The Sun. — London, England, 1844-05-31 00:00:00

Xibition SUN OFFICE, Seven o'Cloch. MARYLEBONE.—(THIS DAY.) Daniel TVright, the young man who had been remanded from Friday last, on a charge of having received 390/. from the .;ing-house of Sir Claude Scott and Co., Cavendish square, la, means of a forged cheque purporting to have been drawn on the Bank of England by William Pulsford, Esq., of 11, Hyde-park-terrace, in favour of Mr. G. Red mayne, the eminent silk mercer of New Bond-street, was placed at the bar for final examination this day. :he evidence taken on the previous occasion, and which was fully reported in The Sun of May 25, was then read over. A brief recapitulation of the principal facts connected with the case may be given. The prisoner called at Sir Claude Scott's bank on the 3d May, and presenting a cheque for 390/., said that Mr. Redmayne would feel obliged if it were cashed for him. Mr. Taylor, one of the clerks in the bank, as Mr. Redmayne had an account there, did so, and paid him in six 50/. notes, four 20/., and ten sovereigns in gold. On the succeeding morning a messenger from the Bank of England returned the cheque as a forged one ; and on the evening of the same day Mr. Pulsford called, and stated that the handwriting was not his. Information was given to the police, and one of the officers in the Detective force traced the prisoner to Birmingham, and subsequently back to London, and at last succeeded in taking him into custody in the Vic toria Hotel, near the railway terminus at Euston-square, where he had lived with a companion (a female) for a few days. In his possession was 5/. 4s. 6d., and in a box belong ing to him was a further sum of seventy sovereigns, and a handsome gold watch and appendages, besides several other articles of jewellery. There being no evidence against the female she was discharged on the first examination. It was stated on that occasion that the prisoner had run up a bill at the hotel of 36/. in the few days he had been there. The evidence taken this day was of very little moment. Mr. Arthur Maitland, from the Bank of England, said that it was the practice of the Bank to pay no cheques excepting ruch as were drawn upon the regular printed forms of the Bank. The cheque in question was not upon one of those forms, neither was the writing like Mr. Pulsford's. Mr. Pulsford, 11, Hyde-park Terrace, said that the signa ture was not his. He did not know anything of the cheque. The prisoner's father was a clothier in Conduit-street, Re gent-street, and had supplied witness with clothing. lie did not know Mr. Redmayne, of Bond-street. Mr. Redmayne said, he knew nothing of any part of the case. On looking at the cheque, it appeared endorsed with the name of his clerk, Mr. Cates, but the writing was widely different, and the name was also differently spelt (on the cheque it was written Keats). The prisoner's father was a most respectable man, and one of his sons, the prisoner's younger brother, was in his (Mr. Redmayne's) employ. Mr. Cates, clerk to last witness, said he knew nothing of the draft whatever, neither did he know the young man at the bar. ' Mr. LONG , said he would commit him (the prisoner) for trial, and asked if he had anything to say in defence. The prisoner, who was bathed in tears, had nothing to say, and he was removed to the lock-up cell. Mr. Burgoyne, solicitor to the banking house of Sir Claude Scott and Co., attended to prosecute, and another professional gentleman, whose name we could not learn, appeared for the misoner. COURSE OF EXCH. Amsterdam CF. 12 6 Ditto, at sight l2 4 Rotterdam 2U. 12 6i Antwerp 25 90 Hamburgh M.B. 13 14 Altona l3 14i Paris, 3 days' sight 25 65 Ditto, 3 months 25 85 Marseilles 25 90 Bonrdeaux 25 90 Frankfort on Maine 122 Petersburgh, 3Us 364' Berlin 7 'Vienna, eifee. fl. 3 M 953 Trieste, ditto Madrid 37 Cadiz SGE.-(THIS DAY.) Gibraltar • Leghorn 3O 45 Genoa 25 90 Milan Venice ........ Naples ........ Palermo, per oz ll7 . Lisbon 54 Oporto 53 Rio Janeiro 23 Bahia 23 Buenos Ayres Newlork,2ldyssight Philadelphia MOM OF BULLION, PER OZ. Foreign Gold, bars. 5.3 17 9 IPortugal Gold Coin 3 17 5 New Doubloons-- 0 0 0 New Dollars 0 4 9i Silver in Bars 0 4 114 Bilbao 36 Barcelona 36 Bev ills SPIRIT of the PUBLIC. JOURNALS FROM TILE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAY. GLOBE.—The sentence upon (Monnell and his co-defend tints is now befiire the. - public. We shall be excused if we abstain from comment, at least for one day. The astounding severity of the infliction, personal and pecuniary, espe cially upon Mr. O'Connell, will, we fear, tend to de prive the law: of, that reverential respect in which even its terrors should be held. Except in the estimation of the Ultra-Protestants of Ireland, for whose special gra tification the finale of the State prosecutions seems to have been reserved, as a compensation for the delays of ven geance of which they so bitterly complained, there is no one, let his party politics be what they may, who will not deplore the extreme severity of the sentence. The effect upon the public mind in Ireland, will, we fear be dangerous in the extreme. But we will not trust ourselves with the use of those burning words of indignation which are prompted by the vengeful visitation upon a political offen der. It will remind the people of Ireland of the iucarcerations of the reign of terror in that unhapppy country; while in England it will be compared with the inflictions of pains and penalties in the days when Castlereagh and Sidmouth sought to suppress agitation by a severity in which judgment. was uutempered by mercy. It remains to be seen whether the sentence will be carried into execution pending the writ of error. Previously to the sentence being passed, notice was served on the solicitor for the Crown, on behalf of the traversers, that they intended to " apply to the Court, that whatever sentence the Court should think fit to pronounce upon *se respective traversers, shall be directed not to commence until such a day, as the Court in their dis cretion shall think it right to order, to enable the tra versers to prosecute their writ of error, and have judg ment thereon between the said time of pronouncing the said judgment and such day as shall be so ap pointed by the Court." The law requires that sentence should be passed before an application could be made to suspend its execution until the writ of error is decided by the House of Lords. To-morrow's post will bring the decision of the Court on this application, and place the entire proceed ings at the close of the State prosecutions--so far as the Court of Queen's Bench is concered—in the hands of the public. STANDARD. The House of Commons re-assembled last night. Mr. Fitzroy Kelly moved for leave to bring in a Bill establishing a Court of Appeal in cases of felony. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman urged the necessity of an appellate jurisdiction in an exceedingly able speech, supported by many melancholy examples. Sir James Graham, without oppos ing the motion, or unreservedly condemning its object, expressed doubts of the necessity of any change of the law in the pifticular referred to, grounding these doubts upon the high character of the law of England, his own experience of Its just administration, and the inconvenience of multiply ing courts and judges. Now, we cannot admit these reasons tii ithout very considerable qualifications. As respects the ,character of the law—the law is one thing, the mode of administering it another—and the law may have and de serve the higk character that it maintains, in defiance of any little irregularity sand injustice practised at Kingagate 'street, at the police-offices, or at the Central Criminal Court. We fear that if the law were to be held respon sible fez the manner in which cases of life and death are often slabbered over in the last, the law would soon have a very unenviable character. But the cbarac ter'cf the law of England has been maintained in spite of its most vicious administration—it flourished even when the administrators of the law applied the peine forte et dare ex hibited the rack, would not allow the prisoner to defend him self by sworn witnesses, while the depositions of absent wit nesses were heard against him ; when juries were punished by ' imprisonment and the pillory for verdicts displeasing to the Court, while prisoners were not allowed to be heard by a single counsel. The character of the law has, therefore, really nothing to do in the case. Sir J. Graham, again, is satisfied with the general result of the present administration ofjustice ; but Sir James, with all respect, is no competent judge in the matter; for he himself it is who produces those results which are satisfactory, not only to him, but, as we gratefully acknowledge, to the country. He may think that every other Home Se cretary would act with the same conscientious dili gence, the same sagacity, and the came humanity which • distinguish his administration of the department ; but though the opinion is natural to an honourable, candid, and • modest man, it is not our opinion ; nor is it, as we believe, the opinion of the public. We all know that there is nothing, for example, to prevent such a man as Dlr. being a Home Secretary ; and we also know that if Mr..: had had been Home Secretary a month ago, Mary Farley would have been hanged .by the neck until dead, on the 6th ult. The truth is, that the appellate jurisdiction, which Mr. F. Kelly calls for as a public tribunal, sits already as a secret tribunal, and the ad ministration of justice would be intolerable without it. The disadvantages of secresy in such a matter are, however, very great. A secret tribunal may be negligent, cruel, unjust, corrupt, which in a free country an open tribunal can never be ; and though the Home Secretary, in whose breast the constitution of the tribunal lies, will be commonly a man of decent cha meter, it is a rare and a happy accident to have a Home Secretary as zealous, acute humane, and just, as Sir James Graham. The shocking sacrifices of life previous to Sir Robert Peel's accession to office, prove that a very respectable nobleman or gentleman may be a very insufficient court of appeal in criminal cases. There is, besides, another injustice, arising out of the want of a public appellate jurisdiction in cases of felony, which cannot come under Sir James Graham's notice—we allude to the number of improper acquittals. Juries will frequently demand a higher amount of evidence than the justice of the case war . rants, when they believe that their verdict must be final, and thus it will happen too frequently that dangerous cri minals are let loose upon society, who would not so escape were it publicly known that there existed a court of appeal. As to the difficulty of finding judges, we can scarcely think that Sir James Graham will, upon serious reflection, find that difficulty insurmountable. The qualifications for a good • judge are different front those of a great lawyer—some times a little at variance with them. All of profes sional qualification that is wanted for a judge is an ele mentary and scientific knowledge of legal principles ; pied sense, integrity, patience, and a modest diligence will do the rest. The young and comparatively inexperienced men who are sent to the colonies make excellent judges, ab • solutely equal, and relatively superior, to the judges of West minster Hall. Meanwhile, it is satisfactory to know that the Government has promised a candid consideration to Mtt - Kelly's proposition. There are some, and they are men whop wtt respect, who hold a very different opinion of Mr. - Roebuck, his talents, objects, and proceedings, f rom that . which we hold ; we shall therefore say nothing of that gen tleman's speech last night. We will not say what we think upon the point ; let others speak well of the Member for 'ath it they can. To do justice to the speeches of Lord Stanley and Mr. C. Buller would be to do justice upon the Learned Member for Bath, and that office we resign to our readers. TUE LONDON GAZETTE (THIS EVENING.) CROWN-OFFICE, MAY 30, 1844. AiIS3IREILS RETURNED TO SERVE IN TIIIS PRESENT PAR Boaotru it or BUCKINGHAM.—The Right Hon. Sir Thomas Francis Fremantle, Bart. CITY or CHESTER.—The Right Hon. Arthur Lennox, com. monly called Lord Arthur Lennox. WAR-OFFICE, MAY 31. 6th Dragooir—Lieut. H. Stone, from 37th Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Fleming, who exchanges, May 31. 9th Light Dragoons—Cornet A. Ilawtrey to he Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Colville, promoted in the Royal Canadian Rifle Regiment ; C. F. Clifton, Gent., to be Cornet, by pur chase, vice Hawtrey, May 31. 15th LightDrageous—Cornet W. B. L. Sleigh to be Lieu- tenant, by purchase, vice Norton, who retires ; W. V. Greet ham, Gent. to be met, by purchase, vice Sleigh. May 31. Ist Regiment of Foot—Captain an d Paymaster J. Espmasse, from 29th Foot, to be Paymaster, vice Sharp, deceased, May 31. 2d Foet—F. J. F. Payne, Gent., to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Hunter, promoted on the Staff, May 31. 3d Foot—Assistant-Surgeon A. Smith, from the 17th Foot, to be Surgeon, vice Macqueen, deceased, May 31. 17th Foot—Assistant-Surgeon J. S. Willes, M.D., from the Staff, to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Smith, - promoted in the 3d Foot, May 31. 27th Foot—J. R. H. Becher, Gent., to be Ensign, by pur chase, vice r; amilton, who retires, May 31. 29th Foot—Lieut. J. H. Clay, from 59th Foot, to be Pay master, vice Espinasse, appointed to the Ist Foot, May 31, 37th Feot—Lieut. J. E. Fleemin., from the 6th Dragoons, to be Lieutenant, vice Stone, who exchanges, May 31. 46th Foot—Ensign .1. E. Spilling to be Lieutenant, without purchase, vice Moffatt, deceased, April 3; Ensign H. F. Sand with to be be Lieutenant without purchase, vice Spilling, whose :promotion on 26th April, 1844, has been ca n c elled, April 26 ; J. H. Chambers, Gent. to be Ensign, without pur chase, vice Sandwith, May 31. 47th Foot—R. C. Gordon, Gent. to be Ensign, by pur chase, vice Peacock, who retires, May 31. 49th Foot—Lieutenant H. S. M. D. Fulton, from 62d Fqot, to be Lieutenant, vice Bartley, who exchanges, May 31. 52d Foot—R. W. Reade, M.D. to be Assistant Surgeon, vice Robinson, appointed to the Staff, May 31. 62d Foot—Lieutenant W. T. Bartley, from 49th Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Fulton, who exchanges, May 31. 70th Toot—Captain J. Brown to be Major, by purchase, vice Taylor, who retires ; Lieutenant W. R. Brereton to be Captain, by purchase, vice Brown ; Ensign G. A. Schreiber to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Brereton ; G. Ryan, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Schreiber, May 31. 73d Feet—Lieut. W. B. Faunce to be Captain, by purchase, vice Sandeman, who retires ; Ensign C. Hoghton to be Lieu tenant, by purchase, vice Faunce ; W. Nash, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Hoghton, May 31. Rifle Brigade—Captain R. Walpole to be Major, by put-- chase, vice Saumarez, promoted; Lieutenant H. 0. Bowles to be Captain, by purchase, vice Walpole ; Second Lieutenant J. F. Beckwith to be First Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Bowles ; A. Lowther, Gent., to be Second Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Beckwith, May 31. Royal Canadian Rifle Regiment--Lieutenant C. .1. Colville, from the 9th Light Dragoons, to be Captain, by purchase, vice Edwards, May 31. UNATTACHIM—Brevet Colonel the Hon. C. Gore, from Major half-pay Unattached, to be Lieutenant-Colonel, without purchase. Major the Hon. J. St. Vincent Saumaurez, from the Rifle Brigade, to be Lieutenant-Colonel by purchase, vice I General A. J. Goldie, who retires. Brevet Col onel W. Camp bell, from ,Captain half-pay 23d Foot, to be Major, without purchase, May 31. , BREVET. —Major A. M. Tulloch, half-pay Unattached, Mi litary Superintendent of Out Pensioners, to be Lieut.-Colonel in the Army, May 31. HOSPITAL &arr.— Assistant- Surgeon W. Robinson, M.D., from 52d Foot, to be Assistant-Surgeon .to, the Forces, vice Willis, appointed to 17th Foot, Slay 31. MEMOILA NDU3L —The Chi istian names of Ensign Coles, of Ist Foot, are Richard George, and not Thomas George, as previously stated. OFFICE OF ORDNANCE, MAY 28. Royal Regiment of Artillery—First Lieutenant C. L. Fitz gerald to be Second Captain, vice Robertson, deceased ; Second Lieutenatit H. A. Vernon to be First Lieutenant, vice Fitz gerald, May 15. Alzmon.alinnst.—The dates of promotion of the under mentioned officers have been altered as follow :—Second Cap tain P. Maclean, April 14 ; Second Captain A. Benn, April 15 ; Second Captain R. M. Mundy, April 28 ; First Lieu tenant Honourable W. C. Yelverton, April First - tenant S. Robinson, April 15 ; First Lieutenant M. Lieu S. Biddulph, April 28. WHITEHALL, Slaw 27. The Lord Chancellor bas appointed William Bickley, of Sheffield, in the county of York, Gent., to be a Master Extra ordinary in the High Court of Chancery. DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY. WILLIAM. KEMP, tailor, Waltham, Lincolnshire. BANKRUPTCY SUPERSEDED. JOSEPH RIDGWAY, fringe manufacturer, Chester. BANKRUPTS: BENJAMIN LAND, victualler. Hertford, to surrender Jur.e 7, at half-past eleven, and July 12, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Alsager, official assignee, Birchin-lane, Cornhill ; Roche, Plowman, and Roche, Upper Wellington street, Covent-garden. WILLIAM DETHICK, lime merchant, Temple-street, Whitefriars, June 14, at one, and July 12, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee, Basing hall-street; Humphrey, Keightly, and Co., Chancery-lane. HENRY RICHARD HARRADEN, printseller, Cam bridge, June 11 and July 16, at eleven, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Pennell, official assignee, Basinghall-street ; Tarrant, Walbrook ; Lawrence, Cambridge.' ' QUIROGA BOLIVAR VITTORIA. JOHN ANI CHINI, merchant, St. Benet's-place, Gracechurch-street, June 7, and July 2, at half-past twelve, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Belcher, official assignee, King's Arms-yard Moor gate-street; Cloves and Wedlake, King's-bench-walk. JOHN WHITLY MARDALL, insurance broker, New Shoreham, Sussex, June 11, and July 16, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Belittler, official assignee, King's Arms-yard, Moorgate-street; Rolfe and Edmunds, South-square, Gray's Inn • Edmunds, Worthing, Sussex. EMANUELI TYNDALE, wine merchant, Ross, eflereford shire, June 7, •at twelve, and July 5, at eleven, at the Bir mingham District Court. Valpy; official assignee Birmingham ; Waibbourne, Gloucester ; Hall and Minett, Ros s ; Stubbs and Rollinks, Birmingham. JOHN MITCHELL, cool merchant, Nottingham, June 10, and July 11, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court. Bittleston, official assigneeißirminghain ; Cann, Nottingham ; Smith, Birmingham. THOMAS NEWTON, cattle-dealer, Holbeach, Lincoln shire,-June 11, at one, and July 5, at twelve, at the Birming ham District Court. Valpy, official assignee, Birmingham ; Staniland, Boston ; Barker and Sons, Birmingham. ROBERT BAXTER, merchant, Sheffield, June 13, and July . 6, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Fearne, official assignee, Leeds; Fiddey, Temple, London; Wilson, Younge, and Pierson, Sheffield. FREDERICK LANE HOMER, merchant, Manchester, June 14, and July 4, at one, at the Manchester District Court. ' Hobson o ffi cial assignee, Manchester ; Blackburn, Leeds ; Edward and Robert William Bennett, Manchester. THOMAS BEECH, grocer, Newcastle-under-Lyme June ' 10, and July 11, at eleven, at the Bi rmin g ham District Court. Whitmore, official assignee, Birmingham ; Stanier, Newcastle under-Lyme; Smith, Birmingham. WILLIAM LYNN, hotel keeper, Liverpool, June 12, at twelve, and July 2, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court. Morgan, official assignee, Liverpool ' • Littledale and Bardswell, Liverpool ; Vincent and Sherwood, Temple, London. JOSEPH OWEN and SARAH OWEN, merchants, Shef field, June 15, and July 3, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Young, official assignee, Leeds ; Biggs, Southampton buildings,•London ; Haywood and Bramley, Sheffield; Bran son, Sheffield. NOTICES OF INSOLVENCY. E. M. Danels, schoolmistress, Turnham-green. C. Perkin, victualler, Bollington, Cheshire. J. E. Adams, schoolmaster, workhouse, Marylebone. G. Parker, coal dealer, Norwich. E. Philippe, Albany-street, Regent's Park. H. Jennings, Princes-road, Lambeth. W. Jones, saddler, Litchborough, Northamptonshire. J. Reed, shoemaker, Chasm, Surrey. • J. W. Newton, farmer, Moulton, Lincolnshire. R. Newton, farmer, Moulton, Lincolnshire. G. E. Green, Whalley, Lancashire. D. Roberts, stationer, Manchester. T. Singleton, druggist, Sheffield. J. Lonfteettom, woolcomber, Wainstell, Yorkshire. E. Maitland, assistant to a publican, Liverpool. J. Manson, bricklayer, Huddersfield. J. Mathews, tallow chandler, Hammersmith. J. Seagar, undertaKer, Wood-street, Lambeth-walk. P. Beer, tobacconist, Plymouth. H. Silley; Shaftesbury-street, New North-road. H. J. Murton, lieutenant-colonel R. M., Brompton. J. Robinson, boot maker, Charlotte-street, Portland-place, C. Morgan, assistant grocer, Brompton. PRICE OF SUGAR. The Average Price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar, for the week ending May 28, 1844, is 375. 3d. per cwt., exclusive of the Duties of Customs paid or payable thereon on the im portation thereof into Great Britain. MARKET INTELLIGENCE. (From the London New Price Current of May 31.) SUGAR.-To-day a large business was transacted in all sorts of West India Sugar, but at lower rates, making the decline since Tuesday last Is 6d on low and middling, and is per cwt for the better sorts; a board of good bright yellow Antigua was sold at 64s per cwt. At public sale, New Barbadoes, and St. Lucia, Sugar of the new crop were offered, the former sold 6d to is per cwt under the rates of Wednesday's sale for low ar.d mid kinds, but good and fine sorts generally sustained the former value; low yellow went at 60s, middling 60s 6d to 625, good 62s 6d to 64s 6d, and fine 65s 6d to 66s ; the latter went at the decline previously quoted ; fine yellow at 62s 6d to 645, good 60s 6d to 625, middling 59s to 60s, low 57s 6d to 58s 6d, good brown 56s to 575, low soft 54s to 54s 6d, and washed 56s per cwt. REFINED.-To - day several purchases were made in Re fined Goods by the home trade; brown lumps 775, and standard lumps 78s 6d per cwt. Banded is held for higher rates, 26s paid for large, and 26s 3d per cwt for small parcels. MAURITIUS.-Importers have shown firmness, and have refrained from offering any at auction. This afternoon some parcels were disposed of privately at rather lower rates. EAST ESDIA.-This afternoon Bengal Sugar met with a good demand at former rates, fine white at 66s td 675, good 64s 6d to 655, mid 63s to 63s 6d, damp 62s to 66s 6d, mid yellow sound 60s 6d, and low 545. Madras low brown went at 24s to 25s 6d, mid 28s to 295, low yellow 30s to 30s 6d, mid 32s to 32s 6d, good 33s to 345. FOREIGN SUGAR.-There has been a good demand for white Havannah Sugar by private contract, and rather higher rates paid ; brown Brazil in small parcels have fetched full-rates. COFFEE.-The market has been largely supplied with West India Coffee this week, but importers submitting to a reduction on former rates of 2s to 3s*per cwt has occasioned the demand to be good. Holders of locha submitting to a reduction on the rates of the last public sale of Is to 2s per cwt has tempted buyers to purchase extensively. This afternoon there was no public sale of any sort of Coffee, and by private contract little business was done ; good ordi nary Ceylon, however, could not be obtained under 47s per cwt. The arrivals of West India Coffee this week are 454 hhds 166 brls. On Tuesday 700 bales of Mocha, 130 casks of Jamaica, are declared for auction. TEA.-For some parcels of Hyson, Young Hyson, Imperial, Gunpowder, and fine Twankay, full rates have been paid, and the supply is still scanty, but for black Tea the market has been in a dull state, and prices are on the decline. To , day there was scarcely any business transacted in the Tea market, and parcels could only be disposed of but at rather lower terms. Cocoa.-Prices remain firm for Foreign, and a fair business has been transacted privately ; West India is less in request, but prices are sustained. MoLAssEs.-By private contract few parcels have been dis posed of ; Barbadoes bought in at 27s ; Antigua sold at 25s to 2 a s t s 2 Ld for middling, and 24s for ordinary; Trinidad taken in East Inarcwt for good. Pri c es cannot be quoted lower for 6d, and Tri. nirdhadis at af 25s tern peroon c l‘ w la t. dr as Molasses taken in st 9s SPICES.-Cassia Lignea is not much d wanted at present, and To-day black Pepper met with ul attention, the rates accepted are rather r those of this day week. Malabar at auction were sold at full rat and 605 bags of to 4d, sea damaged first class secesond gdioodttosiratd,atth3rd ditto 33d. ißum, &wan - , AND HOLIANDS. - Jamaica Rum 26 to 28 per cent overproof is 3s Id to 384 d, 30 to 35 over 3s 5d to 3s 9d, good and fine 3s 10d to 4s 3d, superior 4s 4d to 5 ; Leewards at 2s 2id to 2s 3d, proof strength ; and a small parcel 8 per cent overproof 2s 5d per gallon Calcutta Rum lls ltd for 150 puns proof with certificate. Demerara I strong quality at 3s to 3s 4d per gallon. Brandy is offered upon lower terms :-Cognac, best brands of thevintageof 1838. hhds 5s 6d, puns 5s 4d; ditto 1839, hhds 5s 4d, puns 5s 2d; 1 ditto 1840, hhds 5 s 2 d , p uns ss ; ditto 1841, hhds 5s ld, puns 4s 11d; ditto 1842, hhds Ild, puns 43 9d, mid and THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MAY 31, 1844. good mid qualities 3s Id to 4s 6d, and low 2s 8d to 3s per gallon. Geneva at is 8d for shipping, and 2s to 38 for good and fine for home consumption. English Corn Spirits firm, 4 at lOs 2d per gallon cash. To-day Cognac best brands of the vintage of 1842, 4s 10d to 5s per gallon. RlCE.—Bengal at fully former rates ; middling white rather broken at lOs 6d to Ils, good middling bold Its to lls sd, and damaged lOs 6d per cwt. For Foreign East India Rice cull rates paid ; for cleaned Rice the demand has in creased; 16s for Patna, and 21s to 26s per cwt for Carolina. SAoo—Rather above former rates; Sago Flour 19s 6d to 20s per cwt. Tapioca fetched 4fto 40, and Rio Arrowroot 4d per lb. Ilinmo.—The operations in all sorts of East India have been extremely limited, and the home trade do no more business than they are compelled ; some parties are inclined to sell at prices 2d to 3d under those of April sales' rates. The public sale of East India Indigo held at Liverpool went at a decline of 4d to 5d for shipping, and 3d per lb for con suming sorts. Ou.s.—Southern Oil, fine quality at 294 lOs to 301, good 281 to 281 15s, and middling 271 to 27. lOs per tun. Cod Oil at 331 to 331 10s, pale Seal is 321 to arrive, and 33/ to 331 103 on the spot. In Sperm there is little variation. Linseed Oil on the spot made at 25s 6d to 25s 9d per cwt. Rape Oil is cheaper ; pale 38s 6d, and brown 37s 6d per cwt. for Palm Oil 27s to 28s per cwt. Cocoa Nut Oil fine at 29s to 30s per owt. In Olive Oil prices are looking down ; Gal lipoli 501 lOs to 511, Spanish 491 lOs to 504 and Barbary 49/ per tun. This afternoon Sperm Oil and Headmatter were offered, and partly sold at lower rates ; Oil went at 711 lOs to 751 10s, and Headmatter at 781 lOs to 80; Southern Oil fetched -2715 s to 321 5s for middling to fine. TALI ow.—For Town Tallow the market has been nearly cleared at 38s 6d to 39s per cwt, nett cash ; on the spot Petersburgh Yellow Candle at 403. to 40s 6d per cwt. For deNvery for the last three months of the year at 41s 3d to , " 41s 6d per cwt. American Tallow has a downward tendency. This afternoon New South Wales Tallow, of fine quality, went at 41s per cwt. MPERIAL PARLIAMENT (THIS EVENING.) HOUSE OF LORDS. Their Lordships assembled at Five o'clock. The Duke .of WELLINGTON presented a petition from Newbury, praying for an extension of the Great Western Railway to the town of Newbury. • On the motion of the Earl of RIPON, the Courts martial (East Indies) Bill was . read a first time, LURGAN presented petitions from Ireland against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill ; also petitions praying their Lordships to legalise Presbyterian mar riages in Ireland. Lord CAMPBELL presented twelve petitions from Ireland to the. same effect ; also a petition from Cole raine against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill. THE LATE MONAGHAN ASSIZES. The Marquis of NORMANBY rose to call their' ord ships' attention to the circumstances which had occurred at the last Monaghan assizes. A general impression existed in that part of the country that there had been a want of sincerity in the intentions of the Government in carrying out the directions which were contained in a circular to the Attorney-General Brady, with respect to the custom of challenging jurors. His Noble Friend opposite on that occasion had read a letter from the Crown solicitor, Mr. Hamilton, stating his reasons for striking those persons off the jury. He stated that he had struck off John Hughes because he had been servant to a ribbonman. Lord WHARNCLIFFE—Son-in-law to a ribbonman. The Marquis of NORMANBY had understood his Noble Friend to say servant. The fact was that Hughes had eloped with the daughter of his father-in-law, many years since, but he hadhad no communication with her family since. With respect to Coltield, it was said that he had attended a faction meeting, and Edward Mackinlay had for being convicted of the same offence. Now, with respect to Mackinlay, he was a person of considerable property, who had never been charged with ribbo nism, or indicted, or convicted for any offence. Colfield, also, was a respectable person, who had never been convicted of any offence. and who had frequently before served on juries. Mr. Hamilton should have taken pains to have informed himself accurately, before he had brought such charges against these respectable persons. He was anxious to hear what information his Noble Friend could give of these circumstances. . Lord WHARNCLIFFE considered that no imputa tion had been cast by his Noble Friend upon the cha racter of Mr. Hamilton. The seven persons who had been struck off the jury were Roman Catholics, but then it should be recollected that the offence of ribbonism, of which the prisoner had been accused, was confined almost exclusively to Roman Catholics. If Mr. Ha milton 'believed pose statements to be true, he was perfectly justified in striking those persons off. The verdict of the jury was a discriminating one. —convicting some and acquitting others. Earl FITZWILLIAM—And, therefore, because it was exclusively confined to Catholics, it ought to be tried exclusively by Protestants. Such was the reasoning of his Noble Friend.: According to his (Lord Fitz william's) understanding of the theory of trial by jury that was a reason why Catholics should be on the jury. Would his Noble Friend reverse the case, and have offences committed exclusively by Protestants tried by an exclusively Catholic jury ?—(Cheers.) Lord WHARNCLIFFE denied that he had said that all Catholics should be excluded from juries empanelled for the trial of Ribbonism ; he had only said that under the circumstances Mr. Hamilton was justified in chal lenging these parties. The Marquis of NORMANBY said he had heard nothing that induced him to believe that ribbonism was confined to Catholics. He believed that the Roman Catholic priesthood were among the most active in put ting it down. He had thrown no imputation on the jury; on the contrary, he had said that they had done their duty. He therefore regretted that the moral effect of the prosecution had been lost by the exclusion of Ca tholics from the jury. Lord WHARNCLIFFE referred the Noble Marquis to the evidence taken on the Committee he had referred to, where it was stated that Ribbonism was confined al most exclusively to Roman Catholics. The subject then dropped. FACTORIES BILL. Their Lordships then went into Committee on this Bill. Lord KINNAIRD said though he was opposed on principle to all legislative interference with labour, either with the produce of labour, or with labour itself, yet, as the principle of this Bill had been the law of the land for years, he should not oppose its pass ing. But there was one clause in the Bill which intro duced an entirely new principle. The clause would certainly be quite inoperative, and he wished therefore to know why it had been introduced into the Bill at all ? When they came to the 32d clause he should move that it be expunged. The clause was then agreed to, as were also clauses 2 to 11 inclusive. (LEFT SITTING.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEIKiR took the Chair at the usual hour. NEW MEMBER. Mr. BOUVERIE took the oaths and his seat for K marnock. v The Hon. Member was introduced by Mr. Ellice, jun., and Mr. Ord. DISSENTERS' CHAPELS BILL. Petitions against this Bill were presented by Colonel Powell, by Mr. Broadley from Yorkshire, Sir J. Y. Buller from Devon, Mr. B. Cresswell from Northumber• land, Major Beresford from Harwich, Lord Pollington from Pontefract, Mr. Brotherton from Salford, Mr. B. Hughes from Carnarvon and ißangor, Lord Rendlesham from Suffolk, Mr. Barnard from Greenwich, Mr. Boyd from places in Ireland, and Colonel Fox from Limehouse. Petitions in favour of the Bill were presented by Mr. A. Chapman form Whitby, and Mr. Strutt from Derby. Mr. W. 0. STANLEY presented a petition from a Wesleyan congregation in Holyhead against the Dissen ters' Chapels Bill. Lord ASHLEY presented several petitions to the same effect. Captain ROUS presented a petition from Westminster to the same effect. _ V v Sir W. JAMES presented petitions from several Wesleyan. congregations to the same effect. Mr. CHRISTOPHER presented a petition from the clergy and adult inhabitants of Andover to the same effect. Sir R. H. INGLIS presented a petition froin the wardens and other officers of Winchester College, against the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill ; also from Cromer, in Nor folk, against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill. An HON. MEMBER presented several petitions to the same effect. - _ Sir THOMAS TROWBRIDGE presented a petition to the same effect. Mr. MURPHY presented a petition from Ireland to the same effect. Lord IL VANE presented a petition from Hertford shire in favour of the Bill. Mr. H. BERKELY presented several petitions from Gloucestershire and Somersetshire against the Dissent ers' Chapels Bill. Mr. CARTWRIGHT presented several petitions to the same effect. Lord NEWRY presented several petitions to the same effect. Sir C. LEMON presented a petition, from Ireland to the same effect. Mr. CARTER presented a petition from Clitheroe, and other places, to the same effect. , Sir W. WYNN presented a petition from Devonshire, to the same effect. Mr. VILLIERS presented a petition from Stafford shire to the same effect. Mr. G. KNIGHT presented a petition to the same effect. Mr. CHRISTIE presented a petition from Wales in favour of the Bill. Mr. M. PHILLIPS presented a petition from Mac clesfield to the same effect. Mr. DIVETT presented a petition from Honiton in favour of,_ and one from Huntingdon against, the Dis senters' Chapels Bill. Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition against the Bill. PROTECTION TO AGRICULTURE. Sir J. Y. BULLER presented several petitions from Devon in favour of further protection to agriculture. Lord RENDLESHAM presented similar petitions from Suffolk. Mr. HUME presented a petition from an agricultural society in India, praying for the admission of corn from India on the same terms as corn coming from Canada. The Hon. Member gave notice of his intention to call the attention of the House to the subject on an early day EDUCATION IN IR E LAND. - Mr. LEFROY presented petitions from Cork against the national system of education in Ireland. DISSENTERS' CHAPELS BILL. Mr. KEMBLE presented petitions from congregations of Dissenters in Surrey against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill. Captain TAYLOR presented petitions from Hereford shire to the same effect. POOR-LAWS, Mr. FERRAND moved for copies of the correspond ence between' Mr. Ryder, a men;tber of" the board of . guardians of Chelsea, and the Poor•law Commissioners. —Ordered. . Mr. HUME gave notice that, in Committee upon the Bank Charter Bill, he should move a clause for the re peal of the legal tender clause. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. On the motion of Sir G. CLERii, it was resolved that the House at its rising adjourn till Monday. COURTS-MARTIAL. The Courts-martial Bill lndies) was read a third (East time and passed. INDIAN ARMY, Mr. HUME called the attention of life bovernthen't to the indications of a mutinous spirit among the Sepoys of the Indian army.. He considered it a most alarming symp tom, and it was of the greatest importance that the in justice that had caused it should not be continued. He was consoled by the thought that Sir H. Hardinge would do all in his power to prevent it. , • TRADE WITH PRUSSIA. _ _ Lord J. RUSSELL gave notice, that on Tuesday next, he should move for the production of the corres pondence relative to the commercial relations between this country and Prussia. SUPPLY. On the motion of Sir G. CLERK, the Order of the Day for going into Committee of Supply, was read for the purpose of postponing it. CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION BILL. The Roman Catholic Clergy Grants and Conveyances :reland) Bill was read a second time. SLAVE TRADE. On the Report on the Slave Trade Treaties Bill being brought up, Captain PECHELL asked what treaties it was the intention of Government to legislate upon? Sir G. CLERK said it was only intended by the Bill to give her Majesty power, by order in Council, to carry certain provisions of the treaties into effect, till next session, when they would be embodied in an Act of Par liament. GLASS DUTIES. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX CHEQUER, the Glass and Vinegar Duties' Bill was committed pro forma. ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS. _ _ On the motiOn for reading the Order of the Day for going into Committee on the .Ecelesiastical Courts Bill, Captain PECHELL presented a petition from Brighton against the Bill. Mr. M. PHILLIPS presented a petition from the Law Society of Manchester, praying that a clause should be inserted in the Bill, consolidating the powersof certain of these courts. . . - Mr. T. DUSCOMBE rose to Move an instruetion to the Committee to abolish all Ecclesiastical! Courts, and to transfer the jurisdiction of those Courts to civil tribunals. His object'was to take away all jurisdiction from the Ecclesiastical Courts, and to put an end to the caprice and injustice that took place there. To effect this there could be no doubt that the wkole of Doctors' Commons must bs swept away, and that in its place proper tribunals must be - appointed to replace the mummeries and impositions that not only disgraced the county, but affected the best interests of religion. He did not believe that 658 gentlemen calling themselves reasonable men would attempt to bolster up a system so inconsistent with reason. Ile wishedto see all the doctors and proctors who infested Doctors' Commons cast out, and he for one would be prepared to give them all the compensation they could prove themselves entitled to. In all the proceedings which had taken place from 1829, when the Ecclesiastical Commission was appointed, in all the Bills which had been introduced into Parliament whether by Whigs or by Tories ; they had but pro ceeded from bad to worse till theyhad arrived at the ne plus ultra of worthlessness in the present matter.— (Laughter.) He thought that the Learned Civilian whom he saw opposite (Dr. Nicoll) would be obliged to sit down in despair in attempting to improve the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill, for he would find that his materials were so rotten and so corrupt that he would be the tinker perplexed, who in curing one hole created two.—(Laughter.) It was true the Bill got rid of some spiritual jurisdictions and offences, such as tithes, and defamation and smiting in the church-yard — (Laughter)—which subjected the offender to the loss of one ear, and if he had not one he was to be branded on the cheek with the letter F.—(Laughter.) But that the health of the souls of her Majesty's subjects might not be altogether neglected, they left behind such offences as simony, heresy, brawling, blasphemy, perjury, drunkenness, incest, adultery, fornication, incon tinence, and other evil habits—(Laughter)—over which the jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Court was continued. The jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts over Church-rates was continued, though the Ecclesiastical Commissioners recommended that it should be abolished. He knew no reason why this jurisdiction should be con tinued, except that it occasionally promoted fraud, and that it brought grist to the mill of the lawyers in Doctors' Commons. He would give one instance in which the Rev. Theodore Williams proceeded agiinst Mr. J. Hall, and upon which a most absurd decision was given by Dr. Lushington. It seemed 'that there was a meeting in the vestry for a church-rate, at which the Rev. Vicar was expected to be present, but he was behind time, and a motion for adjourning the meeting was car ried. He came after this, and no doubt was very angty. Some dispute took place between him and Mr. Hall, who said he was a disgrace to his cloth, for which he was dragged into the Ecclesiastical Court. The House would be surprised to hear what the costs were in that case. The first was an item " for the sours health."—(A laugh.) Gentlemen might laugh, but the words were pro salute aninice.—(Renewed laughter.) He supposed that this was something for the soul to take with it in its travels to 'the other world—a sort of viaticum. he cuppoc.a..--4Great laughter.) But the fee had been transferred from the soul to the stomach. and Peter had been robbed to pay Paul, or rather to pay Theodore.—(lncreased laughter.) Well, what was the next charge ? He did not know very well what the word meant—it was "Fortunate," 3s. 6d. —(Loud laughter.) He really could not throw any light upon the subject. He did not know what the item meant—whether it was fortunate for the clerk, fortunate must his say; life. that he never read The judgment was, so absurd for the court, or fortunate for the suitors.—(Laughter.) ; he did not ask the The Right Hon. Baronetopposite perhaps might explain reasonth e of meaning them, of fo these charges there was. n o reason in them, and he would not insult the Right Hon. Gentle m an, by, asking him to find a reason. — (Laughter.) He must come now to the a judgmentdgment that Mr. James Hall should be excommunicated from the parish church for one week of seven days. The judge said that the words used by the judgment, d in he e his Rev. Theodore Williams were words of contempt and that Mr. Hale spoke under provocation when he said that Mr. Williams was a disgrace to his cloth, and he would therefore order that 301. should be deducted from the costs—(Hear, hear)—but even after this de duction, Mr. Hale's costs amounted to 1801.—(Hear, hear.) But what was the punishment upon Mr. Hale, besides the payment of this money? He was to be shut out for seven days from the parish church, into which he would never enter if he had- a spark of spirit.---(Hear, hear.) Now, let them look to the class of offences to which the jurisdiction of these courts extended—drunkenness, idolitary, fornication, incontinence, and such evil practices—(Great laughter) —for all of which, any of you (said the Hon. Gentle man) may be liable to be cited to the EcclesiastiCal Courts—(Shouts of laughter) —for all these they were liable to be called on to do public pennance, and in any place which the Court might appoint—(the laughter was so great, that it was quite impossible to catch cor rectly the words of the Hon. Gentleman) they be called upon to do public penance in the church—(Re newed laughter)—and to recant—(Laughter.) Yes, he was serious; they would be obliged to recant.—(Laugh ter.) He was not speaking of imaginary things, for in the district which he had the honour to represent a wo man had lately been obliged to do public penance in the church, because she had spoken, perhaps, too lightly of the chastity of her sister.—(A laugh.) The following scene occurred in. St. John's :—Rebecca Cohen, the Jewess, having imputed to Deborah, her sis ter, a total want of chastity,a process was commenced in the spiritual court of the Bishop of London, and after about 701. had been run up in fees, Rebecca was allowed to expiate her offence by going to the church in ser vice hours, and then and there, before the church wardens, overseers, and ministers, recanting. • The re cantation was, in fact, a fraud,: because, instead of being done publicly in the church; as had been ordered, the parties were let in and out pri vately at the vestry-door, and hundreds of persons who had heard that this ceremony for the good of Rebecca's soul was to take place were disappointed.—(Hear, hear.) Well might the parochial authorities and the ecclesias tical courts be ashamed of • such a proceeding , but that House ought to be more ashamed if it continued its sanction of courts from which emanated such an amount of absurdity. What a hardship was it upon the subject that this individual had to pay 701 for this process. Now, with regard to the brawling, what had happened to Mr. Theodore Williams within the last few days ? He had been brought before the bench of Middlesex magistrates, for inciting to a breach of the .peace one of his own pa rishioners, a respectable freeholder. He certainly did not do this in the church-yard, but on the highway. The House would .recollect the language used by Hall to Williams : let them now compare it with that used by Williams to Mr. Smith. He said to him " You a thick-headed fellow," and shook his fist in the complainant's face. The clergyman then said, " You are a dirty fellow—you are a shabby fellow—you are a coward," and he added; "You dare not fight." On complainant saying, "If I am a coward, I will meet you in any spot you please ;" the defendant exclaimed, "What, what, we'll discuss the question, Sir. (A laugh.) What was the result ? Why that the magistrates in flicted the highest fine which they could impose under the Police Act; namely, 40s. ; so that, in point of fact, there was one law in the ecclesiastical courts and another in the civil courts. Whereas 40s. was the highest fine which could be inflicted in the one, lea. for costs, and seven da y s ' banishment from church could be imposed in the other. Well, then, were all these offences to remain upon the statute book ? He bad the authority of a Right Rev. Prelate in favour of his views. A Bill had been introduced into the other House of Parliament by the ,Bishop of Exeter, for the purpose of putting down incontinency , fornication, and all those other evil habits ; proving that these Courts had neglected their duty and were not adequate to suppress the immorality of the age. A Bishop might Thehave better opportunities of ascertaining the truth than himself. lion. Member was then proceeding to quote the Bill, when he was interrupted by The SPEAKER, who stated that, ' as the Bill was not before the -House, it could not be cited. The Ecclesiastical Courts would do well to confine them 'selves to the affairs of their own courts. He could not see -why the Court of Assize were not competent to decide questi9n6 that were usually brought before the Eccle- siastical Court. Such tribunals were founded on coin- The LORD CHANCELLOR feared that such a mon sense and common justice, and Lord Hale and Lord I change would entail expenses upon prisoners in the re- ! Holt had denounced the Ecclesiastical Courts as tri- moval of witnesses, which they could ill sustain. A bunals against common justice and common sense. — better division of the year seemed most practicable, by , (Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman concluded by making the summer circuit begin at a different period. moving the motion of which he had given notice. Lord BROUGHAM apprehended that no inconve- Mr. HUME seconded the motion. nience had been experienced in Scotland by making the Dr. NICOLL said that the principle of the Bill had venue transitory. It was accomplished by a small ad been affirmed on the second reading, so far as related to vance of money. the retention of certain portions of ecclesiastical juris- The LORI) CHANCELLOR thought that the country diction; but the Hon. Gentleman was not satisfied with gentlemen would object to any such charge bring made that, and wanted to have the ecclesiastical courts abolished. upon the county rates.. altogether, but at the end of his speech the Hon. Gen- The Duke of RICHMOND remarked that if- the as tleman said that he was prepared to maintain an cede- sizes were to commence in August," that was the month siastical jurisdiction for the discipline of the clergy. It in which in his part of the country the harvest usually was absolutely essential for the maintenance of the Esta- began. blished Church, that it should possess a criminal jurisdic- 2he return was then ordered. tion. With regard to the case alluded to by the Hon. Gen- CUSTOMS BILL. tleman, he begged to remind him that where there were On the motion of the Earl of DALHOUSIE, the two litigious persons, a case would be attended with Customs Bill was read a second time.—Committee to large costs in any of their courts of equity or common morrow.' law, but the case alluded to by the Honourable Gentleman would be put an end to by the Bill if the brawling did not take place in the church , b ut if it took place in the church surely the Hon. Gentleman would not, for decency's sake, wish that there should not ENDOWED SCHOOLS. Lord WHARNCLIFFE moved the second reading. 'of the School Endowment 13i11, explaining that the pur pose of it was to give greater facility to the Privy Coun cil in the endowment of small schools in poor neigh bourhoods. be a means to prevent it, (LEFT SPEAKING.) SENTENCE of the COURT-MARTIAL ON SERGEANT-MAJOR W. NELAME. On Wednesday the Court re-assembled at Chatham Bar racks, when the following charges and sentence upon Ser.- geant-Major William Nelame were promulgated, who bad demanded an inquiry, in consequence of certain allegations having been made against him by Major L. C. N. Meyer, Superintendent of the Cavalry Riding Establishment at Maidstone : Charge 1. For conduct to the prejudice of good order and military discipline, in having, at Maidstone, on the 26th of March, 1844, offered to Major Meyer, the Riding-Master of the Cavalry Depot at Maidstone, some bank-notes, saying, at the same time, I have brought you a present, or words to that effect; and when ordered by the said Major Meyer to remove such bank-notes, begging the said Major Meyer to accept them, he, the said Sergeant-Major Nelame being at the same time under the instructions of the said Major Meyer, with a view to qualify himself for the appointment of Riding- Master to the 12th Lancers, and intending such sutn of money as a. bribe to the said Major Meyer, to report favourably of his qualifications.—Guilty. An additional charge preferred against the prisoner for having at Maidstone, in a letter addressed and sent by him, the said Sergeant- Major Nelame, to the Most Noble Field- Marshal Arthur, Duke of Wellington, Commander-in-Chief of her Majesty's Forces, bearing date the 2d day of April, made false and malicious assertions, with intent to injure and defame, and to give his Grace the Commander-in-Chief false impressions of the conduct of the said Major Meyer, in the following instances—to wit :- Ist Instance—ln asserting, en the 7th of December last, " I got a ride to drill, Colonel Middleton and Major Meyer being present. After drilling the ride, I was mounted on a horse, and rode two or three times round the-school. When I was dismounted, Major Meyer told me my drilling was good, but my riding was bad." Whereas, in truth and in fact, the said Major Meyer did not, on the occasion referred to in the said letter, tell the said Sergeant-Major Nelame that his drilling was good.—Guilty. 6th Instance—ln asserting that, when all these means (thereby meaning the alleged means mentioned in preceding instances) fail, he (thereby meaning the said Major) makes a report to Colonel Middleton that " I gave him a sum of money for the purpose of getting him to make a favourable report of me to the Horse Guards. How any person holding the high and honourable position he does could stoop to such a subterfuge shocks me." Whereas, in truth and in fact, such report to Colonel Middleton was not, as insinuated in the said letter, false or malicious, but was a true report, made by the said Major Meyer in the due discharge of his duty.—Guilty. Sentence—To be reduced to the ranks. This declaration came like a thunder-clap upon the Ser geant-Major, who, it was evident, did not expect it. We understand that he has been actively engaged in the service of his country for the last eight-and-twenty years, sixteen of which wereas sergeant-major, and two years as regi mental sergeant-major. Upon the stripes being cut from his jacket, he indignantly threw it off, and declared he would never put it on again, although he was strongly persuaded so to do, and join his regiment. He subsequently became so excited and ill, that he was ordered to be removed to Fort Pitt Hospital, whence he was conveyed in a carriage pro cured from the town for that purpose. Lord COTTENHAM said the object of this measure might be attained without giving the large powers which were contained in the Bill. Lord BROUGHAM said there were very many cases in existence in which the funds of public schools were misappropriated. The LORD CHANCELLOR said it was his inten tion to introduce a Bill in the course of the present ses sion upon the subject. After a few words from Earl Fitzwilliam, Lord Wharn cliffe, and Lord Cottenham,, the Bill was read a second The Marquis of NORMANBY gave notice that he should call the attention of the House to-morrow to a contradiction of certain facts, stated in a letter from Mr. Hamilton, the Crown Solicitor for the North-East Cir cuit in Ireland, in a matter mentioned by a Noble Friend the other night, for as the allegations in that let ter seriously affected tho character of individuals, he felt it right to give the same publicity to the contradiction which had been given to the charge. Their Lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 80. APPEAL IN CRIMINAL CAnES. M,r. KELLY rose pursuant to notice to ask for leave to bring in a Bill to provide an appeal in criminal cases. • It was almost incredible that while in every case of a civil character, no matter whether the question involved a large or a small amount of money, the law as it stood at present gave an appeal. , A person who Mt himself aggrieved either by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge, could appeal from that verdict or that decision, and carry the case even before the highest tribunal of the land. But in a criminal case, which must involve a question of character, property, or even life, there was no appeal, according to the law of England, against the verdict of the jury, however erro neous, or the decision of the judge, however mistaken. In every country in Europe, and throughout every civilized country in the world, an appeal was given as well in criminal cases as in civil, and the error of a jury or a judge must be rectified by appeal ; but in this country the state of the law was such, that no matter how glaring and palpable might be the error into which the jury might have been led, or however mistaken the judge might have been in point of law, there was no remedy for the party injured, though his liberty, his character, his property, or even his life might be in jeopardy. To remedy such a state of things he now .asked for leave to bring in a Bill—the guiding principle of which was that it endeavoured to assimilate as far as was practically possible the law and practice in criminal cases, to the law and practice in civil cases. The Ho nourable and Learned Gentlemen then went on to show what the practice was with regard to civil cases. In all civil cases any person who thought himself ag grieved, either by an error in the verdict of the jury or by an error in the statement of the law as made by the judge, had an opportunity of appealing, first of all to a court composed of four or five judges, next to a court • composed of double that number of judges, and ulti mately to the House of Lords. The consequence was that, in the administration of the law in civil cases, any errors which were committed were remediable, were cor- rected most frequently, and ultimately justice was done. The result was, that in all civil cases there was the ut. most confidence throughout all classes of the com• munity that justice was done in courts in civil cases. It was almost without an example that any attempt had ever been made either. in Parliament or by the press to impeach the judgments of courts of law in civil cases, because all were agreed that if a party acquiesced in an unjust decision it was his own fault, because he pos sessed the power of appealing, if he chose to exercise it. In criminal cases, however, the state of the law was directly the reverse, and it was inconceivable, looking at the constant improvement which had taken place in our laws, and to the anxiety which. the Legislature had manifested to amend the defects, it was inconceivable that century after century such a state of things should have been suffered to exist, when the remedy was so plain, so easy, and so certain. In civil cases, in which property alone was affected, an appeal was allowed, but there was no appeal in criminal cases, in which lite itself was sometimes at stake. He proposed to remedy this evil ; but before he drew the attention of the House to the remedy which he proposed, he must take the liberty of observing that he did not believe that such a state of the law would have been suffered to exist if the Members of either House _of Parliament had been as liable to be indicted for crimes as all were to be parties in civil actions.—(Hear, hear.) It happened that the criminal law applied more frequently against the humbler classes of society; but if the Members of the Legislature had been as liable to have their characters, their liberties, their property, and their lives placed in jeopardy by the criminal law, as their property was in civil cases, he felt assured that the same remedy would have been provided in criminal cases that was at present provided in all civil cases. It was impossible to conceive any state of the law more opposed to the due administration of justiice than was the state of our criminal law. A man was in dicted—he was tried, evidence was adduced, as in other cases. on the one side and on the other. By a modern improvement, which, strange to say, had been much op posed, counsel might now be heard for the defence in criminal as well as in civil cases, which he acknowledged was a great improvement ; the judge summed up the case, and the jury returned their verdict. The verdict was returned ; there was only one of three courses which could be taken, whatever doubts might exist as to the propriety of that verdict, or as to the correctness of the learned judge in stating the case to the jury. After a verdict of guilty was once pronounced against a pri soner, however convinced the counsel might be that that verdict had been procured by means of false evi dence—although the prisoner might know it was wrong, —although all present might be convinced that the pri soner was innocent—although all lawyers might feel as sured that the judge, in his charge to the jury, was mis taken, there was no appeal allowed by which this mis take could be remedied. There was no means of ob taining a reviewal of that decision but in two ways, which he would state to the House. But before doing so, he would observe that, upon a verdict of guilty, even if the evidence was ever so untrue or misrepresented, if the Learned Judge was satisfied with the verdict there was no remedy ; he passed sentence, and it was carried into effect even to death itself.—(Hear, hear.) No one familiar with the practice of the criminal courts of this country could entertain a doubt upon the fact that there had been a great many cases where the verdict had been wrong or the charge of . the judge wrong, inasmuch as there was no power of correcting if injustice Ras done and the innocent suffered death. He could mention many cases to prove what he had stated, but as he did not wish to trouble the House at length he would only advert to one. Nine years ago a man named Chalker was indicted with another man at Suffolk, for the murder of a gamekeeper in a wood. The trial came on before an eminent judge now no more ; evidence was given that Chalker was in the wood at the time of. the murder, blood was found upon his clothes, and there was circumstantial evidence more or less strong of his guilt. The Learned Judge had early in the trial taken an impression against the prisoner; he summed the case up most clearly and impartially, but most ingeniously. Chalker was convicted, and his fellow prisoner acquitted. He declared that his fellow prisoner was as innocent as him self, and the counsel for Chalker being convinced of his innocence, took the greatest trouble to establish that fact, and having collected a mass of evidence on the sub ject, he laid it before the judge, in hopes, at least, of obtaining a respite for some time of the sentence of death that had been pronounced on Chalker, but the Learned Judge adhered to the opinion he had formed, declared himself perlfectly satisfied of the prisoner's guilt, and refused to interfere. Chalker suffered death ; but it had since transpired that the man who had actually committed the murder, who had seen the miserable vic tim executed, had come forward and confessed his guilt, declared he was the murderer, that the man who was executed was innocent, and gave himself up to jus tice. This was one among many instances which time brought forth, of persons being convicted of crimes, and suffering punishment, because there was no appeal froth the sentence passed upon them. There was no remission of the penalty, because there was no appeal by law. It might be said that whenever the cir cumstances warranted doubt of the prisoner's guilt, whenever there was any . serious objection raised, that no judge would refuse an inquiry, which might be had by applying to the Secretary of State for the Home Depart ment ; and whenever a legal objection of weight was put forward in the prisoner's favour, it could be argued in error, before twelve or fifteen of the judges. In answer to these arguments, he replied that there was nothing to compel the judge to reserve these objections ; and most learned and eminent judges had, over and over again, refused to reserve objections which subsequently appeared to have been well founded. He remembered a case in point among his own extremely limited practice in criminal law. A man was indicted in the county of Huntingdon some years ago, and tried before a Learned Judge now no more. Evidence was given ; the case had closed ; he (Mr. F. Kelly) was counsel for the prisoner, and sub mitted with great confidence to the Learned udge cer tain very strong points in the prisoner's favour. He submitted that although the man might have been guilty of a very gross offence, which would have amounted to a misdemeanour, and perhaps rendered him liable to transportation, still, according to the terms of the indict ment, he was not guilty ; he should have been tried on an indictment differently framed. His offence, he sub mitted, was not a capital one, and he should not be punished for it as such. He urged these points on the Learned Judge in Court with all the force and earnest ness he was capable of; but the Learned Judge decided in a most peremptory manner against reserving the ob jection. He again pressed upon the Learned Judge in Court the propriety of suspending the execution of the prisoner, but was again refused in the same peremptory planner. reeling the strength of his objection, INCEND lARISM. It will be recollected that at the Kingston Spring Assizes, a young man named George Elderfield was charged with an act of incendiarism, committed in the neighbourhood of Guildford, of which town he was a resident. As is usual in cases of this descrip tion, the evidence was entirely circumstantial, and consisted of proof that the prisoner was seen near the barn that was fired immediately before the fire was discovered, and that when the alarm was given he was seen running away from the spot. It was like wise proved that a day or two before the fire Elder field purchased two boxes of lucifer matches ; but when he was apprehended he denied having done so. There was no such evidence against him however, and at the close of the case for the prosecution, Mr. Baron Alderson, who was sitting in the Crown Court, expressed his opinion that there was not sufficient evidence to go to the •jury, and therefore directed an acquittal. The prisoner, upon his being set at liberty, returned to Guildford; but in consequence of the strong impression which prevailed that he was the guilty party, a watch was kept upon his movements. A few nights back the town of Guildford and the neigbour hood were again alarmed, by a fire breaking out in the farm-yard of Mr. Bicknell, an extensive farmer, residing near the town of Guildford. Fortunately, assistance speedily arrived, and two large . ponds of 'water 'being upon the premises, the dwelling-house was saved, but a barn, which contained a large quan tity of wheat, beans, and oats, a stable, and some sheds, with three fine calves, which it was found im possible to rescue, were wholly destroyed. Suspicion at once fell upon Elderfield as the author of the fire, and upon the police making inquiries at the house of the old woman where he lodged, it was found that he had been absent from home during the whole night on which the fire took place, and he was immediately sought for, and taken into custody. After having undergone one or two private examinations, in the course of which no material evidence was brought forward to inculpate him, the prisoner voluntarily confessed his guilt to the officers who had him in charge, and by the direction of the magistrates he was taken to the spot, and he then showed the con stable where he had concealed. himself during the evening of the fire, and said that he lighted the stack by means of a lucifer match ; that the first he tried went out without doing any mischief, but a second one put it in a blaze. The prisoner is a young man of weak intellect, arid upon the former trial it was proved that his mind was continually wandering, and that he frequently talked in a most incoherent manner about fires, and he had several times disturbed his landlady in the night by giving an alarm of fire, which turned out to have no foundation. When before the magistrates Elderfield repeated his confes sion, but he did not assign any motive for the com mission of the desperate act, or appear to feel any dread for the consequences. The magistrates, after careful investigation, resolved upon committing the )risoner to take his trial at the summer assizes, and le was accordingly conveyed to the county gaol. ----- On Wednesday Mr. Baker held an inquest at the London Hospital, on the body of Sussanah Day, aged 86, a widow residing at 24, Skinner-street, Bishopsgate. Her son said that she was very much afflicted with spasms in the stomach, and that at times they were so painful as to drive her to distraction. On Friday morning he went out with some work he had finished, leaving her in bed. On his re turn, to his great surprise, he found her sitting on a chair covered with blood, and on close examination he found that she had severed her throat with his razor. He procured as sistance, and she was promptly taken to that hospital. Mr. D. Carter, house- surgeon, said deceased was admitted with a wound in the throat, four inches long and two deep, and completely dividing the wind -pipe and gullet. It was im • possible for her to survive, and she died in a few hours. Verdict, " Temporary insanity." IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, May 30. DIVISION OF THE CIRCUITS. Lord BROUGHAM moved for a return of the num ber of causes and prisoners tried on the various circuits for certain years. The unequal division of the circuits was one cf the great grievances of Westminster Hall. The northern circuit had nearly as much business as all the others put together.; The LORD CHANCELLOR had no objection to the motion, which might be made the foundation of future inquiry. .It would, however, be quite impossible to make any alteration until the next spring circuit. Lord BROUGHAM said it had been suggested that part of the northern might be advantageously given to the midland circuit, but he apprehended that the better course would be to divide the northern circuit to send two judges into each division. The subject ought to be considered and settled before the next spring circuit. The LORD CHANCELLOR observed that great in convenience had been felt during the last spring assizes. He had, however, communi c at e d with the Home Secre tary upon the subject, and found that there would be ex treme difficulty in making any change at present. The Duke of RICHMOND hoped that in case of any winter circuit being ordered, especially in the county of Sussex, due notice of such an intention would be given. Lord BROUGHAM adverted to the great anomaly, which he hoped to see speedily corrected, that whereas within the district of the Central Criminal Court, a prisoner could not be imprisoned more than a few days before his trial, in some counties there might be, and frequently was, an interval of from six to nine months between a prisoner's committal and his trial. He was averse to increasing the the number of the judges, and he trusted that this great evil could be otherwise reme died. He also stated his strong objection to a partial gaol delivery, according to which some counties were re lieved of their prisoners, while others were not visited by the judges, and he read a list of counties in whi c h no causes nor prisoners bad been tried, owing to the want time. Lord CAMPBELL would respectfully suggest that much good might be done by dividing the circuits more equally in the year; by rendering the interval between the assizes in one case longer, and in the other case not so long. In Scotlard the summer circuit began in Au gust and September, and although such a change in England might interfere with the shooting season, or with trips to France and Italy, be believed that the bar in gereral would be willing to make the sacrifice. Lord BROUG HAM recommended that in criminal cases the venue should be made transitory, so that pri soners could be tried elsewhere than in the place where the offence was committed. he went to the Judge's private residence is the middle of the night. He was received with all the courtesy which , distinguished the Learned Judge, but his application was in vain. la short, after five fruitless applications, when the man wee about to suffer death, he (Mr. Fitzroy Kelly) and waited, for the sixth time, on the Learned Judge, again urged, or rather insisted, in terms which would cer tainly not have been justifiable under any other circura- • stance, on the propriety of writing to the Lord Chief Jus tice of the Queen's Bench, or the Lord Chancellor, to have their opinion as to whether there was anything in the point which he urged. At length the judge coo' sented, and he communicated with Lord Tenterden or the Lord Chancellor. Both of these learned individuals thought the point ought to be reserved—(Hear, hear)-7- and eight hours before the period fixed fo r the roan f°l,' execution, he was respited. The point was, o n the ; lowing term, argued before eleven of the judges, among" 5 , 3 whom was the Learned Judge who tried the man, so they were all unanimous that the point should have been reserved, and that the indictment was not stistainablefe .-:" (Hear, hear.) Here was a case in which a man's li had been saved by mere chance ; then l et him not be told that the judge would, on every occasion, reser!: a point for argument, if there was anything io however eminent or learned that judge might be. - ; (Hear, hear.) The man was now living, a person, and a good member of society. Such was th state of the law when there was a verdict of guilty te state turned, and when, to every impartial bystander, tW: reasons urged by the prisoner's counsel might be sufficient, still the, judge might be inexorable, and the unfortunate accused, although innocent, as in Chalk r case, might suffer the punishment of death. Boweve`f contrary the conviction might have been to the law, ° refortneoe the land, yet still it rested upon the fiat of the klug e whether the prisoner might not suffer punishment, or even death itself.—(Hear, hear.) He asked if this state of things should be allowed to continue in a conotri_ where the law was fairly administered ? But evene where the Learned Judge was disposed to entertain to objections urged, the remedy—if remedy it could he called—was of a most unsatisfactory character. Wirt, was the course when a man had been convicted o crime, and when the objection of his counsel had b ee ,, reserved by the judge for argument ? First, the jOdg e i entertaining the objection at all was a matter of "nu"; gence, and not a matter of right. So that the ,Prie °fie might be indebted for his life, not to the law, but to tot kind and merciful discretion of the judge. He dia., tit speak in any manner disrespectfully of the bench, 1 . 1° :„ $ was a well known fact in Westminster Hall, that se'', of the judges would entertain objections which other_ would absolutely refuse—so that it was altogether matter of accident, whether or no the prisoner, inn hey or guilty, should have the point which his counsel ott honestly raised in his favour argued at all or not J'ielj even, as he said before, where the point was easery what was the proceeding ? The judges met togett it not in open court, as on objections in a civil cases, in some private room in Sergeant's Inn , or elsewber,: and there counsel was heard, and heard, he- mos; t hat after a most irregular manner. It often happene° counsel for the Crown was not employed on these occasi°,,ot and it sometimes occurred that the prisoner we e iee able to fee counsel. Then in this private roll' to judges met, and the point was' decided which we,' $ grant liberty or inflict death on a fellow-creatur e. ip civil case, on a like occasion, all the customary forniend, our courts of judicature would be gone through,gthe what was still more valuable, the arguments °' te a counsel and the reasons of the judges wou ld be salted ao before the public ; but in this case the judges ge s l e o te reasons at all, but it was made known in some lir i a s t or conventional manner to the prisoner's coans e ' ` . t ee the result of the judges' deliberations was_whetherkea man's life was saved, or whether it was to b"_„,l,. of away. Thus no addition could be made to the w c - re . the common law of the realm—no decisions er!,idee corded, or reasons published, which might be ,g"d eo hereafter in like matters. In fact, at present we ed u t ' t he digested body of criminal law at all ; and it reno ir , ees master mind of the individual who had now unde rjl oe it, to reduce our criminal law to an intelligent cod i e%, t he other course left open for a person convicted tioa e ' criminal law was still more objectionable-- if by application to the Secretary of State. do there was a strong case made out for interfere t Li cel the Secretary of State referred to the judge who trivc man, and in most cases the Secretary of State t ee guided by the opinion of the judge. Thus Tavel; man's life depended on the will of a single in t oo But suppose the Secretary of State went further, to f demanded the evidence ...to consider ; hence the See ,r 1 of State was certainly placed in a position of a ~ efr sponsibility. Well, then, he received a copy C wi t elk denee from the judge's notes—he must receive so r to deuce as was laid before him—he had no P ° ,. o j e 0 0 demand any other—it might be false, but be u_ti,fr power to examine parties on oath—no mean s or PP ro ot ing himself whether the statements made were eocis or incorrect ; and yet upon these slender gll'en.cref'' must come to a decision upon the life of a fellow eod ture.—(Hear, hear.) But in most cases the Se el : ea ts' of State rested satisfied with the judge's bar e rePr„°' cos' time and acted accordingly.—(Hear, hear.) '-f" e o ftes sequence of these things was, that the guiltY, L teti , escaped, and the innocent often suffer ed.-- • evi hear.) It was to provide a remedy for tbe s e ot ee• that he submitted the present measure to the m,bera Where there was an erroneous verdict , o r where ; s for was a misdirection of the judge, or good gr° nn je r the supposing either, he proposed by this Bil l to rene ~a mode of appeal the same in criminal as in c ivil caL,e vie at least as nearly so as possible, taking th eir difference into consideration. He proposed th at in v t " or criminal trial, whether at the Central Crimina l Cour.oo, before the going judge of assize, or at quarter se''llrbir or any other criminal tribunal, to enable the prisel,v.„ o so his counsel, when there was a verdict of guilty , tell to in any of the superior courts at Westminster Olde, show cause why the verdict should not be set,„fer' why there should not be a new trial, and why diet not guilty should not have been returned, °firth° the judgment should not be reversed ; and whe ueve , court was satisfied, either upon affidavits osiloper review of the evidence, or upon a belief that itrliesi• evidence had been received upon the trial, or prilieri Bence rejected, or where witnesses were brought °,lOOO suddenly, and whose testimony the prisoner emil!u_ eo , or satisfactorily disproved if due notice had been WI jail where the Learned Judge had misdirected thuof in point of law, or in an erroneous summing to facts, in all or any of these cases, se 1- efn actions, he proposed that it be at the diseretioo_xet' Court to granea new trial, or to order that the l' e ts 'iiti guilty be set aside and a new verdict of not 5 ee recorded. He also proposed that there slo ni that, ° power to move for an arrest of judgment , en d ight be t , in civil cases, appeal to the House of Lords To o, bu r made, which he presumed would very seldom der proPe, nevertheless, resort should be had to it uou, e ' to ca s te restrictions. The mode by whieh he proposeu sesol0„. out this part of the measure was by giving as t he 6e ,;§ power, in all cases of conviction. to suspenu It tence until the appeal should have been oli decided.c $ di absolutely necessary that the judge should bevsed `v cretion cretion upon this subject. What he Pr°P° trio that in all cases where a judge shoul d ha d P ric ed prisoner, and he had been found guilty, the Pc e should declare, before the sentence was P,„, 0 e1d. 0 ,01 that it was his intention to appeal ; and be _"„nclineLol power to the judge either to pronounc e thee of t he sentence, to take effect on the termination ce t oo e t o , if the conviction should be confirmed, or top ° 9 lie P sentence until the motion had been heard. ro s o f posed to leave it to the judge either at once t° , i ' s totiP e e tence, or to order the prisoner to remain in ~o i se°,o , to admit him to bail, either upon his own recee„ ea l ), or upon good and sufficient bail, until the aPi re jec t `i b i tion had been decided, when, if this appeal i' ver h e t edit i$ the sentence should be pronounced. Und°`', ( o tv e 't o part of the measure was open to the obje e 'i. - _ t wi c t, would still be in. the power of the effectsjudge i he verytlo perversely determined to carry into .oposs!rg to refuse to respite the sentence. But it w s hp l dr°, ol to guard against mischief in all cases, and adg e- 0 0 thought the matter might safely be left to the J o the land; unless the thing were so clear thatane ro 4f being could entertain a doubt about it, the g ti tion s e' in all capital cases, postpone the ex were root the sentence ; while, if the sentence the mol d cuted, except in cases of life and death , tjr that could happen was that the priso e , o f % a lit suffer imprisonment, or undergo the first stag e ; a e 0 el s' portation, until the ensuing term. But he be_ hoe, i o ei that, practically, if this measure passed into 0 fr ifo .o l , tice would always be done. In cases where ; 0 s ' sa l objection was raised, the judge migh t here a', tence; on the other hand, in cases 18 ',. f a ct, on o serious doubt existed, either upon a m atter °i n a otr i tet matter of law, or the verdict of the jury, °P ° oo teu e loo" appeal being given it might be taken for g r a , d o the judge would postpone or arrest the se rtter e ° W il, 0 he was at a loss to understand what reasoneh could be made to this measure. It h ad bee% sr', •an objection to the power of appeal under s t e e isb„ e sh stances, that it would give an advantag e to to to ar t it the poor ; that the rich would always be a bl° , o . tbi' th er and that the poor could not afford to d°,_ 0-ocleectolli Would be in fact making one law for the tie', tiel for the poor. He thought that objection " ( Loh e co ul" apply to the power of appeal in civil cases. 0 01 0 6° 0 tages were incidental to the nature of thioo eras not be avoided. But, looking at the practiv,e,o. 00 1/1, of the measure, he saw no reason for belie t n "or t e( 1 1 ,00 0 1 rich man would enjoy a privilege which w es not t ° possessed by the poor man. The judge,"„sraer ,)ile to admit the rich man to bail. He inigu t d - e idedt remain in prison until the appeal were ,e be lt ro: the poor man, if unable to obtain, bail, nilgr l i s or vih ic: rated, at the discretion of the judge, uP°: O59 cognisances. Now, there was only one er t° 49, he desired to give power to the respite of his sentence at an earlierle`s,bod4, it could be obtained in other upon cesc`i, luded, of course, to indictments suc h 00, , tal charges. • He proposed that in rise rc: b esl,' if the judge before whom the P soa ec h ef( l l . l tried refused to allow the appeal, the P2 l O eon' eo t upon giving notice, have the right to u_ ov i s ion, $ 5l O the recorder and two judges, and this P t be e rnte, „s extend to the judges of assize. It m ight i0105:1 re objection to his measure that it would h e . t e the P o rr! e i. prison S. the present state of the courts, and vv e a l ero tig car t ' 0 number of judges, to dispose of the 1311 we re _ re jt i l , "which would take place if this measures ... re He must take leave to say that if this nie.rthe 4 w t - 0 01 0, adS e j made upon the Legislature, on the part of the .1_7 0 .1 1 and expedient in itself, it was no answer t that it would create a necessity for some ali o , ee, o' o to ot sly', if # 4 , ti(Hndatrh,uhseacra.u)se Buta adhdeitdioidnalneoxt pie,*eAoubtecipocco, necessity would be found to exist. Unit appeal were to take place in every case,,id rot e s ; o, o ' o l half the time of the court. But they " iv ij cas cr ia' 0 1 1 courts of law inundated with then, should they anticipate such a re s d re dre 0 P i e a ppeals in e tot ss e oc , cases ? The Bill would be found to ane r bt o be e ieoi ° cases of a criminal nature where irjustice a. ft and in no case could it be seriously anus