The Sun. — London, England, 1844-01-17 00:00:00

- 41Ctirb SUZY-OFFICE, Seven o' Cloch. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. 73,031 THE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAY. GLOBE.—If the Anti-Corn-law Leaguers are not always tolerant of those who do not go all lengths with them, the Corn-law Leaguers are lustily following their example, at the expense of the Ministry. In fact the Government will have two cereal combinations on its back, instead of one. Out of the alligator jaws (de picted by H. B.) of the Anti-Corn-law League, the luckless Sir Robert sinks in the boa-constrictor gripe of the landed protectionists. The chairman of the Suffolk Leaguers thus denounces the policy of the present Go vernment, as having betrayed the constituency to whom it owed its effective majority " They were well aware that at the last general election the majority expected by the friends of the present Government was 20, or thereabouts. By the exertions of the yeomanry and of the agricultural interests generally, a majority of 100 was secured.—(Hear.) Yet what was the result ? In the very first session after the present Government were placed in power *it. Robert Peel brought in his Corn Bill, which les sened the protection given to the agricultural interests. — (Loud cries of Hear. )" One of the spokesmen of the Surrey Leaguers cha racterises, as follows, the wisdom of the country gen tlemen, and charges the Minister of their choice with a highly flattering aptness to being frightened When they saw an unconstitutional body coming forward, and exercising such a powerful influence against them, as was exercised by the ' Cotton Lords,' as they were termed, it would hardly be supposed that the lords of the soil, who, although they might be pos sessed of vast quantities of land, still had very little wisdom, would have come forward to assist that body in their attacks upon the agricultural interest. Such, however, was the case; persons in high station, wh3 ought to have supported them, bad, for political purposes, turned their backs upon them, and gave their support to those who desired to destroy them.— (Hear.) This being so, it was high time for them to come forward themselves in support of that interest, which was not only attacked by the Anti-Corn-law League, but also by those who ought have been amongst its thief supporters—(Cheers)—but who, on the contrary, had of late thought fit to second the endeavours of its most determined opronenta.—(Hear, hear.) He did not wish to enter into a political discussion, but he must say that the agriculturists, by their apathy, had allowed the Government to make concessions, which, if they had exerted themselves, he was quite sure would never have been made ; and he called upon them now to resist the endeavours of the Anti-Corn-law League to frighten their friends into further concessions:" But perhaps the most unkindest cut of all was that of Lord Henniker at the Suffolk meeting:— " The arguments used by the anti-corn-law advocates to prove that the free importation of foreign corn would produce no disarrangement in the agriculture of England, reminded him of an anecdote. It was once asserted by some very grave philosophers, that if an eel were put into a vessel filled with water to the brim, the vessel would not overflow, as none of the water would be displaced. Well, a tub was brought, and it was filled in the presence of the philosophers. A country gentle man, one of the stupid country gentlemen, as they were called, however, told them to take care lest the eel should splash them. —(Laughter.) He was disbelieved ; the eel was put in and it was soon found that it splashed t h e water about in all direc tions. Now be warned the agriculturists that, if free trade were adopted, they would get splashed in like manner." This variation of the old story of Charles the Second and the Royal Society is most maliciously calculated to illustrate the result of putting in Peel. We beg, how ever, to make one slight variation more ; and the parallel will be complete. In the modern Eel or Peel instance, it was not the " grave philosophers " who asserted that, if the Eel, or Peel, were put in, the vessel would not overflow—" no disarrangement would be produced in the agriculture of England." The grave philosophers predicted precisely the contrary. We ourselves, who have sometimes ironically been said to cul tivate the philosophical, emphatically warned " the stupid country gentlemen," that the Eel, or Peel, would " splash them." It was those same " stupid country gentlemen," whom Lord Henniker drags in, head and shoulders, that were bent on trying the an philosophical experiment of a Peel Government. Accordingly the Eel, or Peel, was put in, and " the w ater was splashed about in all directions." It was impossible to furnish a happier illustration of the slippery champion chosen by the country gentlemen ; or one which came more infelicitously, or more in sidiously, from the lips of a senator, who took some pains to declare that he wished to support Government to the utmost of his power. The landed, as well as the manufacturing League seem to repose their hopes in Sir Robert Peel's squeezableness. Between them he will most assuredly have the peine et forte dure to un dergo. "It was desirable, said a speaker at the Suffolk meeting, " that Sir Robert Peel should know, and that it should go forth through the land, that the yeomanry were ready to support the laws and the institutions of the State, and that they were not content to allow themselves and their children to be injured to enrich Mr. Cobden." We never heard that Mr. Cobden had devised any artificial legislation to injure anybody ; or any series of measures with regard to a great article of commerce, each successive one of which has produced disappointment to every interest consulted, or not con sulted. But what we are most edified by in these Landed League proceedings is the sudden adoption of the " unconstitutional" modes of action of the Anti- Corn-law League. Lord Rendlesham said at the Suf folk meeting, They were not to rest satisfied with petitions only. They should come forward with sub scriptions, and if the League raised 100,0001. they ought to raise 200,0001.—(Vehement cheers)—and thus con vince the world that though the League be ' a great fact,' the agricultural interest was still a greater fact." At the same meeting Mr. Gross said, that as tenant farmers, they would tell their enemies that they were ready for the fight. They would stand in the breach, and nail their colours to the mast.—(Hear, hear.) How was it possible for the farmers of Suffolk to compete with the farmers of Poland ? There is a beautiful mixture of metaphor and interrogation here. To " stand in the breach," and " nail their colours to the mast," are each gallant operations ; though they are not commonly con sidered capable of being performed at the same time and place. However, as Sir R. Peel's Constrictionists mean to raise 200,0001. for the League's 100,0001., it is possible that they can do two things at once, in all manner of ways. It ap pears, however, that, though they can stand in a breach, and nail colours to a mast, each of which are deeds of des perate daring—one of which seems enough at a time— there is another thing which they can not do ; or, at least, Mr. Gross pathetically asks, How can they ? " How was it possible for the farmers of Suffolk to compete with the farmers of Poland ?" Why per haps not, while they are standing in breaches, and nailing their colours to the mast. Suppose they tried a less showy process—viz., putting their shoulders to the wheel ! A correspondent of last evening's Standard actually founds a plea for protection on the fact that the farmers won't put their shoulders to the wheel, and adopt even tried improvements ! Others might derive from his observations, which we subjoin, and which seem those of a practical farmer, the strongest possible argument for stimulating improvement by com petition. But " how are they to compete ?"—they can " stand in the breach," and " nail colours to the mast"— but " compete" they cannot. " She didn't mind death, but she couldn't bear pinching." STANDARD.—One of the most common complaints of the Anti-English party in Ireland is, that Parliament, in legislating for the empire, does not study the character nor endeavour to suit " the genius" of the Irish people. What this much-talked-of genius happens to be, it is very difficult to discover, as it has remained hitherto unsuited by every attempt of Par liaments, native or Saxon, but most of all by the com mon law of England, as far as respects trial by jury. The proceedings which took place on Monday in Dub lin, at the commencement of the trial of Daniel O'Connell and his fellow-agitators, present still further proof of this fact, if after the previous trans actions in the case, such proof were at all required. When every pretext for delay which the notorious in genuity of Mr. Pierce Mahony could devise, or the plen tiful affidavits of the traversers partisans support, had been exhausted, Mr. O'Connell and his friends were at length brought to bay by the A ttorney-General upon Monday morning. To imagine, however, that the calling over of the jury would have gone off in decent gravity, and the Attorney-General have been allowed to open the case for the Crown, according to the practice of the matter of-fact and un-mercurial Saxons, had been to do the agents for the traversers, the greatest inustice. On the contrary, no sooner had the counsel ta ken their places than Mr. Ford's grievance-discriminating eye marked a piece of negligence on the part of the under sheriffs' lowest official, and with becoming solemnity " moved the Court" to place the chair for the witnesses a little to one side • a motion which, to do the audience justice, they received with laughter, and which was granted by the Court without the customary dissent of Mr. Justice Perrin. This important matter being disposed of, Mr. Ford proceeded to give an unmistakeable proof of the sincerity of his desire, and that of the party which he represents, to have a jury without any political bias whatever, and of the value which they attach to the oath of jurors, that they will be guided by evidence alone. A Mr. Benjamin Eaton, one of the special jury panel, sharing, it seems, in the general and not unreasonable desire of avoiding a service of many days upon the trials, claimed exemp tion upon the ground of ill-health, to which Mr. Ford, with much candour, replied that it was quite impos sible for the traversers "to lose the chance " afforded them by Mr. Eaton's being upon the jury. This plain and candid reference to hopes grounded upon the , chance of the political feelings of a juror was made, the reader will remark, by party . which has been vanthe representative of a pouri g about the integrity of trial by jury, as though the entire weight of saving the Constitution had devol v e d upon them. Amongst Irish patriots, however,th ere to be found in acts a wholesome commentary upon professions. The historical indignation of Mr. Wyse, the • well-worn rhetoric of Mr. Sheil, the poe tical ferv ou r of Mr. Thomas Steele, and even the fam iliar-faced jo kes and periods of Mr. O'Connell himself, are less va luable as a test of sincerity than the eager refusal of Mr. Ford to lose the chance" of ra i d • - Mr. Eaton. Such incidents as these seem ex tremely odd to those who are accustomed to believe that the spirit of the English law is right in supposing jurors to decide by the evidence that is laid before them, and by that alone. We are net yet so enlightened as to use the popular language of oar Irish neighbours, who talk of "carrying agitation into the Queen's Bench." And certainly, even • with their example before us, and with all the knowledge of legal politics which they have been of late imparting to us, carrying agitation into the jury-room is still a novelty on this side the Channel. The calling of the jury being got over, the traversers made one further attempt to gain time by chal lenging the array on the ground of the omissions in the list, the consideration of which had occupied the Court on the previous Friday. By the application one further' day was gained, but no further advantage, 44 the Court ----- BOMBAY TRADE WITH CHINA. A private letter from Bombay has the following : " Since the settlement of the tariff by Sir Henry Pot tinger, the trade with China is improving. Who would have anticipated, a few months back, the calm and good feeling that now prevails between the Chinese and English ! I doubt, however, if we shall be able to get tea, sugar candy, &c., any cheaper by the arrangement that has been entered into; these articles are at pre sent much dearer than they were before the war: I allude to Bombay. How the good folks in England manage to dispose of tea at the prices published in the newspapers, is an enigma to me. We have at this time three American vessels in the harbour, bound to China, to convey and form the escort of the American Envoy to his Celestial Majesty, in order to negotiate for a free trade with the United States ; but I am told that the treaty entered into by Sir Henry Pottinger comprehends " all European Powers," placing them on an equal footing as regards trade. Such being the case, it was whispered to the worthy Ambassador, that the High Commissioner would not, probably, condescend to receive him, which seemed to raise his choler. The opium trade is as flourishing as ever ; the prices given for the drug are enormous ; ships leave this for our new settlement, Hong-Kong, laden with nothing else ; it is, therefore very clear that our Government wink at, if not countenance, the trade. Sir Henry Pottinger has, indeed, declared that if any opium should be seized on the coast by the Chinese, he will not interfere, nor will her Majesty's Government be answerable for the value of any opium so seized—thus leaving it entirely to the parties to traffic to any extent they please." IRELAND. THE STATE TRIALS. (BY EXPRESS.) (FROM OUR OWN REPORTERS.) DUBLIN, TUESDAY, JAN. 16. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. THE QUEEN V. DANIEL O'CONNELL AND OTHERS. The proceedings of yesterday did not advance the the case at all ; it was a repetition of the preliminary skirmishing that has already given such active occu pation to the Crown lawyers. It was, however, fully ex pected that to-day the case would be fairly commenced by the swearing in of the jury, and the immediate opening address of the Attorney-General. The Court assembled at 10 o'clock, and there was a very full attendance within the building ; but outside the Four Courts there was much less of bustle and excitement than on the previous day. The arrange ments were precisely the same, and proved equally efficacious in securing order. Their Lordships having taken their seats the tra versers were called in the usual manner. Mr. O'Connell answered to his name, but Mr. Barrett and Mr. Duffy were absent. The names of the jury were then called over to take their appearances ; they all answered with the the exception of Mr. Stephen Parker. Captain Edw. Roper applied for an exemption' on the ground of age, being 72 ; and Mr. Benjamin Eaton on the score of ill health. Both the applicants were told by the Chief Justice to wait. On the names of Mr. Barrett and Mr. Duffy being again called, Mr. Gartland, solicitor, said that Mr. Duffey had been obliged to quit the Court on the preceding evening, from severe ill-ness, and applied for an in dulgence of a few minutes for his appearance. Mr. CANTWELL (for Mr. Barrett) said that this gentleman could not appear for a short time, and asked if the case might not proceed in his absence, he (Mr. Cantwell) appearing as his attorney ? The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it Was requisite in a case of this kind that everything should be con ducted with the utmost regularity and order. If a traverser were absent for ten minutes on the first day of the trial he might be absent on another day for a longer period. It might be very inconvenient to individuals, but without the consent of the Crown, a traverser could not appear in this case by attorney. If he appeared by attorney in an early period of the proceedings, there might be some difficulty at a later stage in iden tifying them. It had been decided in England that unless the consent of the Crown was given, parties in a case of this kind could not appear by attorney. Mr. O'CorniELL said he did not think that the tra versers could be considered as included in those de scribed in the indictment as persons unknown. — (Laughter.) The Court waited a few minutes, when The CHIEF JUSTICE said it was now twenty mi nutes beyond the hour to which the Court adjourned. Mr. CANTWELL said Mr. Barrett resided four or five miles from town, and, probably, might have been delayed by some accident. The Cam JUSTICE said the indulgence as to time was one not in the power of the Court to grant. Mr. Cantwell then asked for only five minutes longer, which the Court granted. During the interval Mr. Henn, the counsel for Mr. Barrett, entered the Court, and made the same offer on behalf of his client, that had been previously made by Mr. Cantwell—namely, that the case should proceed in his absence. In a case of misdemeanour there could be no objection to this. The CHIEF JUSTICE said the Attorney-General had already signified that he could not allow this to be dome, on the ground of the difficulty there might be in identifying the traversers. It was the Attorney- General who had to be satisfied on the point, not the Court. The Attorney-General said had the application to appear by Attorney been previously made, he should have been prepared to show that the traversers had no right to appear by attorney. All the parties named in the indictment were bound under recog nizances to appear in person, and during the present trial he should be under the necessity of insisting on their personal appearance every day. Mr. O'Connell said, that would subject, them to a series of accidents that might detain them two hours every day. The CHIEF JUSTICE said that was not likely to happen. The name of Mr. Barrett was again called, and he had not arrived. The Clerk of the Court then ordered Timothy O'Brien, Esq. and James Rooney, Esq. (Mr. Bar rett's bail) to be called, and required " to produce the body of Richard Barrett." Precisely at this moment Mr. Barrett entered the court, and his exceedingly opportune arrival excited great laughter. Mr. Barret apologised for his absence, stating that it arose from his residing at some distance from town. The CHIEF JUSTICE said that was no reason at all of his not attending the hours of the Court. If such a thing occurred again the Court would be compelled to enforce the recognizances. The COURT then proceeded to swear the jury. The first sworn was Mr. James Hamilton. Captain Edward Roper was called, and then again claimed his exemption on the ground of age, and handed in an affidavit setting forth his age. The CHIEF JUSTICE—Pass him over for the present. Mr. Henn objected to the withdrawal of the name Qf Mr. Roper. The plea of age should have been made in the Recorders' Court ; he submitted that it could not be entertained here. The affidavit was handed across the table, and Mr. O'Connell having read it, said that it was only a de claration of age, not an affidavit of any incapacity. Mr. Roper said it was six years since he had served on any jury, and he thought he was exempt from age The CHEF Jurricz said he would have been so had he taken the proper steps in October last. Mr. Macdonough objected to the exemption, and grounded his argument against it on the judgment delivered by Mr. Justice Crampton on the previous evening. That decision asserted, in the strongest and most emphatic manner, the finality of the Recorder's list. One of the qualifications for being placed on that list, was being a certain age ; the Recorder had adjudged on that qualification, and the Court had itself asserted,. in emphatic language, that such adjudication could not be reversed by any TH decided that the Attorney-General's demurrer to the I challenge should be allowed, Mr. Justice Per rin bein g again " under the disadvantage of not concurring with his brethren." As to the ridiculous proceedings of the por tion of the corporation of Dublin, which masqueraded through the streets on Monday morning, in attend ance upon Mr. O'Connell, they are only to be taken in the same way as Mr. Ford's declaration --as so many proofs of the truth of Roman Catholic professions of neutrality, and must have been, no doubt, gratifying to those who saw so little harm in handing over to Mr. O'Connell, and his followers, the Protestant corpora tions of Ireland. SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JANUARY 17, 1844. tribunal ; Mr. Justice Crampton bad expressly said that it could not be inquired into. Mr. Justice CRAmproN said the Court did not in tend to pass over the name of Mr. Roper. Mr. Henn would also permit him to say that his argument was not ad item. His judgment was given on the array of the whole jury panel, and he had given no opinion as to the qualification of any particular juror. The CHIEF JUSTICE said the name of Mr. Roper had been returned, and he was now on the list ; so far the Act of Parliament had been complied with. The next question was, whether Mr. Roper was enti tled to be passed by. As far as he had yet gone he had heard nothing to induce him to say that Mr. Roper had established an excuse. He rather thought that no such sufficient reason had been shown to the Court, and he was of opinion that the jury ought to be sworn. Mr. Roper was then sworn as one of the jury. Stephen Parker was then called, and handed in a medical certificate from Surgeon Kirby, stating his inability to attend. Mr. Vane, a licentiate apothecary was called and sworn. He said he knew and attended Mr. Parker. He was labouring at present under great nervous ex citement.—(Laughter.) Inhis (witness's) opinion, he was not in a state to attend to the present case. He thought it would be fatal to him to attend. He had apoplexy twice. Cross-examined by Mr. Macdonough—ls of opi nion that Mr. Parker could not attend. He was in a At the departure of the mail, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was still addressing the Court. traversers, and concluded a very able argument by calling on the Court to allow the demurrer of the ALARMING FIRE AT IPSWICH. Yesterday . morning, between the hours of twelve and one, the inhabitants of Ipswich were aroused from their slumbers by loud and continuous cries of "Fire !" and most urgent appeals for help. Bells and knockers were suddenly and violently sounded to give the alarm, while a lurid flame lighted up the atmo sphere, and painfully, added weight to the cry— " The White Hart is in flames !—for God's sake get up and help us !" On proceeding to the spot, at about a quart er to one o'clock, we found a range of stabling, running parallel with the back' of the dwelling-house, and nearly eighty feet in length, rapidly being consumed by the fiery ele ment. At this time one engine only (the Tower) was playing. Contiguous to the north end of the stabling = are Mr. Ray's extensive premises, built in this place of slight lath and plaster—these were soon burnt through in several places ; at the south end the stabling joined Mr. Hooker's (chemist) warehouse, containing large quantities of inflammable materials ; Mr. Smith's premises and others, closely surrounded the burning mass; and the all but cer tainty of there being a fearfully extensive conflagra tion stared everbody in the face. Shortly after two other engines arrived, the Suffolk Fire-office and the St. Clement's. The hose of the former was taken through Mr. Ray's private passage way, in Tavern street, and most effectively hemmed in the flames ; the St. Clement's engine also powerfully co-operated with it, by playing principally on the gable end of Mr. Ray's premises, while the Tower engine was em ployed in preventing the ignition of Messrs. Smith's, Hooker's, and Conder's premises. Providentially there was scarcely any wind at the time, and after about two hours persevering exertion all fear of further calamity was removed. The authorities of the town, and many of its most influential inhabitants, were early at the scene of danger, and assisted materially in check ing the progress of the flames—indeed all present, from the Mayor to the humblest artisan, lent their aid with such earnestness and hearty good-will, in their different stations, as to do credit to their hearts. Thanks to them that a much more widely extended conflagration—of the extent of which it is fearful to contemplate—has not visited our town. We are sorry to state that 3 6 coombs of corn, 2 tons of straw, chaff engine, &c., were consumed. The cattle and harness were happily saved. Mr. Boby, landlord of the White Hart, is fully insured. The building destroyed was the property of J. Cobbold, Esq. Many of the inhabitants of the endangered premises hurriedly sought safety in the neighbouring houses ; a great quantity of goods was also removed into St. Lawrence Church, and other places of safety. The fire was first discovered by Mr. Brownsmith, a person living on the premises, who, on entering the yard, perceived some straw on the ground floor to be in flames, which immediately set fire to the lofts above. It has not been ascertained by what means the straw became ignited. In the hurry and excitement some rather severe falls occurred. Mr. Franks, master of the Blue School, sustained some injury ; but there was no casualty of a serious character. We cannot close this notice without an expression of regret that the authorities of St. Mary Tower do not keep the hose of that engine in a better state of repair. A very consi derable time elapsed before anything could be done with it, it being . necessary to bind it with list, and have other contrivances, before the engine could be brought into work. The other engines, particularly the Suffolk Fire Office, were immediately ready for powerful action.—lpswich Express. state of great excitement. I heard him called yester day. I went home with him, and I saw him after dinner. Mr. Macdonough—Was he in a state of excite ment then ?—(Laughter.) The Attorney-General said he did not think there was matter for laughter or ridicule in the case at all. Mr. Macdonough—Many things occur in this Court which are matter for ridicule. The CHIEF JUSTICE—We must excuse Mr. Parker. Edmond Clarke was next called and sworn. Benjamin Heaton, architect and builder, was the next juror called. He begged to be excused, in con sequence of incapacity to serve from severe bodily pain with which he was affected, by reason of a hurt he received in falling from a scaffold, during the pur suit of his business. He had a certificate from Sur geon Hart, stating his inability to serve, and he was sworn to that effect. He was excused. Francis Faulkner was next called and sworn. John Cook was next called and sworn. Henry Flynn was called and sworn. Henry Thompson was called and sworn. Anson Floyd was called and sworn. John Rigby was next called. He asked the Court to excuse him, as he had been summoned as John Rigby, his name being John Jason Rigby. A few questions were put to him, which identified him as being the proper person, and he was accordingly sworn. Robert Hanna was called and sworn. William Longfield was called and sworn. William Ord was the last person called and sworn. The following persons were then called over and answered to their names :—James Hamilton, Upper Ormond Quay, Foreman ; Capt. Edward Roper, Upper Eccles-street ; Edward Clarke ; Francis Faulkner, Grafton-street ; John Croker, North Great Georges-street; Henry Flynn, William-street; Henry Thompson, Eustace-street ; Anson Floyd, Wellington Quay ; John Rigby, Great Brunswick street ; Robert Hanna, Henry-street ; William Long field, Harcourt-street ; William Ord, Cork-street. The names of the several traversers, Daniel O'Con nell, John O'Connell, Thos. Steele, C. G. Duffy, Rich. Barrett, John Gray, and the Rev. Mr. Tierney were then called over and placed upon their trial. Mr. NAPD3R then opened the pleadings, setting forth the nature of the case as stated in the opening of the Attorney-General. There were eleven counts in the indictment, to which the traversers pleaded not guilty. _ _ _ GENERAL JACKSON. TO THE EDITOR GF THE TIMES. Sir,—ln your City Article of Monday appeared an extract from a letter of the correspondent of an Ame rican paper, giving some account of a personage of some celebrity—one who has hitherto been to the English an object of no ordinary respect—l mean the famous An drew Jackson. We find him there described as showing signs, I re gret to say, of the advance of old age, but " the lightning fire of former years yet flashing in his eyes ;" and he is said to be of opinion that it will be long ere the disgrace inflicted upon his countrymen by the hard cider humbug can be wiped off. This letter is very gratifying, on more accounts than one. First of all, it manifests to all the world the exquisite sense of honour inherent in brother Jonathan. To a sensitive mind such as his, the disgrace of the hard cider humbug must be a thing quite unsupportable. Thus we have clearly demonstrated to us the malice of those that would insinu ate, that because he does not pay his debts, therefore he is not a man of honour. What, however, is more import ant (for no ono, I believe, ever seriously doubted Jona than to be a man of honour), this letter seems to promise the means of getting at what I, amongst others, have long been desiring to know—namely, what may happen to be the sentiments of such a person as General Jaukson on the subject of public faith, the obligation of paying one's debts and the like. It must be borne in mind that there are two sides, a " yea" and a " nay," to every question, and it may hap pen that the General's opinion on both these points may be in the negative. Hitherto, however, he, as well as all other public men in America (with the solitary exception of Mr. Webster), have, owing no doubt to the characteristic modesty of the Americans, with singular unanimity kept their sentiments upon these subjects to themselves. No one can suspect the hero of New Orleans of a lack of moral courage to speak out whensoever and whatsoever the good of his c ountry calls for. It must be remembered too, that in et and render dumb. is apt to make the tongue d el i On this subject, the refor e , information is wanted ; and e g a n v a e t i t o o n , the w h r o e n o f excessive, is I should like to know whether any fire or lightning is seen to flash from the General's eyes when he hears talk of M‘Nutt and repudiation ? He is said to take a vast interest in the elections of New York. Pray what does he think of what is now going on the adjoining State of Pennsylvania, where they are said to be dili gently paying off both principal and interest of the floating (that is domestic) debt, whilst the funded (or foreign) creditor is treated with paper in satisfaction of his dividends The General has been removed for some years from the sphere of active politics, and free therefore from the trammels of party politics ; precisely therefore the character from whom, considering his vast in fluence, it was expected and desired that we should hear a strong denunciation of what is regarded here as the folly of his reckless children. This expectation may, however, have been founded in a misapprehen sion. It may be that the mode of thinking which seems to prevail pretty unanimously on this side of the Atlantic, that debts ought to be paid, that contracts are obligatory, that public faith ought to be kept, that for either an individual or a State to borrow money which at the time they have not good reason to know they can, and which they do not seriously intend, to repay, is what is vulgarly called swindling, and that swindling is a trade of infamy may y be that our mode of thinking differs from his. He may look upon all creditors, public creditors especially, as Jews and jobbers ; and it cannot be denied that Jews and jobbers are very detestable animals, and fit subjects for pillage. Swindling he may consider as a necessary ingredient in a democratic constitution, and therefore to be tolerated if not encouraged. In any case it appears highly desirable that the opinion on this subject of such a person should be publicly known, in order that it may be tried whether any thing can be done toward s reconciling the apparent discrepancy in the morality of the whole and the new world. To you, therefore, I address this, in the hope that it may be deemed worthy of a place in your columns, which may chance to bring it to the eye of the " cor respondent," or some other person capable and willing to enlighten us on this interesting matter. Jau. 16. ANTI-SWINDLE. The ATTORNEY•GENBRAL then rose and addressed the Court and jury, He commenced by saying, that the jury had been impannelled on the present occasion to perform the duty of deciding on the guilt or innocence of the several traversers, and it would not be necessary for him to impress on their minds the necessity of giving their anxious and undivided attention to such a mo mentous cause. Mr. Napier had told them the nature of the charge against the several traversers, but to impress it on their minds, and that they might be able to understand the cause as it proceeded, he would call their attention to it again. The traversers stood indicted for havin g conspired together and confederated to create discontent and disaffection among her Majesty's subjects, and to excite them to hatred and contempt ofth Government and Constitution of the realm as by law established, and to stir up hatred and be tween the different classes of her Majesty's subjects, particularly in Ireland ; to excite discontent and dis affection in the army ; and to cause large numbers of persons to meet together at different times and places for the unlawful purpose of obtain ing, by means of the intimidation, thereby created, and by the exhibition of great physical force changes and alterations in the law and constitution of the realm as by law established, and particularly by these means, to bring about a dissolution of the Legislative Union ; and by means of seditious ad dresses, publications, and by intimidating Parliament, to bring about changes in the law of the realm, and to bring into contempt and hatred the tribunals for the administration of justice, and to diminish the confidence of the Queen's subjects in the admi nistration of the law therein, and to assume the pre rogative of the Crown with regard to the administra tion of justice. Having thus brought under the no tice of the jury the charges upon which the defendants stood indicted, it would be convenient and proper for him to make a few observations with regard to the law of conspiracy. SUMMARY OF THE STATE TRIALS. DUBLIN, TUESDAY The traversers made no more opposition to the 'swearing of the jury, which was proceeded with this morning, after a short delay caused by the non appearance of the traversers, Mr. Barrett and Mr. Duffy, the former from having to come from his country residence, some distance from Dublin, and the latter from ill health. Mr. Cantwell, the soli citor, and Mr. Henn, the counsel for these gentlemen, each offered to alio/A the trial to proceed in their ab sence, but the Attorney-General would not per mit it, and the consent of the Crown is necessary for a defendant in such a case to appear by attorney. The Chief Justice said the reason given by Mr. Barrett was no excuse, and if the delay occurred again the Court would enforce the recognizances. The swearing of the Jury was then proceeded with, and some applications for exemption, sup ported by affidavit and certificate of bad health and incapacity having been granted, and one for exemption on account of age having been refused, the following gentlemen were sworn : James Hamilton, Ormond-quay; Capt. Roper, Eccles street ; Edward Clarke; F. Faulkier, Grafton-street; John Croker ; Henry Flinn, William-street ; Henry Thompson Anson Floyd, Wellington-street; John Rigby, Su ffolk-street; Robert Hanna, Henry-street; William Longfield ; William Ord, Kilmainham. The Attorney-General then rose and commenced his address for the prosecution. He stated the nature of the offence and the law of conspiracy, supported by numerous quotations from law authorities. He then went into a lengthened history of the repeal agitation gave sketches of the different Associa tions that have been connected with the movement, and grounded his case against the individual traversers by quotations from the repeal press, from the speeches of Mr. O'Connell, and the evidence of the organisation of the Association itself. In de scribing the repeal card of membership, the mention of the portrait of Brian Boirhome, which is one of its illustrations, excited considerable merriment, which he immediately reproved, appearing somewhat vexed at a merriment he considered so out of place. His whole speech was carefully got up and as care fully delivered, but was without fire or animation of any kind. might exist in the list of jurors. He could not see any objection to amending the book according to the true and real general list, vouched and supported by comparison with the authentic parochial lists. On these grounds he had felt himself compelled to come to that conclusion. He certainly did entertain an im pression that the challenge ought to be allowed, though certainly not without considerable doubt as to the correctness of his opinion. The Court was then adjourned till ten o'clock the following morning. Crown. Mr. Moons said, on the part of Mr. O'Connell, and after the able statement of the Solicitor-General, should be struck. WASTE LANDS.—ENCLOCIRE ACT.—On the motion of Lord Worsley, a very long return was made in June last " of the true or estimated quantity in statute mea sure of all common or waste lands not being held in severalty, in every parish or tithe commutation district, so far as the same can be ascertained from the schedules to the agreements or awards, or from the apportionments received by the Tithe Commissioners," and also "A Re turn of all Acts passed since the year 1800 for the En closure of Common or Waste Lands in England and Wales, not being held in severalty, distinguishing the parishes and counties in which the same were situated, together with the estimated number of Acts passed from 1800 to 1810, from 1810 to 1820, from 1820 to 1830, and from 1830 to 1840." The summary of England shows that in the forty counties the total quantity of land amounts to 6,718,523 acres, of which the quantity of common or waste land is stated to be 1,358,419 acres. In Middlesex alone there are 1,321 acres of waste land. The largest quantity of waste land is in the Nerth Riding of Yorkshire, there being no less than 132,815 acres of common or waste land out of a total of 1,897,592 acres, making a total of waste land in England and Wales of 1,860,232 out of the total of 8,616,115.8 y the second return it appears tha t from 1800 to 1810 number of Enclosure Acts passed was 905, from 1810 to 1820 the number was 741, from 1820 to 1830 the num ber was 192, and from 1830 to 1840 the number of En closure Acts was 125. o r sa lary —Tyne Mercury. AN EDITOR'S SALABY.—At a conference of dele gates of the coal miners, held in Manchester a few days ago, the subject of the amount of s alar y to be paid to the editor of the Miner's Advocate, a fortn i g htl y publication recently esta blished in this town, it was, aft er some discussion, a g reed that twenty-one shillings per week be the laryl w i th an t a n allowanceofewsroorato tw enty shillings per annum, as a subscription enabal:u him t to of see the the papers p IRELAND. THE STATE TRIALS. FROM OUR OWN REPORTERS.) DUBLIN, MONDAY, JAN. 15. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL (in continuation) said— With regard to the observations made by his Learned Friend, Mr. Fitzgibbon, that the fifty - nine persons whose names were left out ought to be inserted, he begged to remark that it wou ld not be competent f o r them to do so. They could not make any alteration in the jury list after it had been once struck, but persons seemed to imagine that things could be done in this case which could not be done in any other. The Learned Gentleman proceeded at great length to controvert the Arguments of the counsel for the ;hat - he would propose the matter should now be re ferred back to the Recorder, and that a new list The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected altogether to such a proposition, and he was astonished that such a one could have been made by Mr. Moore, who, as a lawyer, must know it would be perfectly illegal ; and he, holding the office of Attorney-General, would be unworthy to hold that situation for a single moment if he assented to such a proposition. Mr. MooRE said the Attorney-General had grossly misconceived the nature of his proposition. He (Mr. Moore) made it only with respect to this single case. The Attorney-General seemed to attribute to him an improper motive, and monstrous ignorance in making it. He would not reply to the observations of the At torney-General. The proposition he made in good faith, and in consequence of instructions he had re ceived from his clients. He did not think he could be charged with having exhibited any improper feel ing, or could be charged with monstrous ignorance as to his duties as a lawyer in making it.—(Applause throughout the Court.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that if such feel ings were manifested in Court, he should be obliged to take measures to have no persons admitted to tile gallery. He thought that his Learned Friend had meant his proposition generally, and he must have known, if he did so, it could not be legally done. ' The Learned Judges having consulted for a short time, The CHIEF JUSTICE said the majority of the Court were of opinion in this case that the demurrer should be allowed, and, consequently, that the challenge should be overruled. The subject-matter was not now under the consideration of the Court, inasmuch as the arguments used on both sides had embraced, in substance, the greater part of what the Court had been occupied with on Friday last. The Court had then given judgment, and upon every consideration he had been able to give the subject since, he found no reason to alter the decision the Court had then pronounced, through him. On the contrary, during the progress of the argument, and applying his best judgment to the matter, the opinion he entertained then was confirmed. The application then under the consideration of the Court was, that, for certain rea sons alleged, the panel should be quashed, and he con fessed he could not see the principles upon which he could now be called upon to give a different judgment from that which he had given on a former occasion, and in which all his brethren concurred. The present application came before the Court in the shape of a challenge to the array. The objection was that a number of names which should have been upon the jury list were not there, and that the Recorder of Dublin had neglected, or omitted, to make a proper list. In considering this subject, it would be neces sary to look to the Jury Law to see what its object was. The Learned Judge then proceeded to point out at considerable length how the provisions of the Act applied to the present case, and how no violation of them had been committed so as to invalidate the proceedings of the Recorder or the Clerk of the Peace in the matter. The Clerk of the Peace, with a view to his preparing the jury list for the ensuing year, was directed by the Act to issue his precepts to the several collectors of taxes, whence might be dated the origin of the persons who were to be called on to be placed on the jury lists or not. The Act defined who were the persons that were to be admitted upon the jury list, and precautions were taken by those officers that none were admitted but those qualified to dis charge the duties of a juror. Those lists having been returned to the Clerk of the Peace, were to be subse quently laid by him before the Recorder of the City of Dublin for his revision and adjudication. The Recorder was the last who had any control on the subject, and there must have been very good reasons why his decision was made final and not open to col lateral investigation. In the present case, the provi sions of the Act had been complied with—the precepts made—the lists returned from the parish officer— the investigation and the Recorder's decision made, which decision none but the Recorder himself could review for the purpose of disputing it. All that was required by the Act had been complied with, and if the course contended for by Counsel for the traversers had been pursued, it would be unsettling rather than settling the duties of the officers—a thing that cer• tainly could never have been intended by the Act. Where fraud had not been proved it was out of the power of of tb t e h e Q u Recorde e n e r ' B ev e e n n c h i f t o he investigatebad come n t he a wrong deci sionconclusion. The Learned Judge detailed at consider able length various reasons in support of his view of the case, and concluded by saying that he was of opinion the demurrer must be allowed. Mr. Justice BURTON next stated his reasons for concurring with the Lord Chief Justice in the opinion that the demurrer should be allowed. If the demurrer were not allowed, it would form a precedent which, in future cases, would cause delay, that might, per haps, ruin parties engaged in law proceedings; and it would, besides, render the present proceedings a nullity. It was his opinion the demurrer must be allowed. He had considerable doubt whether any challenge at all existed to the panel of a special jury. Supposing it did apply here, no imputation whatever rests upon the Sheriff; again, there was no imputa tion on the Clerk of the Crown. The Sheriff's duty was indeed a mere formal matter; as to making any judicial decision on the list, it was quite out of his function, which was merely to strike a panel. What was the challenge here founded on ? On the supposed want of impartiality of some unknown person who had access to the Recorder's-office, before the list was arranged. That was an unheard of challenge. It was not founded on the want of impartiality on the part of any public officer ; it gave a new range en tirely to the right of challenge, and impugne d the whole list because there was some fraud or mis management on the part of some unknown person, during the process of preparing the list. Admitting that the Recorder had not been as diligent and atten tive as he might have been under the circumstances, still there was no fraud alleged against him. The Learned Judge then read extracts from the statute defining the duties of the Recorder, which he con tended were judicial, and against his decision there was no appeal to any Court. The other officers had merely a plain, defined duty to perform. As to the omission of the sixty names from the list, what was the duty of the Sheriff with regard to them ? The list must be taken from the jurors' book, and could be taken from no other source; if the jurors' book for 1844 were a nullity, then they were directly driven to the jury book of 1843. The admission of the challenge would cause many difficulties. Suppos ing that a knave or an idiot obtained access to the papers while in course of preparation, and were to purloin part of the papers ; or even if a rat were to eat them, the whole community was to be deprived of a special jury list. Even the omission of one name might on this principle be considered sufficient. It was always necessary that a private injury must give way to a general inconvenience. No par ticular injury bad been stated here ; but was there ever a case in which a snore monstrous general inconvenience had been pointed out? They could not go behind the -jurors' book, and there was no imputation upon that ; the imputa tion was on the general list. They could not enter here into any considerations as to the mode of preparing the jurors' book, through the medium of a challenge. If they had been right in refusing the motion made on this subject, they should be right, ex superabun dante ,in refusing the challenge. He was, therefore, of opinion, that it must be refused. Mr. Justice PERRIN, in giving his opinion, said he had given careful consideration to the Act of Parlia ment, and applying its provisions to the matters as they appeared on the challenge, he was under the dis advantage of not coming to the same conclusion as that to which the Chief Justice and his brethren had arrived. He thought, subject to considerable doubt, that the challenge ought to be allowed. By the Act of Parliament, the collectors of taxes were to make out two lists of all qualified persons to act on the jury within their districts, and to give them to the Clerk of the Peace. These lists were afterwards re vised by the Recorder, and, with respect to that officer, he fully concurred in the distinction which had been drawn between his ministerial and judicial functions. With the revision cf the list he considered that the Recorder's judicial duty ended. This ap peared to be the case, from the mode in which the jury lists were prepared in the counties. There they were revised by the Justices, and delivered to the Sheriff. In the present case, the Recorder should not have written out a general list with his own hand ; he ought to have caused a general list to be made out from the list he had revised ; but it did not appear that the least degree of fraud had been imputed to the Recorder ; he had never heard it imputed, nor could it be believed. But it seemed that he had been imposed upon by the person whom he had employed to make out the list. Now every one must employ clerks, and if con trivances of that kind, on the part of persons so em ployed, were not inquired into, and were not to vitiate the acts which purported to be the acts of their superior officers, he was really at a loss to understand what was the security of the public for the purity of the jurors' book. In such a case one list might be muti lated, and another list substituted. He had heard some difficulties stated, as to whether the Recorder could amend his list, having discovered any mutilation or omission, after having delivered it to the Sheriff. But it seemed to him that he could do so, and would do his duty ha so amending it. It had been stated also that there was likely to be some inconvenience experienced should the challenge be allowed. It ap peared to him that the inconvenience had been appre hended to be much more extensive than it would really be found to be. It appeared to him that there was a power of at once correcting the errors which REPEAL ASSOCIATION. Among the subscriptions handed in was 11. sent from the Queen's Bench by Dr. Gray, the proprietor of the Freeman's Journal and one of the traversers. The whole amount for the week was 9041. 19s. sd. The announcement of that sum was received with loud and enthusiastic applause. _ The following letter was read by Mr. Crean : " Merrion-square, Festivalof the Holy Name, 1844. " Dear Sir,—As I shall be of course confined by my attend ance at the trial to-morrow, and thereby unable to be person ally present at the Association, I inclose you 11., and beg o 1 you to get proposed as a member of the Association my twenty. sixth grandchild, Miss Eliza O'Connell, who bad hardly a right to use the name as yet. " I hope and believe that in the necessary absence of many of the leading members of the Association not one word of an irritating nature will lie uttered, but that, on the contrary, the people throughout the country, and the repeal wardens in par ticular, will once again have it authentically declared unto them that the success of the repeal agitation depends altogether upon the most perfect peace, order, and tranquillity being pre served throughout. If they wish to gratify me and their other friends they will preserve the most perfect peace, order, and tranquillity. I repeat this advice so frequently that every man throughout Ireland might understand the deep conviction I entertain, that whoever disturbs the public peace in the slightest degree is a traitor to the sacred cause of repeal. " The next point to which I wish to call the attention of all the members of the Association is the great Catholic move ment which is now being made in order to endeavour to obtain for the Catholics of Ireland some legal guarantee for the enjoy ment of the rights intended to be secured to them by the Emancipation Bill—it being perfectly clear that the conduct of the Attorney-General is, on the other hand, a practical repeal of the most valuable right intended to be secured by that Bill. I do not at all deny that the Attorney-General had legal autho rity to make the use he has done of the royal prerogative, by the exclusion of Catholics from that jury. The moral pro priety of so using that prerogative is quite another question ; but this is perfectly certain, that it is absolutely necessary for the Catholics of Ireland, for the preservation of their lives, liberties, and properties, to continue the Catholic agita tion until a legal guarantee shall be obtained against a :similar exercise of the Royal prerogative in future. The Catholics have two things to complain of—first, of the striking off of every single Catholic, eleven in number, from the bal loted panel. This is sought to be accounted for by an idle ex cuse that these eleven were all Repealers. The allegation, however, is usifounded, the fact being distinctly otherwise; but even if they were all Repealers the excuse would be a bad one, and would serve as a precedent for any other idle excuse that may be given by a future Attorney-General. I would particularly press the folly of yielding to excuses of that kind to mitigate a prominent and undoubted fact, namely the exclu sion of all the Catholics from the balloted panel. " Another cause of complaint which the Catholics have is, that there have disappeared from the jury panel—nobody can tell us exactly how—but by some manoeuvre or misfortune, about sixty-three individuals, thirty-five of whom were Catho lics of respectability, several of whom took no part whatsoever in the Repeal agitation, and about twenty-eight Protestants, most of them, it is said, of Liberal politics. This is what Judge Perrin is reported to have called a matter of deep suspi cion. That seems a very moderate way of expressing it; but however it be expressed, and especially if it be true that the jury panel was transmitted, as has been alleged, by some of the clerks in the office, to England, it is perfectly clear that the Catholics should apply to the Legislature for some mode of legal remedy against the occurrence in future of a similar fatality. As the thing stands at present, the Catholics of Ireland are clearly deprived of any legal guarantee for the most valuable of the rights we thought we had acquired, namely, a fair and unsectarian trial by jury. " I scorn to complain that this practical repeal of the Eman cipation Act has occurred in my case. I was one of the most prominent in obtaining what we considered Emancipation, and it is quite fit that the discovery should be made in my person, that such Emancipation may . be practically repealed. It im poses a sacred duty to continue Catholic agitation again—it renders itself doubly incumbent upon me to exert myself once again, as a Catholic, to make the Emancipation Act, in reality, what it was in spirit intended to be. " My object in submitting these reflections to the Associa tion is simply this :—To convince the members of the Asso ciation that they ought not to interfere, as Repealers, with this distinct and Catholic agitation. It should be a distinct and separate agitation—totally unconnected with the question of repeal. Ihe repeal should not, if possible, even be mentioned at any of the meetings held for the purpose of petitioning to have the Emancipation Act rendered perfect. There are many 'Catholics non-Repealers or anti-Repealers ' who feel with us the absolute necessity of a better protection for their lives, liberties, and properties. Let us, then, cheerfully follow, assist, and support those persons ; and I trust that every person in Ireland will, as speedily as may be convenient, send petitions to Parliament, and an address to the Queen, praying for relief and protection. " It is quite true that those addresses to the Queen must go through the hands of gir James Graham, who was distinctly understood in the last session to have more than insinuated a charge of perjury against the Catholics ; he was, however, in duced to retract or disavow any such charge, but it is to be apprehended that his retractation was merely verbal, whilst his real opinion may by recent events be practically illustrated. " Upon the whole, therefore, I have to implore of the Re- pealers— " First, to observe perfect peace and tranquillity all over Ireland. Secondly,.not to mix up the Repeal agitation with the Cithoht agitation for the bettor securoy of trial by jury. " .Thirdly,,to continue, in every other respect, their peace fill, legal; loyal, and constitutional exertions for the restoration of our domestic legislature, in the person of our respected and loved Sovereign the Queen, in the Irish House of Lords and Irish House of Commons. " I am, dear Sir, your faithful servant, " To Martin Crean, Esq., "DANIEL O'CONNELL." MURDER AND ROBBERY. In addition to the excitement caused in Dublin by the State trials, a general feeling of horror was created by the report that a barbarous murder had been com mitted during the prievous evening, in the priest's house attached to the Catholic chapel at Rathmines. The Rev. Mr. Roche, the curate, and other clergymen, reside in the house. At seven o'clock last evening (Sunday) the house was broken open, and money stolen to the amount of 401., and the maid-servant barbarously mur dered. She was found with her throat cut. It is not known whether there is any clue to the discovery of the perpetrators of this horrid outrage. TUESDAY NIGHT'S GAZETTE. 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 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, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. The following places have been duly registered for solemnizing marriages therein, pursuant to the Act 6th and 7th Will. IV., chap. 85 . Long Holme Wesleyan Chapel, Rawtenstall, Lancashire. Independent Chapel, St. Alban's, Hertfordshire. BANKRUPTCIES SUPERSEDED. JOHN KIDD, grocer, Kendal, Westmoreland. JOHN HARWOOD and FREDERICK HARWOOD, stationers, Fenchurch-street, City. BANKRUPTS. JAMES PIGGOTT, jun., cabinet maker, Richmond, Surrey, to surrender, Jan. 26, at eleven, and March 1, 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 UARLES 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, warehousemen, 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 bury, 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 singball-street ; Lloyd, Great Jarnes;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. 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. D. Thorne, farmer, Brentwood and Shenfield, Essex. T. Parker, grocer, Leicester. J. Sandbacb, 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 11. 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 bawler, Leamonroyd-lock, Yorkshire C. Armitage, engraver, Sheffield. J. Thompson, veterinary surgeon, Boroughbridge. A. Weeld, livery-stable-Icoeper , Queen's-row, Pimiier". J. Fox, win ehouseman, Manchester. T. Loverock, licensed victualler, Dudley, Worcestershire. J. Patchett, wire drawer, Manchester. W. Dobbin, superannuated clerk, Arundel-street, Strantii. H. Dell; Upper Stamford-street. J. BingLan, laundress, Hawley-crescent, Camden-tovill• J. Simpson, oilman, Grosvenor-row, Pimlico. E. Casement, carpenter, West-street, Bermonsey. A. W. Shaw, landing-waiter, Stratford-le-Bow. F. Shaw, harm dealer, Rotherham, Yorlcshire. J. Walker, table-knife nianufacturee, Sheffield. J. B. Crafter, jeweller, Portsmouth. W. Franklin, Blacksmith, Bedford. M. Mackintosh, carpenter, Lower Crown-st., NVestrniDet• 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 , Ne w Accrington, Lancashire. W. Hollis, lieutenant in the E.I.C . service, ,Sussex-streety Old Brompton. J. S. Hulme, commercial clerk, Bloomsbury. C. Blenkin, farmer, Otteringham, Yorkshire. W. T. Ashton, decorative gilder, Shen 'ard stree t, Golden-square. NV. Hughes, tailor, Took's-court, Cursitor-strect. M. Brook, grocer, Halifax, Yorkshire. T. Thompson, Barnard Castle, Durham. W. Cock, jun., bookbinder, Maidstone, Kent. H. P. Wright, hair dresser, Great Surrey-etrect G. Salter, boatman, Tipton Staiffonishire. SECOND NOTICES. F. F. Davis, Lymington , Sout ham p ton, Jan. 029 i f half-past two, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Turqu on"' official assignee. W. Swain, farmer, Hitchin , Hertford shire, Jan. 22, 0 1 welve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Graham, 01'661/ assignee. F. Finnemore, Great College-street, Camden. town, Jan. 22, at eleve , n, at the Court of Bankruptcy. quand, official assignee. J. P. Fryer, licensed victualler, Montpelier-row, Ola Brompton, Jan. 22, at half-past twelve, at the Court 0 Bankruptcy. Turquand, official assignee. H. Pitcher, sen., toll-collector Paris-street, Lambeth, Jan. 22, at half-past eleven, at the Court of Bankrupt)" Turquand, official-assignee. J. B. Ash, carpenter, High Holborn, Jan. 2 7, half-past one, at the ourt of Bankruptcy. Gromile, official assignee. M. Moses, furrier, Staining - lane , Wood-street, City, Jan. 27, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Edwards' official assignee. W. L. Martin, corn dealer, Kew House-road, Bich 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. La c ' . ington, Coleman-street -buildings, official assignee. u H. Castle, linen draper, Tranquil-vale, Blackhesti" Jan. 24, at iree, at the Court of Bankruptcy. ohnson: Basinghall-street, official assignee. W. Eveleigh, commission agent, Dalston, Middlesat Jan. 24, at two, at the Court o f Bankruptcy. acking ton, official assignee. J. Couch, saddler, St. Erth Pra z e , Co rnwall, Jan; 2.5 aO l at eleven, at the Exeter District Cou r t . Hirtzel, ottl assignee. W. Hancock, attorney, North Curry, Some eri/ivrsetshire' Feb. 20, at twelve, at the Exeter District Court. Il man, official assignee. 25, T. Lamping, plumber, Tavistock, Devonshire, J P. xt at twelve, at the Exeter District Court. Hirtzel, Oci assignee. W. Jones, mariner, Woodside, Cheshire, Jan. 2%,..9 twelve, at the Liverpool District Court. Bird, Ouctai assi J gnee. . Brook, hatter, Holmfirth, Yorkshire, Jan. 2 2 ' iV eleven, at the Leeds district Court. Young, official signee. J. Holroyd, Halifax, Jan. 22, at eleven, at the Le caf District Court. Young, official assignee. A 20, S. Wright, stone dealer , K ilnwick, Yorkshire, Jan. . at eleven, at the Leeds District C ourt. Fearne, O"' assignee.ot A. Pinder, clothier, Kirkburton, Jan. 20, at elevee, the Leeds District Court. Hope, official assignee. • 0, W. Hammertoe , wire worker, Huddersfield, Jatioi at eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Young, 0e b 4 assignee. T. Ridler, sen., builder, Gloucester, Jan. 23, at elec e° ' at the Bristol District Court. Miller, official assigrle;o, J. Hignett, tobacconist, Liverpool , Jan. 23, at ele % at the Liverpool District Court. Bird, official assign: o, W. W. Vaughan, Brace Meole, Shropshire, Ja.., o ; tt ie. P at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court. " ston, official assignee. q.st M. C. Thompson, Shrewley, 'Warwickshire, Jan. 2;00 eleven, at the Birmingham District Court. Valpy, assignee. DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-stree t w . T. Creeke, tailor, Cambridge, Feb. 8 , at one--J•e shall, merchant, Birchin-lane, rob. 6, at half-past J. W. Dyer, plumber, Colchester, Feb. 6, at halfP;te two—A. W. and T. S. Lowman, cheesemongers, cheap, Feb. 7, at one. In the Country. T. H. Jackson, glass cutter, Sheffield, Feb. 7, at ele:„' at the Leeds District Court—T. W. Winbmove, P-0$ manufacturer, Barnsley, Yorkshire, Feb. 13, at e leveto the Leeds District Court—W. Shepherd, miller, Acton, Gloucestershire, Feb. 12, at eleven, at the 1 3 r7 o p f " District Court—C. Pearsall, boiler maker, Ancl er ,;lo Cheshire, Feb. 8, at twelve, at the Manchester D' s , - 4' Ccurt—W. H. and T. B. Turner, cotton spinners,l3tAr burn, Lancashire, Feb. 8, at twelve, at the Manc„ ll ,..l;l‘, District Court--W. Smithson, linen draper, 1 - 1 -,;0 1 Yorkshire, Feb. 9, at eleven, at the Leeds District l' w " e b. —M. Willock, merchant, Huddersfield, York*hire , 'oo; 9, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court—T. Jobli6,ol printer, Liverpool, Feb. 9, at eleven, at the Liv i er r P o rd , District Court—G. Brinsmead, flour retailer, 0°,4%00 Devonshire, Feb. 8, at eleven, at the Exeter District uLro, --S. Butler, W. Butler, and J. Butler, iron fotll3lso Birmingham, Feb. 12, at twelve, at the Birotiog" District Court. 1000 CERTIFICATES to be granted, unless cause be 011 to the contrary, on the day herein-mentione d ' J. R. Spencer, tanner, Halstead, Essex, Feb. 8 13 , Leaf, warehousemen, Wood-street, Cheapside, Feb Clare' T. Wright, cheesemonger, Blackmore-street , market, Feb. B—R. Hale, bookseller, Margate,_F v :eore R. T. Milbanke, surgeon, Burwood-place, Edge"c,or road, Feb. 7—T. Martin, victualler, Pavement, t, fields, Feb. 6—J. Mallet, miller, Hadley, Feb. 7 - " 6 ,...1; White, stone mason, St. Mary's, Hampshire, Fol 7•„;„, Webster, newspaper proprietor, Sheffield, Feb. Raphael and A. Nathan, silversmiths, Hull, Feb. 'OO Bastow, sen., J. Jackson, and T. Bastow, jun., „tcleh brewers, Birmingham, Feb. 9 — j. Smalley, iron foci Sneinton Nottinghamshire, Feb. 9—T. Water s, salesman, , Christchurch, Monmouthshire, Feb. „hit' Bumby, hatter, Melton, Yorkshire, Feb. 6--J. „1 1 1' more, pawnbroker, Stockport, Cheshire, Feb. 'OOO Morgan, bookseller, Lichfield, Feb. 6—T. H. Ja b glass cutter, Sheffield, Feb. 6—A. T. and B. T. P." wholesale tea dealers, Birmingham; Feb. 6. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. 1 1 0 0 J. Calton, and C. Calton, jun., grocers, Roth ° 0 11' Yorkshire—S. Ogden and J. Carruthers, ginghs t t o rcl e ' nufacturers, Radcliffe, Lancashire—W. and L ac tor , merchants, Liverpool—T. and J. W. Thompson, s oles neys, Lancaster—W. C. Paul and T. Martin, beast "feol men, Smithfield—J. and F. Harwood, s t a tionersc r ieo church-street—J. Peach and W. Willis, general e5.,,i0,0 Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire—R. Ridway, and T. Dent, joiners, Manchester—J. Parker, se'pleSl Parker, jun., and D. Parker, woollen warell,.olll3eY Minories (so far as regards J. Parker, sen.) --14— n ais c ; with, T. Dunn, and W. Taylerson, cabinet 113% turers, Stockton-up WL.l5' on-Tees, Durham—C. Davi s 4 -0, C. Reinhardt, commission agents, Leeds—B. : - k obl ib r Walton, and Js. Walton, size dealers, Halifax_,,,SlD 9 , —H, Hetley, C. W. Everett, R. Hetley, and NY. bankers, Salisbury (so far as regards R. Hetlelr 'Vq ‘ and T. Squier, jun., bazaar keepers, Dover--,"„:„. ford, G. Nottidge, jun., T. Greenwood, S. 11. Walford, jun., and B. Sparrow, bankers, Essex (so far as regards S. H. Day)—G. Nottidgireiforo T. Greenwood, W. M. Tufnell, S. H. Day, W. 9 1-ie r s jun., and B. Sparrow, bankers, Bishop Stortford,lb fordshire (so far as regards S. H. Day)-13- St ti „ l b/ A , R. Painton, cheese factors, Great Faringdon, Beris",• o oe A r" W. Hastings, H. Haworth, and R. Pagan, cotton sP;oes - t ,. Spotland, Lancashire—W. and T. Sutcliffe, cart e r reel Liverpool—C. and W. Lufkins, stationers, Silvr,.. - 10, 1 ,', St. James's—W. H. Goodlake and W. Beard. oil, ''f l or7., Great Winchester-street—T. Blunn and T. Wigl e ;r vi e,,j'' silk mercers, Leamington Priors, Warwicksb' ni ar", l Thatcher, J. Thatcher, and G. Thatcher, aids brewers, Welton, Somersetshire (so far as reg - v get",j, Thatcher)—J. Miles and W. Martin, cheesen3°, 0 13 I / • w ort° je Gilbert's-passage, Clare-market—B. erns W. Tetley, common brewers, Liverpool—F. o `',,clcli 9 , lo _ , G. Claridge, and J. Nicholls, wine merchants , '` . " - oriv„°:l lane—E. R. Pratt and T. Bromwich, mercers,id, north, Shropshire—C. Billson, jun., J. P. Do W J. B. Billing, cotton winders, Leicester. • SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS. oiherP,A, ALEXANDER MACKAY, merchant, glis,":„tio' Jan. 22 and Feb. 13, at twelve, at Ferguson 'S Edinburgh. ertr sr JOHN CAIRNS, farmer, Kippendavie, Jan. 20 and Feb. 10, at twelve, at Kinross's Inn, 10 WILLIAM BROWN, merchant, Troon, Feb. 17, at two, at the King's Arms Inn, Irvin e ' 0 CHARLES BLAIR, merchant, Alloa, Feb. 12, at one, at the Crown - Inn, Alloa. I to tll B THE WRECKED FISHERMEN.—We are Hof ti be that the appeal to the sympathie 6 l3° Y o° public in behalf of the poor fishermen hav e f lost their bread-winners, is not likely to ,todl made in vain. The subscriptions advertise,' ilotie amount to upwards of one hundred and si%tYvvrill it e d and we know that more is forthcoming. N°,l.,a.vvreifo unrequired. The sum necessary to replace he aeu,' boats is much larger than was at first supPose";here the people can do little or nothing thereselves e , u b li be the greater claim on the generosity of th 05 0 Aberdeen Herald. co o o f CUSTOMS AT LEITH.—The revenue i°4ffrerefice, at this port is still increasing, showing 0 , n ic leal o of il°t amount between last year and the one just in tho o ptio t ves a very great improvement in the trade oftheate he country, and in amount forming one-tent: frded crease in the Customs of the United King..l.- h ° A - 1 revenue collected at the port during the year " - n i n e ?' 1 " 9 on the sth of January, 1844, wa5......... 628,-,4 Do, of January, 1843 ............... 569, 6 ' 0 ... 14 ; 59, 323 Increase .................... —Scotsman. Th e 44 gac Coln ..,. was nt 92 p Pr so n The 44 rn !?ver e reti Th( Jos, was -rood 4essr 431 24, three temp stree lord 81 Anee that torn ita ra( to Ce