wil The (111 The of tw e 'The ethof] Yearlp E for the Proprie 'when el Jan. T' l TO . gi Herber' Tho m , Charles Thema ! The Ma 'Vir g ,' I The ma , Jeremia Messrs. The e a Messrs. Messrs. Acr im CoNsu SOLICr Capital 31. pe quire and 'This to cone teona ri Ord, plied iv' sessio n effect. A Tt aothent IPectus l ament 40 per On the Appl to Ales tondor, Stock C - other s sirable, The last ma TIC 11 ERC CAT!' Srst cluetior latter. E,TR, ?A prolong Cc Palpitat debilit y to h o p, and fl them 0 c°4,Plel " Use °fit bad to and an * sball a }'ears, ' 4 enefit are 14111 14 m litany te CeiVi LO Xes ,person "PO, there' I lun t equi • a fror ache, trg, ; • Pt p, r e l y givi ng call. Kat Prl till li Public goo d .. '•! L 1 dile , ree,,, be n , fo r c th e hap 10w ledi be (Poi , nii Pl] Plts tro r e t