The Sun. — London, England, 1844-09-05 00:00:00

had been followed by the Court below. Now he must say that he thought there would be the greatest injustice. The case was not the same as if some irre levant staff had been inserted which imputed offences. But it was impossible not to see that if there had been three or four indictments, some of them bad, and the court had passed judgment on all these, the case would be the same, and there would be the greatest injustice, for the court might pass its judgriaent on the strongest clauses, and then the bad ones. The first case, which was relied on by his Noble and Learned Friend was, that of the King v. Powell, where the defendant was indicted for two offences--assault with a certain intent, and with a comm.n assault. The jury found a verdict generally, and a writ of error was brought on the ground that the defendant was found guilty on two indictments. Now, there was one remark which fell from Mr. Justice Tann tan, to which he (Lord Denman) wished to direct atten tion. That learned judge said that there were not two indictments, that there was but one act charged, and that the defendant was found guilty of only one offence. The words " misdemeanour" and " offence comprised both the counts, and formed, in fact, a women conjunctium applying to one act. He thought that the decision of the judge separated that case from this appeal. The next case relied on was that of the " King v. Rhodes" for subornation of perjury. Some of the counts were deemed bad, because there were no assignments of perjury in them. The view taken of that case by the Lord Chief Justice Holt was, that there was only one offence, that of perjury, and that it was no matter what were the assign ments. Now to him (Lord Denman) that answer completejy removed the case from the present argu ment. The nutcase was an indictment against a man and his wife for assault. There the objection was somewhat of a grammatical nature. In the first pirt of the Indictment the singular number was used in the words " vulneravit et verberavit." But on the latter part the error was corrected, " vulneravesunt et verberaverunt." In that case Mr. Justice Parker held that there was only one count, and that the verdict was rightly found. These were the only cases which were relied on, and these were all the authorities on which the state of the English law before Lord Mans • field was affirmed to be in support of his Noble and Learned Mend. But they relied further on cases which occurred anise. Let them first, however, consider what was. the weight of Lord Mansfield's general dictum. His Learned Brother, Baron Parke, with more doubt than his subsequent argument seemed to war rant, had shown their Lordships that it was not of great weight as applied to this case. He (Lord Denman) concurred in that view. He would corns: now to the causes-which were afterwards Vited. The. first was the "King A t•sl Powell ar4 Ryan; that case was relied on, but he could' n5 -- t see v_vjiat bearing w it had on the present ca se . Th ere 'ere several counts ; they•all charged one offence and some or the counts were objected to. The judge said that he would reserve the objections, but in the meantime would pass sentence, and if all the counts were found bad judgMent would be arrested; but if one was good the sentence would be carried into , effect, but that it was the practice of e the Court of King's Bench to take care t -sthat no verdict should be taken for the Crown on a e'.bad count. The next case was that of the " King v. siktuanli,''s.an indictment for obtaining money under false pretences, for which the punishment was dis cretionary—either pillory with imprisonment, or transportation. Now it was admitted that in the indictment twoof the counts were bad; but it was evident that there was great want of distinctness in the case as an authority, for the learned reporter himself said in his marginal note that judgment was arrested. That case; however, was very different from those in which the successive counts contained cumulative charges, which would lead to greater punishment in the discretion of the court. Now he thought that in those cases, where there were bad counts, the discretion might be ill exercised, and he " thought the court was bound to arrest the judgment, lest it should appear to have been awarded on the bad counts. The " King v. Young" was no authority on the point, although it was relied on by his Noble and Learned Friends. But there the court only refused to arrest the judgment in the' way stated, because there were good counts in the indictment, but it is relied on that because no writ of error 'was brought the decision of the court must be takin as conclusive. Yet, there was actually rio means of trying in what way the judgment was entered upon the record, nor was there anything whatever to show whether a writ of error could or could not be brought. His Noble and Learned Friend said that the - point had never been decided by a court of error, and, therefore, it was only difficult to make out any authorities upon this very doubtful, very loose, and (he would say) very censurable practice. His' Noble and Learned Friend said this was purely - technical in its nature, and that the effect of it would be, that if a party, were found guilty, not generally upon such an indict ment, but upon the good counts only, he would not be able to defend himself in case of any other charges being brought against him, by pleading that he had been already punished ; for the answer would be "No," because he had not been punished on the imperfect counts. What was the answer given by one of the most acute and learned persons he had ever the good fortune to meet with in an argument ?—let him observe not stated with any doubt—it was stated by Mr. Justice Coltman, . whose plain and manly understanding brought the' question before them in a way that could not be doubted. He said it was an injustice . that , a person should be punished who could not plead that punishuierit against being punished a second time on the same state of fa cts. What was the answer of Mr. Justice Patteion to that ? He said that the proceedings would be estopped. Why were they not estopped now, a conviction having taken place on this indictment ? Now, again, there would be a difficulty :in calling on the judge to decide at the assizes whether a count was good or had ; and they were to 'assume that he did so decide, and they were to get rid of that question, whether the decision was good, because he did not so decide. They were to have it both ways. They were to assist - he it was too difficult for him to give his mind to the subject at all, and they were to say that he had apportioned the judgment on those counts which were good in point of law. He thought when they got rid of the supposed authorities, the dicta founded on a mistaken and unfortunate observation of Lord Mansfield, that the principle would appear altogether unsatisfactory, and he thought when they looked at the 'record itself, without at - all advertino to the other Circumstances of the case, it would be found that judgment was pronounced on counts stating no offence, as well as on counts stating that_there had been offences upon which there were erroneous findings entered up, and that therefore the judgments.Of the court below had been incorrectly passed. He stated again that this point overpowered him not only with its novelty, but with the clear and demonstrated• force upon which, when he came to the examination of the arguments, it rested, and he took up, therefore, the principle on which he thought they could only set aside the judgment of the court below, namely, that what had been done by the court below was not properly done. He regarded the Court of Queen's Bench in Dublin with the greatest possible respect, and he had the highest opinion of the talents and endowments of the learned judges of that court. He had still a greater veneration for the opinions of his learned brethren here, with whom he acted, and for whom he entertained the greatest pus- Bible respect.. He acted there, however, as a judge for himself, and he felt bound in duty to ex- j ercise his judgment on the reasons brought before him. He thoUght that the reasoning in support of the judg ment was not gOod in point of law, and it was his duty to vote against the motion of his Noble and Learned Friend. LOrd COTTEiIHAM then proceeded to deliver his judgment. He , agreed with his Noble and Learned Friend who preceded him, as to the difficulty in which any Member of the House was placed who felt him self called on to come to a conclusion adverse to the great majority of the judges, and the effect of an opinion expressed by a great majority of the judges ought, of course, to make any one extremely cautious of coming to a conclusion con trary to what was expressed by their opinion, and it oulfht to m a k e one wa t c h every step one too k , an d to weigh t every conclusion which the mind was supposed com e to, in order that if a person came to an pinion adverse to that of the majority; and he should exercise all the pcwedr!frwith which he w as invested if to a he was to come rent conclusion. He ad o pt e d that course, he caref u l ly attended to all that h a d been urged at: their the reasons that had L o r dships' been bar, and all urged by the Lord Chief Justice in deliver the opinions of the judges. He hesitated at ng esery sti s u te c p am o e f the reasoning, as he follow e d hi m, and h e to the conclusion that the opinion expressed by the majority was wrong, and the opinion expressed by th e m i no rity was' right. He apprehended it was his bounden duty to state the reasons upon which he came to that conclusion. They asked for the assistance of the learned judges, in order to inform the House, to assist them in coming to a right conclusion in matters of law, and their opinions were entitled to great weight, but they were not to bind the House, they were merely to assist the House; and no doubt when a majority of them came to one conclusion, the great est caution and care should be taken at every reason ing upon which one felt bound to come. to a different opinion. On a question which lately came before their Lordships; there was a unanimous concurrence of the judges, and two of their Lordships concurred in their opinions, and two others dissented, so that the decision come to 'was against the opinion of all the judges. Upon one part of the case, to which his Noble and Learned Friend had last adverted, namely, the of the challenge of the array, he would merely advert to, for the purpose of guarding him self against the supposition of forming an opinion ~.~ ~m TIIE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING, SEPTEMBER 5, 1844 adverse to the case of the plaintiffs in error. He ' would only say that, if the judgment in that case was ' right, it would establish this strange proposition, that there was no remedy for an acknowledged wrong of great magnitude. The only part of the case on which he would address any observations to the House was, as to the effect to be given to the opinion of the learned judges, who thought that the first, second, third, and seventh counts of the indictment were to be rejected; the two last because they were bad in them selves, the others because the findings and the enter ing upon the findings were erroneous, and that a judgment and sentence of the court, which was " for his offences aforesaid" could not be impugned. A court of law could not be affected by a consideration of the nature of the counts which it was called on to reject. The question they had to consider was, whe-. ther there was error in the record, and if they read the record as any other document, and only gave to the words found there the construction they would receive if used in any other instrument, could it be for a moment doubted that, on the intend ments stated in the indictments in the several counts, the jury had found a verdict of guilty upon all, and that the defendants, for the offences aforesaid, were subject to punishment ? Had not the court below passed sentence for the offences in the sixth and seventh count, as well as for the offences charged in the others ? It was so found in the record, and were they to say that the court had not passed sentence upon all the counts ? He considered that the only answer given, namely, that the court only passed sen tence upon the good counts, was unsatisfactory. They could not look to the record to ascertain cer tain proceedings not mentioned in it. Some of the arguments that had been used, supposed the court below to be right in all particulars. In his opiniorl the reverse was the fact ; there was manifest error on the ' record, and it was not competent for a court of error to inquire into the causes of that error. Supposing there was a charge in a count of a malignant libel, and that count was proved to be bad, was it to be said that the party was to be punished equally , as if the count was good? Now, the judg ment of the House was to be governed by the cases that had taken place ; and with respect to them seve ral had been referred to. Two classes of cases had been cited, the second of which he considered only to be applicable to the present case ; the first were utterly inapplicable. The Noble and Learned Lord then adverted to the cases of the " Queen v. Rhodes" and the " Queen. v. Ingram," for the pur• pose of showing that the court in those •• - had arrested the judgment on the ground thd cif the counts being proved to he bad, t • • a., - could not apportion the punisTiihent. " Young /4.4.. King" had been relied upon on the part of the Cieewn. He had carefully examined that case, and; he s did - not consider that the decision pronounced in it had any bearing whatever on the present. It had been said, that in the " King, v. Mason," a misdemeanour was charged on two counts, and therefore the . judgment was sustained. Now that was not the fact ; and in the "King v. Fuller," it Was clearly laid down that judgment could not be passed if there was any good count. Frotn all these authorities, it appeared that the rule in criminal cases, on a motion in arrest of judgment was, that the court having ascertained, before it pro nounced judgment, what counts were good and_ what bad, awarded the punishMent, as it thought right, upon the offences contained in the good counts. It appeared to him that a court of error was in precisely the same predicament. It had no more jurisdiction over the quantum of pu nishment, and no better means of referring one por tion of it to one count, or another to another, than *a civil court had with respect to damages in an action. In both cases the judgment proceeded on an indict ment which was found to be defective, and having come to one result upon the whole, which the su perior jurisdiction could not apportion, the same necessity existed in the one case as in the other, of holding the whole to be bad. It had been urged that much inconvenience would arise from adopting this rule. He felt satisfied that the inconvenience which would arise from the opposite I course would be far greater, and would in many cases be productive of great injustice. The only inconvenience was, that the prosecutor would be com pelled to be careful as to the counts upon which he rested his case; whilst the rejection of the rule would deprive the defendants of the benefit of a writ of error. The rule contended for by the de fendants was founded on principle, and necessary for the purposes of justice; and it was in perfect analogy with the decisions in civil and criminal cases. The opinion which he had then expressed he formed early in the argument. He had carefully attended to all that had been urged at the bar by the majority of the judges against it, and he had not found any reason for altering his view. Lord CAMPBELL then proceeded to read his judg ment. He said it was now his duty to state to their Lordships the opinion which, after great considera tion, he had formed upon the questions of law raised by this record, and to these, ofcourse, he should strictly confine himself. In the first place, he had no doubt that there were various good counts in the indictment. A conspiracy to effect an unlawful purpose, or to effect a lawful purpose by unlawful means, was, by the common law of England, an indictable offence ; and if several persons deliberately plotted mischief to an individual or to the State, they were liable to punishment, although they might have done no act in execution of their purpose. Where they had actually done what they intended to do, it might be more proper to prosecute them for illegal acts ; but in point of law, they remained liable for the offence of entering into a conspiracy. The first five counts in this indictment clearly charged the de fendants with having conspired together to dicta' un lawful:purposes. The fifth count was strongly objected to. He considered that any person who deliberately attempted to promote feelings of and hosti- lity between different classes of her Majesty's stab-t , jects, to make the English hated by the Irish; or' the Irish by the English, was guilty of a most culpable proceeding, and that, if several combined to do so, they committed a misdemeanour, for which tiler might be indicted and punished. lie was likewise clearly of opinion that the plea in abatement was bad in form, if not in substance, for -not averring that there were nut other witnesses duly sworn, on whose evidence the indictment niight have baen supported, and for not showing that" the witnesses who were examined could not, on account of their religious profession, have been lawfully eXainined without being sworn in. He thought :!the Court of Queerra Bench was fully authorised :to continue the trial- in the vacation, and that the ;bider for that purpose, though conditional, was quite sufficient. In his opi nion, the rule of the common law requiring the con tinuance of the order did not apply. The question raised by the writ of error, coram nobis, was more doubtful. The assignment of error in respect to the witnesses not having been sworn in court, was free from defects fatal to the plea in abatement. lie had no difficulty in over-ruling Mr. Steele's point, that there was no statement written -on the indictment of the names of the witnesses sworn; He was at first much struck with the objection to the validity of the judgment by reason of the form of the recognisance into Which the defendant was required to enter, and he was by ncemea.ns free from doubt upon it then, although he was not prepared to say that it would be a sufficient ground for reversal. It must be taken to be part of the sentence pronounced upon the defendant for the offences of which he had been found guilty, and it could not be separated from the finding. The recognisances imposed in this case might lead to perpetual imprisonment. Magna Charta provided that no fine should be im posed upon any party which it was out of his power to pay. The effect of the sentence, in this case, would be, that if the required recognisances were not found, the party would remain in prison for the rest of his life r He felt still more - difficulty when he came to the next part of the case—probably the most important part of it, as it was not merely a technical question, but one which affected the administration of justice—he meant the constitution of the jury by whom the defendants were tried. The only question here was, whether the challenge to the array was a remedy which the law allowed. (The Noble and Learned Lord here read that portion of the plea of the defendants which applied to this part of their case.) Now, he was clearly of opinion that the defendants ought not to have been tried by a jury constituted in the manner described in the case of the plaintiffs in error. It was there described not merely as a casual omission of names, but the averment was that the names had been-fraudulently omitted. He conceived that under such circumstances the panel ought to have been quashed. No other remedy was suggested. His Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack had suggested no remedy. If the jury list was found to be defective, the jury list of the former year ought to have been brought into operation as though no list had been formed for the current year. He confessed that he should not have been inclined to ad vise their Lordships to reverse the judgment merely upon this ground upon his own sole opinion, but since writing his judgment he had listened to the argu mentsof his Noble and Learned Friend the Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench, and also those of Mr. Justic e Coltman. The jury were unanimous in the opinio n th a t th e fi n di ng o f t h e j urymen on the 2d, lst, and 3d counts of the indictment were contrary to law. His opinion off nces was s that the punishment must be tak en as Navin ebeencharged e i n bad respect of the supposedcounts. According to the plain use of language and the com mon sense of mankind, the defendants were being punished on charges which did not amount to crimes, and for crimes of which they had not been con victed. With respect to the bad counts, it was said that it was a rule of law if there were any good counts, a bad count would not vitiate the judgment. It would be strange if such were the universal rule. Such might very well be the case where only one corpus dilicti was charged in an indictment consisting of more than one count in utile per inutile non vitiatur ; but where the separate counts of an indict ment charged distinct offences, they must be consi dered as separate indictments, and, as had been shown in the case of Feargus O'Connor, where the court had arrested the judgment upon one count as soon as it was discovered to be bad. They were told that they were to presume that the court below knew what counts were bad, and what were good, and passed judgment upon those counts only which were good. Such an opi nion would be contrary to the whole spirit of our law, which supposed judges to be fallible, and provided a machinery by bills of exceptions, writs of error, and other expedients, for the correction of any errors into which they might fall ; and it would be contrary to fact, for all the judges in the Court of Queen's Bench in Ireland had held the sixth and seventh counts to be unexceptionable. lie would suppose a case, in which there were two counts, A and B, A being a good count, and B a bad one, the court below held B, which charged a grave offence, to be good, and A, which charged a light offence, to be bad, and passed sentence on the count B, would it be held that a court of error, finding the count B to be bad, would be bound to subject a man to that severe punishment, because A, charging a lighter offence, was good ? This doctrine was attempted to be upheld on authority, and by the general opinion of the profession. The dictum of Lord Mansfield referred solely to motions in arrest of judgment, and not to writs of error. It had no application at all to the present case; and in the cases of the " King and Mason," and the " King and Young," the point had not been raised. The case in " Russell and Bligh" amounted to nothing, as the Court had no power to consider any thing but the point reserved; and in the " King and Powell" it was decided that misdemeanour and offence must be con sidered as a novum collectinum, and as both counts were held good, there could be no doubt that the judg ment was correct. In indictments for perjury, if one assignment were good, that would support a verdict, because perjury was but one offence, and one good assignment was sufficient to support it, how many bad ones soever there might be in the indictment. It was said that this indictment ought to be supported on the ground of expediency. He could not see what inconvenience could possibly arise from taking a verdict upon such count, and passing sentence only upon those counts which were good. lie understood that Mr. Baron Rolfe had Vesed sentence in an indictment for murder in which 'cffe'count was bad, but in such a case no practical difficulty would arise, as where one felony was proved it; was sufficknt to support a verdict of guilty, and lejeuld nevir. be , worth the while of a person con `v of felony OU otie goorcOube - to sue out a writ of error. Bat in cores of misdemeannr ittviwas very different, for actor ding to the present loo4sygtem of drawing up indict Ants, a pleader having drawn one good count, might go on draWing - other counts, each' increasing in vagueness and ambiguity, until he involved the patty indicted in such perplexity, that there would be the greatest difficulty in ascertaining of what he was accused. There could be no difficulty in taking a verdict Of acquittal, or entering a nolli prosequi on the counts that were bad, and passing judgment only on those that were good.' It had been said by the learned judges, with the ex ception of Justice Patteson, on the good counts only, and not on the three bad ones ; and yet, those counts contained the most serious charges, includinc , that of creating discontent in the army. Now, could their Lordships concur in the incredible fiction, that the judges, having the general verdict, so far neglected their duty as to overlook those grave charges ? He would remind their Lordships that they were not bound by the opi nion of the majority of the judges. The appeal was not from the Irish to the English judges, but to that Chamber, in the exercise of one of its most important functions, which he hoped their Lordships would long continue to exercise for the benefit of the coun try and the protection of its liberties. The LORD CHANCELLOR then put the question thus —ls it your Lordships' pleasure that the judgment be reversed ? Lords Denman, Cottenham, and Campbell said, " Content." Lord Brougham and two or three Tory Peers (lay Lords) said "Not Content." The LORD CHANCELLOR was about to put the ques tion again, in the usual form, previous to taking the numbers or dividing, when— Lord WHARNCLIFFE rose, but on the suggestion of the Lord Chancellor, he sat down, put on his hat, and addressed the House from his seat. He said that he did not think it desirable that their Lordships should divide, as there was a majority of the law lordi in the House in favour of the appeal. He humbly recommended those of their Lordships who were not law lords—and who, not having heard the whole case, were not so well qualified to judge of the question—to abstain from voting. It was far better that the character of the House, as a court of appeal, should be maintained, and that their decision should be against the opinion of the majority of the judges— even though in this case it should produce great inconvenience—than that those Lords who had not heard the case should, by their interference, reverse the judgment of those members to whom e deci sion of such cases was usually committed by the prac tice of the House. , Lord BROUGHAM entirely concurred in the opinion of the majority of the judges in Ireland and England. But he also agreed with the Noble Lord who had just spoken, that it was more advisable that those of their Lordships who had not heard the case, should not vote. He deeply lamented the division to which the Hotiseivotild come ; but he would now only say, that. when he differed from the majority of the judges on the queStion' of Presbyterian Marriages in Ireland, he did so upon- the authority of Lord Stowell and other leditent persons. Lord CAMPBELL had voted' with his Noble 'Friend on the question of Presbyterian Marriages, and for the same reason. He would now only say that the dis tinction between lay Lords.and law Lords was not knoWn to the Constitution, but that it was the rule of all courts of law that no judge should decide a case which he had not heard. The Duke of CLEVELAND was understood to say that he had paid great attention to the case, und that he thought he had a right to vote upon it. The 'Marquis of CLANRICARDE said that if any other lay -Veer voted, he would vote also, although he=thought it would be calamitous for the character of the House, as a judicial body, if the established rule in such cases were departed from. - After a few words from Lord VERULAM, the whole of the lay - Peers withdrew. The question was again put, and Lords Cottenham, Denman, and Campbell having voted for the reversal of thei judgrinent, and Lord Brougham against it, The :LORD CHANCELLOR said—My Lords, THE JUDGMENT IS REVERSED. before said, it was unwise to press and strain too much upon the well-known and proverbial loyalty of the Irish people, more especially as it had ever been in time of war and danger that their rights had been partly con ceded to them. In conclusion, he stated that he felt sa tisfied in his own mind that the day was not far distant when the mighty shadow of a corning event would be lost in the bright reality of an Irish Parliament. Several contributions from different parts of England and Ireland having been handed in, Mr. R. D. BROWSE rose and stated that he appeared there as the representative of Mr. W. S. O'Brien, from whom he would read a letter addressed to the Secretary of the Association. After the Hon. Gentleman had con cluded reading the letter of Mr. O'Brien, he proceeded to compliment the Chairman upon the speech with which lie had opened the day's proceedings. He next dwelt upon foreign affairs—upon the French fleet and army located on the north coast of Africa, and then touched upon the intended visit of her Majesty to Ireland. The first, indeed, deeply affected the interests of Ireland. With respect to the other, there were perspective con siderations as to the demeanour of the Irish people upon that occasion when the eyes of the world would be upon them, but it sank into insignifance when compared with the former topic. A French fleet was now sweep ing through the Mediterranean. Now, it was a melan choly fact that the political aphorism. " That England's weakness was Ireland's opportunity"—(Loud cheers) — was only too true.—(Renewed cheering.) With one so litary exception, Ireland had never gained a concession except by the arms of France—(Applause)—by the arms of America—(Great cheering)—or by some intes tinal tumult. The present time was the hour of Eng land's weakness.—(" No, no," and cries of" Hear, hear.") The Learned Member then proceeded at great length to consider the present state of the Mediterranean, which in his opinion was most perilous to the interests of Eng land. He praised the Prince de Joinville and the French navy. Suppose the armies of England were occupied in the Oregon territory, or in Canada, where the French habitans sympathise with their European ancestors—or on the heights of Caubul, contending with the stardy Affghans—or in suppressing monster meetings in Ire land—or, what is still more formidable, in stifling the cries of the hungry artisans of England for bread, who are beginning to feel that it is as well to die by the sword as by famine. If England's army was thus en gaged what was to prevent the Prince de Joinville, who had already seized upon one of the pillars of Hercules, from ascertaining whether Calpe's boasted rock was in , deed inaccessible. Whom would England have to sup port her in such a contest ?—(Hear, hear.) Would the Russians tender their assistance ? Would Mehemet Ali feel grateful to England for her past conduct ? Would the Pope coincide with the people of England against Catholic France ?—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) Would the Sultan join his forces to those of England while an avalanche was in the act of gathering in the North which; . 44411e(Fdown and crush the minarets of Constantity . (t . eiiftriCiA(English had applied the term cowards: ta:lorefraiktitt..navy of France. The noble spirit,of c fA clrleape c i into life at the word in the youth ful sec of the .Prince de Joinville, who had an swereilat with the thunder of his cannons against Tan giers.—(Loud and long-continued applause.) The con duct of England had been marked by weakness and indecision, and reminded him of a story which he had heard of 'a man who said to an assailant of his, " You have called me a rascal and a liar. You have kicked me too, but beware! If you insult me again, you will rouse the British lion within me."—(Applause and laugh ter.) Now, he came to the royal visit to this country, the people of -Ireland were attached to the person of their Sovereign; they would even be ambitious to shed their blood in the defence of the glory of her empire, if justice were done to Ireland.—(Cheers.) They would welcome their Sovereign in their hearts, but he would say, it was an ill-tinied visit.—(Hear.) If O'Connell was liberated it wotild'he an ill-timed visit, because he would not, nor would the people of Ireland take it as a boon; injustice had been done them, and they (lid nct come crouching either before a Sovereign or a Minister. —(hear.) But if she came this year, he for one would not shout in her train; and while O'Connell was in pri son, let it be recollected that Ireland was a house of mourning, and no idle and ostentatious pageant should intrude upon the soil.—(Cheers.) But if she came to Ireland, he trusted she would take advantage of the op portunity and learn the real condition of their country; that she would not take Dublin as what it might appear then for the moment, but that she would inquire and hear of its deserted Custom-house—its deserted Hall of Trade—its deserted shops—its deserted streets in ordinary . circumstances—(Rear, hear) — the houses of its nobility uninhabited—the houses of its gentry crumbling to ruins—its. Exchange a mockery—its Bank a monopoly, and its Castle the seat of their Government—a despotism. —(Hear, hear.) Let her Majesty travel to the interior of the country, and see the almost naked peasant—a hapless, shoeless human being and her subject, the proud Victoria.—(ifear, hear.) Let her see its spacious harbours—let her behold its rapid, its liquid streams, capable of turning a great portion of the manufactories of England and floating the armada, rolling on in their majestic course through millions of acres of uncultivated land.—(Hear.) Let her at last contemplate her peace able, intelligent, sober, and loyal people ; and when she went back to her Ministry, let her exclaim, " Is a country so circumstanced to be in such a condition ? Are a people so blessed by Providence to be reduced to such a state of ineffable misery, of dangerous despair ?" Mr. D. O'CoNNELL, jun., read a communication from a private source in London, bearing date Saturday even ing, and detailing some particulars connected with the consultation of the Judges on the writ of error question, who, it was stated, had assembled on that morning at the residence of Sir N. C. Tindal, the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, to consider in private, and interpret the law bearing on the most material points urged in objection on the part of the traversers. Other speeches were delivered by General Cloney, the Rev. Mr. O'Neil, and other gentlemen, who handed in contributions to the national treasury from various parts of Ireland. Mr. D. O'CONNELL again rose to bring forward his weekly bulletin from the Richmond Bridewell. He first announced that the traversers were in excellent health and spirits. He then proceeded to read as follows :- 6' The decision of the judges to be waited for with the utmost indifference, the eleven questions referred to the English judges being so framed as to exclude the consideration of th e .great merits. of the case of the traversers. In particular, no question arises upon the charge of the Chief Justice, a charge that nobody has been found, either in or out of the Houses of Parlia ment, to defend ; yet the traversers are deprived of any advantage from the illegality of that charge. The traversers are aLo deprived of any benefit from the Irish judges having admitted newspapers - as evidence of the facts therein contained against the traversers. It is quite manifest that this evidence would not have been received by the Court of Queen's Bench in Eng land, yet the traversers are deprived of any benefit arising from the illegality of that evidence. The eleven questions submitted to the judge 4 are framed in the most unfavourable way for the traversers, and can be met:and .answered negatively on technial reasons, totally independent. of, and unconnected with the merits: tinder those circumstanc e s, i t wou ld lie quite idle to expect anything favourable from the decision of- the English judg...s. Let the people, therefore, throughout Ireland, receive with the utmost tranquillity, and a ith out the slightest irritation the announcement of an un favourable deci,ion by 'the judges." Such, I know, would be my father's opinion and advice, if he 'were present. My father is thoroughly convinced that the tranquillity of the country will be unimpaired, and that the remainder of the imprisonment will pass away with the same tranquil forbearance on the part of the people that has marked the three preceding months. .In the present state of the political world there is no need of impatience perseverance, th a t i s , p ersev erance accom panied tra nqu illi ty , w ill i nsure , beyond a doubt, P—atniel lail9 .'by Ilil the repeal of the union. My father is very anxious that the gentlemen engaged in the late registry in the city of Dublin should be sensible of his deep gratitude to them for their patriotic and disinterested exertions, and in particular Counsellors Mackey and Burke, who deserve the thanks of the Association, for their legal acumen and patriotic exertions. These gen tlemen have set a most laudable example to other patriotic barristers and attorneys. It is most desirable to follow up the exertions for registry in the city of Dublin, and in particular to apply to the Protestant operatives and tradesmen to procure them to join in the repeal registration. The Protestant operatives and trades men have the same, if not a deeper interest in the repeal of the union than the Catholics, and it is quite certain that no candidate will get the support of the Liberal in terest at the next election buta repealer, no matter what his religion may be—that is utterly immaterial to the pub lic. My father thinks that there would be no objection at all to vote for the present Members if they declared themselves Repealers, as they assuredly ought, if they consult the material interests of their constituents. Everything must be done to procure the registration to be universal throughout the counties at the next session; but this subject is so powerfully taken up by that inesti mable patriot, Smith O'Brien, that any details had better be reserved for his return to town. Peace and perseve rance—tranquil perseverance! It is manifest that politi cal events are thickening into such consistency as will render it impossible that Ireland shall not peaceably ob tain justice. Hurra for Repeal ! Mr. R. D. BROWNE explained to the meeting that he had penned a letter to the Nation newspaper, in consequence of some strictures which appeared in that journal ; but after an interview with Mr. O'Connell, he considered it the more prudent course, for unanimity sake, not to have it published. Mr. M'NEvn.r then read a report on the subject of the attendance of Irish Members in Parliament. The report was adopted. Mr. GORDON rose up, and in rather an abrupt and excited manner, gave notice of the following motion, which he expressed his intention of moving on that day fortnight ;—" That in the event of a war with France, to , resolve that an extraordinary. genera l meeting of this Association b e called exclusively for t he p ur pose of taking into con sider a tion the propriety of revivin g the volunteer or g anisation of 1779 and 1782, b y me ans of which the people of Ireland protected their country from the foreign f o e, in circumstances s imilar to those which now threaten the security. of the three nations, as well as the general peace of the world ; and under which th e y also wrung from the oppressors and Anti-Irish Ministe rial factions of those periods, freedom of trade and legis lative independence." When Mr. Gordon had finished reading his notice, and was about addressing the me etin g , h e was interrupted by Mr. R. D. BitowNE, who called upon the Chairman not to receive that proposition. — (Loud cr i es o f " H ear, hear," " Order, order," and some slight excitement.) It is not safe to receive such a document. —(Great cheer ing.) That motion would be manifestly illegal, and Mr. O'Connell had stated that any such attempt would ex pose the Association to danger.—(Loud cheers.) The CHAIRMAN expressed his determination not to receive the notice, as he conceived it WAS of an illegal character. Mr. GORDON, amid some confusion, claimed the right to speak, and urged that his notice of motion was per fectly just and legitimate. Mr. R.D. BROWNE protested against Mr. Gordon speak ing in reference to the notice, which could not be received. Town-councillor REILLY interrupted the discussion by handing in several sums of money. Mr. GORDON again essayed to address the Chair, when Mr. R. D. BROWNE declared that if such vague, un digested motions were entertained in that meeting, he would take up his hat and leave the place. The lion. i 1 ember then read a letter from the parish priest of Claremorris, one of Mr. Browne's constituents. The rent for the week was announced to be 7351. Mr. M. Blake was then called to the Chair, and a vote of thanks having been passed to Mr. O'Hea, the meeting separated. LAW INTELLIGENCE. ADMIRALTY COURT, Sept. 4. The first Surrogates' Court during the vacation was held this day at Doctors' Commons, fur the purpose of hearing applications, several of which were upon the list, but none of them possessed much general interest. her husband worked." When they got into her room, the man ordered her to open her boxes and drawers, and to give him up all the papers therein, as he said they no doubt would throiv some light on the robberies which her husband had committed on his employers. She then proceeded to unlock her drawers, in which there was a green purse containing 12/. 10s., and the .moment he saw it he took possession of it, saying that it was part of the produce of the robbery. and he afterwards took six silver spoons and a small jewel-case containing two . gold wedding-rings and other articles of jevr ellery, adding that he had no doubt they were also pur chased with part of the stolen money. During these proceedings the nurse and the other female lodger were down stairs, not interfering, under the supposition that the " gentlemen" were either tax-gatherers or pub lic officers; and as she (complainant) believed all along they were the latter, she did not oppose them in any way, although she was so much terrified that she could scarcely move. When he had ransacks the place he then asked her upon her oath if she had exhibited every thing to him, and on her reply in° in the affirmative he then said that she must he careful of what she said, for that she would have to make the same statement again before their superiors. Having placed the money, spoons, and jewel-case in his pocket, he then inquired for a sheet of writing-paper, saying that he should write a letter to the inspector oft a Tower-street station house, where her husband was locked up, requesting that every indulgence might be granted to him consis tent with his safe custody, and he then proposed that she should take the note to the station-house, adding, that probably the inspector would liberate him until the day of examination arrived. He then called the prisoner Cooper, saying that he would accompany her to Tower street, and when she said that she was afraid she would not be able to go so far, his remark was that Cooper would assist her there, that she should lean upon his arm, and that the sooner it was done the sooner would her husband be released from the station-house. She agreed to this arrangement, and having thrown on her bonnet and shawl, she and Cooper, who bad the letter, left the house together, leaving the tall man behind, who said that he should wait until their return. When she and Cooper got to the end of Agnes-street, Waterloo-road, they proceeded on towards the Hero of Waterloo Tavern, and when they got near that house, Cooper said there was an officer waiting there for him, and desired her to wait at a little distance until he came out. Cooper then left her, and having waited for some time for his return, and finding he did not come back, she hastened off to her house, found the street door wide open, and the tall man gone. The complainant added, that she then sus pected it was all a plan laid to rob the house, and her suspicions were verified on her husband shortly after wards retarning home from his employer's premises. In reply to Mr. TRAILL, the complainant said that she Should know the tall man who ransacked her drawers, but that Jackson was not the man. Sarah Cowper confirmed the greater portion of the complainant's evidence, and as she was the person who opened the door for the men who robbed the house, and had a full opportunity of distinguishing their persons and features, said that she could speak positively to the identity of Cooper as being one of them. Sergeant Langley, of the detective police, stated that having received information of the robbery, together with a description of the men who committed it, he took the prisoners into custody, walking together in the West- Minster-road. Jackson gave a fictitious name and address, and seeing a wedding-ring on one of his fingers he tried to get it off, suipectlng it to have been stolen from Mrs. Brundall, but he failed in the attempt, and he was therefore desirous that the complainant should now examine the ring on Jackson's finger, and state whether it was hers Or not. Jackson said he had broken the ring in attempting to take it off his finger, and that he threw it away on going to the station-house. The prisoners, who said they would reserve their defence, were remanded until Wednesday. • WANDSTV 01? TH. On Tuesday James Dawes, waggoner to the Earl of Lovelace, the Lord-Lieutenant of the county of Surrey, and John Clements, carman to Mr. Collins, a distiller at Byfleet, Surrey, was brought before Mr. Clive for re-ex atniriath,n, the former charged with stealing a bundle of hay, the property of the above-mentioned nobleman, and the latter with receiving the same, knov%lng it to be stolen. The facts, as detailed at the first examination, were as follows :—On Friday morning last, at about half past five o'clock, police-constable Gardiner, 279 V, was on diity in the High-street, Wandsworth, when he observed the two prisoners behind a waggon loaded with hay. The constable saw Dawes draw bundle of hay fr3m under the waggon, and give it to Clements, who put it into his cart. The constable afterwards went to Cle ments, and told him that he had been doing wrong in taking the . hay, when the latter said that it was no busi ness of his, and drove off. The policeman caught hold of the reins, and was dragged upwards of half a mile befbre another constable came to his assistance, when he took the prisoner into custody, and afterwards went back and, apprehended Dawes. The defence made by the prisoners was, that it was no robbery, and that they were merely exchanging fodder =Dawes giving hay for clover. The prisoners, for whom the sitting magistrate (Mr. Clive) refused bail, were remanded until Tuesday next. After the prisoners had been placed in the dock yes terday, Mr. Cluvx asked if there was any one in attendance from the Earl of Lovelace ? Mr. William Kaye, his Lordship's steward, stepped forward. Mr. CLIVE—I have received a letter from Lord Love lade. I suppose you are aware of its contents ? Mr. Kaye—l believe I am. His Lordship won't prosecute his waggoner. He has had him for many years, and believes him to be an honest servant. The practice of exchanging fodder on the road is one that frequently occurs, and I should allow it. Mr. CLlVE—Whatever your opinion may be, I think a decided case of felony has been made out; but if your master will not prosecute, why the men must be dis charged. Mr. Kaye said that th e p r i soners h a d ac t e d as they had done believing that they had a right to do so. Mr. CLIVE called police-constable Gardiner, 279 V, and asked him if, when the prisoners were taken into custody, they attempted to set up their act as a matter of right. The constable replied, certainly not ; and it was not until they had been brought to that Court that they said they were only exchanging hay for clover. Mr. Kaye submitted, that it was a known practice for waggoners and carters who were acquainted with each other to exchange fodder, whilst on their journey, and the prisoner Dawes had his authority to exchange fodder if he thought fit to do so. Mr. CravE—There is no evidence here of exchange•, and there is no proof that Clements was possessed of any clover, and it is my belief that this defence was con cocted between the parties after they were in custody. Robberies of this kind are exceedingly numerous, and it requires the utmost vigilance on the part of the police to detect them. I have been led to make these remarks in consequence of the receipt of a letter from 14 , ,rd Lovelace, in which his Lordship thinks the police are to blame ; but I will read the substance of the communi cation. (The worthy Magistrate then read portions of the letter, which were to the effect that Lord Lovelace considered his servant had been most unjustly treated in being committed to prison on a frivolous charge of steal ing hay, when the practice on the road of exchanging fodder was generally known, and allowed by the masters. He considered his servant had done nothing more than he would have done in the steward's presence ; but owing to the officious meddling of the police he had been treated as a criminal, and his (Lord Lovelace's) property had been jeopardized by being intrusted to a little boy. The letter•proceeded to state that he trusted the magis trate would feel it right to order the release of his ser vant, and make him some reparation for having been confined among felons: If that was not done, he should take legal advice as to the best means of exposing the oppression under which an innocent man had been de prived of his liberty, and respectable bail refused.) Mr. Cravu said he had distinctly understood the lad's age to be sixteen who was intrusted with his Lordship's team, and that he had himself stated that he was fully capable of managing it; but that did not matter. It had nothing to do with the charge. Mr. Kaye—My opinion is that the police should have found some one more competent to take the team home. Mr. CLIVE-It does not matter about your opinion. If his Lordship thinks it necessary to take proceedings against the police, they will be prepared to meet the chatlge._ _ __ _ Mr. Kaye—His Lordship will expect compliance with the tmns of his note. Mr. CLIVE—It is not becoming in you to threat(-n in a court of justice. I told you before, the police will be prepared to meet any charge, and I repeat that they were justified in what they did. Mr. CLIVE afterwards read a letter from Mr. Collins, the master of the other prisoner, in which that p erson regretted that his servant should have got into trouble, and blamed him for not having taken sufficient food fur his horses from home. The Magistrate thought this letter proved that no exchange touk place, or was in tended; for it was pretty evident that Clements had no clover, or any other kind of fodder, to give in exchange for hay. The prisoners were then discharged. .PORT'ENTOUS LAUNCH AT GREENOCK. It is pretty generally known, that for some time past a schooner has been building at this port, intended I .as a sort of floatin g b a tt ery, t o ena bl e t h e m i n i sters of the Free Secession to carry on their war against the Church, among the sounds and shores of the West Highlands. By the brusque and fiery zealots with whom this enterprise originated, every conceivable effort has been exhausted, in order to invest it with an interest and consequentiality, not dissimilar to what attached .50 years ago to the London Missionary ves sel called the Duff, a name , by th e wa y, w hich this Hebridean privateer mi g ht no t unsu it a bly emulate, in compliment to that exploit, whereby a certain Calcutta officer in the same service has recently made free with the site for " the Orphan Refuge," belonging of right to the Establishment he has deserted. Enthusiasm has been wrought up to the highest pitch in favour of the Gree,nock galley. Even during the sacramental week just ended, the nee ministers v.ho had come to assist at the communion were repeatedly observed at the building-yard, inspecting its progress. Yesterday was the day fixed upon for the launch, for w hi c h pre parations of no ordinary kind bad been proudly ar ranged. All sorts of gay Erastian flags were be dizening the merry masts. Horrid worldly guns were ever and anon piercing the peaceful air. The free mantuamake:s and other f, ee ladies were s-en and trailing from all quarters. A finer day for the occasion could not possibly have been desired ; the assembled concourse of sympathising seamstresses and of truants, both from the counter and the kitchen, IRELAND. DUBLIN, SEPT. 2.—The weekly meeting of the Re peal "Association was held to-day in the Conciliation Hall, which presented a crowded appearance. Robert Dillon Browne, Esq., M.P., for Mayo, discharged the duties ofleader with great ability, in the absence of John Smith O'Brien, Esq., M.P., and Henry Grattan, Esq., M.P. for IVicklow. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman, who was greeted with loud and rapturous applause on taking his seat next to Mr. O'Connell's chair, moved that James O'Hea, Esq., barrister-at-law, and one of the junior coun'serfur the traversers in the Irish State trials, do preside.. _ _ _ The Learned CHAIRMAN called the attention of the meeting to the fact, that since the incarceration of Mr. O'Connell and his fellow-martyrs, the chair had been in variably filled by Members of Parliament—men of rank and station ; but the Committee had, on the present oc casion, deviated from the principles which regulated the selection of chairman, and selected so humble an in dividual as himself to hold that high and important position, for the purpose of showing to the lowliest mem bers of the Association that the highest honours which the Association could bestow were as open to them as to their superiors in rank and wealth. Mr. O'Hea then alluded to the fact, that while they (the Repeal ers) were holding their great national weekly as sembly on that day, the House of Lords were pro nouncing judgment on the writ of error in the great State cause of the Queen v. O'Connell. He was perfectly aware that if' that legal decision should be ad verse to the Repeal meetings, it would be turned to an improper and unjustifiable use. The Premier of Eng ' land had said, in his place in Parliament, that Mr. i O'Connell and his compatriots had had a fair trial— (Loud cries of " NO, no")—and if the decision of the English Judges and Law Lords on the record proved un- I favourable to the men who were suffering incarceration for their country, he had no doubt on his mind but that the Tory press and the Tory speakers would assert that • such decision was corroborative testimony that the pri soners were fairly and impartially tried. The Chairman then argued at great length and with considerable ability, that even in deciding adversely to the prisoners the House of Lords would make no pronouncement whatever a: to the fairness or unfairness of the Judge's charge to the jury empannelled for Mr. O'Connell's trial. He forewarned the public mind not to be led away by the 'arguments of the Tory pre. ss. They should remember that it was upon the proceedings on the record that the House of Lords was to decide, and not on the merits of the case.—(Hear.) Alluding to the present state and present prospects of the great national cause, the Chair man said that he saw no reason for despair , much less for despondency, but every reason for Cheerfulness. War was impending, and it seemed unavoidable—it was all but proclaimed. In such an event occurring Sir Robert Peel said he relied upon the loyalty of the Irish people.—(Laughter, and, ironical cheers.) He was right, however, and he might rely that the Irish would be found like a wall of fire around their Sovereign. But he asked,,had the Minister any 'right to oppress, to bar rass the Irish people, and t , ) strain their loyalty too far ? Was' it reasonable to expect that they would bear the brunt of the battle, and reap no advantages from the victory ? The Tangiers pepper would perhaps season some agreeable condiment, of which the Irish people would be called upon to 'partake. It was their (the Repealers') time to make their own terms. As he THE CASE OF THE EDWARD AND JANE. In this case the claim arose from certain services ren dered by four fishermen to the above vessel off the port of Itomeney during a severe gale, in which the vessel had sprung a leak. The sailors went on board, and by their exertions in assisting the crew, who were very much exhausted, alleged that they contributed mainly in saving the vessel. For this service they claimed a sum of 401. as salvage money. By the owners it was answered that the services of the applicants were nut wanted, or if they were, not to that degree at all which they alleged, as the ship was well manned, and after the departure of the claimants was enabled to gain port, where she underwent some very slight repairs, and proceeded on her voyage. The case had been already argued before the Court during the term from which it stood over to the next Surrogates' Court. This day it was further adjourned by the consent of the proctors on both sides, as the owners were not as yet fully prepared with their answer. The Court then adjourned, the next day for sitting being fixed for the 9th of next month. CONS'S TORY COURT, Sept, 4. This Court met to-day for the first time since the ter mination of the general sitting, to dispose of short ap• plications. No case of genes-al interest came before the Court, which was ordered to stand ajourned to October 9. SUMMER ASSIZES. NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Liverpool, Sept. 2. (Before Mr. Justice CRESSWELL.) VON DADELZER V. UNSWORTH AND LUND. This was an action in which the plaintiff claimed com pensation in damages from the defendants, for the non completion of a contract by the latter to buy from the plaintiff 200 tuns of palm oil. The defendants had pleaded, among other pleas, that the plaintiff was not ready to deliver the oil in question at the stipulated time. Mr. Baines and Mr. Denman for the plaintiff ; and Mr. Crompton for the defendant. It appeared from the case for the plaintiff that he is a merchant in this town, and the defendants carrying on the business of soap boilers. They were also dealers in palm oil, and in the latter part of the year 1843 held a considerable stock of that article. They were desirous at that time of making some reduction of the stock, without the necessity of throwing it heavily upon the market, and through their broker, Mr. Rayner, they ar• ranged with the plaintiff, who then wanted a quantity of oil for exportation, that they would supply him with with 200 tuns at 271. per tun, they agreeing to take from him in the course of the following year the same quantity at the same price. Accordingly they delivered to the plaintiff 200 tuns, and bought and sold notes were exchanged between the parties, with a view to the completion of the other half of the bargain, viz., the receipt by the defendants of a similar quantity at a future time. By the terms of the con tract the defendants engaged to take from the plain tiff 200 tuns palm oil, at 271. per tun, in bond in the warehouses, to be delivered between tke Ist of February and the 30th of June, 1844. The price of the article rose atj the end of the year 1843, and the de fendants had every prospect of having made a good bargain, but in the beginning of 1844 the markets began to fall. On the 18th of June the plaintiff, through his broker, Mr. Rayner, wrote to the defendants, stating that he was ready to deliver the 200 tuns of oil, and asking their directions as to the mode of delivery. In reply to that they had a letter from Mr. Unsworth, asking for the particulars. The plaintiff replied that the oil proposed to be delivered consisted of 100 tuns ex Peruvian, and 100 tuns ex Majestic, or Mary Harrup. To that letter he had no reply, and on the 22d he wrote again, stating that the 200 tuns were now landing. There was still no reply from the defendants, and on the 25th Mr. Rayner called at their office, and saw Mr. Lund. Mr. Rayner wrote out a delivery order to be signed by the defendants, but Mr. Lund told him he knew nothing about the transaction, and that they had nothing further to do with it, as they had made over their bargain to Messrs. Rosco and Co., brokers on behalf of some parties in London. Mr. Rayner said he knew nothing of Messrs. Rosco and Co. in the transaction, and would loOk only to the defendants. The oil in the meanwhile, to save expense, was warehoused, and on the 29th of June an invoice was sent to the de fendants. They, however, took no steps until the Sa turday, the last day for the delivery of the oil, and then in the afternoon of that day • their clerk calleti at the office of the plaintiff and presented delivery orders to be signed by him. Mr. Von Dadelzer, as is usual it ap peared with merchants at Liverpool, had left his office at an earlier hour on the Saturday than on other days, and gone to his residence at Allerton, and the clerk who received the orders did not think himself authorised to sign them, but desired them to be left until he had con sulted with the clerk in Mr. Von Dadelzer's establish ment, to whom the Custom-house business belonged. On the return of his clerk, he consulted with the head clerk, Mr. Kreitmair, who saw Mr. Rayner on the busi ness. Mr. Rayner said it was then too late to do any thing, as the goods were in bond, and the duties could not be paid at the Custom-house that evening, so that it would be the same thing if the delivery orders were signed on the Monday. On that evening, ho wever , th e deendant left a letter in the counting-house of the plain tiff, repudiating the contract, on the ground that the plaintiff was not ready to deliver the oil pursuant to his agreement. Th e d e f en d ants persisting in this course, the oil was sold on account of whom it might concern, and the plaintiff now brought this action for the loss, amounting to 2971.85. 3d. A verdict was finally returned for the plaintiff for the full amount. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. (YESTERDAY.) BOW-STREET. Yesterday an inquiry took place before Mr. Jar dine into the conduct of two individuals, charged with a criminal offence. O ne was name d Frederick Mansell; residing in Lamb's Conduit-street, aged 36, and - the other a youth, named John Pollock, living in Stanhope-street, Clare-market. On Tuesday night, about twelve o'clock, the younger prisoner went into the,. Macready Coffee house, Little Russel T - -street, an d as k e d f or a b e d f or himself and cousin, - upon getting which he went out side and let in the elder prisoner. They retired to bed, and were soon after followed up stairs by Mr. Dent, a gentleman who was formerly a licensed vic tualler in London, but now resides at Riegate, in Surrey. He retired to his bed-room, but while put ting his boots outside the door, he heard such con versation and expressions pass between the prisoners, who slept in the room opposite to him, as induced him to go down stairs and raise an alarm. He then proceeded with the porter to the chamber of the pri soners, and ordered them to get up. The elder pri soner denied most strongly that anything had taken place, but Mr. Dent told them he was convinced otherwise, from their language. The younger pri soner declared he would not leave the house, as he had paid for his bed and had a right to it. lie, how ever, dressed himself, and policeman F 37 took him into custody. He afterwards attempted to escape, by up a court into Bow-street, but the Constable ran round and intercepted him. Both the prisoners denied that anything improper had taken place, and said they were very drunk. Mr. JARDINE remanded them till Saturday week, and offered to take bail in two sureties of 501. each for each prisoner. The bail was not procured, and they' were removad to Tothill-fields prison. UNION-HALL. On Tuesday William Cooper and George Jackson, alias Conttson, were brought before Mr. Traill, charged with stealing 121. 10s. in money, together with six silver spoons, two gold wedding-rings, a gold brooch, a coral brooch and locket, and several other articles, the pro • party of Edward Brundall, of No. 24, Agnes-street, Wa terloo-road. ocoomn on confined, Mrs. Carlotta Br un d a ll , a delicate-looking woman, stated that her husb an d was a carpenter in the employ ' leaveee been recentlyer bed - ; nfi of Mr. Patrick, a b u ild er of the Belvedere-road. She had b Tuesday a nd" la d st o . nl 3 o'clock on t h at d ay she was informed by Sarah Cooper, the nurse who attend ed onl y been Between balne and to upon her, that two gentlemen had called and requested to have an interview with her, saying that they wanted to see her on very urgent busi ness. When the nurse entered the room she was closely followed by a tall well-dressed man, who, addressing himself to her (the complainant), said that he was come there on very unpleasant business, to apprise her of something that had befallen her husband. She became very much alarmed, and anxiously inquired if he had met with an accident, but the rely was, " No, n o t an acc id ent , b u t . something worse. " " For God's sake," said she, " has he been killed ?" " No," was the answer, " but he has been taken into custody this morning for robbing his employer to a large amount ; and I have a search-warrant authorising me to examine your house for the stolen property," at the same time exhibiting a paper for her inspection, which she was unable to peruse owing to the fright into which she was thrown in tier weakly state of health. He (the tall man) sahl, that he must commence the examination, and forth with desired her to accompany him into the different ro.,ms in the house ; and as she was showing him the way op stairs, she e saw another man st a ndi ng near .. then the street door. and that man she was confident was the prisoner Cooper. The tall man and she went up stairs, and he went into the lodgers' rooms, and he wanted her to open the boxes and draw rs, but she informed him hat she had not the k, ys, and than he desired her to take him to her bedroom, . and exhibit In ~ r property, be remarking at the time 'that the " . gentleman she saw in the passage was one of the firm in whose employment _1 was considerable. Several free seceding mu' wore present; but the sermon and consecrate .n Vr ° : were given by the Rev. Dr. Patrick Whether the solem!, ordinance cf baptism Na: faned and travestied by an effusion of .4 ine on, schooner's stern, when bestowing her name urn, o i we were not near enough t o as ce rt a i n . The l'e' °b, fie l barque, however, was design a t e d "Th e Bre:111 3111° ft (. 1 Naething will he l os t by th a t," s !; deacon, in our hearing) ' • and at length, when preliminary forms were finished, a gun, of wore 1 . 1; usual pomposity and loud ness , announc ed thst` d , wooden idol, with all her flags and finery, w: s ° vet: to glide majestically into her destined element. 01 1 off she certainly did. Th e b o y s , poor thi ng s! P i t ! hurrah—a few mouldy spinsters even made re r : e l ( to wave their pocket hankerchiefs ; but, alas ! se° had the idol touched the wat e r ere s h e nearlY A sized., Away she went on her beam-ends, and very outset of her career presented the appeal" 0: a wreck. The men on board were obliged to save lo selves by scrambling from th e d ec k t o th e gu n 4 . 6 0 bulwarks. People were r u n n i ng i n a ll di rec ti o ns ta t the extent of the disaster. Every h e art was 0 1°- 0 0 every brow was melancholy, and every b o nnet was drooping at this ominous a n d h um bling sation. " Troth, but that's bad luck to begin ' said a grave-looking maiden lady; " there's been ° O O muckle human dependence her e . T o pit folkS so P in marquises, wi' a' that farrafonade o' braws, is just as verasteen as to trust in chaviw; horse. 06, Sirs ! sae hoo the masts are a' 4'llo See thae vil riband flauntings, hoo thefre ar,ll l in the water , like the tawdery finery o' a drum; wallowing in a ditch. I wuss gu ile m ay col ° o ! this . sycophantish Breadalbaning. Gie's your , fl ei Kirstie, and let's awa' to our closets and ' Yon glowring' deacon fallow has his a ° folks' pooches already. He'll mak' r o et. pocket on the spot. Haste y e , ye hi l , o ol come awa'. Ships are uncanny thi ngs to hs;so dealings wi' ; baith Jonah and P au l k en t that." w e homely musings of the maidenly bystander b°fi liloquy and half dialogue, suggest ma t er ials ' fore reflection. Our free friends w e re won t to be r „nal observers of portents. When Willi a m the Pi t y portrait fell from the walls of HolyroodPalaue, ll o time of the disruption—and when the Lord u; el 4 sioner's • carriage horse stumbled on driving °, the Erastian Assembly, these significant Ome"„ c ,4 with the doom of the accursed Church, were polio upon by the free interpreters of events, and cin i fatf over as the harbingers of the total downia 1 : 0 :: Establishment. In what way their pretty r for construing signs may deport itself I I present occasion, we are not over car e t i o r guess. It may possibly occur to them . 0 0" , - prosperous launch would be a dreadfully Evast l f,::, fair. Make of it what they will, however, we ,l6 . t bii„ ful chroniclers, record the incident exactly as 1 ,, 0 1 pened. Their boasted flotilla for a sectariP o r, against the most hallowed institution of the 1 tA I ,, was virtually stranded at the very moment , 1 00 the deep. An insu ffi ciency of ballast, we 101' 1 1 ;4 (a blunder which capsizes every Free Church. l i s ti' ment), was the cause, under God, of this hum' f. occurrence. A large schooner wen t o ff to ~ schooner, to render her some humane assi-tgabr, as the very commencement of Freeism itself " 5 1,00 1 ; a sorry and unsuccessinl launch a y ear ago, We 0 ,1,, not wonder to see the Chur c h' s ✓ triumphant, t and engines imploringly hailed t o save tu o itdl Freeism from the beam-end peril s w hi c h, in its fine flags and loud huzzas, it is to e l - 11 , 1 " suffering. " Except the Lord do bl ess the a:lit builders-launch in vain."—Renfrewshire Ade' MARKET NEWS. (YESTEB- gtl i CORN-EXCHANGE. ',Ott h, Notwithstanding the twithstanding the arrivals of English .1- 0 0d4 been very limited since our last rep or t, the d ell3 be o 11 that article was in a very sluggish st a te ; aid w o jkld' l4 were pressed, lower prices were accepted for the fote i , and inferior qualities. So little was doing in 00;4 Wheat, both for and in bond, that the rates w e 'i o e, nominal. Barley and Malt met a very strong 4, Tr and prices were barely supported. Oats, D e ' lli and Flour, was quite as dear. fl' 4 ARRIVALS. 7 Eng1i5h.......... 2%",oloealltrs. Earley . 0 6. 2 5 t 4 t , 5. 0.. 9, >3 o° ‘ , 1ri5h.............. —. 2,010 F0reign.......... 2.200 310 Malt. 1.658 an. If WHITECHAPZI.. OP' / For the time of year we had rather a 111 rg e tot h i l Meat, while the trade was in a very sluggis h ', ss l barely stationary prices :—Beef, from 2s 4 a rd. li t Mutton, 2s 6d to 3s 8d • Lamb, 3s ,4d to 46 810 3s 4d to 4s 4d; and Pork, ' 2s 6d to'3B 10d Pe r the carcase. it t c ellti f t3dll STATE OF T RADE .—Th e yarn mar-e, t he i steady, but without animation, so far as regal'' s y for',4 ping demand ; but with a very animated inqu'rfry (l A , yarn suited for the home trade. Goods are y e Tor and some descriptions are a shade lower then o n e f.P, AA last. —Manchester Guardian. 1 ,41? ROCHDALE FLANNEL M ARKET , o,gni•tf • s r; TEMBER 2.—The market has been much th e O.' for some' weeks past ; perhaps with rather his ,": quiry for the coarser kind of goods. Ther e cliv been much activity in the wool market, and n° in prices. The South-Western Railway Directors'. hi fr i ;o9 nounced their intention to apply forthwith to for leave to make a direct line from Salisbury ° se e? and Mr. Locke, the eminent engineer, is at Pr e .bos i i veying the country. The saving of distance is ;010 miles, and the route will include the popu lous o fp 4 Yeovil. Sherborne, &c.— Western Times. con NARROW ESCAPE.—O n M o nd a y night, ten o'clock, three inspectors of the Thames pu''a o o lo o el Hambrook, Everest, and Griffin, were g oin g river in one of th e p o li ce ga ll eys on t h e ebb Cider their boat was capsized, and they narrowq, vivo watery grave. It appears that the City o Via steam-ship, lying off the police-station at .dia 9 came up the river at seven o'clock, and was r`defast upon tide, with on e rip e out a h ea d o f her, lu s . n atli t ilti the London, about ei g hty y ar d s a h ea d, and' " t sti/ 41 ; the shore. In making their way towards the` la st' it inspectors shot ahead of the London to ge t - g flidtP City of Aberdeen ; and while they were pa sli S ' t bAween tlui two vessels, a steamer corn tI!S, sp .ed cared so much commotion in the ws' iu tfror warp ahead of the City of Aberdeyn became boa t der the galley was passing over it, and lifted tb e , he t O into the air, turned it r i g h t over , and threw i tt ii Ci r eo tors into the river. Fo r t unate l y they w ere n cal e ;orl'' swimmers, and, though two of -them ivcr e h the 1 Kith heavy clothing, they all managed to ro in th e and landed at W a ppi ng N ew - sta i rs much he el l ,l o° The galley was c arr i e d un d er t h e p a ddle i ,, t wee'ileg' City of Aberdeen, where it remained fast, 7,, i t floats until several constables put off 10 1 ,,„"Laes„atr, During the last six months eleven of the 4 R,: r ibs 'de!: have been thrown overboard while passingt Ab e joP' to which the steamers are made fast, near iuf og ia ne tig and Dundee Steam-wharf, and unless surnt' i ,fte", to abate the evil, and compel a safer noPu e n r - lir e the steam-ships, similar accidents and los s s" 10 1 ' . inevitably occur. 10,,0)7 4 [ADVERTISEMENT:I.—A MAGIC CU RS ' r LOWAY'S OINTMENT AND PILE& J . 51.1e riff „ le d residing in the Calton, Glasgow, had been sioP t e",,, her youth with a contraction in the knee, ie i t alia,.'jr, - a fall, which produced fifteen abscesses in IP' e ta l ; of the leg and thigh. • It need scarcely be c al re i ste b g ; 0 0 ,11 / 8 had had the advice of medical men of I " e rlittt. e i r elfr nence, but all failed to afford the least relie4- ca Are e l now be seen walking about Glasgow per v osti, abscesses healed, and her limb sound, an°,` - ‘ ,",•hau s arv i l other means but these wonderful medicines j e e e Sold at Professor Holloway's Establishm e t, 0 10 1 !;iji (where advice may be had gratis), and 7tbe ct respectable vendors of medicine throughout world. 1)1..F;li. WTI" d y On the 28th u ,, l g t. e , d E , d B s . vard, eldest son of L ' til",i Bethnal-green, 0 . A & Pl".6' t r On the 30th mt., Peter Augustus La Parga r - : ',teti• - bands I.4,sworth, senior magistrate for L t e l i t e e es c t o e ut i t iire, PePutri''''. 'Se' I , sg h1 61 1 1 " On the 30th ult., Mr. Thomasy.Paris, of i F . l; --3113 0 ;es - ° 0 On the 30th ult., at Tunoridge-we1...., Ja offi° Turnley, aged 21. wo olch d On the ;3 iA. ult., at Norwood, Miss Sophia 1-- , P) Harbour-lane, Camberwell. cli N T•oht 9 ~,, (),1 the 31st tilt , Eliza Sykes, wife of — 1- Jd° EFT, M ay-or of Pl 3 :mouth, aged 36.0 f O r. On tilt 1;4 inst., Ilarriet, second daughter O4 Sa lhii Co;ttes, of Kirby, Essex. ft 13, id On the 2d inst., at I;rooksby's-walk, ilor ae—° AP" Cl' ;vile of Mr. Robert Mopsey. , ark , On the 2d inst., in Sussex - p lace, Regea 2s.l3 i Churchill, Esq., aAed ' 60. • • -- - "1 4 6 ' 0, London: l'rinted and Published by grli ti gtia), ~ , 1 1 " . tf °I .N u. il2, Strand, Printer , a t The Sii.";`",hi CAP Strand, in the Precinct of th e Savoy. in , Aliddlesex, Thursday, September 5, 1844. C R A Der B r are _._. re star Of CLI FErkeTAR SOLIcITO R PARLIANIE Of theden n tak en ' A PPI' Icat th e Se c str et J. It . . 60 11( II LLocko 4 .8 flap I T . F( .0 the p %des Gen Untielsh tc , taki n 'el' 1 ‘ 144 1b i ar id , e 4 also et) t o 00. 1 LIVE. 13' Si r Ih ° 4 la T , is s h.. as N ‘ V4 i r". bu c k an, !a!t er yllll4lll Bo ~1 10 be irb rt Br ° , —c r i ck I O are, L Ipill 11 —a jarne i r a cr , C e Xow, Wil r i e Gra l i t'al. h 'laern s alp arc Joh n f ree, J ohn Howe bo ny Kumt 'lh orn _' liar] Joh n io slce ci, rne n tit ss it u, Presti l iatu r D aniel \Vat U Wil 1, eep .se Prestor At Si BIRTHS. On the 31st ult., at B e ll e V ue -t err ace, n'e-r 11011' tb j of C. H. Phillips, E sq ., o f a d aug ht er . cst. A n- le r. On the 30th ult., Mrs. Edward Toulmie , No On th ßr e 31st u rixton, of a at il d K aughter. lt., burn, the lady of of'' of a •datighter. -tha l e y of On the 31st ult., at Coptfold Hall, Ese eA • 10 11 , Hardcastle, Esq., of a daughter. : e beti l ' v Tn On the 2d inst., a t th e L awn South ij • V' P. J. Mugens, Es q ., o f a d aug h ter. la dy Of W IW On the 2d inst., a t SO u th ampton , the - r Humphrys, Esq., of a son. y rs . On the 2d inst., at Hi g hb ury -place, 1 0, of a daughter. n , a or On the 2d inst., a t Kidd erm i ns ter, the '"°-* • 1 stv ton, of a daughte r . f 1° On the 3d inst , a t W oo l w i c h, the wife °- ham, of a daughter, still bo. n. FN e MARRIED. f rt, th On the 27th ult., at th e C a thedral of Clooos 1;0)0 J. Phipps, R ec t or o f D ev i zes , Wilts, to S °34T , l irche'itl l : eldest daughter of the Ven. J. S. Bu tsen ;th i t Clonfert, only son of the late Lord Bishop 01 'Tisoliodbte On the 31st ult., at St. Peter's Church, rs, George Henry Goodwin, Esq., to Emma Af e .,, l er srai, t ,oreof W. L. T. Robins, of St. Peter's-square. Hau l "; ar o, "i r iblv‘ir On the 31st ult. ? at St. Mary's,b Cheltenl,ight o te a : Carruthers, Esq., surgeon of the Owo o f the r vii Regiment of Militia, to Anne, third datight!fthutabfe David William Smith, Bart., of Alnwick, Nuirsocis On the 2d inst., at Leamington, the Rev- -" r f chaplain to his Royal Highness the Dok e ° revik n Andalusia, youngest daughter of John Fitzb Portland-place. of v#l.' G e ts. th aret r , 411,1 1 hu rek _ th e tb ue a : 14ited