The Sun. — London, England, 1844-04-11 00:00:00

§pl the PUBLIC J OURNALS. FROM EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY. GLO BE.—T wo highly important questions connect ed with thcadministration of public justice have been mooted within the present week, in two of the courts having jurisdiction within and in the neighbourhood of the metropolis. As these questions are of general application, they seem to justify a distinct allusion to the practices to which they relate, in order that the attention of the proper authorities in other places may be drawn to them ; and thus customs at varience with public rights, and which have no authority from the law may be abolished. The Central Criminal Court, at its opening on Mon day, became the scene of a somewhat acrimonious, and certainly undignified, controversy between the Lord Mayor and the Sheriffs, respecting the right of the , public to admission to the gallery of the court during its sittings for the trial of prisoners, without the payment of fees for admission. It was evident that the subject had been previously discussed in private ; and that the difference of opinion between these functionaries had excited a feeling which had not subsided when they entered the court. The interest which the trials of the parties connected with the will forgeries are expected to excite, and the numerous applications to the Civic authorities for admission to the court on the occasion, have, it is understood, given rise to the question as to the particular functionary with whom the regulation of the court resides. The Lord Mayor, who had been previously engaged in an animated conversation with Mr. Sheriff Moon, raising his voice so as to be heard throughout the court, said, " the public had a right of admission without the payment of fees. He understood it bad been customary to charge a fee of .ss. and upwards, even as much as 205., for admission." The Recorder—who evidently desired to bring to a termination a dispute which portended an open rup ture—remarked, " So long as the gallery was not inoonveniently crowded, and the people conducted themselves properly, the public had a right to be ad mitted gratuitously. He wished that rules could be laid down for the more convenient admission of the public." The presence of an officer at the gallery door to keep order, as the Lord Mayor observed, would prevent confusion. By regulating the admis sion of persons to the gallery, and thus preventing s greater number from entering than it can ac commodate, the respect due to the administra tion of public justice from the auditory would be preserved. The present system of admission, by payment of fees, so far from effecting this, actually has a contrary tendency. The object of the fee takers is to make the gallery productive of gain. Hence, every one who will pay the price is thrust within the door ' • and, having paid for a place, fights his way forward to the best he can secure by dint of physical exertion. Whoever has been present in the Central Criminal Court when any trial of great public interest has been proceeding, can testify to the confusion which Las existed in the gallery . . " Silence!"—" Silence in the gallery !"—is fre quently bawled out by the stentorian lungs of the ushers, who have observed the eyes of the pre - siding judge raised wrathfully to the part of the court whence the confusion seemed to proceed. The altercation between the civic functionaries seemed to arise from an exclusive ex-officio claim which the Sheriffs make to the arrangements of the court, and under which they found their right to regulate ad mission to the gallery, as well as to enforce the obser vance of order and regularity in the court. Mr. Sheriff Musgrove evidently alluded to this asserted and controverted c'aim :—" He had no wish that any fees should be taken directly or indirectly for the ad mission of the public to this court. He considered it the duty of the Sheriffs to preserve order and regularity in the court, and he thought the Lord Mayor had no concurrent authority in the matter." Again the Recorder interposed between the official belligerents, and suggested that the public court was not a fit place for a discussion of the kind. The Lord Mayor rejoined—" Ho thought it a very fit place; the question very materially affected the in terests of the public." We refer with considerable pleasure to the opinion which the Recorder now felt himself called upon to deliver on the points at issue. It clearly explains the relative position of the parties to the controversy, defines their duties, and limits their powers ; it at the same time settles the question as to the illegality of the practice out of which the controversy had arisen. The late Justice Park, while engaged in the trial of a prisoner at one of the Assizes, gave a pretty signifi cant opinion respecting the practice of demanding fees for admission to courts of justice. Being in terrupted by a noise at one of the doors of the court, he demanded its cause, and was answered that a person insisted upon coming in. " And who pre vents him ?" said the Judge : " there is plenty of room. Open the door, and admit all who wish to enter, If any one makes a noise in court, I shall know what to do with him. Your refusal to let the person in," continued the Learned Judge, looking significantly at the door-keeper, " caused the noise.' The subject was dropped in the Central Criminal Court at the close of the Recorder's observation, and the regular business was proceeded with. It was resumed, however, about noon. The second act in the drama was yet more illustrative of the folly and mischief of entrusting a corporate body with the powers which that of London exercises in the appoint ment of judges, and the regulation of courts of justice. The public knew some of the anomalies connected with the system ; but were not prepared for anything so positively disgraceful as was disclosed. The fact is, that the sword-bearer to the Lord Mayor for the time being, is, in part, paid out of these admis sion fees. The gallery is rented of the Sheriffs ; a portion of the rent is appropriated to support the gingerbread splendour of the chief magistrate's ephe meral dignity ; and the present contest between the Lord Mayor and the Sheriffs, respecting their official rights, has brought the practice into public view, and will result in the extinction of fee-taking for ad mission to the Central Criminal Court. The other question to which we allude is of equal import ance, if not a more serious infraction upon the rights of the subject. At several quarter sessions a practice yet prevails—it was general within the last quarter of a century—of demanding from persons tried and acquitted of misdemeanour a fee upon their dis charge. The amouet varies in different courts. The question as to its legality was raised yesterday at the Surrey Quarter Sessions ' • and, certainly, the " Great Unpaid" cut but a p oor figure in the discus sion. A petition from a person named Ward, who had been tried for misdemeanour, aid acquitted, was presented by Mr. Jeffrey. It set forth, " that • being arraigned upon a charge of raisietneanour and acquitted, he was compelled to pay a fee o f los. 6,1. for his discharge. The petitioner com plained bitterly of this proceeding, and of the hard ship of a poor man being compelled to pay a heavy fee after he was declared innocent of the charge made against him." These fees, it appeared—having no plea but that of a custom, the ori,ria of which no one could explain—were divided am mg the jury, the summoning -officer, and the crier of the court ! The practice of demanding fees from such persons prevailed in Middlesex, but was abolished some years since—when it was found they could not be enforced. A person arraigned upon a charge of inisderneanour, and acquitted. had the customary demand made upon him, with which he promised compliance. This led to an investigation. On the discovery being made that, although sanctioned by the court, it had no legal authority in its favour, the practice was dropped. If the Bill which the Government has promised to bring in on the subject of fees to clerks of petty ses sions, were to comprehend every description of fees in courts of criminal jurisprudence, and sweep them away by a clause declarative of their illegality, the question, which is one of great public moment, would be set at rest. STANDARD.—Many influences co-operated to render inevitable the passin g of the unfortunate " Bill of twenty-nin e ," b ut among these and influences we be lieve the first pl ace i s due to indolence to avoid trouble.the desire The self-indulgent fops, who, before many the Reform Bill, occupied soseats inthe d hl b ouse of Commons, found the long emancipation which so often retained them f rom the opera ad broke ' in upon their evening parties, an intoleraVe bore. The self-seeking politicians as frequently met the stubborn Protestant constitution obstructing their pleasant and profitable combinations. These two classes made up a great majority of the old House of Commons—they made " the settling of the question" an inevitable condition of enabling any administration effectually to govern the country; they fancied, in their transcendent folly, that by concession only could the question be "settled," but that by concession it would be settled effectually. They had their way—with what effect at home we need hardly tell, with the remembrance of eleven years of Whig government fresh in memory, and with the shouts of monster meetings still ringing in our ears—with what effect abroad nearly every co lonial and foreign newspaper of the last few years will tell. Concession, in fact, has been so far from "settling the question," or limiting it even locally, that we have it among ourselves at this hour in aug mented vigour, and have the satisfaction of seeing that sve have presented a share of it to a good portion of the world. The Canadas Newfoundland, and most recently Ceylon, have had their Catholic ques tions; France, Prussia, have not been less happy in this respect ; and the comfort seems to be extending generally over Germany under the patr onage of the ex-Liberal King of Bavaria. According to the la test intelligence from the dominions o f this Monarch, he has pub- Reif signified his determination to confiscate and to apply to the support of Roman Catholic monasteries, all money contributed by the Pro testant inhabitants of other German States to the support of the Protestant ministers and the repair of Protestant temples in his kingdom. The Protes tants in Bavaria are about a million and a half, or six sixteenths of the whole population, but they are, as we are informed, the poorest class ; the State makes no provision for their ministers or religious edifices, and we need not say that the Protestant Church, un like the Church of Rome in this respect, does not permit its ministers to " make merchandise cf men's souls" by driving a retail trade in charms and spells, and so-called religious rites and ceremonies—a retail trade which is often, as in Ireland, worth more than the richest endowment that any State would confer upon a church. Thus the Protestant Church in Bavaria is extremely poor ; so poor as to have been lately in danger of expiring altogether cs a col lective body, and the sympathies of the Protestants of the other German States, awakened by its danger, have been making moderate contributions for it; the admirable King of Prussia, " the fore most in every good work , ' having by his example and patronage aide I the pious and benevolent design. It is to intercept and appropriate the bounty intended for the religious use of his Protestant subjects, that the King of Bavaria declares l.is dignified purpose Whether the proceeding is legal according to the kind of constitution that Bavaria possesses we know not, but that it is neither a gentlemanlike nor honest proceeding there can be no doubt whatever. We freely admit that the Government of a country has a clear right, and indeed owes a duty, to seize upon and confiscate all money remitted to its subjects for any political purpose whatever, not expressly sanctioned by the Government it self. We say for any political purpose whatever, because the interference of the citizens of one State in the political concerns of another is a plain act of hostility against the Govern ment, the concerns of which are intruded upon by those who owe it and pretend to owe it no allegiance. Money contributed to political objects, is justly" forfeited as the money of enemies. Money, however, passing from one State into another for purposes not political, is surely free from the danger of confiscation by the law of every country at this side of Turkey, except the kingdom of Bavaria. It is, no doubt, a monstrous abuse of the abundant liberty enjoyed by the people of this country, and exercised certainly to its fullest extent in Ireland, that persons engaged in a con spiracy for the dismemberment of the United King dom are allowed to draw large subsidies from the enemies of the British empire in every part of the world; and there can be no question that upon every principle of justice and of public law, these subsidies, as well as the money collected at home for the same illegal purpose, ought to be con fiscated, as the money of enemies ; and we hope that ere long it will be confiscated by a law passed for the purpose. The error of allowing such abuse is, however, an error on the opposite side from the error of the King of Bavaria ; his Majesty proposes to confiscate money contributed from the purest motives of charity and religion, not to any political, not to any illegal or immoral object, but merely to enable his subjects to worship their Crea tor " decently and in order, and to hear the Gospel." Compare the conduct of the intolerant Protestant Saxon with that of the liberal Romanist Bavarian It is thus that " the Catholic question," which we let loose fifteen years ago, is working all over the world. We believe that it is working for good in the end, and that the end is not distant; but that we may secure the happy consummation, and bring it nearer, it is necessary to expose from time to time, the progress of the great Romanist fer mentation. SHORT OR LONG HOURS OF LABOUR? After three distinct decisions against the twelve hours' clause, Sir James Graham has withdrawn the Ministerial Factory Bill, and introduced another as nearly as possible resembling the one at present in force. Lord Ashley has given his consent to this course, promising to " take the discussion on the ten hours' clause after Easter." Lord Ashley, it appears to us, was terrified at his own success last week, and determined to take the first opportunity of retreating—at the same time pre serving, if possible, his reputation for philanthropy and benevolence. As Mr. Bailie Cochrane—one of Lord Ashley's own followers—observed on Friday night, the Ministry were really in earnest in their opposition to the ten hours' clause; suggesting, at the same time, that Lord Ashley was not in earnest in proposing it. We leave the Noble Lord himself to settle this question with his own followers. In the meantime the country will have time to study the proposal of a Ten Hours' Bill, and to speak out upon the subject. As yet there has been no ex pression of opinion worthy of notice. We do not yet hear of any public movement either for or against a Ten or a Twelve Hour's Bill. We should like to know what the operatives themselves say as to the shortening of the hours of labour for the women and children. It is very easy for Members of the House of Com mons, as well as editors of newspapers, to say—" Oh ! let there be a Ten Hours' Bill by all means." This costs them nothing, and looks very philanthropic. But it is a very different thing to the operative himself, whose weekly income (already too scanty) it may cut down by one-sixth. We should, therefore, wish the working classes now to speak out, and lose no time in declaring their opinions on this important question. We can easily imagine an operative thus arguing: —" You propose a Ten Hours Labour Bill, and I hail with delight the prospect of working ten instead of twelve hours a day ; but at present I find that my weekly wage is not more than sufficient—and some times very insufficient—for the maintenance of my family. What with dear sugar, dear tea, dear bread, and everything dear because taxed, I find that my wage is altogether swallowed up in simply subsisting, and that a reduction of my weekly income would only drive me into a lower abyss of pauperism. Now, will you assure me that my wages shall not In lowered by a Ten Hours' Bill—will you guarantee to me that I shall obtain for the short period of labour the same amount of remuneration that I now obtain for the longer ?" Now, we believe this to be the present dilemma of the operative classes. They feel that their hours of labour are already by far too long ; but they fear that the reduction of the hours of labour would only lead to a proportional redaction of their weekly wages. It is necessity which compels them to work long hours—it is necessity which compels them to send their wives, sons, and daughters, into the factory— and if you take them out, or reduce their hours of labour by one-sixth, there is unquestionably also the immi nent risk of cutting off the sixth of their weekly in-. come. It is possible, therefore, that in passing a Ten Hours' Bill the Legislature might be acting a philan thropic part at the cost of the suffering operative themselves. Indeed, Lord Ashley himself stated, in the House of Commons, that some workmen had declared to him that they would accept the change with terror. We confess that, much as we desire to see the time of working in factories greatly curtailed, so as to af ford to the operative classes the opportunity of moral and intellectual cultiv a ti on , as we ll as for the enjoy ment of the social and domestic pleasures of life, we do not look upon these compulsory regulations of the hour; of labour without considerable apprehension and alarm. We are really reduced to so lamentable a position as a nation—the competition in the race of manufacture has grown so intense, and the commer cial rivalry between nations so keen—that it is quite possible that such a reduction as that contemplated, might inflict a great blow on the manufacturing prosperity of Britain. Sir James Graham and Sir Robert Peel both assert this. Then, our whole social system is so artificial—one part so hangs upon another—the soundness of one portion of the capitalist system is so necessary to the soundness of the whole —that such an injury to manufacturers might prove the immediate forerunner of the most extensive and de structive mischief. " Whilst property," says the Nonconformist, "is distributed as it is, poverty must be the lot of the many ; and so long as the many are close pressed by 1 destitution, the universal scramble for employment will put the workman at the mercy of his employer. In the case of factory labour, master and men will be driven by the same relentless necessity. The first effect of Lord Ashley's interference would be to raise the price of goods—the second, to close against them every neutral market—the third, an incalculable diminution of employment—the last, a permanent de pression of wages beyond their present level. Then come panics in the money market—failures of bank ing_. establishments —increase of poor-rates—general discontent, and, in all probability, social insurrection." Well, then ; and is the fate of these poor women and children of the factories b inevitable ? Is there no alternative for them ofut consuming toil and bondage ? Does the integrity the l empire really depend i on their two hours' extraandabour per day ? Are our institutions in Church State all worthless, with out this twelve hours' labour ,tbe for factory women and 1 children ? Is - England, pride of the wor ld an d the envy of surroundi ng nations,'orfrom unable to rescue it s poor overtaaked and helplessconsuming toil, without the risk of a gener a l overturn Surely, such were not the excuses made, when it was proposed, a few years ago, to rescue 800,000 human beings from slavery ! It was decided that justice ought to be done, whatever the consequences. Is it just, is it fair, on the part of the Legislature to interfere to prevent the physical, moral, and intellec.. tual deterioration of the people? If so, it is just and fair, on their part, to interfere in the inordinate work ing of women and children in factories. The principle has been established—it has been already acted upon ; all that is asked is, that it should be carried out to its legitimate extent. And if it be proved that the consequences of the interference of the Legislature has been to diminish the gains of the factory opera tives, why, they must themselves be prepared to con cede such measures as will amply make up for the loss they may have sustained. The repeal of the corn-laws, the reduction of taxation on articles of consumption, would far more than repay the working-classes for any 1 diminution in their weekly wages by the enactment of a Ten Hours' Bill. It will not do for the landowners to cast the burden and th 3 blame on the manufac turers ; both must be prepared to make sacrifices to avert the evils of our present social position, but es pecially the former. The manufacturers have already, in numerous instances, been sacrificed and crippled by the Legislature ; heavy taxes have been imposed upon them; their places of production have been subjected to the strict supervision of the Govern meat, and have been repeatedly interfered with by Legislative enactment; instead of being "protected," they have been burdened and restricted in all conceivable means ; and, though so essen tial to the welfare and prosperity of the country, they have been treated as if they were its greatest enemies. Now, the landowners have been called upon to make no such sa crifices, to bear no such burdens, to suffer no such restrictions on the employment of their capital or their property. They have possessed the exclusive power in the State, and have done everything for themselves at the expense of others. They may now—and we hope they will (for the sake of our common humanity)— diminish the hours of labour for women and children; but we warn them that they must themselves be pre pared to make the necessary sacrifices before such a measure can be regarded as "a boon" by the indus trious classes. They must be prepared to give up their bread-tax—to give up the taxes on consumption —and to abolish most of the existing restrictions on the trade and industry of the country. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Liverpool, April 9. CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Baron RoLFE and a Special Jury.) OLIVERSON AND ANOTHER V. BRIGHTMAN AND OTHERS The hearing of this cause was resumed at the sitting of the Court this morning. Mr. Byrn, the resident partner of the house of M'Viccar and Co., at Macao, was examined at considerable length, respecting the state of relations between this country and China at the time the Penang reached the country. Ho stated, in effect, that it was impossible to land the cargo ut Hong- Kong, as there were no warehouses there, and that it would have been imprudent, as it was not a place of trade. The only port where the goods could have been disposed of was Canton ; but a large portion of the damaged cargo was sold at Hong-Kong. At the time the goods were transhipped to the James Laing, there was no intention of again putting them on board the Penang. Captain Joseph Lyas, the master of the Herald, a Queen's ship, which went out to China in 1840, was next called. He stated that there never was any declaration of war, on the part of England, against the Chinese— that Hong-Kong was a more preferable place for lying up than Macao, and that in May, 1840, the vessels of war were withdrawn from the Canton river ; but that, in the latter end of August or September following, the witness returned with the Herald. This closed the plaintiffs' case. Mr. KELLY said that the few observations he had to make were in substance addressed to his Lordship. Having attentively considered the whole of the evidence beforehand,!he was quite satisfied that no real question of fact would arise or be in dispute between the parties which could properly be loft to a jury; and now that the plaintiffs' casts had come to an end, he begged to say that there was not one single point which, with any benefit to either party, or with any view to the administration of justice, could be submitted to a jury. They had had direct answers on every question from Mr. Byrn; and though he was an hostile witness, he (Mr. Kelly) was content to take literally and substantially as true every answer that witness had given, and upon those questions and answers to raise the question of law. The law was clearly settled in favour of the defendants, by the case of " Brown v. Vean," in 12 East, page 293, which was a decision of Lord Ellenborough in the Court of Queen's Bench. There an insurance had been effected on the Ann to certain ports in the river Plate. The vessel proceeded to Monte Video, and, having stopped there, it was intended to proceed and finish the voyage at Buenos Ayres. The fact and intention of the parties were stated. At the time the vessel arrived hostilities were going on at Buenos Ayres; and this was exactly analogous to the present case. Hong-Kong was here (lamed as one of several places mentioned in the policy; but the intended place of discharge was, in the one case, Buenos Ayres—in the other Canton. There was a state of hostilities between Buenos Ayres and the English; and here there was a state of hostilities between Canton and Great Britain. Though he was quite free to admit that in putting the goods on board the James Laing, it was intended, if circumstances afterwards permitted, and if hostilities should cease, to send them on to Canton, and there dispose of them, still he contended that when a vessel arrived at one of the places men tioned in the policy, intending to proceed to another, and that if, from existing circumstances, which prevented the parties from proceeding further, they landed their cargo, or put it into any other place, in order that it might re main in safety, on the chance of that state of things ceasing, so as that afterwards it might be sent elsewhere, the parties made that place the ultimate port of dis charge, and the risk was at an end. If he were wrong on this point, the plaintiff would be entitled to recover ; and if he were right, he apprehended then, that the voy age was at an end, and the risk determined. In the case already cited, the verdict was for the defendant. Some discussion followed between the counsel on both sides ; and at length it was agreed to make it a special case. and to leave it to the Court of Queen's Bench to decide the question upon his Lordship's• note, with the understaading that if the plaintiffs should be entitled to recover, interest should be calculated from the Ist March, 1842. A verdict was accordingly taken for the plaintiff's, by consent, for 2,870/, subject to a special case. CRUICKSHANK AND OTHERS V. WELLS AND ANOTHER. Verdict for the plaintiffs, by consent, for 3,255/. 7s. 9d. with interest, subject to the special case in the last. BOLD AND ANOTHER V. ROTHERHAM. Verdict for the plaintiff, by consent, for 1651. 3s. 4d. with interest, subject to a special case. WESTERN ClRCUlT.—Taunton, April 9. (Before Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN.) Mary Ann Sealey (sister of Faith Sealey, who was yesterday acquitted of the charge of administering white arsenic to William Sealey, her father, at Pinckney, in the parish of Kingston, near Taunton,) was this day placed at the bar, charged with this offence, and no evidence being offered, the jury were directed to acquit her. This prisoner, who is but 21 years of age, was next charged with the wilful murder of her aunt, Betty Sealcy, who lived also at the same place, by strangling her, on the Bth of December last. Mr. Carey and Mr. Merewether appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Kinglake for the prisoner. The decease", Betty Sealey, aged 79, lived in the right-hand wing of a dilapidated farm-house, at Pinck ney, under which roof the prisoner lived. This farm house stands in a line with the village road. The prisoner lived in the front part of this wing, and the deceased aunt in that of the back, to which there were two ways of entrance, the one from the village road, and the other from a foot-path leading to Bishop's Lydiard; and at this back entrance there was a small barkin, occupied by cattle, and a barn in the rear, which formed three sides of a square. Betty Sealey had from time to time money and things stolen from her, and in such a manner as to convince her that it must be the act of some. person, who well knew the locality, entering by means of false keys, or in some other clandestine manner. Deceased received parish support from the Kingston parish, which money was payable every Friday. On Friday, the Bth of December, she deputed some per son to receive her money for her, being determined, if possible, to detect the thief. Accordingly, she left her home, as usual, on pretence of going to Kingston, when she pursued the road leading to Kingston, till out of sight of the prisoner, who was at home when she left. She then returned by a footpath through the barn and barkin to her own door. She must have taken her arm-chair and placed it in a dark closet opposite her entrance-door, and then remained there in it till the robber arrived—for in this chair she was found dead the next Saturday, the 9th of December, at eight o'clock in the evening, by her son, John Sealey, his wife and son, who had been fetched by the woman who went for the parish pay on this Friday, and in consequease, too, of her having repeatedly failed in gaining admission that day. These witnesses found that the old woman's throat was pinched, for finger-marks appeared thereon. Her hands and arms were scratched. Her tongue protruded from her mouth, and other ap pearances, which led the medical gentleman, Mr. Welch, surgeon, of Taunton, to say that she died by strangula tion. Her bonnet and clothes clearly indicated some foul play. It also appeared that her daughter-in-law had sent her, some few days before, an Octagon phial bottle, the marks of which were visible on her clothes, hut that the bottle was gone. Evidence was given, that shortly after the time when it is supposed that the old woman had left, the prisoner insisted on some young man leaving her house, as though she wished to avail herself of the supposed absence of the old woman. In the earlier part of the day Gabriel Porter was in the prisoner's house with her when Mr. Far thing, the landlord of the premises, passed in his car riage. That on this occasion the old woman hailed him, and he stopped, and as she was speaking to him prisoner said she was talking about her, and that she had taken some sticks from her own garden hedge that day, and had the old woman seen her she would have told Mr. Farthing of that too. It was then alleged that she said to a young girl, with whom she bad been picking apples at Mr. Farthing's, that all old women, such as Betty Sealey, the deceased, ought to die, and that she for one would help. Evidence was next given to prove, that as soon as it was supposed that she had committed the offence, she went to a place called Etheridge, to Jane Bond's, the mother of her young man, where she re mained some hours, and went again next day. That when the policeman searched her box on the following Sunday, a bottle, like the said octagon phial-bottle, was therein found. It was attempted to be proved that a trap-door was discovered in one of the prisoner's up stair-rooms opening into the deceased old woman's apart ments, and that the opening was free from dust. Several prisoners from Wilton gaol were then brought forward, who deposed to some strange statements made by the prisoner, confessing her guilt. The Jury, however, having retired for half an hour, returned a verdict of " Net Guilty." • TEST OF MESMERISM.—A strong proof of the in fallibility of this much-disputed science was adduced the other evening at a lecture on the subject. A boy bei:ig asked, whilst in the mesmeric state, whether " The income tax would be discontinued after the third year, as Sir Robert Peel had promised?" replied "Certainly not !" This, upon being mentioned to the Premier, wa s d ec l are d to be the strongest instance of clairvoyance that could be brought for ward in favour of the science.—Punch, THE SUN, LONDON, TireRSDAY EVENING, APRIL ii, 1844. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. OLD COURT. Heury Davies was indicted for feloniously assault ing Thomas M'Carthy with a poker, with the intent to do him grievous bodily harm. Mr. Clarkson conducted the prosecution, and Messrs. Doane and C. Jones appeared for the defence. From the evidence of the prosecutor, it appeared that both he and the accused were licensed victuallers at Chelsea, Mr. Davies being the landlord of the Ca dogan Arms. The occurrence in question took place in the night of the 12th of January in the defendant's house. The prosecutor was in the house drinking for a great many hours, and in the course of the evening some dispute arose, and, aocording to the prosecutor's story, the accused seized a poker from the fire-place, and struck him a very severe blow with it on the head. In cross-examination, he admitted he was a good deal the worse fur liquor at the time, and that he had made use of insulting language to the accused. The defence set up was, that no poker was used, but that upon the prosecutor making use of some of fensive expression to the accused, he collared him, and they struggled and fell down, and that he hurt his head in the full. A witness named Fry was called to prove these facts, and he swore positively that no poker was made use of. Captain Fitzgerald, a Magistrate for the county of Middlesex, was called to speak to the character of Mr. Davies, and he described him as a very honourable and respectable man, and he bore testimony to the excellent mariner in which his house was conducted. The jury expressed themselves satisfied, and with out troubling the Judge to sum up, at once returned a verdict of Not guilty. Mr. Baron GURNEY observed, that the real fact of the matter appeared to be, that the prosecutor had not wilfully mis-stated the facts, but from the quantity he had drank he was not in a condition to tell what really did take place. (Before the RECORDER.) Anne Elizabeth Earnshaw, 34, married, and Emma Wells, 28, single woman, were indicted for stealing a silver knife, value 6s. 6d., the property of Mary Anne Rose. Mr. Ballantine prosecuted, and Messrs. Clarkson and Wilkins appeared for the prisoners. The circumstances under which the present, and several other charges of a similar character were made against the prisoners having been very recently fully given in our police reports, it will be unneces sary to repeat them at any length on the present occasion. The prisoner Earnshaw, who is respectably connected, accompanied by the other woman, Wells, were in the habit of going to the shops of different jewellers, and asking to look at various articles, such as watches, rings, &c., and taking that opportunity to steal every article that came in their way. In the present case they went into the shop of the prose cutrix, in Farringdon-street, and asked to leok at some silver fruit-knives. A great number were shown them, but they did not purchase any ; and, immediately on their leaving the shop, a silver knife was missed. The prisoners were followed to a pawn broker's shop, and taken into custody, and upon Wells being searched, a silver knife was found in her pos sion, which the prosecutrix identified as her property, but it appeared that it was not the same she had missed. Mr. CLARKSON, on behalf of the prisoners, argued that the knife in question might have been sold at some former time, and that there was no proof of its having been stolen at the time the prisoners were in the shop. Several witnesses were called, who gave the pri soners an excellent character • and it was stated that Earnshaw was i n th e rece ipt of a considerable income, and that the other prisoner lived with her as a companion. _ _ The jury found Earnshaw Not Guilty, and con victed Wells, but at the same time recommended her to mercy. The RECORDER said they had better wait a little before they took this step. The prisoners were then indicted for stealing two diamond rings, value 31. 7s. 6d., the property of Thomas Chapman. This case was of a similar description to the last, and the jury returned the same verdict, acquitting Earnshaw, apparently upon the ground that the pro perty was found in the possession of Wells. The prisoners were then arraigned upon another indictment, charging them with stealing a gold watch, value 301., the property of John Smith. The prosecutor in this case is a watchmaker in the Strand, and the prisoners went into his shop, and wished to look at some watches. A great many were shown them ; but they said none o► them suited, and left the shop without purchasing any article, and, almost immediately afterwards, a gold watch, value 301., was missed from one of the trays. This watch was subsequently found in the possession of the prisoner Wells. The jury, in this case, found both prisoners guilty. The prisoners were then indicted for stealing a gold locket, the property of George, Lamb. The case was clearly made out, and the jury again returned a verdict of guilty against both pri,oners. The RECORDER sentenced them to be transported for seven years. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. (YESTERDAY.) CLERKEN WELL. THE ABDUCTION CASE.— Wm. Burton Newenham was brought up on remand, charged with the abduc tion of Miss Frances Louisa Wortharn, of 28, Gerard street, Coburg .road, Islington, a ward in Chancery. The prisoner took his place in the dock with great composure. Ile was neatly dressed, but looked paler and in worse spirits than on the previous occasions. The Court was crowded with respectable civilians and professional gentlemen, and great anxiety was mani fested to know the result of the struggle between Mr. Combe and Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce for the possession of the prisoner. Mr. Allen, the tipstaff of the Court of Chancery, was in attendance, bearing the Lord Chancellor's warrant for the prisoner's ap prehension. Mr. Mallard, a county Magistrate, sat on the Bench with Mr. Combe, as a spectator. Mr. Southey, of the Temple, conducted the prosecution; and Mr. Hum phries defended the prisoner. Mr. Southey said that since the last hearing of the ease he had communicated with Vice-Chancellor Bruce, and informed him of the Magistrate's deter. mination, and of his reasons for coming to that deter mination. The Vica-Chancellor said he considered Mr. Combe acted wrongly in detaining the prisoner against the Lord Chancellor's warrant. The Vice- Chancellor said he entertained a very strong opinion on the subject, but he had not been able to commu nicate with the Lord Chancellor, who was at his country seat in Berkshire. He (Mr. Southey) had been directed by the Vice-Chancellor to express his opinion, and it was under his Honour's direction he did so. He would not call upon the Magistrate to pursue any particular course. Having communicated what had transpired, he was now ready to go on with the case. _ _ Mr. COMBE—Let the case be proceeded with. Mr. Humphries—Before your Worship comes to any decision I have a proposal to make. Mr. COMBS—I have already decided. I do not think it necessary to reiterate the reasons which I have already publicly stated for the course I am about to pursue. It the Lord Chancellor or the Vice-Chancellor have the power to take the prisoner out of my hands, then let them exercise it, and I will, of course, yield to it at once. A prisoner has been brought before me charged with a very grave offence—evidence has been submitted which warranted me in believing that that offence had been committed. I have reason to know that evidence can be adduced which will prove the commission of a much higher offence. I repeat I do not feel myself at liberty to give the man up to the Court of Chancery under such circumstances. If the law gives paramount autho rity to the Lord Chancellor —authority to take a prisoner under these circumstances from a police magistrate, I must submit, of course, but I am not aware that the law confers any such powers. Mr. Southey--I do not now make any application to you one way or the other. Mr. COMBE—I was called upon to give the pri soner up to the tipstaff of the Court of Chancery now present on a former occasion, I refused to do so, and I now refuse. Call upon Mrs. Wortham to appear. After some delay, Mrs. W o rtham, mother of the lady, made her appearance. She was genteelly at tired, and took her place in the witness box with ap parent reluctance. Having been sworn, Mr. Comnr, asked Mr. Southey if he would exa mine her, or should he (the Magistrate) do so? Mr. Southey preferred the Magistrate's doing so. In answer to questions from the bench, Mrs. Wortham repeated her former testimony, which the clerk (Mr. Mould) upon this occasion took formally down in depositions for trial. She added several new facts. The following is the substance of her testi mony :—Her husband was in the shawl trade in Re gent-street, and died on the 14th of June, 1842, leav ing no property whatever. Tier daughter, an only one, Frances Louisa, the subject of the present inves tigation, was born on the 24th of December, 1828, and was consequently 15 years old last Christmas eve. The prisoner came to lodge at her house in June, 1840, and continued to lodge with her at Ge rard-street up to the period of her husband's death, when he left. Mr. COMBE—Do you know what he is ? Witness —No ; I have been informed that he is a person of independent fortune. A lady in the neighbourhood, with whom he formerly lodged, told me so. The witness proceeded to state that, after her husband's death, the prisoner continued on visiting terms with her. Six months after her husband's death, her daughter was bequeathed landed property to the value of 400/. a year, but at present encumbered with a life annuity of 2001., of which bequest the prisoner was aware. On the 7th of January, 1843, witness re ceived a letter from Bir. Hawkins, one of the trustees of the property, which letter she showed to the pri soner on the Sunday following. Mr. Humphries objected to this evidence. Where was the letter ? Mr. South , y said it would be produced on a future occasion, but was not then in Court. Mr. COMBE—State what the prisoner said when you apprised him of this bequest to your daughter. Witness—He said " Oh, I am very happy to hear it."—(A laugh.) I asked him if I should not write to Mr. Hawkins ; but he said "By no means, and that he would recommend me to his attorney, Mr. Hammond, of Furnival's Inn." He agreed to take the copy of the deed to his own solicitor; but I never got it back since. I saw it the day the bill was filed in Chancery. The prisoner subsequently stated that he was afraid it should go into Chancery ; but he did not say anything about Miss Wortham being made a ward of Chancery. Mr. COMBE—Was there any conversation between you and the prisoner about her being made a ward of Chancery ? Witness—Yes ;on the evening before he abducted her. He was at my house. I had just received a letter from Mr. Camberton; one of the trustees. Mr. Humphries objected to the contents of this let ter being stated, as it was not produced. The witness, in answer to the Magistrate, said the prisoner read the letter, and when she spoke to him about her daughter becoming a ward of Chancery, he said he " thought it would be so." The witness then narrated the circumstances of her daughter's abduction, which took place on the 13th of October last, and which have been already published. He removed her during the temporary absence of the witness, who did not again see them until last Thurs ' day week at the station-house. Witness was then her daughter's only guardian, and had never given her consent to the abduction, nor even known that the prisoner was paying his addresses to Miss Wortham. Mr. COMBS—Was your daughter from home after her father's death for any period. Witness—Yes ; for six months at school, with Miss Brown, on Stockwell- common. Mr. COMM—Did the prisoner see her. Witness— Yes ; he frequently accompanied me there, and some times went there with books and messages from me to her. Mr. COMBE—Now, Mrs. Wortham, tell me if you had any communication with your daughter since her return ? Mrs. Wortham (after much hesitition)—l have had some, but not a great deal. Mr. COMBE—Did she explain any of the circum stances of her departure to you? Mrs. Wortham again hesitated. Mr. Southey-1 object to the question. Mr. COMBE repeated the question. Mrs. Wortham (reluctantly)—Yes; she told me she thaught she was going to Furnival's Inn. Mr. Southey-1 object to any question on this head. Mr. COMM—You, the solicitor for the prosecution, object ! Why, I must say, that is very strange indeed. Mr. Southey—l say it is very indiscreet to put such questions now, and that it will defeat the end of justice. Mr. COMBE—State your objection. Mr. Southey—l have done so. Mr. COMBE—You have objected, but you have given me no reason for objecting. Mr. Southey—l have already given you my senti ments on this matter in private. Mr. COMBE—Sentiments are not reasons. I think the questions are necessary ; and if you cannot show me the contrary I will feel it my duty to put them. Mr. Southey—Airs. Wortham is here to give her evidence of what she knows of the matter, but not to mention what Miss Wortham said. Mr. COMBE—She is here to answer what questions I think proper to put to her, and if she does not an swer them she may as well know that I have the power of sending her to the House of Correction. Mr. Southey—What the daughter told the mother is not, I submit, necessary to the present inquiry, and I feel myself bound again to say that extracting such information from her will defeat the ends of justice. Mr. COMBE —lf you really think so, you are bound to show me why. Mr. Southey—l will, in your private room. Mr. COMER—Then let us hear them. The Worthy Magistrate and the Solicitor for the prosecution then retired to the Magistrates' private-room. After the lapse of a quarter of an hour they came into Court, when Mr. Combe said that he had heard all Mr. Southey had to say, and that he still remained of the same opinion. The case must be proceeded with. But he would now remand the prisoner, that those documents might be produced which w ere necessary to complete the case. The prisoner was then remanded to Wednesday next at twelve o'clock. SURREY QUARTER SESSIONS. REIGATE. Upon the report of the visiting justices to the Brixton house of Correction being made to the Court on Tuesday, it appeared that Mr. Gardiner, the sur• geon to the gaol, had expressed his intention to re sign his appointment, and requested the Court to take the necessary measures to appoint a successor. The ground for tho resignation. as stated by Mr. Gar diner, was incapacity to fulfil the duties of the office, by reason of bodily infirmity and illness, and a cer tificate to that effect, signed by Sir B. Brodie and Dr. Chambers, was put in to support the statement as to the condition of his health. Mr. DERRICK, before the report was received, begged to be allowed to say a few words upon the subject with a view to ascertain the real grounds for Mr. Gardiner's resignation. He had heard that one of the prisoners who was ordered upon the treadwheel refused to work, and said that he was unable from illness. Mr. Gardiner, however, upon examining him, declared he was able to work, and insisted that he should go on the wheel, and on his still refusing he was flogged ; eventually some other medical gentle men were called in, and they at once said that the prisoner was not in a fit state of health to go upon the wheel, and these circumstances led to an intimation being given to Mr. Gardiner that he had better re sign. He mentioned these facts in order that some explanation might be given upon the subject. Mr. GossE said he was very glad Mr. Derrick had mentioned this subject, because it gave him an oppor tunity, as one of the visiting justices, to contradict the statement referred to. The facts were these : a prisoner had refused to go upon the wheel, stating that he was too ill to do so. Mr. Gardiner was re ferred to, and he, after examining him, declared that he was not ill, and upon the man still refusing to go to the wheel, he was ordered a flogging. He still de clared that he was ill, and the magistrates called in another medical man, and his report being doubtful, they called in two others, and they concurred in the opinion of Mr. Gardiner, and declared the prisoner was in a fit condition to go upon the tread wheel. The magistrates, under these circumstances, felt themselves compelled to enforce the regulations of the gaol ; and he assured the Court that the circumstance had no thing to do with the resignation of Mr. Gardiner, which was alone caused by his incapacity, from ill ness, to perform the duties of his office. Mr. KEMBLE begged to confirm the statement made by Mr. Gorse, and he remarked that the disci pline of the gaol would be completely at an end, if a prisoner was allowed to porsist in refusing to work when he was declared to be competent to do so by the medical officer. Mr. PENIIRYN remarked, that the surgeon could have no interest in declaring a man to be in a fit state of health to go to work, if he did not believe he really was so. He did not think there was any blame to be attached to Mr. Gardiner in the transaction, and when his opinion was confirmed by two other medical men, he thought he was justified in ordering him to go upon the wheel. The report was then received. Mr. KEMBLE said he thought that there was an other matter of very considerable importance con nected with this proceeding. Mr. Gardiner had de clared himself to be incompetent to perform the duty of surgeon, and two most eminent men had expressed the same opinion in their certificate. Three months must elapse before a fresh surgeon could be appointed, and he really thought they ought to consider whether the prisoners should be left for that period in the charge of a medical man who had represented himself to he incapable of performing the duty. The CHAIRMAN remarked that it would be very difficult to find a gentleman of competent skill who would be willing to undertake the duty from the present time until a fresh surgeon was appointed. He then inquired whether the honourable magistrate intended to make any motion upon the subject? Mr. KEMBLE did not wish to make any motion ; but he must repeat that, when their medical officer declared that he was unable to perform his duty to the prisoners under his charge, if anything serious should arise, the Magistrates would be placed in a very painful position. An HoN. MAGISTRATE then moved, that the elec tion of a successor to Mr. Gardiner should take place at the usual period, the general quarter session. Mr. KEMBLE said that would be a period of nearly three months, and as some amelioration he should move that the election take place on the second ad journment day. Mr. JOHNSON had no objection to offer to the amendment, hut he begged to say that Mr. Gardiner had always performed his duty faithfully, and he was sure that if he felt any inconvenience was likely to arise from his inability to perform his duty to the prisoners under his charge, he would take care to obtain competent assistance. The amendment was then put and carried. ORTHOPEDIC INSTITUTION. — Tuesday a special general meeting of the members of this Institution was held at their house in Bloomsbury-square, the Earl of Arundel and Surrey in the chair, when Surgeon Law rence, of St. Bartholomew's Hospital, was appointed medical officer, in place of Dr. Little, resigned. . THE FACTORY QUESTION. LEEDS, APRIL 9.—Last night a very numerous, re. spectable, and in many respects an important meeting of the inhabitants of the borough of Leeds, was hel l in the Music-hall, in Albion-street, in this town, in order to further a restriction on factory labour to ten hours per day for women, young p9rsons, and children. On the platform were the Rev. Dr. Hook, Vicar ; the Rev. Joseph Wardle, the Rev. T. B. Ferris, the Rev. Thomas Nunns, and other clergymen ; Mr. S. Smith, Mr. George Balmer, Mr. Francis Sharpe, and other surgeons ; several merchants; Mr. Oastler, Mr. Busfei!d Ferrand. M.P. ; Mr. B. Jowett, of London ; Mr. Chas. Walker, of Bradford ; and many other friends of the tern hours' cause. On the motion of Mr. Bulmer, seconded by Mr. Sum ners, the Vicar of Leeds was invited to take the chair. The Rev. Dr. HooK rose amidst loud applause, and having addressed the meeting at some length in favour of the Ten Hours' Bill, concluded by saying—" I am ready, in this righteous cause, to press forward with you to the last gasp.—(Applause.) And I trust that our friends in London, when the question is put to th.n, whether they will support the cause of the poor or the cause of party, will fling party to the dogs, and support humanity, and go straight forward in that right path in which they now are. The arguments I have adduced I know may he met by counter arguments, but I have en tered into them for that reason. There is, at least, you will agree, looking at the commercial question, much ti , be said on both sides ; if much is to be said on both sides, let us take the side of humanity. Throw humanity into the scale, and then we know how to proceed. Whether the Bill will pass in this session of Parliament or not may be doubtful ; but this I know, and this I will say, that pass it must, and pass it will ere long.— (Loud applause.) Even Lord Ashley consented to post pone the operation of this Act for a short time ; and therefore we, I trust, are willing to abide our time ; but here we are to expedite the movements of our friends.— (Hear, hear.) I cannot conclude without saying that I have not now, nor have I at any other time, uttered a single word of disrespect towards the leading millowners and manufacturers in this town ; on the contrary, I know some of them to be amongst the most generous, and most benevolent, and most humane of our species; but to this system we are opposed, and in our opposition to this system I trust we shall persevere diligently, ardently, patiently, determinately ; affording that fair play to all which every Englishman loves, and with Christian feel ing, till we have brought it to a successful issue." At this stage of the proceedings Mr. Oastler ascended into the orchestra, and was vociferously cheered. Mr. G. J. HARNEY moved the following resolution, which was seconded by Mr. R. POUNDER, a factory operative:—" That this meeting believes that what is commonly understood as the Ten Hours' Factory Ques tion—meaning thereby the limitation of factory labour within a day of twelve hours, with a proper allowance of time for meals and rest—is a reasonable, a holy, and a righteous object ; and that the blessing of Almighty God will not fail to attend the prosecution of it by upright and honourable means.. That while this meeting deeply laments that the attainment of so legitimate an object should have been retarded by a conflict which has now lasted more than five-and-twenty years, daring which tens of thousands have gone to a premature grave, this meeting rejoices with a joy un speakable at the progress this question has made within the last month; and more especially at the fact that, on the 18th of March, in the present year, two divisions were taken in the Commons House of Parlia- went, both virtually in favour of making the factory day commence at six o'clock in the morning and terminate at six o'clock in the evening, a decision at once in ac cordance with the requirements of justice, policy, huma nity, and religion, and one which calls for unbounded gratitude to that Being who has the hearts of all in his rule and governance." WM. BITSFEILD FERRAND, Esq., M.P., came forward to support the resolution. He was received with loud applause, which was continued for several minutes. After it had subsided, he said, that when, a few short woeks ago, he had the honour of addressing a meeting in Leeds, he told those whom he then addressed, that Richard Oastler would soon be free ; and now Mr. Oastler was present to bear witness to the truth of that assertion.—(Applause.) He (Mr. Ferrand) told them that night that the day was not far distant when they would have a Ten Hours' Factories Bill.—(Hear.) If he wanted a proof that his assertion would come true, he would wish no more convincing one than was supplied by the numerous meeting before him, presided over, as it was, by their venerable chairman. They had met to tell the Queen's Ministers, and to tell the House Commons that justice was their claim and justice was their right ; and as sure as he addressed them that night justice should and would be done to them--(Applause)— for there was a spirit awakened abroad in theircause which the oppressors of the weak and poor could not gainsay nor destroy. Sir J. Graham, the man who declared :hey should not have a Tdn Hours' Bill, had been luring the last few weeks dreadfully earwigged at the Home-office by the oppressors of the poor.—(Hear, hear.) His (Mr. Ferrand's) firm conviction was, that, had it not been for the cold-blooded coolness Ind dogged stupidity of Sir James Graham, they would have had the Government at this instant sanctioning a Ten Hours' Bill—(Hear, hear)—but he was dead to all the finer feelings of humanity to think of anything but self.—(Applause.) Sir James Graham, ever since he took office, had done everything that he could to oppress and grind the poor. He had said that he would not consent to a Ten Hours' Bill, and that the Government were determined to stand by him. Not only ' that, but he had said that if they were in a minority, they would resign. He (Mr. Ferrand) had no hesi tation in saying that the declaration was unconstitu tional, and disgraceful to Sir James as a Minister.— (Hear.) The Ministry had declared the factory ques tion an open one, when they had no thought that there would be a majority against them ; but when they were in a minority, they said it was a party question. If they had made it a Government question, and found them selves in a minority, they ought to have resigned.— (Hear, hear.) The Whigs, when there was a majority of one vote—that of Mr. Walter—against them, dis solved Parliament, and that led to their resignation. The present Government ought to do their duty to the country; and not to call upon the house of Commons to drag them through the kennel of apostacy, making the representatives of the people the tools of a party. —(Hear, hear). He believed that the Ministry would be defeated, and that the House of Commons would not dezrade and stultify itself , and sho w an example of the first assembly in the universe sinking down, without feelings of honesty or consistency, at the mere bidding of a Ministry.—(Hear, hear.) But if they did, was t h e meeting to be told that there were no honesty, no patriotism, in that House, but that which sat on the Treasury benches ? There might not be the cunning .?xpediency of Sir Robert Peel, nor the cool effrontery of Sir James Graham, amongst the Tories who sat in that House, or those who lived in this country ; but there was a greater desire on their part to do justice between man and man, between master and servant, than he could find in the present Government. The meeting had no occasion to be disheartened ; they ought to take courage, and go on.—(Cheers.) Let the Ministry resign. I, for one, should not drop a tear. Sir Ho bert Peel gave the country to un d erstan d t h a t h e wou ld repeal the obnoxious clauses of the New Poor law Bill. Instead of doing so, he had stood by them.—(Hear, hear.) He had lost his (Mr. Fer rand's) confidence. He placed no faith in him, and he told the meeting that after Sir Robert had made the factory question an open question in the House of Commons, and he had a majority against him—a ma jority who asserted that ten hours were sufficient for factory labourers to work—if he should, by whipping up the Treasury benches, by Treasury influence, and the influence of the Government, destroy that vote by unfair, underhand, and unconstitutional means, he (Mr. Fer rand) would withdraw his confidence from the Govern ment, and place himself in opposition.—(Hear, hear.) He would tell Sir Robert Peel that he was not to play the same game now as he did in 1829 ; that there are now a body of independent men sitting on his side of the House, whO are determined to do their duty to their country. Ile (Mr. Ferranti) had f , r the last twelve years felt deeply on the factory question. He tirst took an active part on the subject at the Otball Moor meeting, which was convened by his friend, Mr. Richard Oastler.—(Hear, hear.) Since that time the cause had gained strength; and if those who took part in its promotion acted legally, constitutionally, and ener getically, they were sure to succeed, for they might do pend upon it that God would defend the right. The lion. Member sat down amidst loud cheers, and, after they had subsided, the resolution was put to the meeting and carried unanimously. The Rev. TnomEs FERRIS briefly proposed the next resolution, which was as follows:--" That while this meeting would make its chief acknowledgments to him by whom kings reign and princes decree justice,' it feels bound to express the deep sense of obligation it entertains towards all - those Members of Parliament, Of whatever party in the State, who united in the recent inemorable vote in favour of the ten hours' measure ; and especially to the noblemen and gentlemen who took a prominent part in the debate in favour of the desired restriction, and whose names are herein after enumerated, namely—Lord Ashley, Lord John Russell, Lord Palmerston, Lord John Manners, Lord liowick, Lord Sandon, Sir George Grey, Sir Robert Inglis, Mr. Brotherton, Mr. Stuart Wortley, Mr. Muntz, Mr. Aglionby, Mr. M'Geachy, Mr. William Beckett, Mr. Charles Buller, Mr. W. B. Ferrand, Mr. Fiehlen, Mr. Colquhoun, Mr. Hindley, Mr. Borthwick, Mr. Bernal, Mr. Hawes, Mr. Brocklehurst, Mr. Thos. Dun combe, and Mr. Hardy, and that the noblemen and gentlemen who prominently supported, and all those who voted with Lord Ashley on the occasion above referred to, be earnestly requested to continue their exertions until the success of this most sacred measure is tri umphantly secured." Mr. GEORGE BULMER, surgeon, seconded the resolution. The Rev. T. NUNN, in an able speech, proposed the next resolution:—" That this meeting would fain hope that her Majesty the Queen will be made cognisant of the fact that a large majority of those who work in factories are females, the number often amount ing to two-thirds, and in some instances to three-fourths of those employed ; and that this meeting confidently believes, that her Majesty herself, if the facts of the case are duly laid before her, by her confidential advisers, will not fail to sympathise with her oppressed Subjects, but be anxious to redress their wrongs. What ever course, however, her Majesty's Ministers may think proper to take, warned as they have been by the defec tion of ninety-three of their ordinary supporters, this meeting feels that the interests involved in this question are of far too sacred a character to permit them to be waived for any party, or temporary considerations what ever ; and it therefore hereby calls upon Lord Ashley and his Parliamentary supporters to persevere reso lutely in the course to which they in the sight of God i and their country stand pledged, until the ten hours' , question is brought to a glorious and triumphant issue." Mr. SAMUEL SMITH, surgeon, seconded the resolution. Mr. OdiSTLEA was next called upon, and on rising he was greeted with three hearty cheers. In the courseol a long and eloquent speech, he said—l am deternti r l et never to restcid we have the Te n H ou r s ' Bill, and her to place any confidence in any set of men who may b ei o rt pointed to g overn us , w h o re f use i t. B ut w h en wek il , h o with so loud a vo i ce a t th e d oor o f t h e C a bi ne t, I trust " c c Sir J. Graham himself will be disposed to yield ; ° n o t not, we must, in the name of that great cause we are 0 . 0 to support, bid him be gone .—(L ou d c h eers .) He adverted to the nickname of "Jack Cade," wili c ' e James Graham had appli e d t o L or d A s hl e y a nd bi s ° . ; r e l porters. He (Mr. Oastler) had made many prophe t c h l o none of which had b e e n f a l s ifi e d • an d w h en he salv_.,,y Sir James Graham had been reduced to the begri o necessity of calling nicknames, he exclaimed, months hence you are out, Sir James ;" and he int e " co r to mark the time caref u lly, t o see w h e th er he pas p. rect or not. Mr. Oastler concluded by quoting 4 [ o o tiful psssage from a s e r mon b y the Rev: Dr. Tito John Ilu.sey, Rector of Hayes Kent, and Si" d a d amidst vociferous applause. The resolution passed unanimously. Mr. Joshua HonsoN road a long petition, erabodYitig, the resolutions, and containing much additional t ir t r ment in favour of a T en H ours ' Factory Bill. li e d to eluded by movin g it s a d o pti on , an d t h at it shoal y r , sent To Mr. W. Beckett for presentation, and tha t t r Ferrand and Mr. Thomas S. D uncom b e s h ou ld '" quested to support the same. Mr. JOHN SMITHSON seconded the motion. dt y A vote of thanks was pa s s e d t o th e Ch a i rm an, so meeting broke up shortly after eleven o'clock. THE WELSH CHURCH. ,0 " And the poor have th e G os p e l p reac h e d to th u s Such was the closing fact appealed to bk r io great founder of our faith, in t es ti mon y o f his 1. 0 ,0 mission, and the truth of the di s p ensa tion ile.oo about to usher in. And thi s Di v i ne c haraeter4 has been from age to age most devoutly preserve"o every ecclesiastical body of people down to these e and degenerate days. Even the Church of itn n ' h igt the plenitude of its despotic power, howsoever its pride or deep its corruption, never once f,„ 0 7 1 1 ,- that grand principle of its original formation. 11 0 ,.; ever might be its derelictions in o ther resPec:;o l never neglected the poor; their t em p o r a l wan" 0 attended to in a way that might often shame °go much vaunted Reformation improvements • an d Iti their spiritual require men t s , suc h as the Churfail Rome believed the t ru th t o b e , suc h a -GosPg';,od acknowledged, it communi ca t e d o f it t o the r i d bountifully, assiduously, and w ith earne stness i d good-will ; and it was reserved for the Chur c h d England, or rather for that h a lf- w ith ere d bra,n e it, the Church of Wales, ope n ly an d w ithout chlo. to discard this great principle, and adopt its opP For here, were the message of' the Prophet delic e t y the answer would often be, " And the rich hav e Gospel preached to them." Should any doubt,o correctness of this statement, let them at once re e r re ; to Wales, and note the conduct o f th e Church t. l ' tiro for, in many parts of th a t ill- use d coun t r y, this le, precise principle acted upon. In one va lley 11 4 in a mineral district, in the diocese of Llandaffild, taming a population of 10,000, up to a recent l o w there was no place of wor s hip b e l ong i ng t o the e gi blished Church for many miles. About five I c e' ago, in consequence of the r e p ea t e d remons tranct e pd specting the neglect of the people by the Churo .i t o r the numerous Dissenting chap e l s c on ti n ually slued ing up, it was determined to mak e an e ff or t to so one place of worship belonging to the Establisil e o Accordingly a subscription was set on f oo t, and IS were the appeals to the benevolent public, sn f e friends of religion, &c., and loud was the clain° ir el specting accommodation for the poor, and e a of hackneyed canting exp ress i on k nown was e nliste jo r the side of the working- c la sses an d th e labonf l o y classes, &c. ; and in order to insure this acconl.iii 4 tion, it was expressly covenanted f o r, th a t the s e . gp c . was to be performed alternately in W e l s h and 5. 13 3 lish, the former being the language of the g reat ot oi of the people. Under these assurances the sal, some thousand pounds was raised, t o whi c e tbet, Church Building Society liberally added an te d thousand, and thus a church was erected, cal )° e tic o holding two thousand people, and ever y exPec' to id held out that the shepherdless sheep on the insu n ti eto should at last be securely folded. And so they, for some time ; and no d ou bt wou ld h ave c ontin i had the original contract b een h onest l y o bservep which it was stipulated that the W e l s h service,' be regularly performed every S un d a y a lt ern ated, stO the English. But this order was soon laid asine,Vi as the iron masters and their familie s were 'el' elj° the Welsh service was often entirely dropped, a ' fo? partially performed, and thatgenerally only o nce sod night, so that the Welsh people gradually the church, and now, where it was intended tha t e ot, thousand should assemble in worship, it is a ra.il e currence to find more than two hundred, ex clusn '0 the school children ; and the Comm u nion servi t ' never performed at all in Welsh. Are the Welsh, then, an irreligious race ? „ice the reverse, when they ha v e th e i r re ligious se' ro ti performed in their native language. And, as 0 1 ) 0 11 there are within almost a stone's throw of 0 15 I li church, no less than eight Dissenting chapels, in , II or the Welsh is the language of th e m i n i s t r y, W i i t o,' vice in each twice at least every Sunday, an a ° O Ol times on other days of the week a s we ll. In " e el' these chapels alone the average att e ndance el ite a thousand, and the communicants amount „ to t's? hundred. And what does the Bishop say to a l i t iG Nothing. He probably knows nothing abl How should he. And if he did, h e wou ld ow/ jo' that the Welsh are obstinate, and must not d ee d with Welsh prayers—once in three " will do for a Welshman, or once a month. f ore Is it to be wondered at th a t th e s h eep are sca".ol)°, with such shepherds ? N o . B u t t h e won d e r if they are ever recalled; and it is well th'",4 l6 i, should know h ow th ese ma tt ers are manage d " g o Anglo-Welsh Bishops, who fatten o n th e dioc e6- 0 0 0 : the aboriginal Britain. W e are p repare d wit' viiio facts hereafter of each one, an d a ll o f thenit i l shall be made known, if th e y canno t b e a ltered' If 0:1 [ADVERTISEMENT.)—CoURT B EAUTIES .--- 11 . f A been, said and written relative to th e ass emb l lol o female beauty celebrated under thi s ti t l e . The e b r ie by Sir Peter Lely and Vandyke, i n Wi n d sor Cas'istle, doubtless faithful representations of th ose f a ir 011 ,A cessful aspirants to a notoriety w hi c h endures gie present day. But how gratifying are the cone';: ifi l we are enabled to arrive at i n f avour o f our o wn ` o " 0 The polished observanc es o f mo d ern soc i e ty s e ; o ov have had their effects in subduing the bold expressojA eyes akin to those that beamed upon the Restt l ," While a costume ever chaste and resplendent has " t oe', seded the stiff and formal sameness of the , f o lden Je d ' And to these important advantages m a y be a d ip %io pleasing restorative and preserver of the color/ Cl l o i Gowland's Lotion, in removing every species taneoas impurity, and sustaining a brilliant viv ii ;ici!, tint, has lung been appreciated in th e hi g hest 't An assurance of the sterling remedial qualities ° e a PI invaluable article cannot be too firmly entertain. oo ° all who suffer from irritabilit y an d di sco lournt i the skin. Cc l , lls [ADVERTISEMENT.]—A N EXTRAORDINAR OF A CASE OF CONSUMPTION BY HOLLOWAY'S „,oi‘ e ' —Miss Newman, aged 19, whose father is a shoe', c oil; living in Long-lane, Bermondsey, had been in 1 1 , 4 e. sumptive and dangerous state for about two year s :, We' l , parents considered her case as hopeless, w hen th e y hi s, recommended the use of these miraculous pills , t ho,r; after she had tak en th em f or a b ou t t h ree Le° ll- C cOP; stored her to perfect health, although she had dered on the b r i n k o f th e grave . Thi s me di c i n e W I " 41'e' any coughs or colds, however bad they may bet 99 00 1 4, 1 ' as asthmatical affections. S o ld ( a l so HollowsP, 1 4 went) at Professor Holloway' s est a bli s lneo•4 Strand (where advice may be had gr a ti s ), a nd bY ic ili all respectable medicine venders throughout thehe world. BIRTHS. On the 12th of Feb. is Vecunderabad, the WI; 007, Wilby, Esq., of the 4th or King's Own R egime nt, o f of On the Bth inst., at Yat e ly L o d ge, H ants, t h e lad' ar John Murton, Esq., of a daughter. On the 9th inst., in St an h ope - s t ree t , Hyd e .parivc.: 0 , the lady of Captain Bish o p C u l peper, o f a son an d l'S l ,rs° On the 9th in -t., at Wi n d sor , th e l a d y of Captai12 ......„,. / .51 ' . Scotch Fusilier Guards, of a son. .111..4RRIED. hig,9o °l l.4 At St. Martin's Church, the Ea r l o f Aboyne, the Marquis of Huntley, to Mary Antoinetta, only 6i)ols daughter of the Rev. P. W. Pegus and the Countess e of Lindsey. Al e :0 1 On the 9th inst., at St. Martin's-in-the-Pields, g i r ; t. 1)1 0 , ander Cadotte, of Sandwi c h, Upp er C ana d a , to Sarsifor, daughter of Mr. Henry Haynes, of George-street' j. square. "5 AiTse On the 9th inst., at St. J o h n ' s , P a ddi ng t on , Franc l , o of fourth son of the late G enera l Si r S amue l Hawker , tor Anne, eldest daughter of the late Henry Vignot Church-hill, Walthamsto w . 13 °1 On the 9th inst., at Brighton, Sir John Dean P¢ o pD of Rodborougb, Gloucestershire, to Elizabeth, . 7 daughter of Samuel, late Lord Bishop of St. AssPh' •lo o' DIED. tCecif On the 25th of January, at Colpetty, in the Island °- 0 (P John Michael Staples, member of the Hon. Soda A , coin's Inn. gay. _.or On the 3d of February, at Neemuch, East India the wife of Adam Keir, M.D., Hon. E as t India " •alt Service. a On the 29th ult., at Hastings, the Rev. Edga r op Mitford, aged 32. Co l° On the 31st ult., at Blandford, Dorset, Lieutenant ./# Samuel Cleaveland, late of the Madra s Artillery. 1 0.1 On the sth inst., at Trem a in s , Glamorganshirer Alicia., wife of Richard Lewellin, Esq., of Tremains.DO W Ice On the Gth inst., at the Pa r ad e , H ar l e yf o rd-roa • p ton, Charles Dimes, Esq., aged 72. On the Gth inst., at Rose-hill, Chesterfield, the Heathcote, aged 82. 5 0 401 On the 7th inst., at Ventnor, Mr. Charles Dix , il f1; On the Bth inst., at Cl a ph am - com mon, Ja rtt ;i• Ftw" youngest son of the late Alexander Gib!), Esq. , row, Milk -street. On the Bth inst., F re d er i c k Th omas , eldest son °f P Nash, Esq., of Birchanger, near Bishop Stortford. Cro l On the Bth inst., Susanna, the wife of Charles P . o f Esq., Hemel Hempst e d On the sth in s t., a t Finchley, Lieutenant-General:till: Salvin, aged 86. On the sth i ns t., at Walworth, Charles Danie l -g e ld l9 ', At his seat in D orse t s hi re, General John Mich el, ab" 0( otll .l°' London: Printed and Published by MURDO ;O. gi No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Stag ( c e d o inti Strand, in the-Precinct of the Savoy, in Oa ° Bliddlesez, Thursday, Apra 11, 1544. jottru; H. D. ; boddin B. and George Felix C W. NI, Cock& Jahn C Cretvi f:, Roger Cur re y Drewe' . 111)1.13; • rntbes titedst: tregs o Guest Hants) Means l'reder , Jones • Xracit ' Leaf, Magni Georg • 1 4Orri ilfere *rev Itabai ' N• . m 4!lndt %cott, 'Stone • J. Th osep Truer IVat War r Whit • litteri • 4, ea( Bro w • John Vineb Pc inaripq film y 1- I,9de Orb t•S. J. an( • Ertl 1. J• Xaine Aims J. am Cap Th, 1 1.4 • he Ca l J. - Jai 7 ;: re lP ti tt t 0, • toi t i Ana The 0 ,0 1;(1 - "I 1 111 1 44,147gat