The Sun. — London, England, 1844-07-04 00:00:00

O'CONNELL VERSUS THE QUEEN, IN ERROR. THE 1V8.EN.1.17 CHRONICLE, of sArruu DAy and SUND.IY NEXT, will contain a full report of these interesting proceedings in the Houso of ; also of the im portant Noes ll'orn India; 7.ifeditatcd ~ ',:tiquest of the Punjaub by Ellenhoroneh, and retreat of British Troops before the ReleoChees ; th 3 Sussex Peerage Inquiry ; the Exhibition of Frescoes and Statttary at Westminster Hall; the extraordinary case of Running Rein, the Winner of the Derby; the Parliamentary Inquiry into the Frauds, Forgeries, and Espionage of the Post-office ; the Horrible Massacres L . D . ',Oard ti.o Salad in, and ail the News of the Week. Office. 337, Strand, and all Newsvenders. Just ready, in 2 vol 3. small Svo., with Ilkastratiens. REVELA'rIONS OF RUSSIA OR,. THE EMPEROR NICHOLAS AND WS EMPIRE IN 1844. 'By " One who has seen and describes." " Tbt on turd tout se .Gait."—Malntenon. Henry Colburn, Publisher, 13, Great Marlborough-street. -------:------- Published this day, post Bvo., 10s. 6d., THE MODERN SYRIANS; or, Native So ciety in Damascus, Aleppo, and the Mountains of the Druses. From Notes made during a Residence In those parts in 1841, 42, and 43. By an ORLENT..4.L STUDENT. London : Longman, Brown, Green, and Longratms. This day is published, in one thick volume, Bvo., with nearly 1,000 Woodcuts, uniform with Messrs. Longman and Co.'s series of " One volumr Encyclopmdias and Dictionaries," 505., bound in cloth, AN ENCYCLOPEDIA OF I)OIAIES'TIC ECONOMY ; comprising such subjects as are most imme df,riely connected with Housekeeping, as Building, Furnishing, Servaias, Cookery, Dress, Carriages, Health, &c. By THOMAS WIZBSTEII, F.G.S., &c.; assisted by the late Mrs. PARKES, Author of " Domestic Duties." London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longman/I. HER MAJESTY'S THEATRE. Madam' GRIST has the honour to inform her Friends, Subscribers to the o,tera, and the Publ E ic, that ENINO JULY 4, HER Bi , 'N Ek I will take place THIS V When will be perf rmed (fir t time these three years), Stossini's Opera Stria, OTELLO. Ilesderacria, Madame Grid; Emilia, Madame Bellinl; Liblache; lago, Sig. Fomasari (his first appearance in that character) • Rodrigo, Sig. Corelli; Dcge, Sig G. ; and Otello, Sig. Ma•io. After which, a . 1 DIVERTISSEMENT," In which will be Intro dosed a new Pas de Deux by Mdlle. Fanny Elsaler and lit. St. loon, l'as de Deux by Mdlles. Scheffer and Plunkett, and the attained Spanish • ance La Sartgossa by Mcllle. Fanny Elssler. To be followed by the Last Act of DZinisetti's Opera. LUCIA DI LAN MERMOOR. Lucia, Madame Persiani; and Edgardo, Signor Moriani. To conclude with the celebrated Ball Scene of ALMA, in which ik d lle. Cerilo, ‘I. St Leon Scc., will appear. Applications for Boxes, Stalls, and Ticket, to be made at the Box odic O t era-colannade. Doors open at Seven; the Opera will coin at Half -past Seven. THEATRE ROYAL, HAYMARKLT MK. BENJAMIN WEBSTER, LES EE THIS EVENING, JULY 6, Will be repeated the Prize Comedy of QUID PRO QUO; or, THE DAY O 1 DUPES. With a Prologue spoken by Mr. Webster. Earl of Huasdon Mr. Stuart; Lord Fellamont, Mrs. Nisbett ; Jeremy orison Mr. Strickland; litiry, Mr. H. Holl; Captain Si:•pett, Mr Buckstono; Sir George Mordent, Mr W. Farren ; Countess of Hunsdos, Mrs. W. Clsdbrd; Lady Mary Rivers, Miss Julia Bennett; Mrs. Grigson, Mrs. Glover; Bridget I rim, Mrs. Humby. Alter the Comedy Mr. John Parry will sing " Fayre Rosamonde." To be followed by a New Comic Drama, entitled USED UP. Sir Charles Coldstream, Bart., Mr. Charles Mathews; Sir Adonis • Leech, Mr Tilbury; Wurzle Mr. James Bland; Mary, Miss Julia Bennett; Lady Clutterbuck, Mrs. Humby. To conclude with THE TRUMPETER'S DAUGHTER; or, Love and the Polka. Philll pot, Mr. Webster; Madelon, Madame Celeste; who will dance the celebrated Polka. Orchestra Stalls, Se. ; Boxes, 3e. ; Pit, 3s. ; Gallery, qs.; Upper G illery, lc. Half-price—Boxes 3e. ; 2s. ; Gallery. la. ; Upper Gallery, 6d. Doors opened at half-past Six, and the Performances commence at Seven. Tickets and Places to be had of Mr. I. T. Archer, in the Box o'Fce, from Ten till Five. PRINCESS'S THEATRE, OXFORD-STREET. LESSEE, Mr. J. M. MADDOX. THIS EVENING. JULY 4, Will be performed GWYNNETH VAUGAAN. Owen Wil- Vami, Mr. Fitsjames ; Hugh Morgan, Mr. Wright; Owyaneth Vaughan, Mrs. Sti ling. After which, a New Drama, called BLANCHE DE VALMY Colonel Chatillon, Mr. Granby; Franca'. Mr. Walton ; Hilare, Mr. W. Lacy; Blanche de Vaimy, Madame Eugenie Prosper. To conclnde with a New and Original Burlesque,. entitled THE WONDERFUL LAMP, being an Illustrated Version of Aladdin. Abanaaar, Mr. Paul Bedford; Aladdin, Mr. Wright; Princess Badrpulbadour, Miss E. Stank y. IHF.A FRE ROY AL LYCEUM, LATE ENGLISH OPERA HOUSE, Under the Management of Mrs. KEELEY. THIS EVENING, JULY 4, Will be performed a New Domestic Drama, entitled THE MO MENTOUS QUESTION. Characters by Messrs. Diddear, F. Vining, J. W. Coltier, Miss Fortescus, and Mrs. A. Wigan. After which, a Grand Burlesque Yalu Extravaganza, called QPION SESAME; or, a Sight with the Forty Thie- ee. llasuarac, Vr. Keeley ; Morgur, Mrs. Keeley. To be followed by an Apropos Bagatllle, called POLKAMANIA. Tharacters by Mr. 1. Matthews, W. Wigan, Mr. Keeley, Miss V•.'osstrir, and Mrs. Keeley. To conclude with THE THREE FRA DIAVOLOS. Principal -Characters by Messrs. F. Vining. Keeley, Wigan. Diddear, Miss VVoolgly, and Mrs. Woollidge. ASTLEY'S ROYAL AMPHITHEATRE OF A irrs. Proprietor and Manager, Mr. BATTY. direst &Nice's of the Chinese Feast of Lanterns, and New Miliory and Naval Spectacle. THIS EVENING, JULY 4, Will he repeated an entire new Military and Naval Equestrian ;pectacle, entitled THE CHINESE WAR; or. The Conques .& ts of Amoy by British Arms. New Scenery. Dresses, Appointanentsc., o realise the recent triumphs of England's Army and Nei y. Feast of 1250 Lanterns. After which, a graceful and novel pageant, entitled THE ROY AL COTILLION OF FRA NCIS THE FIRST; or, The Beauties of the Leune. Marguerite de Valois, Mrs Batty. New and unequalled Scenes of the Circle — Extraordinary Feats .f Hersamair,hip by Monsieur Louis Tournaire, S g. Germani Herr eisback, La Petit Isabelle, Mr. Newsome, &c., with Mr. R. Smith's highly trained Strode. ,lo conclude with THE GREAT STEEPLE-CHASE; or, Eng land's Harvest Hume. The Joors will open nightly at six o'elocr, and the performances cammence at seven. Box-ottice opened daily from ten till four. The priest* boxes hays been reconstructed and decorated wiih care and splendour. Acting aid stagean inner, Mr. W. D.Broadfoot. DAV 'DOE'S ROYAL SURREY THEATRE. TIIIS EVENING, JULY 4, Will be performed an entirely new Aquatic Spectacle, introducing Three Wesel; of Real Water, entitled THE MOUNTAIN CATA RACT; or, The Enchanter's Spell. Ater which, a Lilliputian Ballet, entitled Napoleon's Gene rosity," in which the Brockstedt Family—three German Lilliputians, only 21 32, and 9d inches in height—will perform. o conclude with a New Drama, called Trl E CARPENTER OF ROUEN, in which Messrs Hudson Kirby, Hicks, Neville, Vale, }estop, Johnson, Era. Daly, Miss I'crrey, and Mrs. R. Honner will perform Places and Private Boxes to be had of Mr. Kerschner, at the Box. oe, from Eleven , 0 Four ROYAL SURREY ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS. Daylight View of • LONDON in the OLDEN TIME! Painted by Danson and Telbin. The fiekssatioe caused by this unrivalled production is beyond all former precedent; the artist, the- amateur, the casual observe r are all struck wi!lt ita extraordinary beauty and fidelity of delinea tion, and are unanii.2ous in pr . onouncipg it the most wonderfiii ex. hibition ever witnessed. To vice it only as a vehicle for the terrific display at Dusk is unjust I it should be veen in the calm stillness of the quiet Evening, with Its To;iers and Steeples reflected in the spa cious Lake, to be lolly appreciated. - The Even PROMENADE CONCERTS, on Men 'ay% bleat days. Wednesdays, and Thursdays,' conducted by Mr. Godfrey, are two. a scale of i n o :e than usual excellence: but words fail in sloing justice to the awful -irpresentstion of THE GREA't ;PIE' OF LONDON. Its feartail eh iracteriatics are truthrejly pourtrayed, but at the same time so beautifully blended with the-i:pnders of thehe Pvr Thousands otechnic Alt, that delight is pred ominant over- terror; and t who nightly crowd the Gardens hail it with acclaraations, and Matc ahlessdmit that Southby, the Unrivalled Pyrotechnist, as aChierVelli a triumph. The Gardens and Zoological Collection are in the most perfect gat*, and combining so msny and interesting features, are by far the most attractive lounge in or near the metropolis. eeding of the Animal) at Five—Concert at Six—Conflagration at Dusk. Admitt ince, One Shilling. EGYPTIAN HALL, PICCADILLY. IMPORTANT NOTICE. ONA SIIILLING Admission to TIIE NAI OLEON SEUIf, the most magnificent and extensive Collazticm of Illeto iicalliurior;,tiee and c,'orks of Art ever known to hive been ,formed by One Persoi:. during Twenty-five years of elaborate research, at a cost of 0,000 gui,:eas, and to completely illustrate, hi the most in structive and Interes:ing manner the most Importaut part of Euro pean history, v12.--CILIRLEKA, OLIVER CROMWELL, and I.)U IS XIV., to the deaths (if eilfoiViE 111., and the EMPEROR NAPOLEON, In 1821. This unique I: , n.seutu has been vi.4ted often, (luring the last and present year, by the Royal Farnry, the Duke of Wellington, the Foreign Princes, Amin , an the'r Ladies, deo, many thousands of the Nubility and a uhlic ; an'i the Pro , rtetur Gas recently been able to increase, by several very fine i,ictures, Sec., hie previous almost Incredible Ab by s ev e r I variety of •••,A., Works of Art, and a multitude cif yaluable end other Airiosltles, in this most instructive and, ne htmdre , le have ed it ought ) be, a National Museum. Many thousoiri have itisoocteel it, and TUIItTY PRINCIPAL EDITORS of the Prilif,lC :PRESSis {salve stated that It ought to be seen b y everyone. The price of ridin Pon to reduced to ONE SIILLLING. —h e NAPOLEON MINE UM is to be sent only at the • figyptisui !sit Ten till r WEATIIER.—Sett OFFICE, JULY 4.. xiugalton,:rEn, Lowest, 53; Highest, 68 : cost, 63 13azomErzu, 29.7.—NN vin, S.W. Yo-t..—The number 32 on the Thermometer denotes the freezing p0;...."t, and 55 temperate. In 13aron:t4t4 8' fair is t u, t ity- placed oroosite 30, and rain at 29. wisemewe ~ W TI W.tTER A.T LONDON.BRIDGE T;J:S T)AY. minutes stir 41 Evening...s6 minutes .4fter 4 - ----_-- .........,...___...___ , ..., • ,}...., \ a 4 ' . , N i. - 44' N,—.` s "`"" z •k '. ' ": ' 0-. :, Zgrt ~... - .', . -i. , ~ .: •, e T 0% ...---1,- - • r• ~._. ~. , ''‘' r• ',“;:,,,_ ' " **" SF,COND EDITION. nuns LONDON, THURSDAY, JULY 4, 1844 The House of Commons met yesterday at twelve o'clock, when Mr. GLADSTONE moved that the House resolve itself into a Committee on the Joint-Stock Companies Registration and Regulation Bill. The motion was opposed by Mr: 11Awas, a lengthened discussion ensued, Mr. HAwEs iri lly with4rew his amendment, and the House went into Committee. IsTral clauses were agreed to and th 9 House re sumed. The Smoke Prevention Bill was withdrawn, and a ft e r the transaction of some other business of little imvortance, the House adjourned. The House of Lords did not sit yesterday The Irish Orangemen are again speaking out, in their a:nal unceremonious style, on the subject of Sir E. PEEL And his Conservative Government. They are a l w ays in a ferment about this period of the year, when the anniverory of the battle of the Boyne co m.as round, which they seem to consider as the most g:sorious military achievement recorded in the annals a history, and it revires the utmost efforts of their' sober an more pro* -1 4ent leader s t o keep them witin tho hounds ot pro of the 4 effervescing piety. At a pub lic meeLng Orangemen, w hich took place ou,Alonday last At the o Rotunda in Dublin , for the purpose of commem rating their great battle , t heir incorrigible party pre judices, which would appear to be engrained Into their very nature, and which can no more be roo out of ,them than an zEthit,p•can be washed white, were manifested io the boldest rna•nner possible, not in by a host of bigoted orations, in which each speaker, whether lay or clerical, vied with the other In virulence of sentiment and expregston; but by such flagrant party toasts as "Protestant Ascendancy' r—which every one knows is synonyumus with the ascendancy of despotism, corruption, and bigotry in their most shameless form—" The Orange Societies of Ireland," of which the illustrious ERNEST of Hanover is, ta. was, the head; the " Ten Bishops Restored," which means that the Established Church in the sister-country should be rendered a still greater nuisance than it is at present ; and lastly," Scriptural education," which, however plausibly th s toast may sound, and however inoffensive it may appear, implies neither more nor less than that the education of all classes of Irishmen should be vested exclusively in the hands of Protesiant pastors and masters, in order that another " heavy blow and great discourage ment"—as Lord MiLsouRNE would say—may be in flicted on the long suffering millions in Ireland who profess the Catholic faith. But if the toasts of these desperate partisans of a worn-out system were offen sive and intolerant in their character, the appeals made to their passions were, if possible, still worse ; and one of the speakers, after abusing Sir ROBERT PEEL, in terms borrowed from the un savoury vocabulary of Billingsgate, went on to ob serve :—" the miserable and incompetent Government, now reigning over them, after having supported Popery in every other part of Europe, were now about to put in force what Mr. WYSE calls the Orange Procession Act. Oh, they little knew the force and current of Protestant feeling, if they considered that an Act of Parliament could extinguish the glorious principle of its life. There were a hundred thousand Protestants ready, if the tide of anarchy should con tinue to advance, and at length assail the last bulwarks of the Church and Constitution, to raise once more a Nassau, and prepare once more to cross the Boyne." The meaning of this passage—that is to say, if any meaning can be extracted from it—is, that if Government shall decide on making any fur ther concessions to the cause of liberal govern ment in Ireland, they, the Irish Protestants, will assemble their thousands in arms, and resist all such concessions by open, bare-faced violence ? A 3 this swaggering threat was an after-dinner one, its in spiration may easily be conjectured; and indeed so outrageously absurd is it, so faithful a copy of the BompASTES FuRIOSO style of bombast, that we should scarcely have considered it worthy even of a passing notice, had it not strictly illustrated the character of the Irish Orangemen. Un taught by experience, untamed by the humiliat ing reverses they have encountered since the passing of the Catholic Emancipation Bill, these men are just as bigoted just as arbitrary and self opinionated as they were in the good old ELDON times, when the game was in their own hands—the ball at their feet—and Protestant Ascendancy was the order of the day in Ireland. While the world about them has been in progress, they alone have either stood stock-still, gazing about them, like STDINE'S scullion, " with a foolish faze of wonder," or else, when forced into reluctant motion by the irre sistible pressure of events, have taken two steps back ward for every one they have taken forward. Verily your Irish Orangeman is a queer creature. He has scarcely one sympathy or opinion in common with the age in which he lives, and which he can not be brought to comprehend. His mind dwells exclusively on the past, hating the present, and filled with distrust of the future. It is vain to tell him that it is his duty, not less than his interest, to concede something to the altered character of the age, and that other men, far more influential than himself, have done the same ; such reasoning is wholly lost on his obtuse, purblind faculties, and he exhibits, in consequence, the humiliating spectacle of bigotry without power, and perseverance without hope. - - We entreat the public attention to a circular, which will be found in another column, addressed, by the Committee of the Society for the Emancipation of Industry, to the Members of the House of Commons, entreating their instant "attention to the consequences which must ensue from the Bank of England Charter Bill passing through Parliament in its present state." It is a well-timed appeal to that House—in which we fear, however, this fatal measure is destined to run its full course, perhaps this very evening, for which we see the third reading is fixed. But prior to the Bill being carried up to the House of Lords — a tribunal from whose greater sagacity in the conduct and investigation of all measures immediately affect ing the monetary resources of the country, we look forward with some confidence to extensive modifica tions, if not the ultimate rejection of the scheme, — it is well that Sir ROBERT PEEL should have been afforded this last opportunity of reconsidering the enactments he is calling on the Legislature to pass. It will not be in his power to plead hereafter that the erro neous principle of his Bill, and its inevitably disastrou s operation, (if passed into a law), had not been suf ficiently or clearly brought under his consideration. The " circular" before us is a most able paper, -xhibiting, in a few short paragraphs, not only the demonstration of the errors of principle and the prac tical tendencies to which we allude ; but a rationale of the whole theory of our currency system since 1819; of its inherent elements of disorganisation and disturbance ever since ; and of their indefinite and ruinous aggravation under this Bill of 1844. This circular is signed by Mr. SPOTTISWOODE, the Chair man of the Society, and forms an honourable testi mony to the unremitting and intelligent exertions of that gentleman to indue Parliament to discharge a duty which it certainly has not hitherto performed— in giving to the Bill in question a much more search ing, impartial, and dispassionate consideration than it has found from the House of Commons, owing _either to the timidity et that assembly in dealing with great administrative questions of this nature ; or to the overwhelming influence which Sir ROBERT has managed to eriliStlhere in support of his scheme, but without reference to it s merits—if any could bZ predicated of it ! Accounts have been received from Naples, dated the 22d ult., announcing the total defeat of the Italian emigrants, and the two brothers BANDEIRA, who left Corfu on the 12th, and disembarked on the 16th on the coast of Calabria.' On the 19th, they were at tacked by a party of the Royal troops at Belvedere, in the province of Cantajarra. The commander of the municipal guard and a gensd'arme were killed. After this success the insurgents continued their march to St. Giovani-in-flori, on the road to Cocenza. At the distance of two leagues from St. Giovani they fell in with another party cif tho Royalist troops, who at tacked them, and the result was that three of the in surgents were killcd, two were wounded, and four teen were taken prisoners. The rest took to flight. Their object was to release the political prisoners de tained at Cocenza. THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, JULY 4, 1844. the Royal Family meets with objections, which we regret, but which we respect, because they are sincere The following, from the National, is evidently di rected against Louis PHILIPPE himself:— " There are some men who are so completely blinded by their love of gold, that they lose the most vulgar notions of prudence. The effect produced on Monday by the admi rable speech of M. L'lleroette, will no doubt appear to them to be a movement of the factions; and some words of good sense pronounced by M. ITupirt, will be regarded as au in sane attack against monarchical institutions. The law of dotation will be incessantly brought forward, and we are glad of it. Assured as we are of public opinion, which will rally all good men against the stock-jobbers, we are not inclined to be afflicted at the imprudence committed in the llioniteur, or elsewhere." The Quotidiene attacks the Ministry for the article in the Moniteur, and, unlike the National, charges it with falsehood, in stating that tne KING had only received five millions under the head of indemnity. The amount he received, it asserts, exceeded sixteen millions. " LOUIS PHILIPPE asking for more," bids fair to damage the Ministry more than any event whilh has occurred since M. Guizor became Prime Minister. We see nothing else of interest in the papers. On Tuesday the Three per Cents. closed at 81f. 90c., and the Fives at 122 f. 35c. THE BOURSE-TUESDAY, JULY 2. - - First Highest Lowest Last Price. Price. Price. Price. French Five perC3nts..—.. 122 .. 122 10 .. 121 95 .. 122 10 Three per Cents.. ••• 81 65 .. SI 90 .. 81 65 .. 81 80 Bank of France •..3015 ..3015 . 3010 ..3 010 Laftitte Bank. B,ooof BharessoBo —6OBO —5OBO —5OBO Belgian Bank ..• ••• • • ...... 665 .. 665 665 .. 665 Belgian FiTes,lB3l.• .•. • . 1031 .. 1031 .. 1031 .. 1031 1840 •• • • 1041 .. 1041 .. 1041 .. 1041 1842 ipanish Threes . Neapolitan........ •• •• .• 98 59 • • 98 70 • • 98 50 • • 98 70 Roman ..... RAILWAY SHARES. St. Germain • 892 50 .. 895 .. 892 50 .• 895 Versailles, . ..... 375 375 .. 375 .. 373 L. 8.•• •• •• 245 .. 259 .. 245 .. 230 Rouen .... •• ....... 992 50 .. 997 50 .. 9 9 0 .• 997 50 Rouen to Navre 778 .. 770 .• 770 .. 770 Orleans .•• •• •• •• •••• 990 995 .. 990 .. 995 Strasburg to Bale .. 235 .. 240 .. 233 •• 240 Avignon to Marseilles•• •• •• 767 50 .. 772 50 •. 767 50 • 772 50 RAILWAY SHARES FOR SETTLING, 30xn JUNE ACCOUNT. Versailles, R.B.••• • • • . 372 50 .. 376 25 .. 372 50 .. 376 25 L.B •. • ..• ...... 245 .. 248 75 .• 245 .. 248 75 Rouen .. Rouen to Havre Orleans 987 50 .. 997 50 .. 987 50 .. 997 59 Strasburg to Bale ••• • • • .... 235 .. 240 .. 235 .. 240 Avignon to Marseilles.• .• •• 765 .. 773 75 .. 765 772 50 RAILWAY SHARES FOR THE ACCOUNT, 15Tu JULY. Versailles, R.B. L. 8.•• •• •• 245 .. 245 243 75 .. 243 75 Rouen 992 50 ..1002 50 •. 992 50 —lOOO Rouen to Havre.. •.. ..... 765 .• 772 50 .. 765 .. 770 Orleans Stra-sbarg to 8a1e.... Avignon to Marseilles• ••• .. 770 • • 775 • • 770 • • 773 75 MORTALITY IN THE METROPOLIS.--The number of deaths during the week ending June 29, was 964, being 18 above the average of the last five years. The excess is chiefly in small-pox, scarlatina, and violent deaths. The deaths from small-pox are unusually great, being 51, or 36 above the average. Of the 51 persons who died of this disease, 31 had not been vaccinated. The deaths from scarlatina were 60—average 34; and from violence, 66—average 25. Of these deaths, 14 were caused by suicide, and a considerable proportion from burns and scalds. The thermometer was highest on Monday, the 24th June, 83.3, and lowest on Wednesday, 48. Rain in inches, 1.55. THIS DAY S NEWS. QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.) (Sittings at Guildhall before Mr. Justice WIGHTILLR and a Special Jury.) BODMER V. BUTTERWORTH. This was an action to try the right to a patent for certain drawing frames, rollers, &c., used in the cotton and woollen trade. There was not the slightest interest in the case which promised to last throughout the entire day. EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.) (Sittings at Guildhall, before the LORD CHIEF BAaox and a Special Jury.) REDMAN V. HAY. The hearing of this case, which occupied the Court a great part of yesterday, was resumed this morning. It was an ac tion to recover on a policy of insurance effected with the In demnity Assurance Company on the freight of the barque Lerd Wellington. There was no point of interest in the facts of the case, the whole question turning on the terms and conditions of the policy, and as to whether or not they bad been complied with in the navigation of the ship. After some discussion between the Chief Baron and Counsel (Mr. Martin and Mr. Tomlinson) as to the form of the verdict, the jury were directed to find for the plaintiff, with da mages, 1,5221. ALEXANDER O. PRAT!. This cause was similar to the last, being an action brought by the plaintiff to recover a sum of 3,0001. on a policy of assurance, granted by the General Maritime Assurance Com pany, on the barque Cecilia, 325 tons admeasurement. The particulars of the case had not been elicited when our report was sent off. The case is expected to last the whole day. COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.) (Sittings at Guildhall, before Mr. Justice CltEsswJLL and a Special Jury.) NICKELS V. lIASLAM. - _ . This was an action to try the validity of a patent of certain machinery, invented to facilitate the carding of cotton. The whole matter, as far as it had proceeded, was of the most dry and technical character, possessing not the slightest in terest to the general reader. The case was not expected to conclude until a very late hour this eveniag. BANKRUPTCY.-(THIS DAY.) (Before Mr. Commissioner FANE.) IN RE GRANT. Wm. Grant, boot and shoe merchant, Swaffham, appeared to pass his final examination. The amount of the bankrupt's liabilities was originally 42/. 2s. 6d., for which ➢iessrs. Thomas and Co., of Friday street, put in an execution ; and the losses 'attending the sale of the bankrupt's stock by auction, with the attendant expenses, amounted to upwards of 1401. The bankrupt was unopposed, and passed his examination. IN RE WHITE. The bankrupt, Jonathan Williams White, holds a situation in the Court of Chancery, as clerk of accounts, with a salary of 400/. per annum, which, however, in consequence of extra duty, averaged during the last three years and a quarter 5001. The amount of his liabilities were 692/., and he offered to lay aside 100/. per annum to meet his creditors. A few of those attended, and said that they would with draw their opposition if the bankrupt advanced his offer to 150/.—He was finally put back to amend his schedule. CRIMINAL COURT.-(THIS DAY.) OLD COURT. (Before the RECORDER.) Sharringtan Bach was charged with uttering a forged bill of exchange, knowing at the time that it was forged. The case has recently been before the public, when it was investigated at the police-office. The case was not sustained, the principal witness having failed to satisfy the jury that the name to the bill was a forgery, The prisoner was accordingly discharged. This was the last case, and the Court adjourned to the 19th of August. CORN AVERAGES. tiENERAL AVERAGE FRIOEB OF SRI 118 H CORN, For the Week ended June 29, 1844 made up from the Returns of the inspectors in the di ff erent Cities and Towns in Englan.. and Wales, per imperial Quarter Ms. 91.1 Oats .....».. 224. IM.I 8ean0...." 31s. Od 345. l Rye ...... 353. Od I tease...—. 3es. Id AVZILAOKS OF THE LAST $U Wills. Weeks ending WHISAT. SAILLEY.I OATS. 1 RYE. BEANS. • SASE May 25 June I II 15 II 000000 0* i 9••••••••• 1-1) '55 10 55 6 55 6 53 . 55 • 55 6 30 1 30 7 31 9 31 4 32 10 34 4 21 2 21 7 21 It 22 6 22 1 8! 9 it 7 33 II 34 0 34 10 33 11 3.5 11 32 4 36 11 94 2 37 10 3.5 0 38 I 33 4 31 1 114 1 34 1 35 2 311 1 IMPERIAL. AGGREGATE ATERAOCS OT THE Eli WEEKS Wheat......... 35+ lid Oats 225. Id.l Beam , ..... ....Ms. 3d 31.4 10.1 Rye ..... 33i. &LI Pea5e........345. Id. DUTIES ON FOILRIGN CORN. Wheat Od.l Oats .....—.. Od.l 8eatt5......... Is. &I. Barley „ r „... 71. Od. 1 nye .."..... 641.1 Pease ......... et MARKET NEWS.-(THIS DAY.) NAY WLA.3tBSTS. SMITIIFIEIX..—Coarse Meadow Hay, 31 108 to 4/ 4s ; use ful ditto, 4/ 5s to 4/ 103; fine Upland ditto, 4/ 123 to 4/ 16s ; Clover Hay, 4/ 158 to 61 Os; Oat Straw, 11123 to 1/ 14s; Wheat Straw, 1/ 14s to 1/ 163 per load. Owing to the showery weather the trade to=day was heavy, at barely late rates. CUMBERLAND.—Coarse Meadow Hay 41 to 4/ 4s; use ful ditto, 41 53 to 41 12s; fine Upland ditto, 4/ 14s to 51 ; Clover ligy, 41128 to 01; Oat Straw, 1/14s to 11163; Wheat Straw, It 16s to 1/ ltla per load. Supply but moderate, and trade rather dull. WurrEcturst.—Coarse Meadow Hay, 31123 to 4/ 43 ; use ful ditto, 4/ Os to 4l 123; fine Upland ditto, 4/ 14s to 4/ 18s ; Clover Hay, 5/ to 6/ 12s ; Oat Straw, 1/ 12s to 1/ 14s ; Wheat Stiaw, 11 14s to 1/ 16s per load. A. moderate !Ripply, and a sluggish demand. "New Meadow Hay was at fram to to 4 1 5s per load? The:remarkable article in the Moniteur, advocating the right of the younger branches of the Royal Family to State pensions, has excited a painful sensation throughout France. It forms a subject of comment in every Paris journal of Tuesday. Those of the Opposition attack the Government, or more properly speaking, the Severeio, in terms much stronger 'than any they have ventured to use Since the passing of the geptember Libel - Laws; and even the Qoyern. ment papers can say nothing in its defence. Never g measure so universally exeprated. The Globe, which is reel oned the organ of the Court, uses mere generalities, which might refer to almost any subject; an d th e Journal" des Debate ell 'nit condemns the mode in which the proposal has been mAde. We will not deny," it says, " that the sudden appearance of this manifesto has somewhat surprised us, and that w i have sought to digpoyer its object with a certain degree of ijicitude. It is not th3t we are without fixed opinions off ti question itself-,they still are i: what they always have beef, The ,justice anti neces sity of providing portions for the Priupp§ of the Royal Family is, in PUT eyes, a legitimate conse quence, not only of this or thatparticular law, but also of the monarehleal principle, wp have any regret. it is that the question Of •Andowment was. mit brought before the Chambers when it would have come naturally into discussion of one of the most portant jaws the country was ever called upon to pass —we mean the 4,egpr f oy If the Government had no more to contend, gigAlqst than the Pi 2 1111411?nt projwlices of M. L'HBRISITT 3 N l ;r i a 3 l - 1 11 ? - e ee nt t i e ,o r n day t. tht Mr. scruple; .of PuriN , or eJ,Ten the ocgasion at we believe that it would be PortTsotpli WA4I),---4 VUOICV prevailed In 014 Alderman Johnsen had anneunee4 but, ilttle disturb c ed by the one, and not too lon alarme d b y th e ,gthet,. But therp i agtnothing , eligible su&es osorreiruildgbehfeouanidde.rinJlZnnicagvwencsaonN,. soon oasoro which the Governtnent much more than the ,s!ipiff_ Moon and Mr, David Salomon% respecr opinion of its adversaries —the opinion of its fripds. za nida a t n ea ci p z i u i Pt eil erl d has been g , c4!nil lip o p n or se t several d r aLs e , 4 7 e as ,;ti l v ) 3 meetings haVP already been held in the Now we are not ignorant, and shall not attempt to others conceal, that even in ale . ranks of the Conservative credited, Mr. Salo a m re on m a will retire t f lie rei Co o n rt te m st ay an b d party the que;tion of endowments for the rrihc . c . s . of leave Kr, Sheriff Noon in sole possession of the field, • LLOYD'S SHIPPING.-(THIS DAY.) 14011)01 , T, 4.—Wind light, south-easterly breezes. Pottramotrrit, JULY 3.—Wind W.S.W.—Arrd. H.M.S. Childers, Hong-Kong, sailed from Ascension May 14, on freight 1,000,000 dollars. Off, Scotia, Drayner, China; Delta, 4/ 4 ? Tvii4 for porgt i Duke of Argyll, litristowis:,, fl h144r4 8 I Eugezembad, Sgrin*q t file 4‘ 4 4Tptetdo4; Fanny, allett 2 Newfoundland. Orr DA.urrgourn-.—Tyrian, Clarkson, New Zealand (10 dap) i Tikßor, AO 4 Plitch barritte, bOth troM Batavia for Rotterdam. CARDirr, JULY 3.—The Mary Ann, Pitley, of Yarmouth, PO jli 11Pre a few days since, leaky, and has discharged to ;0114ir• LtvEttpoot,, JULY light.—rrd• l3lapk Nage, Wbite, Ichalioe ; Gonypium, Brown, New OrleaNS. Std. Pearl, St, John's Lanark-, Quebec, Enterprise, Cal cutta; • Gleaner and Royal Bride, Ichaboe ; Brothers and Jane, Africa; Admiral Nelson, Vera Cruz; Franconia and Stepilun golwin, Philadelph ia ; General Washington, Vir ginia Alh4nop, 143 7 4 ,1, 411,4 ;SLow Tol*i Howard? Is6 s t on; Oberon, Robert .ewPoR, 449 ) . , )f9 Enter rise, Yarn:until, Nova Scotia. P4PTILW T! *44INER% RAdISNY ? QF 44x, 414 ?.,m ,, - - 1 1 14 sloop Alexander M'Neal, which sank In the Bay laid March, hell in the direct track of vessels, with her mast head visible at low water. THE STATE TRIALS. WRIT OF ERROR. HOUSE OF LORDS.-(THIS DAY.) THE QU EEN AGAINST O'CONNELL AND OTHERS. This being the day fixed for the hearing of the great appeal case, in the matter of the Queen v. Daniel O'Connell and others, the entrance to the House of Lords was crowded with persons interested in the case. At ten o'clock the Lords present were the Lord Chan cellor, Lord Brougham, Lord Cottenham, Lord Camp bell, Lord Denman, Lord Auckland, Lord Redesdale, Lord Glenelg, and Lord Carnoys. The following Judges were also present :—Sir Nicholas Tyndal, Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, Mr. Justice Patteson, Mr. Justice Williams, Mr. Justice Coleridge, Mr. Justice Coltman, Mr. Justice Maule, Baron Gurney, Baron Al derson, and Baron Parke. The following are the names of the counsel engaged for the Crown :—Sir William Follett, Attorney-General ; Sir F. Thesiger, Solicitor-General ; Mr. T. B. C. Smith, Attorney-General for Ireland ; Mr. H. Waddington, Mr. Napier, and Mr. Smyly. The following are the names of the defendants' counsel ;—Sir Thomas Wilde, Mr. M. D. Hill, Mr. Fitzroy Kelly, Mr. Sergeant F. S. Murphy, Mr. Charles Crompton, Mr. David Leahy, Mr. John William Smith, Mr. J. S. Close, Mr. B. Peacock, and Sir Colman M. O'Loghlen. Agents—Mr. P. Mahony, Mr. Ford, and Mr. Cantwell. Lord DENMAN—I more that counsel be called. Counsel having appeared at the bar, _ Th• LORD CHANCELLOR (addressing Sir T. Wilde) said—Sir Thomas Wilde, will you state what course you intend to pursue with regard to this case. Sir T. WILDE-1 appear for Daniel O'Connell. The Loma CHA.Ncaii.on—Yes. 4l;oappeiirS;ith you? Sir T. WILDs—I believe Mr. Peacock. But your Lordships are aware that there are several defendants in error, who have brought separate writs ; and there are points applicable to som e w hi c h d o no t apply t o others. With a view to the convenience of the House, I would suggest to your Lordships that Mr. Peacock and myself should appear for Mr. Daniel O'Connell, and with regard to the other defendants, who have different counsel, I would propose that Mr. Hill should be heard for Mr. Steele, and Mr. Kelly for the other defendants. Lord BuouGnAat—That is four counsel in all. Sir T. WILDS—Yes ; and we have also, with a view to the convenience of your Lordships, agreed that, upon several points, we shall not each address your Lordships, but there are others of such importance that each coun sel will address your Lordships upon them. The LORD CHANcELLort—When you come to the re ply, will you reply for all the defendants ? Sir T. WILDE—No, my Lord. My Learned Friends, Mr. Hill and Mr, Kelly, will also address your Lord ships. The LORD CHANCELLOR—Then we shall have three replies ? Sir T. WILDE—Yes. The LORH•CHANCELLOR—Then I would suggest a circumstance material for your consideration, which is, :hat the circuits are fixed for Wednesday ; and if you do not complete your argument before Wednesday, so as to get the opinion -of the Learned Judges before that time, it will be impossible to finish during the present session. Sir T. WILDE—We will bear in mind the importance of getting the opinion of the Judges before that time ; and with that view we will compress our argument as much as possible, and as much as is consistent with justice. The LORD CIIANCELLOR—Having stated the actual position of things, I must leave it to your own judg ment and consideration, to take that course which you think best. Lord BROUGHAM—There are but four days altogether, but do not understand that the maximum should be ne cessarily the minim u m. The LORD CHANCELLOR—The Judges will probably require a day to consider the arguments, so that prac tically you will only have three days. Lord BROUGHAM—That is only if they are necessary. The ATTORNEY GENERAL (for England)—l do not understand your Lordships to determine that there shall be three replies in this case. The LORD CHANCELLOR—In strictness, each party is entitled to a separate reply by counsel, and as there are, I believe, nearly ten parties-- Lord BROUGRAM—Seven. The LORD CHANCELLOR—Seven, is it? Well, as there are seven parties, strictly speaking, seven counsel ought to be heard, that is one for each. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (for England) was about to interpose with some observation, when he was inter rupted by Lord CAMPBELL—When there are several plaintiffs in error, each has a right to be heard by himself and his counsel. If that were not the case, injustice would frequently be done. In strictness, each party has a right to be heard by himself or his counsel. In the present case I understand that it is proposed that some arrange ment should be entered into with the view, if possible, of saving time. The proposal, I believe, was that the counsel for one party should not re-argue points which had been already argued. The ATTORNEY..GENXIIAL (for England)—lt is a matter of indifference to me,.w.hether four or four-and twenty counsel are heard. I believe the ordinary rule is that the Crown has the right of reply. The Learned Gentleman was here interrupted in his argument by the Lord Chancellor, who called Lord Brougham and Lord Campbell to the table, and a long consultation followed between the Lord Chancellor, Lord Denman, Lord Brougham, Lord Campbell, and the Chief Justice of the-Common Pleas. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL continued—lt is usual in cases of this nature for all the parties to join in one writ of error. In the present case each party has sued out a seperate writ of error, and in consequence of their pursuing this unusual course each party claims the right of appearing by separate counsel. Lord BstoucnAm—ln civil cases we always make par ties consolidate their appeals. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (for England)—The course which has been adopted in this case is most unusual. SirT. WILDE—Your Lordships will perceive that in this case there have been several different findings. One party has been convicted of one offence, and another party of another, and the Attorney-General asks why the parties did not join in one writ of error ? because the errors assigned in one case differ from those assigned in another. My Learned Friend says that the parties wished to appear by separate counsel. Possibly that might be the case, and it would be unfair to deprive a person of the right of appearing by the counsel in whom he might place confidence. Lord BaouGnam—l would suggest, Sir Thomas Wilde, that you should try to shorten the case as much as possible, and I do this, not for the sake of the House, not for the sake of the Crown, but for the sake of the plain tiffs in error. You have only five days, including Saturday, and it is for your interest that the Judges should give their opinion before they go on circuit. Sir T. WILDE—We must endeavour to take care of our own interests. Each party has clearly a right to appear by his own counsel, as he would have a right to be heard himself if he were present. The defendants, severally, have been convicted ; they are severally suf fering the penalty of imprisonment, and they have seve rally the right to appear before your Lordships. If they have not that right, the Attorney-General is too late now in taking his objection. The ATTORNEY - GENHRAL (for England)—l am not objecting to the defendants appearing by as many coun sel as they may think proper ; but holding the office which I do, I think it right to draw your Lordships' at tention to the right to reply claimed for the plaintiffs in error. I believe that, in strictness, the Crown is always entitled to reply. At all events, there ought not to be these replies on the other side, or the replies should be conducted upon the principle which my Learned Friend Counsel should not reply on the same points that they are not entitled to reply. laid Lo d r o d. w b n ucA , tx t that submitpant two lE t h w rit of error for the Exch ad eq uoccasi onrevenue to h ea that r case it was a a s ruled that the plaintiff in error was entitled to reply. In Frost's case, in which I was Attorney-General, the counsel for the prisoner replied, and each had a sepa rate reply. The LORD CU4NCXLLOR—it is unnecessary to deter mine that . point at present. As the case is now stated, I understood Sir T. Wilde to say that no counsel will touch upon any points which bare been argued by his predecessor. —I would not wish which maywishta deprive Mr. sir T. N v n.DE O'Connell of the benefit of any points be raised by Other counsel ; but, without pledging myself strictly to any arrangement of that nature, we will gene, rally endeavour to abide by that rule, The LORD CHANCELLOR —That separate counsel shall confine themselves to separate points. Sir T. WxLßE—Precisely so. The LORD CHANCELLOR—If the Attorney-General has a right to reply on the whole case, we can consider that point hereafter—at present we have nothing t o d o with it. Sir T. WlLDE—My.iiords I appear for Daniel O'Con nell, found guilty ou an indictment, charging him with con who, ill coWuncti o n with other defendants has been spirney, O n t h a t indictment he comes before your Lordships 'in error, and various errors are assigned. I will now stat e to you r Lordships the objections which, as far as I am concerne d,l intend to urge against this convic tion. The p resen t is an indictment fair conspiracy, w hi c h contained l 1 poontit. Tile Brat Pewit charged, " t h at i t wag the intent of the plaintiffs in error, t o ra i se and create discontent and disaffection among her Majesty's subjects; and to excite such subjects to hatred and con tempt of the Govrevnment and Constitution of the realm as by law established, and to unlawful and seditious op position to the said Government and Constitution. To stir up jealousies, hatred and ill-will between different towards and against h e r M a j esty ' s littgricist ,: r c o lil t ; i st i l es :iy asqlo i I I°f her hMosaljieisittyy's subjects, and esp ec i a ll y t o. pro her l*,,l i esty4 subjects in Irel an d f ee li ngs subjects in th e other parts of the United Kingdom, and especially i n that part of the United Kingdom called England. To excite discontent and disaffection amongst divers of her Majesty's subjects serving 41 !IPr Majesty's, arTY! §? IA? cause and p rocure , ail aid and assist in' causing yid' procuring, divers sUbject§ of I,,, r isWes,ty unlawfully, Maliciensly,aud 6e di_ tipiisly . to meet And assemble together in large numbers at various times and at different places within Ireland, for the unlawful and seditious purpose of obtaining, by means of the intimidation to be thereby caused, and by iiiEßna of the exhibition awl demonswation Of, great physical force it t '614 isk9inb , lles' titid iuectings, chang e i and alte rat ion s "it} .the goy9yriment; laws, and constitu tion of t he realm by law establisho. T 9 briTg i'4° hatred a n d • di srep oe . ttle enufte by laly estabj4Po in Ireland fo f tli e Ominisi,ration ofjusticgonct to diminish confiden ce of hpr Majestys subjects in Ireland 14 the administration of the law therein, with the j u t en t to a duce her Majesty's subjects to Vitt u'raw the adjudic;: tion of their differences with and claims upon each other from the eepte44ee, cif tlite said courts : ~ ... . ... . by law established, and to submit the same to the judgment and determination of other tribu nals to be constituted and contrived for that purpose." That was the charge in the indictment ; it then set forth a vast number of overt acts, among which were attend ing and assembling a large number of persons between January and October, 1843, and making various sedi tious and infiammatery speeches at those meeting: , , and during that period causing those speeches to be pub lished in various newspapers. The overt acts ran to a great length, but he had stated accurately the subject of the first count. The second count is the same as the first, omitting the overt acts. The third count is the same as the second, save that in the fourth charge the words "unlawfully, maliciously, and seditiously," are omitted. The fourth count is the same as the third, omitting the charge as to the army. The fifth count contains the first and second charges set forth in the first count, omitting the overt acts. The sixth count contains the fourth charge set forth in the first count, omitting the words " unlawfully, maliciously, and sedi tiously," and the overt acts. The seventh count is the same as the sixth, adding the words, " and especially b . ) the means aforesaid to bring about and accom plish a dissolution of the Legislative union now subsisting between Great Britain and Ireland." The eighth count contains the fifth charge set forth in the first count, omitting the overt acts. The ninth count, contains the fifth charge set forth in the first count, omitting the intent therein charged and the overt acts, but adding the following charge (that is to say) : "And, to assume and usurp the prerogative of the Crown in the establishment of courts for the administration of law." The tenth count is the same as the eighth, omit tine- the intent stated in the fifth charge in the fir s t coun t The eleventh count charges the supposed conspiracy to be to cause and procure meetings in divers places, and at divers times, in Ireland, " and by means of unlawful, seditious, and infiamatory speeches and addresses to be made and delivered at such meetings, and also, by means of the publishing and causing and procuring to be pub lished, to and amongst her Majesty's subjects, divers malicious, unlawful, and seditious writings and composi tions, to intimidate the Lords spritual and temporal, and the Commons of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, and thereby to effect and bring about changes and alte rations in the laws and constitution of the realm as now by___ law established." Such were the s e vera l cou nt s . The record then proceeded to state the finding of the jury upon the several counts. The parties, when called upon to plead, pleaded in abatement; they pleaded that the bill was found by the grand jury upon the evidence of witnesses that had not been properly sworn in the Court of Queen's Bench in Ireland. These pleas in abatement were over-ruled, and the defendants then pleaded not guilty, and upon that plea issue was joined, and the trial was appointed for a certain day. On that day, on the jury being called, Mr. O'Connell challenged the array. Mr. O'Connell says " that the said several lists respectively were by the said Recorder at the said special sessions duly corrected, allowed and signed by the said Recorder, pursuant to the statutable enactments in such case made and provided, and that the several persons whose names arc hereinafter mentioned were then and there adjudged .by the said Recorder to have the qualification hereinafter named, and that the names of the said several persons were then and there contained in the said several lists so corrected, allowed and signed as aforesaid; but the said Daniel O'Connell says that the said Recorder did not, as by the said statutable enactments is directed, cause to be made out from said several last-mentioned lists one general list containing the names of all persons whose qualifications had been so allowed, arranged ac cording to rank and property, nor did the said Recorder thereupon or at all deliver such general list containing such names to the Clerk of the Peace to be fairly copied by said Clerk of the Peace in the same order as by the said statutable enactments is directed, but on the contrary thereof omitted so to do. And the said Daniel O'Connell further says, that a certain paper writing purporting to be a general list, purporting to be made out from such several lists so corrected, al lowed and signed as aforesaid, was illegally and frau dulently made out by some person or persons unknown." To that challenge the Attorney-General of her Majesty in Ireland demurred. So likewise the several defendants all presented their challenges, and to their respective challenges a like demurrer was filed. The record pro ceeded to state that those demurrers were overruled, and judgment given for the Crown. It then proceeded to state the empannelling of the jury, and their being sworn to speak the truth. The appearance of the parties was then set forth. It then proceeded to aver that the jury found the verdict upon the indictment, which verdict was contained in page 76 and the following pages. The first finding was that eight of the defendants (there was a ninth, who was dead) were guilty of so Much of the indictment as charged that they unlawfully, maliciously, and seditiously endeavoured to create disaffection among the subjects of the Queen, and to excite hatred and eontempt of the Government ; :that they " did conspire with each other" which words would be found material in a future stage of this argument—and with divers other persons whose names were unkown, to raise discontent, and to excite contempt of the Government, and to create jealousies between different classes of her Majesty's subjects. In fact, the whole eight were found guilty of the charges set fortb in the first and second counts. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to read the particulars of the finding of the jury, and the sentence of the Court. In page 80, a writ of error, coram nobis, was set forth. It appeared that the Attorney-General did not take issue upon that, but he joined, and, after the case had been argued, the Court held that the err or was no t we ll assigned, and that there was no error in truth, and gave judgment for the Crown. My Lords, continued the Learned Counsel, upon that judgment, given by the Court below, and also upon the judgment originally given, writs of error have been brought. My Lords,-upon this record several objec tions appear to arise. I .will state to your Lordships what these objections are :—ln the first place, it is meant to be insisted that these counts are too generally framed to be properly the subject of an indictment ; that the judgment was not formed upon evidence sworn as required by the statute ; that the jury was not pro perly constituted ; that judgment had been passed upon more offences than are charged in the indictment, than have been presented by the grand jury, and than 'have been pleaded by the defendants ; and that will apply to the first, second, and third counts ; that with respect to the verdicts of acquittal in certain insances, no proper judgment has been pronounced. Lord CAMPBELL here put a question to the Learned Counsel which was inaudible in the gallery. Sir T. WILDE—It is insisted that these counts are bad, for the reason I have stated, their being too gene rally framed, and not stating an indictable offence.; and it is contended that, if any one of the counts is bad, the judgment must be reversed altogether. The LORD CHANCELLOR—De you make that a sepa rate position ? Sir T. WILDE—I don't know that it is a separate posi tion; it is stated ratherby way of answer to anything that may be urged, supposing the argument should not sa tisfy your Lordships that the whole of the counts are bad. We mean to insist that if any one is bad the judg ment cannot be sustained. It is then stated that the judgment is unlawful, inasmuch as the parties are re quired to be in prison, not only till they have paid their own fines and given, their own re cogn i zances , b a t a l so till the others h ave paid their fines and given their re cognizances. Thirdly, the judgment requires the pri_, goners to give security for their good behaviour for, seven years, but it does not say from what period that i seven years is to commence. The judgment is also di•fective in its form in not stating where and when the jury was sworn, and it is also alleged that there is an uncertainty whether the jury was sworn, or whether they merely affirmed ; and if they affirmed it is not stated that they were of that description of persons whose affirmation would qualify them to be upon the jury. It is also stated that whether the jury was sworn or affirmed they did not do so in the legal words, " we do solemnly affirm," which are in the statute, but "we affirm" simply. It also stated that the order for the continuance of the trial out of term is also informal, and that there is a discontinuance on the record. These are the points that will be presented to your Lordships, and it is my intention principally to ad dress myself to the character of the indictment and the effect of the finding of the jury, and to insist that with respect to the finding it is.erroneous in several particu lars, upon grounds that entitle the defendants to the judgment of the Court. This, my Lords, is, I believe, the first time that an indictment for conspiracy has come befbre your Lordships for judgment. The LORD CHANCELLOR--Allow me to ask, Sir Thomas Wilde, if your statement includes all the points that are to he argued by all the Counsel ? Sir T. WILDE—They do, my Lord. lam not aware, my Lord, that I have omitted any. Ia as stating that this is the first time that an indictment for conspiracy has come before your Lordships for judgment. The nature of an indictment and conspiracy has always been the subject of much comment, and I have never con versed with any legal 'authority who did not express Ilitaself with respect to the form of such an indict ment, that it was inconsistent with justice. The foundation of law, on this subject seems to have been the 33d of Edward 1., and I be lieve there was no attempt made to prosecute any one for a conspiracy from that time down to the trial of the seven Bishops. They were tried for an offence similar to one of the charges in this indictment ; the seven Bishops were tried for attempting to encroach on the royal prerogative, by the presentation of a certain peti tion. There was a charge in this indictment for en croaching on the royal prerogative, by creating courts of justice. From the time of the seven Bishops to the year 1796 there was no indictment for any conspiracy to commit a political offence. Mr. Redhead Yorke was the first person tried on such an indictment, but one count of it charged hint with a riot, and being found guilty of that it was useless for him to contest the le gality of the indictment. The next case was that of Henry Hunt, he was charged on one count with attend ing an unlawful assembly. Mr. Hunt defended himself, so was not competent to contest the legal form of the indictment on which he was tried. That CAso brings us down to a very modern period, The LORD, OtskNctuu.oa—Was Mr. Hunt only con victed on one count ? Lord BROUGHAM—Was he sent to prison for 30 months for attending an unlawful assembly ? Sir T. WILDE—For a conspiracy for procuring and attending an unlawful assembly, When your LOraships consider the great expense attending. the prosecution of a writ of error before this llbnse, you will perceive that it is hot' in the Poirer of many defendants to cots e 4 o,* i m peneh the form of an indictment awl conspiracy, The Courts Of W4stminster liarA would not feel inclined to cIA with seigh a question, but before this tribnnnl are justified in bringing it, A n d .... parties important duties 9f thi , is one of the most to review ' - ...ouse in its appellate jurisdictu n - ...e law as it-is laid down and acted on in the courts below, or Ps it mey have been retained and acted on till challenged as informal. I think the form of this kind of indictment is utterly inconsistent with justice, and at variance with all the principles of justice, which re- quire that a man charged under it shall be adequately, informed by its terms and shape of the crime imputed to him, so that he may know how to prepare his defence; and one of the most important objects of an indictment of this kind is that the defendupt may have the charges presented to him in such a f(lriu that this House, as an appellate court, should have the opportunity of seeing and judging whether, on the several points, a crime has been committed. The charge involving the crime, may embrace an innocent act, which could only be made an act of guilt by leaving the person charged with the means of seeing . and knowing whether he was convicted on a charge involving legal guilt, and to deprivb the criminal of appeal in such a case would not be consistent with the general principles of law, and which should receive great consideration before it re ceived the sanction of the House. Looking to the doc trine of conspiracy, it was impossible not to feel the ex treme mischief which it had done, and is calculated tc do; the crime of conspiracy does not consist in an act done; it is complete when the intention is formed. Much is left to uncertainty; it is not like any other crime. You were left to infer inten tions from acts of a very doubtful nature. Most of the political cases that have occurred in which in justice is supposed to have been done, have occurred in cases of political conspiracy. To say that the party is protected by the jury because the matter is for the jury, is to give an answer supposed to afford safety to the sub ject. But the whole history of the country shows this to he utterly fallacious. The objects of persons in the worst periods of our history have always been accomplished through juries. The difference between the safety which prevailed at one time, and the insecurity which existed at another, had been when the power of appeal to pro cure other judgments on the questions of law on the nature and character of the crime, upon the nature and character of the evidence, was when facilities were given fur appeal in those several matters: How stands the case of conspiracy here ? Your Lordships are aware of the facts to which this indictment refers, but the question here is as to the form of the indictment, and I ask of your Lordships if such an indictment can be sus mined, what security is there for the subject if those parties have been tried and convicted according to law ? The charges are of such a nature as to convey nothing sufficient to enable your Lordships to say that they constitute an illegal act or not. In the course of the trial it was held that those acts could not be tendered in a case of misdemeanour, and when your Lordships look to the indictment pur porting to prove those charges, you will find that they are made up from circumstances occurring from January to October, a period of ten months, by the selection of speeches of different persons, not made in the presence of the others charged, of reports of newspapers, done in the ordinary course of business, giving the ,news of the day. One of the objects was to procure a dissolution of the Act of Union between Great Britain and Ireland—a great political object, no doubt; but when in the history of this country was it, that certain parties did not hold opinions on some great political subject ? That con formity of action should result from coincidence of opinion, might be naturally expected—not upon any par ticular transaction in which the parties had any indivi dual interest, not conspiring to obtain goods by fraud, to affect the character or interests of individuals, but in a conspiracy to obtain Parliamentskry reform, to obtain a repeal of the Corn-laws, to prevent Catholic Emancipa• tion, that was to say, there must be a coincidence of opinion, leading to uniformity of action upon any great event affecting the interests of the country. There was a charge of exciti ng th e su bj ec t s o f h er Majesty to dis affection agaiast the Government. In what age of the country was it that persons had not endea voured to excite disaffection against the Government? Did the Government mean the Constitution, or the form of the Government, or the persons administering it ? Why, may not the present Government be charged with exciting disaffection against the late GoVernment ? Each of the parties of the present day seemed desirous of producing disaffection and hatred towards what was called the Government ? If the parties were guilty of making seditious speeches, let them be tried for it. I would call attention to what was done at the Revolution in France. There was then a conspiracy to excite dis affection against the Government. One drunken woman uttered a few idle words, tending, it was supposed, to produce hatred towards the Government, and she was hanged for it. I could find many parallels to this in diconent, where the parties charged have been hanged. I would ask of your Lordships to consider whether a charge of this kind, seeking to establish guilt by those means, can be the subject of a prosecution ? But here a course of conduct is permitted to be persisted in for two months—and there is no limit to it—the time ,may . be extended indefinitely ;until- the- vietiaa,is caught. Here are these transactions allowed to go on, until by an accumulation of acts, each innocent in itself, it is sought to take the chance of the weakness, or the in firmity, or the prejudices of the jury, to lead them to a conclusion, not that any particular act has been done, but to some conclusion which is utterly false and un founded—that the defendants met together and con spired. Do your Lordships believe that the jury were told that Government endeavoured to ascertain when and where those parties entered into a conspiracy ? that they were not to convict thein unless they could come to the conclusion that there really had been some comoion consent and agreement between the parties ? No such thing. In an ordinary case, such as a conspir acy to defraud or obtain money under false pretences, if you see parties acting together for that common illegal object, it might be evidence to go to the jury, and it might be for them to consider whether the so acting together could be considered as proof of some common agreement. But when a case is on in which great public interests are .concerned the principle-does not apply—then the acting in concert cannot be taken as proof of conspiracy, and it mu:t be shown that the several parties actually met and conspired. My Lords, I submit that all the counts of the indictment from the fifth to the end are bad—bad for generality. They are rrarned in terms unknown to the law, and are wholly destitute of legal precision. The fifth count charges that the said Daniel O'Connell, John O'Connell, Thomas Steele, Thomas Mathew Ray, Charles Gavan Duffy, Thomas Tierney, Peter James Tyrrell, John Gray, and Richard Barrett, unlawfully, maliciously, and seditiously contriving, intending, and devising to cause and create discontent and disaffection amongst the liege subjects of our said Lady the Queen, and to excite the said subjects to hatred and contempt of the Government and Constitution of this realm as by law established heretofore ; to wit on the thirteenth day of February, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and forty-three, with force and arms, to wit, at the parish of St. Mark, in the county and the city of Dublin aforesaid, unlawfully, maliciously and seditiously did combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with each other, and with divers other persons whose names are to the jurors aforesaid unknown, to raise and create discontent and disaffection amongst the liege subjects of our said Lady the Queen, and to excite the said subjects to hatred and contempt of the Government and Constitution of this realm, as by law established, and to unlawful and sedi tious opposition to the said Government and Constitu tion ; and also to stir up jealonsies, hatred, and between different classes of her Majesty's subjects, arid especially to promote amongst her Majesty's subjects in Ireland feelings of and hostility towards and against ber Majesty's subjects in the other parts of the said United Kingdom ; and especially in that par of the said United Kingdom called England, in contempt of our .said -Lady- ~-khes Queen and the laws of this realm,• to • the evil example of all others in 'the -like case offending, and against the peace of our' :said. Lady the Queen, her crown and dignity. Now; What is meant by creating discontent and disaffec tion ? What is the legal meaning of these words ? What is the crime against which a party thus charged is called to defend himself ? Why, at the time the Bill was pro posed granting Catholic Emancipation, there were many persons who endeavoured to persuade the people that if the King consented to the measure lie would be violating his coronation oath—that it would introduce Popery, and upset the Church. They endeavoured to excite a spirit of hostility to the Government which supported that measure. Now, who were those men who thus en deavoured to excite discontent and disaffection ? The words conveyed no legal charge. To what are we in debted for every legal change which is brought about but to the attempt made to excite discontent and dis affection with the existing state of things ? It is impos sible to produce any change except by such means. Now ought such words to be introduced into a criminal in dict-ment. and left to the jury without any e xplanation of their legal meaning ? Are the words to be looked out in "Johnson's Dictionary," and is the meaning, .tho--res found to be attached to them ? The charge of disaffec • tion does not necessarily imply guilt. Some e4f the greatest patriots that ever lived !ni t ht be liable to a similar charge. They are also charged with unlawful and seditious opposition to the Government, Now, what is meant by illegal opposition ? Who is to decide what is meant by seditious opposition ? Is it to be left to the jury ? They will determine, according to their party politics ; if they are of the same party with the Government, t hey will probably consider all opposition seditious ; if they ~ are opposed to it, it will be hard to convince them that any apposition can be seditious. But how is a man to know what he is called upon to de fend himself against when he is accused of seditious opposition ? It may be a refusal to pay taxes—it may be some other act which is to shew that he has been guilty of' seditious opposition. Now what act except the commission of the crime of sedition—a crime to be sepa rately proved—is there to give meaning to the words seditious opposition. If the word seditious is to be re jected as surplusage, as a word of no meaning, then the count stands for ofibring opposition to the Government, which is no crime at all. Now, your Lordships should recollect that you are now dealing with a criminal charge, and that, therefore, the most rigid construction is called for. I submit that the fifth count is of; on general a nature—that it embodies no legal charge, and that from the wording of it the party charged cannot tell what it is that he is called upon to answer. It is nf the utmost importance, in order to secure the due administration of justice, that there should be upoo every criminal charge sufficient to enable a court cog ap peal to see more clearly than they could in she present case what was attempted to be charged, in the present case no bill of exception, cesuld be tendered to the sum ming up of tee, I.earted Judge, and the only course, ex e,e 4 .e„; ceeming to that House, would be to apply fora new trial. When they could not bring the cheep of the judge before a higher tribuoal, the iodietnaeut ought most clearly to describe the offence of which the c.hargett Po importance of ineeee usoeus o f d e f ence, an d having a fa Jar ty was fair it one necessity of the indictment ne , ...elle definite charge which the party might nipple with, had been clearly stated by Lard Ellenbo rough in the case of the King v. Perry. In that case the man suffered his whole imprisonment before his writ of error was argued, although upon the arguing of that writ of error, he was found to be an,innocetnt man. (The Learned Counsel then proceeded to refer to the state ments of Lord Ellenborough in the case of the King v. Perry, and then proceeded.) In the count to which I am now referring, thee are no overt acts .----.--411•,.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••......... "'° attached, but if there were, they did m il , to show clearly what the charge was. wow, the doctrines of Lord Ellenborough to the re case the indictment in the King a. Perry referte:-. several transactions, but in this case it refers to 9 or subjects. It is scarcely possible, I will venture tt't for any individual to be able to meet such a charC , made in the pr esen t case . C er t a i nty , i n matters of Initial charge is one of the great principles o f til t , : that should be acted upon always, and never lost:, of in a criminal charge. Such, then, my Lords, fifth count. The sixth count charges the assetabliti' large number of persons, for the purpose of chaig . o' altering the GoPernment of the realm as by law estabh •fhe question is, were these meetings illegal ? not charged as being so. The Ist and 2d c ounts', t charge the illegality of the meetin gs , were overrn e e s the jury. Here was intimidation at a legal In charged as a crime. 1 1 Lord BROUGHAM—The count says for an n e and seditious purpose. Sir THOMAS WILDE—The count ought to have how it was unlawful. The count says, procuring . subjects of our Lady the Queen to meet and el' together in large numbers, for th e un lawfu l seditious purpose of obtaining, by mean s of 10. dation to be thereby caused, alterations Government, laws, and Constitution o f the , There is no charge that the m, etings were unla that they were called together for the purpose of' dation. In fact there is not a single circumstal gives to these meetings any illegality. If they be s illegal what, I would ask, would be said to the tive for allowing ihem to go on ? Look at Hen' s ' he was sentenced to two years' itnpris'', for attending an illegal mesting. There charge that the objects of the meeting w ere It is stated that a meeting of a great number of was caused, but nothing is asserted as to the e'e those who attended the meeting. , The LORD CHANCELL OR iii —There is no ieg this count that any meeting was held. Sir T. WILDE—I thank your Lordship. The LORD CHANCEMOR—The charge is a C conspiracy to do certain acts ; there is no stateln e i it was followed up. The question, therefore , . question of law, whether the conspiring of p e rse s the acts which are here stated is a sufficient a llege; conspiring to do that which on the face o f the ment is stated to be illegal. Sir T. WILDE—What I complain of is, not P e i indictment states it to be unlawful, but that itu„ show it to be unlawful ; that it does not sb ° l which it ought to have shown, in order to enabl e ' say that it charges a crime. The LORD CHANCELLOR—As the object o. s spiracy the parties must be supposed to have In ther, and to have agreed to this. Sir T. WILDE—Yes, so I understand it. The LORD CHANCELLOR—The charge is tt,: agreed to cause a meeting of a number of pe t order by a demonstration of physical force to i e o changes and alterations in the Government, is Constitution of this realm as by law establish,: question is, whether, if parties conspire and tien" ther for that purpose, such meeting is unlawful . y Sir T. WlLDE—Whether the agreement iS uD The LORD CHANCELLOR—Yes. Sir T. WILDE—WeII, then, I say tent the that they meant to intimidate by causing a )1 ing is not a statement of an agreement which itself a crime. Lord BROUGHAM—Conspiring together t s stated to be assembling—to be assembling 0 ,P, 1 ;5• the people of England together on Salisbury the purpose of intimidating the Government.. Sir T. WILDE—The question, my Lords, is , be intimidated ? 0' The LORD CHANCELLOR—When you are C o ' this indictment you must suppose the partiee i i met together, and to have come to this agre e s„ "Let us assemble a great force—so great, so e" Ii; that it shall produce intimidation and alarm; ", a change in the Government and C o nstituted, eountry." They may have failed to acsol, purpose ; but are parties, by meeting tog, e o , agreeing to such a scheme g u ilty o f a n o° l or not ? Sir T. WILDE—Any epithets which may be e i duced, I apprehend, are not material. It is a 0 a large number of persons. The LORD CHANCELLOR—YOU cannot sati n thets are immaterial. ." Seditious" is an ePI has a specific meaning. Sir T. WILDE—But your Lordship used " great " and " enormous," and I say that sue d e will not be material. Now, I say, that this e ''s : this conspiracy, is nut charged in terms sulfid s , else to constitute a legal offence. Of courses's ment is addressed, or purports to be addresss.° A ir e posed agreement between the several plaisaireee The indictment supposes an agreerar nt to °id forth. (Their Lordships here consulted t. two or three minutes.) I say, my Lords, i t el, looked at with reference to the object here s til ott; Lord CAMPBELL—What meaning is to be inset " physical force ?" When wa s it fi rs t in' indictment? Lo r is' meant T. WILDE—Let us first see, my meant by " demonstration." I believe thst et least entitled to the merit of novelty. Ih a able to find it use d i n an y other legal fort ' t however, I call your Lordship's attentioll if words, I wish to ask what is meant by "iu t lil Who is to be intimid a t e d? H ow , b y me ans ° tion, is the effect to be produced of prr j euringe ton of the law? It is not to " break t h e 10'; to " set the law at defiance i " it is t `'S an alteration of the law. Dos s th a t me an i t thority or otherwise ? Is it a sufficient eil‘' i se a great number of persons meeting t f and the Commons will be intimidated, and t ilt ' be induced, under the influ e n ce o f th a t in t `V consent to au alteration of th e l aw cont rary l e i victions, and as to what the interests of th e quire ? Are these persons to be supPos?, libelled your Lordships, as well as entered 0 1. racy, by imagining that your Lordships c ' duced by intimid a ti on t o repea l an ex i st ing a is not said that your Lordships are to he that the House of Commons are to bee T Who, then, is to be i n ti m id a t e d? A re the! . d set of maniac s who met f or a pin t '" they could not possibly aeco. n pli s h . I t is O t t: these persons intended to procure their objece mg upon her Majesty, b r upon your Lord6b o the House of Common s ; w h a t i s sta t e d is s o o' to call meetings of la rge num b ers o f Pered . trying to intimidate, and by this I s S, so called, to procure an alteration of th 9 mit to your Lord s hip s th at it is absolut% in order to mike thi s intelligible, that golf stated who it was upo n whom the i se' was intended to operat e . so a s to as a consequence, an a lt era ti on o f the e t '": it is not enough to l ea y e thi s unF e r pr oi) then, how is thi s i nt i m id a ti on to be Is 4 the " demonstration of phy s i ca l f or ce r :hat physical Force is to be used ? N ° 'rse'• stated th a t by th e meeting o f a number 0 , r i f f se how or ether, th e a lt erat i on i s to b e pro° 0 4 thing more meant by a demonstration of P of f than the calling together of a number women ? Surely that is not such a d e . , 133 ,1 physical force as c an b e suppose d or i n t e tw e r sf effect of intimidation. I know of no a utb°, a position. In the case of Lord George diottnent was for high treason, for levying' is Se court laid it down, that the bringing of au a round the Houses of Parliament, ° lis t s intimidating the Legi s lat ure , was s spiracy, but a levying of war agai r ' ns ai Lord George Gordon was tried for high . o btr, ground of personally intimidating the M_ ss e )5 , Houses of Parliament, surrounding the luT s , b ; Members, and pulling the Bishops out ot That was an intimidation that could be 101 ,0 the intimidation here was confined tO land, at a time when . the Legislatve vv os ) 1 ' when it. was uncertain how n3ar,y o f the U which of them, would e **. TW e et toge ther aye dation is stated wititon . , ,, saying who Nelf,t on ; I contend that stsch a charge is il ,fin slee!s ral and tooambignous to be made the OW" charge. How is such a charge to be 11 ' IF A s timidation the 'necessary consequence otl . psn of persons PLeeting, together for a polities . ;I s Lord. CAMPBELL—Might there n ot bet; agreement in the city of Dublin,' to call ° o f sace. yard. Westminster, for the purpos e A VP the Legislature ? " ieee Sir. T. WILDE—The count says I n ' 4 ' land only. The LORD CHANCELLOR—Yes ; " within Ireland." Sir T. Wri.DE submitted that the chargeoe2 was too vague, general, and indefinite. varies from the sixth by adding to the c. , procuring an y a l tera ti on i n t h e l aws , t' of proceeding to procure a repeal 0 ' Union between Great Britain and Irels01,911" The LORD CHANCELLOR—It i 8 n ot t t the law that is the question, it is cns that alteration is to be effectea—thl e 6' gist of the indictment. To entertoin the the indictment we must considor that 50C been held. A 0:$ Sir THOMAS WILIA.--Ycis, my L ° , l :, -. tb e such comp lain of is this, that the charge i"pr, ' -ilso r- • • one as the defendants can an - a t"? that it is no t s h own to whom the -or°, apply. If it was stated that it was mea ll ibe titular persons, it might be shown th at pt, were not suffici en t to ma k e i t so applY,,-hclit'oc it is imp oss ibl e to say whether i t IS re, the whole Irish people, the Legisle tll e ty jesty. Th e seventh count is the sno b eighth count c h arges defendant s w t t b - e.c , 0 ,,t " To lying int o h atre d an d di sre pute established in Ireland for the achniuittieV and to diminish the confidence of kokf lad to t in Irel an d i n the adminiAr:sttion of onet , , the intent to indloo her Majesty's ttlrciic, the adjuclioattsot of their differences o each other from the cognisance of th.e_ n , i to y established, and t o su b m i t i t ; ment and determination , t 1 doe' 0 0 , 1 '4 e constituted and Now, first of L or d s hi p sh aV- 10 0 , 411 your in gaged • • contrived f t) ; at , framing Acts removing or° It (action from one tribunal to another. n etilt_ d l s i ; that merchants and traders preseott rotivto Houses of Parliament, praying for a1 , e 040 4 risdiction by which their differenc e th e settled—the pending alterations i n of p ruptcy are cases of that kind. es . Lord CAMPBELL—This count c0e1 f . .; 0 0 ,61 4 ject—the last one charged the tige -° e a 0 4 , Sir T. WILDE--Both counts Pre ° t I J e fec 1,4 tion of an illegal object, but the o, not setting forth how that o bject tt