The Sun. — London, England, 1844-03-28 00:00:00

Je . ' e4:l of 0 6 e—the y s h ou ld re l y upon t h e L eague , an d Th e sPeedy terms with the League.—(Hear, hear.) w oi ,p c ' c lY terms that were to be made being, that they ! , ire lt serve the League, and in the end serve them s, by the total abolition of that infamous mono 4ib,,(cheers.) He contended it was a warfare 4 4e civilisation this wanton abuse by the land -4,1.4, of their legislatorial powers ; for when and e in the world's history had civilisation advanced iol t : e l coenecti on with the harmonigus and harmonising flee s of commercial intercourse. To whom did 4 iro werld owe its first alphabet but to those adven o%orr merchants, the Phoenicians ? There was Pf cant abroad about the instability of commerce. X the empire of the Phoenicians lasted 700 years. at the it but their commercial intercourse . . that 4 4 , elegant and polished Athenian his superiority k p aae rude Spartan ? In the Middle Ages h ootirs of Italy, while they kept alive some . °f political ' freedom, did it in connection with rho, Co mmercial greatness. Their princely mer tom were the sources of wealth and civilisation to to r t Ineeeeding ages. In that great start which c oliti ,l* took at th e p er i o d of the Reformation, they mere found the burgesses, the tradesmen, and by th7,2 l ts, making good their position in society, and advance raising the feudal lords themselves; Co wh at were they then, and what would they be w ' b ut for the benignant influence of commerce ? itho t ! or that those very persons who denied to the Ohir r er the food which his labour had earned, lo k e ,,,theY surrounded themselves with all the ki" e s they could accumulate from every fo l'egion—these men would have been, instead It/e i Zg in richly carpeted rooms, dwelling in rush don moors, in cold and stony residences, more like liql; °°B than anything else, with unglazed windows, li ett let i n t h e sleet and snow, as we ll as th e a i r o f lir o l i ei t They would still, if sanctioning the char- Ilist e kilie mercantile guild, affix to it their marks , 1 / 4 w,3 °f writing their names ; and would have been Informed of those distant countries, over the 1 ke: es of which they exercised so large an in as those feudal - barons, who, when they set ' 0 114 1 : the crusade to Palestine, expected in that Eoc t 0 encounter giants riding on unicorns, to ,i'lice h eack magicians, who for breakfast sucked Iroz o - ' ' s eggs, and who expected to find griffins and N''', L as plenty as barn-door fowls.—(Laughter.) was commerce had made men of them. seri l .nu beggarly was the boon that was asked of !oh o , i n return, to allow the very humblest of the Livil'ers the reward of his labour which Providence ol,i,'lotted him. Laws for the restriction of corn koleesvere an absurdity under any circumstances, S te a wickedness as well as an absurdity—much sh were they both in such a country as this. ,Att ) ei this land was made for commerce—it was out for commerce by the hand of Heaven loy Creative power had stamped that as its des- Their long lines of coast—their beautiful 11 44 their s a f e harbours—all indicated that every ttoi l 4nat blew ought to waft from their shores some t o : of wealth or knowledge or charity to every t ki t ,,',.of the world. It was marked out for com ti4 °Y its coal-beds and mineral treasures, by ma ell4• - b , which nature itself had put into their hands 40 e, them to minister to the subsistence of their ft l l67 li°ll S, and feeding and clothing millions and to more. The industry, the unwearied toil, emulated ' capital, and the persevering skill and 4 4 of this land—the means by which ,N e already attained all they could show— • were the conquests they had to make, S A a t s their mission from Heaven for the universal . ,t eti Of mankind. Then who or what was this ',4o, e „lass, that they should stand up and.say that not be done,because it would deteriorate !lot;tito.perty and lower their rents? Why, sup ,t should should do so, was there anything in that class, t hok st h ad for ages such immense advantages over all Sor;t:f society, supposing they.were to suffer a privation, that they should allow it to ' the way of accomplishing all that humanity Th .` 4 4.•• 4 4 . right to claim, and which charity Sri. alike awarded their sacred sanction to? S they e t ‘ permanently divert this island from it "Plm Work--could - they succeed in permanently laws which must cripple the manufac kf i Z kid Commerce, by which they had been en - Q' Which_ had made them a great and strong `ttild„ 'mould they go on in suppressing these ? th ey keep &yin the ebullition of misery and sup 'qe• "" indicati ons o f di s content—could they, through % • a n g Years, to the fullest extent carryout, which ilre far from being able to do, the purpose for 1 / 4 4 011 the monopolist laws were enacted, what dis ktilt s re • sults would take place from end to end of this I 4 1? With a growing population, and a declining g'4tiet with ports barred against the' foreigner by e inisease and famine would continually stalk d 'qt c 4 - 0 -- frightful demoralisation would ensue— arrn of power must be put forth to keep th e millions - they must "Make a solitude and ch pe acekreir ;' such peace as would he the peace of a i k% ,„ ) ,Ird, where every man was nerveless, every ,14;: r 118 cold, and all were mouldering fast into one i Corruption. The land would be p ortioned /ti i i," o little squirearchies, and each rural tyrant stalk, in all the solitary majesty_ of self-as- On, over his own petty domain. The peasant ",pod think it a great prize when he got a good tl4 wt _Potat oe Intellect, the arts, all that civilised ned life,would leave the country, which , de } e le,tk7 ll ,abandoned, would become so fearful a spec - • we should say, " God of heaven! let this island 11 -1, i n l again ed beneath the ocean from which it 1 t ih e l lt io n it find a worthier grave there ra ther than g annals of its glory should end in any- IN mnus and so • Irifa disgusting!"—(Loud cheers.) ti , not then advocating an y m ere ma nufac ere :I° l 'stion ; they were not pleading for any mere ft to the poor ; they were asserting one common i j ,l+Vt right of humanity, and one interest, which Merely a pecuniary interest of the passing hlhto tit .Z.Pie interest of human nature in all countries or all t-`4l- ag'es—a cause which was the cause of ci itse lf. That •for which they strove was , 4 4 derlworld's progress should not be turned back e effect of this mischief and wrong. It was • e that would call forth the 'warmest ks of their hearts and the intensest devotion of ▪ dig; a a use that would be before them from ' till and from night to night, and from year to th e the th at e result they contemplated . was obtained ; C'ss 't was- regarded, in all its importance, by r, gi n station gave them ampler means of th e ß . on that result. For should the Sovereign i 'N fAi . 3 realms have her moments of perplexity and kt,9lllCoe, 85 distracted by conflicting councils, and ta d ' look wistfully at the battles of warring 1,17* Should she, in such a moment, desire to w hat it was hich would make her reign Its to wipe away the tears of the distressed, Tee ; 1 1, 0 the naked, to feed the hungry, and t i: ) ,'e who were trampled down ; should tt '''.lll (l 3 " to know what it was that OIL, r ender her reign illustrious, not only by „ I ''' l l)e, misery . sad recovering her people from t tl et itt :nit by giving a higher splendour, one before 1 , 11 (14," glories of conquest and of legislation, insti paidw i k l e , l of revolutions in former times should alld't t -1 11 comparison;—should she desire to know as th • that magic which should render her reign eth ie lnthe world's history, and the best and ktirbit.io the annals of Great Britain ;_ when she 1, "'is, oh that some good angel would whisper f'l4 We that the talismanic words that would do all " Commercial Freedom !"—(Loud cheers, N i 4, the conc l us i on o f th e H on . Gentleman's :th e N„.„,"ArasaJoas then announced that these meet aoti4ld be re-commenced after Easter, and that e as s , e °l the day of meeting would be given. otobly then dispersed. - `lll▪ 'at kdONNELL AND THE GOiERNMENT.- litt t 't it Qe..ginning to ask themselves what effect will the tcliZt e K?linisters on the Factory question have on the )P itli Y, O 'Connell? Connell? It was supposed to be a very hazardous doh th e I ,en Sir Robert Peel's Government was surrounded 6ert ' 4lO 0 111 di ',tied power and appeared to have the I; . ee 151 ' tl n vi • Cr e, 'e great majonty in England and Scotland, to yLI , I , rov en , ell up for "convicted It has lately been dis hy.' ti o e q that the conspirator" is regarded N l ot ; n iense number of Englishmen as Ireland's best While the Ministry was strong, and, appa- Nee ely I ` th e Government. tsi ns 4 omnipotent, they made common cause with qi ft But now the Government has ~,) ec ome a mere rope of sand.. It cannot hold its own nl o ,`"gether : it is damaged beyond healing. Half the cult; (3 ,f England have decided against it. From . the t-kjor rt ' f a i saints, led on by Lord Ashley, it is obliged to jo g t ' i t i ge to the manufacturers who are opposed to it. In V o Pp oz . t _ .layv into execution against Mr. O'Connell, who t Y ep 4l), 17 1 by all Ireland and a great porti, of England, i for feeble assistance. IVill this damaged Go rZit to : t he, denuded of popular support, venture to give th er miliverdict which no person defends as just, after a vilittebe re, till no man describes as fair ? It is concluded,. sat the Ministerial defeat on the Factory Bill h y o fie ld fo r Mr. O'Connell. ) :tt l _ 4l; towi l " s - - The high and universal celebrity , a ll 4 ad's Kalydor continuesto maintain, as an active 11,1 1, is, d o :P . ' soothing extirpator of all impurities of the ss l . 4 ° S.re ar ie g the period of Spring, most pleasingly evinced. 11 . 4 4 !1n g, &Lien, eminently balsamic, restorative, and invi tiohdieg , fa er luelly celebrated for safety in application, as for arov i _ e aeYin removing all impurities and discoloura tkZe " Parti ngSkin'" a healthy freshness and transparency tli f '‘es th e omp Its universally great demand 4 1 ,titl e of Nidity: of unprincipled shopkeepers, who give zo 74 efact.._ trennine" Ralydor to compounds of their own L ti lerai :ire., of the most deleterious character, containing t itei7 4 " l egents utterly ruinous to the Complexion, and, 17,,,inlreapetiN1!_anotnaction endangering health. It is, there- N ,, r‘,=, Purchasers to see that the words Row :,oll,it•TeTe. are on the wrapper. —All 'others are *audit iljpkb • . 4 „ , cm tcy ' 3 .1 . ..11-JURE OF A DREADFUL SKIN j `itso fiv e Yea IOLLOWAY'S OINTMENT AND Pius. —A child, th t eho o ,, r _s , flanged Jones, whose parents live at No. 4, co a ge of _T'eY, Wilson-street, Finsbury-, London, was, from oo „..,?!xleen months, fearfully swollen in the body, and ho 4ll the n 'i l lti ir ge, black sores. This child had been taken , :paws in London, but got no relief ; she has, Yekt,',e,inos7wdically cured by means of these wonderful ?)a q , sta udi u n 'en will cure any skin disease, even if of twenty ! 244 , r g. sold at Professor Holloway's Establish tivot9roost '_tnand (where advice may be had gratis) ; and wed Nv o ariVectablo medicine vendors throughout the ebtrb Mftition SUN OFFICE, Sevez o' Clock. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAY. GLOBE.—We are glad that farther interference with adult labour is not carried by a coup de main; and that Parliament and the public are allowed some interval to " look before they leap." There are two points of view, a party and a public one—from which the subject may be'regarded. We have refused to place ourselves at the party point of view, though we see as clearly as the Times the chance of Opposition advantage from making this question the occasion for detaching the wavering or malcontent section of the Ministerialirts. Our versa tile Contemporary expresses this with some naivete; and indicates that he has a month's mind to strike in with such a combined movement. He exclaims, "Let it be looked on as a Ministerial question. Ministers make it one. Can there be a question more important and more worthy to divide the House ? At present there is no rallying point in the House—no one respectable standard to assemble round. Why not gather into one all those who are not ashamed of the principle of protecting the labourer ?" Certainly here is a great temptation ; the easy virtue of the Times jumps at it. The Times is tired of the pre sent Ministry ; " small blame to it," as Paddy would say. So is Young England ; those young (or ci-devant young) gentlemen occupy a place in their own opinion which, at present, they occupy nowhere else. They are the natural and inevitable malcontents of the present party in power ; and ready to swell any defec tion, " pour avoir de la consideration." They fight, or rather stand under arms, " under the cold shade of Peel," and have lost hope of their " exquisite notions". flourishing, unless in a new and " bright field." It may suit party purposes to offer this field to these inte resting and select combatants ; but we cannot think " All the Crotchets" an acquisition, so much as a nui sance, to any party. These gentlemen are so fine, that they are always shooting over everybody's heads. They are always aiming at something, which is to do something no one else ever dreamed of. We are to "keep.' the holidays of the Church," or restore the monastic orders, or liberate Don Carlos, or send an ambassador to the Pope—in short, we are to retrograde, as far as possi ble, from all that three centuries have been doing. It is a curious historical and political theory which these gentlemen would seem to have imbibed. One of their kindred geniuses, of a clerical cut, not long back, in the British critic, declared that English history stopped, at the.end of the seventeenth century—that no farther development of the national mind or spirit was to be looked for in the eighteenth. Forsooth, priestly ascendancy came decidedly to an end in the former pe riod ; and of course the progress of empire, science, and industry, - . could deserve no notice afterwards. Ac cording to these innovators backwards, it is, our supposed progress which has planted us where we are. The whole tendency of the age is towards over-exer tion, and over •production. People require to be checked in the excess of their eagerness to better their condi tion. Above all, we must discard that horrible indus trial heresy of laissez faire. And here the Retro grades have really distinguished support amongst writers and thinkers ; though it always appears to us that such reasoners do not put the saddle on the right horse. When a writer quarrels with the whole tendency, theoretical and practical, of the age he lives in, it is a fair. question—What are you driving at ? What is your ideal of social economy ? If he says—lt is not my business to tell you—l am sufficiently occupied in uncovering the social sore places which you cannot deny to exist—we reply : That answer might perhaps be al lowed to pass, if you did not indicate some theory of your of own by your mode of criticising others—if you did not:assume that certain philosophical and political aberrations were the causes of certain social disorders— that at some former period(unspecified) things were better, because men acted on better principles —at some former period -men were more guided and governed ; and prospered more accordingly. Now, we demur to this assumption of the cause of existing evils, as residing in the too • great laxity and independence in the rela tions between man and man. We deny that the con nexion existing in former ages between superiors and inferiors was more in the interests of the latter ; and we do not believe that a total revol u ti on i n th e pre valent tendencies in this respect is possible or desirable. And we deny, above all, the justice of attacking the factories as the worst example of present ill. Indeed, the best disproof of this is, that people go thither from the country, and won't go back. - The Dorsetsbire philanthropists may find the pressure on labour nearer home. Let them single out the first hedger or ditcher, eking out his pittance by piece -work. Let them exa mine if that man does not endure harder toil than fac tory operatives—endure it voluntarily—as voluntarily as can be said of .a man working for scant bread for himself and children. There is no " factory system" there. There are general causes of pressure, periodically aggravated, on individual labour everywhere. Unless that pressure is worst in the factories ; unless the " factory system " dictates the laws (instead of suffer ing the common necessities) of labour—unless it can be shown—not that the competition is severe—we all know that—but that its severity is owing to too wide a field being left open by law to industry—instead of being owing to too narrow a field being left open for its returns—unless existing evils can be traced to the factories as their source and birth-place, we must con tinue to think, as we think now, that the whole agita tion against them is a farce. And we must protest very seriously against Lord Ashley paying himself the unde served compliment of imagining that the mantle of "Mr. Cade" (commonly called Jack Cade) has fallen on him. Mr. Cade was an Irishman, and a Parliamentary Re former, and would have been sent to Kilmainham, if the ecclesiastical statesmen of that age had not found shorter ways of dealing with him. Mr. Cade was a decided Laissez • faire man, more likely to have been an Anti-Corn-law Leaguer than a single-string performer in the Short Time strain. It appears from Mr. Cade's memorials to the King, .that his views were partly directed to wards reform of the game-laws—" Simple people (he says) that use not hunting are greatly oppressed by indictments "—partly to reform in Parliament:— " People of Kent not suffered to have free election of their knights of the shire, but letters have been sent to the great rulers, forcing them to choose other per sons than the Commons wished." It appears from the following heads of grievance, that Mr. Cade was the decided opponent of the Statute of Labourers, which the Morning Post considers the great precedent for " pro tecting" labour :—" That all the extortions used daily among the common people be laid down ; that is, the green wax so falsely used to the perpetual destruction of the commons of Kent ; also the King's-Bench so greeve ful to the shire of Kent ; also the taking of wheat and other grains, beef, mutton, and all other victuals, which is importable to the said commons ; also the statute of labourers, &c. &c." We are not profound enough in local and general research to trace the exact sense of some of the above items • but viewing M r . C a d e ' s opi nions with the respect Parliament now views them, we should suggest to both Houses whether the present corn laws may not come within the meaning of " taking" from the commonalty " of wheat and other grains"— " which is importable to the said commons." The words, doubtless, were used in another sense at the time ; but it is the property of great men's utterances to ac quire an enlarged scope in the lapse of ages. STANDARD.—Our readers will have seen by the report of last night's proceodings in the House of Com mons, that the Factory question is postponed. Sir James Graham will to-morrow night withdraw the Bill now before Parliament, introduce a new Bill at the same time, and take the dis cussion on this second Bill as soon as possible after the recess. Lord Ashley assents to this arrange ment, reserving to himself the right to introduce a short-time Bill, independent of tho Gevernment measure. • In one view this arrangement is satisfactory, for the great question in issue will thus be distinctly dis cussed, otherwise we must lament that the postpone ment takes place with little prospect of accommodation, though . with a perfect certainty that, sooner or later, the ten hours' limitation will be carried. We are weary of the subject, and so, no doubt, are our readers; but duty requires often that we submit to what is weari some in order to arrive at truth and to do justice, as all of us have felt in listening to tedious stories and investigating long and complicated accounts. Such is the case in the matter before us ; for not only are the circumstances perplexing in themselves, but every day brings forth some new fallacy, or some new scheme of accommodation, the more to entangle our judg ment. This morning's fallacy is the argument of the Morning Chronicle against the competency of the Factory Commissioners as witnesses in the case. It is known that the opinions of the Factory Com missioners, men selected for their intelligence and sagacity, and officers of the Government, which opposes Lord Ashley, are all favourable to a considerable limi tation of the hours of labour. And accordingly the Morning Chronicle finds it necessary to impeach their authority :—" It is the more necessary to insist upon the impropriety of resting the whole case upon the dicta of the Factory Commissioners, because not only is Lord Ashley's interference with millowners, and the other parts of society, defended by appealing to their report, but the superiority of their know ledge is assumed to be so great, that it is described as a new species of reason for other men to surrender their own judgment to the conclusions of Messrs. Horner and Saunders. Parliament, which deputed them to inquire, is held to have given up its own senses and will to them, and is held to be bound to see only with their eyes, and le gislate only with their understandings. By this kind of deference they are elevated into the masters of the Minis ters and the Parliament. By Lord Ashley and some of our Contemporaries they seem to be regarded as the concen trated essence of good sense, which alone is capable on this subject of giving flavour to a general vapidness. Now, it is precisely because their attention has been closely and exclusively fixed on a single point that we are dis posed to resist their authority, and affirm that their sug gestions, as the basis of a law which is to affect the vhole community, are unworthy of notice. Let it be fur ther remembered that the inquiries of the Factory Corn missioners have been as much limited in time as in space. They have seen the factories inoprderAatsiohnleyon,s Bill;and only, be. lieve s ince 1833, the date of Lord s r h v a s ; i have e seend in the manufacturing districts. The certainly the greatest and thhernwnogrhstacloamrgpelapinortstinhnavoef been made since that time. T the intervening period great distremsiashn millowners together the they have had difficulty in scraping _ their property, and even their subsistence, in peril ;. . the very large demands - ather they of the public tax -gather means of paying their workpeople, and o . f rying have been forced, therefere, to be thrifty—at times may ' have seemed to lean hard uponthe o p e ratives, exactingout • of them the means of bearing the public c har g es ; and of sustaining-their own fortunes—which we hold, when honestly performed, to be laudable in the individual and beneficent to the State ; they have been unable, also to find adequate employment for men, and have been glad, on account of the pressure on themselves, to use only the cheapest labour." One must admire the new canon of rea soning asserted in this argument. The witnesses are be yond dispute originally impartial, and they happen to be the only available witnesses who are impar tial ; if there are other impartial witnesses let them be named. But to attend to the evidence of these, the only impartial witnesses, is to elevate them to be masters of the Ministers and the. Parliament ; just, we suppose, as an impartial witness in the Court of Queen's Bench becomes the master of Lord Denman and a special jury. Our Contemporary, however, thinks that notwithstanding their unimpeached intelligence and impartiality, the Factory Commissioners are unworthy to have their opinions seriously considered, and this for the strangest reason in the world—" precisely because their attention has been closely and exclusively fixed upon a single point"—which is the point in ques tion, neverthless. The witness is to be slighted because he has minutely studied the subject of his evi dence; or, to come to the matter, the gentleman who, by careful consideration of repeated experiments has satisfied himself that more work, and better work, and cheaper work, is done by a given number of hands working ten hours in a cotton mill than by the same number of hands working twelve hours (a conclusion of more than one com missioner) is to be disregarded—because, we suppose, he has not taken a course of the lectures of the League. But there is another reason why the report of eye-witnesses is to be held of no account. They have not merely been deprived of the peripatetic lights. of Messrs. Cobden, Acland, Bright, and Smith, which our Contemporary designates as a want of space. " The inquiries of the Factory Commissioners have been as much limited in time as in space, they have seen the factories in operation only, we believe, since 1833." Only during eleven years ! quite a transient glance, says the Morning Chronicle, and these 11 years have been years during which the millowners have had difficulty in, scraping together the means of paying their workpeople and of paying the very laro 6 v de mands of the public tax-gatherer, " and have been glad, on account of the pressure on themselves, to employ only the cheapest labour." Poor fellows, nothing but neces sity could prevent their overpaying their labourers. But for these sad eleven years—we mast not call them tedious—because they are but a twinkling of the eye, in our Contemporary's opinion—for these sad eleven years, we should like to know, to what extent the number of mills has been diminished during the period of depression ? Will the Morning Chronicle tell us ? Well, if it cannot speak of any diminution, perhaps it might tell the extent to swhich the number of mills has increased, notwith standing the sufferings of the poor fellows " scraping" to pay their way. Has the increase been 10 per cent. 7-20 per cent. ?-50 per cent. 7-100 per cent. ? We are very much disposed to rate the increase even above the last ratio ; and if we should happen to be right, what becomes of the peculiar circum stances that render the last e le ven y ears an un fit p er i o d to be taken as a sample of the manufacturing history of the country ? Mark, we do not dispute the existence of great distress during the eleven years ; but we ascribe it altogether to that system of over-building, over-pro duction, and over-working, of which long hours of la bour constitute the basis, and, if we may so speak, the charter—for without long hours of labour there would be no temptation to over-build, and little opportunity of over-production. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS EVENING.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. There being but 34 Members present at 4 o'clock, the SPEAKER adjourned the House till to-morrow. HOUSE OF LORDS. Their Lordships met at the usual hour. Messengers from the Commons brought up the Mutiny Bill, the Marine Mutiny Bill and other Bills, which were read a first time, and ordered to be read'a second time to morrow. TWE LONDON THURSDAY EVENX NG, MARC II 2% 1844. on the second reading—and he thought he was about the only member of the House that had done so—he must say that never was Bill brought forward with so little title to their support. Why, the only ground on which . it was supported was the not very creditable one that a better Bill would not be brought forward, inasmuch as it would he opposed by tl e country practitioners He would say that he thought the House of Commons had been very much wronged on this subject. Let him call their Lordships' attention to what was the plain state of the case. In the Honse of Commons, previous to the division, Sir James Graham, after stating all the authorities for the abolition of these Courts, and stating his own opinion as strongly as possible on the subject, wound up a most effective speech by saying " Upon principle, then, I cannot yield to the opposition to this Bill. With all deference I must say that if the House shall think proper to reject this BA I cannot offer any measure likely to be more accept able in its place." Sir ltoliert Peel, also, at the conclu sion of the debate, said the Government were aware by introducing this measure, they were exposing them selves to the opposition of their friends, but they would not endeavour to purchase a continuance of their sup port by shrinking from the discharge of what they con sidered their duty. On the division the numbers were 186 to 84, a much larger majority, in proportion to the members present, than any which even the present strong Government had had since they first came into office. Now, what became of all that courage and determination not to shrink from their duty? Why, the Bill was re ferred to a Select Committee, and so far from being re cognised and adopted by the House of Commons, it was reported by that Select Committee on the 28th of May, and from that period to the end of the session no steps were taken on the subject. He thought therefore, it was hard upon that House to call upon it to pass the Bill which was admitted by all to be the means of perpetuating very great evils ; it kept up the diocesan courts and perpetuated courts that bad not business to sustain them : Under all these circumstances, he thought the country when it judged Of this Bill, would believe that the Go vernment had pursued a course of yielding to the most humiliating necessity to which a strong Government was ever driven. Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that he had no objec tion to take kis share of the responsibility of bringing in this measure. He admitted that the Government did before bring in a Bill that went much further than the present one. They found that there was a strong opinion respecting the Bill, not only in the House of Commons, but elsewhere, not- only on the part of practitioners but of the public in general. He was quite ready to take any blame of the part he had had in bringing in the Bill. Lord COTTENHAM said the question was not whether the Government had yieleld to pressure or not. but whether it had acted properly. The question whe ther it would be inconvenient for parties to come to London to transact their business had 'been a matter of inquiry ever since the year 1832, and every report of the Commissioners had stated that the advantages of removing the courts to London would far outweigh any inconvenience that would be occasioned by making parties come to London to attend the courts. In answer to a question from Lord BROUGHAM as to the standing to be required in a barrister, in order to be qualified to sit as a judge in the Court, ;The LORD CHANCELLOR saw no reason why five years should not be a sufficient qualification. He had no objection to make the required alteration. The question that the report be received was then about to be put, upon which Lord BROUGHAM rose, and said he wished to correct a misapprehension which had arisen out of what he had stated the other night, upon the presentation of a petition from certain females in Scotland. He had received several letters from persons in the country, and • one stated that he for one ought not to attempt to prevent the libouring classes from obtaining a limitation of their hours of labour, constdering that he was at present receiving a large pension fur doing nothing out of the taxes imposed upon the people. Now the pensions which he and his Noble and Learned Friend received were only compensations for large incomes they had sacrificed at the bar. His Noble and Learned Friend behind him (Lord Campbell) was in a still worse position, for he bad given up a large income, yet he did not receive any pension. Lord CAMPBELL—I often work ten hours a day. Lord BROUGHAM said his Noble and Learned Yriend had worked ten hours a day, and frequently worked so hard that he envied the situation of the factory children. Some of the letters requested him to follow up the useful suggestion which he had made, that wages should be fixed at a minimum, and that manufacturers should be prevented from giving their work-people less than a certain amount. What he said was that he would prefer a law fora minimum of wages unjust and absurd as it might be to a law for a maximum of hours. Another of his correspondent asked•him, how he could say that toil was the lot of man, and at the same time advocate the abolition of slavery. He spoke only of voluntary toil; all that he required was that men should not be compelled to work, or prevented from working. Lord MON I'EAGLE moved for a return of the cor respondence between the Government and the Inspectors of Allistrict Lunatic Asylums, on the subject of the treatment of lunatics in Asylums in Ireland. In Ireland lunatics were not subject to supervision of any Government agents, and he thought there should be some provision made from the estimates of the year to effect this purpose. The motion was agreed to withont opposition. Their Lordships then adjourned. TIT TERSALL'S.-T HIS EVENING. QUARTER TO SIX O'CLOCK. TWO THOUSAND GULNEAS STAKES. 6 to 4 agst Mr. John Day's The Ugly Buck. CHESTER CUP. 11 to 1 agst Pharaoh 15 to 1 agst Pagan 15 to 1 agst Cattonito 17 to 1 agst Jamie Forest 20 to 1 agst Bramble 22 to 1 agst Vakeel 25 to 1 agst Alice Hawthorn 27 to 1 agst Sir Robert DERBY. 6 to 1 agst Ugly Buck 6 to 1 agst Rattan 17 to 1 agst Orlando 22 to 1 agst lonian 20 to 1 agst Cockamaroo 20 to 1 agst T'Auld 'Squire 40 to 1 agst Campunero 45 to 1 agst Grey Momus colt—taken 100 to 1 agst Akbar ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. HOME CIRCUIT, Kingston, March 27. CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.) TUE MURDER OF LORD GRANTLEY'S GAMEKEEPER. —James Elsley, 38, was indicted for the wilful murder of James Edwards. There were four counts in the indictment. The first charged the prisoner with shooting the deceased ; the second with shooting him, and also beating him to death; the third with beating him only ; and the fourth charged the murder to have been committed by casting the de ceased into the water, and thereby suffocating and drowning him. Mr. Clarkson, with Mr. Locke, conducted the prose cution ; and Mr. Charnock appeared for the prisoner. The case seemed to create a good deal of interest, and the Court was crowded during the trial, which lasted some hours. Mr. CLARKSON stated the case for the prosecution, which he said was instituted by Lord Grantley, in whose service the deceased was employed as gamekeeper. He observed that although his Lordship had felt it his duty to prosecute the present indictment against the pri soner for the murder of an old and faithful servant, yet, of course, he had no desire but that the case should be fully and' fitirly investigated, and if in the result the jury should be satisfied that the more serious charge had not been made out against the prisoner, such a result coming from a conscientious conviction in the minds of the jury, upon the evidence, would be quite satisfactory to his Lordship and to all concerned in the prosecution. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to state the facts of the case as they afterwards appeared in evidence, and also the law upon the subject, concluding by calling the following witnesses :-- Joseph Head, examined by Mr. LOCKE—I am bailiff to Lord Grantley, and live at Bromley. I - knew the de ceased, James Edwards. He acted as gamekeeper to Lord Grantley. I recollect the 6th of January, and on that day I went along the Wey and Avon Canal, to wards Wonersh. I know the lock which separates the canal from the Lynarsh-field. (A plan of the neigh bourhood was here produced and proved to be correct). Examination continued—l was on horseback by the side of the canal about nine o'clock in the morning, when I saw something on the water, which, at first, I thought was a piece of sack or tarpauling. I dismounted, and threw in stories for n:y dog to go into the water, but he would not do so. I made some inquiries, and ob tained assistance and returned to the spot. At this time the body was out of the water, and I recognised it to be that of the deceased, who was in his usual dress. The body appeared very much beaten. The head was wounded in several places. I examined the ground near the car.al, particularly on the Lynarsh side; and on that side it rises up to the edge of the canal, for a distance of two feet. I observed a large pool of blood, and from that spot it is five or six yards to the edge of the canal. There is some furze about two yards from the canal, which is used as a preserve for game. I examined these furze bushes, and saw some small portions of human flesh on parts of them, and the pool of blood lay on the ground below the furze. I also saw the marks of heels and toes of shoes near the bank of the canal, and a few years nearer to the lock of the canal, I saw other marks of the same size and description, and I there found the hat and stick of the deceased, which I now produce.— (The hat bore an indentation on one side evidently oc casioned by a very violent blow. The stick was a very slight one.) Cross-examined--It is dead water in the canal except when the lock is let off. At the place where the body was found there are about three or four feet of water. The furze may be about two or three yards from the bank of the canal. At the, open part of the furze a per son might very easily get into the canal. There is a good deal of traffic at times on the canal. Re-examined--The land on the opposite side of the lock is not preserved. The land, all along, retires to wards the Lynarsh-field, and if the body had rolled fli.t all, it must have rolled up a hill. I have seen the de ceased wear the hat I produce, and also know the stick to have been his. Mr. Duncombe, a surveyor, who had been previously called to prove the correctness of the plan, was again placed in the box, and he described the details and the position of the different localities, with a view to show that it was impossible for the decease' to have rolled into the river, as represented by the prisoner in his state meta. William Stanton, examined by Mr. CLACKSON—My father has a wharf on the canal, near Lord Grantley's preserve. On the morning the body was found, in con sequence of soniething Mr. Head said to me, I went to the canal and saw an object floating in the water. I as sisted to bring it to the bank, and it turned out to b 3 the body of the deceased. I knew him directly, and I re marked that one of his ears was very much, lacerated, and on the opposite side the skull seemed to be beaten in. The wounds appeared to have bled a good deal, and they were bleeding at the time the body -was taken out of the 'water. Humphreys Durrant confirmed the testimony of the last witness, relative to the finding of the body. He also said he observed that the ear was jammed all to pieces.--(This correspondedwith the marks on the hat.) The ear was cut in every direction. Charles Jenkins, inspector of police, produced a broken gun-stock, which was Sound near the canal, also the broken lock of a gun. Henry Day; examined by Mr. LocKE:—On Saturday, the 6th of January, I was close to the canal in the Ly narsh• field, and I picked up the broken gun-stock. It was in the furze. There was blood upon it, and also a small quantity of human hair. The brass upon the butt of the gun-stock was bent up, and upon that I saw the hair. Henry Green deposed that on the same day the water was drawn off the canal, and he found in the bed of the canal the remaining portion of the broken gun-stock. Edmund Walker, :examined by Mr. LocKE—I am gamekeeper to Mr. John Sparkes. I knew the deceased well, and was with him at the Jolly Farmer public-house at Bromley, on the evening of the sth• January. There was a raffle going on;: and a good many people were in the house. The .deceased came in about half-past seven o'clock in the evening, and we drank together. He was quite sober when he went away, which was about eight o'clock in the evening. When. Edwards went away he had such a stick in his hand as the one that has been produced, and I have no doubt it is the same. Cross-examined—l' cannot Undertake to swear posi tively that it is the same stick. We had only two pints of beer together, but I don't know what the deceased had drank before. I stayed an hour, expecting the de ceased would return as he had promised, hut as he did not come I went away. Alexander Lambert examined by Mr. CLARKSON— I was at the Jolly Farmer public-house on Friday, the sth of Januiry, and I remember the prisoner coming into the house in question about seven o'clock. His legs appeared to be wet, and he asked me to let him dry his clothes by the fire. I did so, and went into the bar, whore I saw the deceased, and drank some beer with him. He was quite sober. He left the room for a short time, and asked me to hold his stick while he was gone. I did so, and I have no doubt the stick that has been produced is the same.—(The portions of the broken gun were here handed to the witness, and he identified them as having o r i g i na lly f orme d a gun which he had seen in the possession of the prisoner. By Mr. CHARNOCK—I was not examined before the Coroner. The prisoner is a married man, with a family of six or seven children. It i s a ver y o ld stock indeed., and appears to be worm. eaten. Ido not swear positively to the stick, but to the best of my belief it is the same. Re-examined—The prisoner had been Working for a person named Tickner. George Lucas, pot-boy at the Jolly Farmer, proved that he saw the prisoner leave the house about eight o'clock. Charlotte Brown examined by Mr. CLAitxsoN—l live at Bromley, and about eight o'clock in the evening of the sth January I heard the report of a gun come directly from the Lynarsh field, and shortly afterwards I heard a second report in the seine direction. Ten minutes might have elapsed between the two reports. John Turrell proved that he also heard the report of a gun, and likewise heard some person cry out very much. The cries were repeated several times, and at last he went out, and then heard some one call out " Oh dear!" Thd sound came in a direction from the lock. He heard no other sound after the person called out " Oh dear!" Thomas Champion, examined by Mr. CLARKSON—On the night of the sth January I heard the report of a gun, and about five minutes afterwards there was a cry of " Come on." Immediately afterwards I heard a second report. _ _ _ Joseph Head re-called—The deceased had persons under him called watchers, whose duty it was at night to watch these preserves. By Mr, CHARNOCK—The deceased was taller and stouter than the prisoner, but I cannot say whether he was a stronger man. John Burl, examined by Mr. LocKE—I know the pri soner, and have frequently had conversations with him. About a twelvemonth ago he told me that he would never be taken by any one man. Cross-examined—l don't know what we were talking about which led to the observation, nor whether it was a year and half or two years ago. Charles Jenkins re-called-LI am the inspector of po lice stationed at Shere, near Guildford. On Saturday, the 6th January, in consequence of what I had heard I went to Bromley, and from thence to a place called Run Common, where I found the prisoner working for a per son named Tickner, and took him into custody. I con veyed him to the Jolly Farmer at Bromley, and left him in charge of a parish constable while I searched the pri soner's house. I found in his house a short smock frock with spots of blood upon it, and which appeared to have been partly washed and hung to the fire to dry. The blood was upon the breast and upon both sleeves. I took the frock back to the prisoner, and he told me, in answer to a question I put to him, that it was his own frock. I then told the prisoner I should take him on suspicion of the murder of the keeper, and he replied " Thank God, I am innocent" Shortly after this I searched the prisoner. and found a powder-horn and a clasp knife in his pockets. I next examined the pri soner's person, but could not discover any bruises or other marks of violence. I made a further search at the house of the prisoner the next day, and found a large quantity of chisels, planes, and tools of every description. William Biddlecomb, examined by Mr. LOCKE—I am chief constable of Godalming, and accompanied the last witness, when he searched the prisoner's house. I examined the prisoner's arms, chest, legs, and head, and found no mark of violence on any part of his per son. I subsequently searched the prisoner's cottage, and in the grate in the bed-room I found a shirt covered over with old rags. The shirt was torn in the breast, and there were marks of blood on that part, and also on the left wristband. The right wristband appeared as though it bad been in dirty water and afterwards dried. I searched the prisoner's wood-house, and found the coat which I now produce. It was wet, and in the pocket there were some pheasant's feathers. I also found two guns, and part" of another gun. In the prisoner's house I also found the greater part of a leg of mutton, a piece of pork in salt, and also some butter. Cross-examined—The right cuff of the jacket appears to be very much torn. It is also torn under the arm. Charles Hollington, examined byMr. CLARKSON—I am inspector of the police at Guildford, The prisoner was given into my custody about 10- o'clock at night, on. a Saturday the 6th, and the next day, in consequence of communication I received, I went to the police station to see the prisoner. He told me he wanted to ask a favour. I said if it related to the charge against him, I must caution him that what he said must be taken down, and would be used against him at a future time. He told me that it did not relate to the charge, but that he de sired to see Mr. Pitman, the clergy man of Stratford parish, and I promised to endeavour to do what he wished. On the Monday morning I again saw the pri soner, and he told me he wished to say something. I said he had better wait till the inspector who took him in charge came: He said that he could not wait, adding that he wished to relieve his mind. At this time he ap peared very feeble and dejected, and scarcely able to support himself. I then took down in writing the following statement from the prisoner's mouth:— " On Friday evening I went home and took supper, but on entering the door I saw my son eating some victuals. I said to him, Where are you going to Bill?' He said, lam going to the raffle.' I said, ' What is the use of your going to the raffle?' He replied, James Shurlock is going to give me a pint of beer, father; will you come down and take a part of it? I told him that I would as soon as I had eat my supper. I went down as soon as I had eat my supper, and took part of a pint of beer, and called for another; and after that me and my son went home together, and my son had something to eat and went to bed. When he was gone I said to my wife, 'Oh, how hard it is for us to be in such distress ; we have neither butter, nor cheese, nor sugar,' and whether she had any tea I am not certain, for , when we were at supper we had but a piece of bread each of us, with a little tea without sugar or milk, and as I had spent the twopence for the beer, we were quite destitute. It hurt my feelings; so I said to my wife, will go and get a bird or two if I possibly can, for I cannot bear to see us in such distress.' And I took the gun and went and shot a brace of birds, and I thought if I could get sale for them it would get a little tea and sugar. 1 came away from the preserves directly, hoping that I should return safe, but when I got to the river side I saw the keeper coming towards me. I stood on one side behind a furze bush ; but he saw me and said, you, I've got you now.' He appeared to me to be a little the worse for drink. He put up his stick and tried to strike me, saying your eyes, I'll kill you.' I replied, Don't do that, good man ;' and as he was going to strike me, I jumped in and threw him down. He got up again and used the same expressions. threw him down again, and he held me and repeated the third time, I will kill you.' I then said to him, W e w ill fi g h t, life for life.' He replied, I will,' and directly he got up, he struck at me with his stick and I warded off the blow with my gun. I then struck him with the butt end of the gun ; and as near as I can tell, it was near the side of the temple. He rose again, and I saw the blood running down his face. Ho seemed fully bent to come at me again'; and I struck him again with the butt end of the gun, and he fell down. Whether I struck him once or twice afterwards I am not certain ; but the last time I struck him on the ground, he rolled into the river. I then went away and left him, and saw him no more. I then went home, and my wife said to me, Have you got any thing ?' I showed her what I had got, and she said, Whatever shall we do with them.' I said, I don't know,' I could not say anything more to her then, but went to bed. She hung my wet clothes to dry by the fire, and got up the next morning and brought them to me. (Signed) " JAMES ELSLEY." Examination continued—ln consequence of what the prisoner said, I went, on the Monday evening, to hls cottage, at Bromley, and saw a bee-hive that was in his garden, and I there found two hen pheasants. The prisoner had told me where to find them. They ap peared to have been shot. Cross-examined—l asked the prisoner to sign the statement, and he did so very readily. — Mr. C. J. Woods examined by Mr. CLARKSON—I am one of the Coroners for this county, and I remember upon the occasion of the inquest being held on the body of the deceased, that the witness Hollington tendered his statement, and when it was read over he said he wished to abide by it iA every respect. Thomas Punter examined by Mr. Loess-1 remem ber last winter hearing the prisoner say he would do for Edwards some day or other if he had a chance. Cross-examined—Did not know what he meant by it, or who else was present when it was said. Could not say when he first mentioned the conversation having taken place. James Douglas examined by Mr. CLARKSON—I am a labourer, but I am not in any regular service. I was placed to watch the prisoner in the station-house at Guildford; and on the Sunday morning the prisoner made a statement to me. I did not mention that state ment to any one until last Tuesday night, when I dis closed it to inspector Hollington. The prisoner said to me, lam so full I cannot bear it any longer. He then knelt down on his knees, and .said he hoped the Lord would forgive him, and protect his wife and family. The prisoner then said, that he saw a man coming over the lock, but did not know who it was at the time, and that he ran back into the furze bushes, and as he was doing so, he looked back and saw it was the keeper, and if he had kept on running he would have just got into the cover out of his Way ; but as it was he got into the furze thinking he would pass him. Edwards, however, he said saw him and said "-- you, I've got you, I will kill you;" and he replied, " don't do that good man." Ed wards again said that he would, and as soon as he said so, he (prisoner) paid into him, took him round the waist, and threw him on his back. Edwards got up, and they struggled, and both fell to the ground, and were struggling together for a minute - or two, when Edwards again said, " you, I'll kill you." He then said .to him, "If that's what you mean, Jem, we will fight life for life." Edwards then asked him to let him get up, and, as soon as he had done so, he came at him with a stick, and he' hit him down with the butt-end of The gun, and he laid on the ground' for several minutes. I (the witness) told him that he might then have ran away, but he said that he could not go away from the spot, and he felt deter mined to finish him. The prisoner went on to say that, after a little time, the deceased came at him again, and they continued to fight nearer and nearer to the canal, and the deceased fell down near the canal, and he (pri soner) put up his foot and poked him in, and went away and left him. Cross-examined—Believes this was all that took place► Did not put it down in writing, and should not have mentioned it when he did, if he had not been asked the question. He sometimes acted as assistant to the police, sometimes as a gaoler, and did any job in a fair way. He was formerly a publican, and then took to being an assistant to the police. _ He was not whitewashed. By the Courai—l did not at first think there was any material difference between the prisoner's statement to me, and the one he made to the inspector. Mr. John Ray examined by Mr. LOCKE—I am a sur geon, and reside at Bromley. By the direction of the coroner, I made a post mor tem examination of the de ceased. I observed many lacerated wounds upon the head and face, and no less than twelve on the right side. There were also the same number on the left side. There was a wound upoa the nose which exposed the bone. The principal wound was over the right ear, and this was three inches long, and three broad. The temporal bone and the jaw bone were both fractured, and pro bably at one time by the blow of some heavy instrument. At first I thought there were traces of a gnn-shot wound, but I did not discover any shot. The skull was fractured, and laid bare in several places. The deceased died of aneurism of the brain, which would have caused instant insensibility, and almost immediate death. The jugular vein was severed, as was also the carotid artery. Witness was shown some blood upon the ground, which be had no doubt flowed from the jugular vein. It would be totally impossible for a person who had lost such a quantity of blood as must have been lost in this case, to have risen from f the ground. By Mr. Cnikalloca.—All these injuries were such as might be produced by two men fighting with a gun and a stick. By Mr. CLARRSON—There could have been no fighting after the deceased received the blow on the side of his head, which fractured the skull and severed the jugular vein. The skull was completely smashed, and there must have been a number of blows struck upon both sides of the head. Mr. John Chandler, surgeon, of Guildford, confirmed the testimony given by M r . Ray. By the CoURT—Did not think that suffocation had anything to do with causing the death of the deceased. This was the case for the prosecution. Mr. CHARNoca then addressed the jury for the pri soner, and he commenced by observing that he felt deeply the responsibility that was thrown upon him in having to defend the prisoner upon such a dreadful charge as the one now made against him ; but he trusted he should be able to satisfy the jury that the offence did not amount to murder. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to comment upon the circum stances of the case, and said that it was a melancholy thing that, in order to enable persons in the position of Lord Grantley to enjoy their pleasures, and preserve their game, the lives of the poorer classes wereto be sacrificed, and he expressed his opinion that it would be much better if there were no game, and that such lordly pleasures should be altogether abolished, than that such dreadful cases as the present, and similar ones all over the country, during the present assizes, should have taken place. He then went on to contend that the state ment of the prisoner was the real truth of the transac tion, and that the violence had been done upon the un fortunate deceased under the impression entertained by the prisoner that his own life was in danger, and, under such circumstances, the offence would only amount to manslaughter. Mr. Baron ALDERSON summed up, and went minutely through every portion of the evidence, commenting, in his usual clear and admirable manner, upon 'the more important points, as he proceeded, concluding byleaving the case in the hands of the jury. The jury retired, and, after being absent about twenty minutes, returned into Court, and delivered their verdict, finding the prisoner guilty of Manslaughter. The prisoner was immediately called up for judgment, and the Learned Judge, after observing that the prisoner had reason to be extremely grateful for the lenient view the jury had taken of the case against him, sentenced him to be transported for life. CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Lord Chief Justice DENMAN and a Common Jury.) SKINNER V. SALE.—TRESPASS. This was an action for an alleged trespass and seizure of the goods of the plaintiff. The defendant pleaded Not Guilty as to the trespass, and that the entry into the house was by the leave and license of the plaintiff. Mr. PLATT, who appeared for the plaintiff, stated that the plaintiff was now a pauper, but that he had been a tenant of the defendant. The plaintiff occupied a cot tage at Pain's-hill, of which the defendant was the land lord. The Learned Counsel remarked that the law gave to landlords very great privileges, and it was most im portant that these privileges should not, as in this in stance, be strained too far. Yet here the defendant had taken the opportunity of distraining for rent, on the 4th of January last, in the absence of the plaintiff. Mr. PLATT called the plaintiff's wife's sister, and other witnesses, from whose evidence it appeared, that on the day in question the defendant came to the cottage, took an inventory of the goods, and, although it was a wet, snowy day, turned the woman and her two children out of doors. A distraint was made upon the goods, and a quantity of tools belonging to the plaintiff were also taken away. Mr. THESIGER, for the defendant, suggested that the remark about the privileges of landlords was only meant to influence the minds of the jury. The defen dant, he said, was justified in distraining for the rent due to him, and with respect to turning the plaintiff's wife out of doors, she had stated to a witness that she intended to give up possession the next morning after breakfast. The Learned Counsel called witnesses in support of his statement, but did not prove that any rent was due on the part of the plaintiff. Mr. PLATT, in reply, contended that no answer had been given to the case. All the goods of these poor people had been seized, and the defendant had even made a merit of allowing the poor woman to take her clothes. The Learned Counsel, after again adverting to the inclemency of the season when the plaintiff's wife and her young children were turned out of doors, re marked also upon the fact that the distress had been put in at the time when the plaintiff was absent, and not only had lie been expelled from his home, but his in dustry had been paralysed, in consequence of his tools having been taken from him. Thus he was ruined, and was compelled to sue in forma pauperis. In this coun try, happily, however, a poor man could recover damages for any injustice practised towards him, eve n by th e highest dignitary in the land. Lord DENMAN, in summing up the case, said there was no doubt the house had been entered and the plain tiff s family turned out of doors. This might have been justified if rent had been due, but he did not find any evidence that such was the case. Mr. THESIGER said the plaintiff in his declaration charged that he was a tenant of the defendant. Lord DENMAN said they could not assume that rent was due because there was a possession. As to the al leged leave and license to enter the premises, the wife had no right to give up possession without her hushand's authority. There was no justification for the trespass. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff Damages 151. NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Liverpool, March 26. CROWN SlDE.—(Before Mr. Justice COLTMAN.) Thomas Cashmore, aged 20, was indicted for cutting and wounding Robert Middleton, with intent to do him some grievous bodily harm. Mr. Hulton conducted the prosecution. The prisoner was not defended by Counsel. It appeared that there had been some preiious grudge be tween the parties, and meeting accidentally on the day in question, the prosecutor addressed the prisoner tauntingly by the title of Mister Cashmore. The prisoner being offended at this, addressed to the prosecutor a query, the exact applica tion of which did not appear, namely, " Who killed Isaac Cutts?" The prosecutor, who is a much more powerful man than the prisoner, was much irritated at this, and, seizing the prosecutor by the collar, shook him violently. The prisoner, in return, threw a stone, and then ran into the shop in which he was employed in his trade of joiner. The prosecutor fol lowed and kicked him repeatedly. A struggle ensued between them, which lasted for some little time, and on its ceasing the prosecutor found that he was wounded on the left side, and was — bleeding copiously. The prisoner had then a chise in his hand, but at what time of the contest he had procured it, or whether he had the chisel in his hand when it com menced, did not appear. On the person of the prosecutor being examined, it appeared be had received two wounds, evidently inflicted with the chisel, which had been struck from below upwards. One was just above the hip bone, and the other higher up. They were of a serious nature, and his life was for some time in peril. The prisoner in his defence declared the prosecutor had beaten and kicked him very severely, and that he had struck in self-defence, without reflecting that he had the chisel in his hand. Verdict—Guilty of a common assault. To be imprisoned for six calendar months. Catherine O'Brien, aged thiriy, was indicted for cutting and wounding her husband, John O'Brien. Mr. Whigham conducted the prosecution. It appeared that on the evening in question the prosecutor Was sitting in his house half asleep, leaning his head on his hand. His wife, the prisoner, came in, and he waking np, thought she seemed under the influence of drink, and accused her of being intoxicated. She was at that time cutting some bread with a knife. She retorted his accusation with some irritating words, and the prosecutor finally struck her. A scuffle ensued, when the prosecutor received a wound in the face, extending from the cheek-bone to the corner of the mouth. He now, however, seemed very unwilling to press the charge, and stated it to be his belief that the wound was ac cidentallv inflicted.—Verdict not guilty. The final entry of causes is forty-seven for the Salford list, and ninety-four for the West Derby list. It has been ar ranged that all in the second lists after No. 60, except unde fended causes and special juries, shall be tried before Mr. Justice Coltman, after the criminal business shall have been disposed of. . OXFORD ClRCUlT.—Monmouth, March 26. CROWD COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron PARKE.) James Wynyar d, aged 22, a fellow of extremely forbidding appearance, was charged with maliciously cutting and stab bing James Berry, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm. Mr. Greaves prosecuted ; the prisoner was defended by Mr. Skinner. On the 2d of last September the prisoner and some others were drinking at the Golden Ball, at Monmouth, and after wards sat down to cards ; a dispute arose amongst them, and the prisoner made use of some opprobrious epithets towards the uncle of the prosecutor, which he resented, and a challenge to fight having been given to the prisoner, he struck Berry in the side, who fell with Wynyard upon him, and, while down, the prosecutor received so many severe kicks from the prisoner, that his chest remained black and blue for a month after. The landlordthen interfered, and separated them ; but the prisoner, watching his opportunity, struck at Berry, over the head of his mother, who was sitting at the fire, and with a clasp-knife stabbed him nearly to the heart. Fortunately he recovered, the wound not proving very serious, although at first presenting a dangerous appearance Mr. Skinner called g witness, who gave a somewhat different version of the occurrence; but the . jury-did nut seem to place much reliance on his story. Wynyard was convicted, and sentenced to transportation for fifteen years. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. (YESTERDAY.) MANSION-HOUSE. David Ilearit who has been known as a coffee-stand keeper on London-bridge, was brought before Sir Peter Laurie, charged with having committed a robbery upon a sailor. Ford, the prosecutor, stated that he belonged to the ship Brilliant. now lying in the London Docks, and that, as he was passing over London-bridge, at a very early hour in the morning, he saw the prisoner, and in vited him to have something to drink, a compliment which was at once accepted ; that they walked to a public house in Darkhouse-lane, and there enjoyed some liquor, and that the prosecutor laid his head upon the table at about half-past three o'clock, and fell asleep ; that, while he was reposing, the landlady saw the pri soner's hand slip into the prosecutor's pocket, and that she seized him in a vigorous manner, and with the as sistance of a person whom she called, she opened the clenched fist, and took two half-crowns and some small silver out of it, after which she deposited the thief in the custody of a policeman. In the prisoner's posses sion were also found two books, which were the prose cutor's property. A boy named Plummer stated that he saw the prispner draw a watch from the prosecutor's pocket, but as there was a guard chain to it, the fellow failed.in disengaging it. The witness said he had himself something more to make complaint of against the prisoner. A few nights ago he had gone to the theatre, and having been de tained till a late hour, he asked the prisoner, who was on London Bridge, to accommodate him by letting him know where he could get a bed. The prisoner offered to take him home to his own house ; and thither they went, and the prosecutor, after having treated his host, retired to bed. At six in the morning, however, the prosecutor was surprised at the entrance of the prisoner, who threatened to hand him over to the custody of a police man who was waiting below, if he did not consent to fork out two shillings. Sir PETER LAURIE said he was astonished that the police should allow a man who must, as was apparent from the statements just made, be known to be a bad character to have the privilege of standing on London Bridge. The prisoner was then remanded. Two common girls of the town, named Elizabeth Boswell and Mary Reid, were brought up, charged with having been concerned with another girl in robbing a young female, aged about fourteen years, named Susan Furr. In the course of the examination Sir Peter Laurie found that there was ground for supposing that a plan had been made to entice the little girl into a house of ill-fame in the notorious vicinity of Wentworth-street, and that, if it had not been for the interposition of a decent and humane woman named Ann Kean, the poor child would, in all probability, have been ruined. Susan Furr had, it appeared, from a long statement made in an unmethodical manner, been living with a young lady at a house in Clerkenwell, and was employed in making artificial flowers. The lady had occasion to leave town, and the little girl, having obtained an ad mission for two to the City of London Theatre, was ob. served in conversation with the prisoners, to whom she offered the orders. It afterwards appeared that she went home, made up all her clothes in two bundles, and put them into the possession of a girl who was known to be the companion of the prisoners, but who decamped with the property. The prisoners, who had tak en a room in Wentworth-street for the accommodation of Susan Furr and themselves, were, after the disappear ance of the thief, taken into custody, and they stated that the little girl had applied to them to help her to a lodging, and ageed to pay the expenses arising from the accommodation which they provided in the above-men oned street! Sir PETER LAURIE said that the robbery was nothing in comparison with the awful danger into which the child was near falling. He knew that girls of the town were regularly employed in decoying the innocent and inexperienced of their sex, and such emissaries were in finitely more to be dreaded than even the person to whom the victims were betrayed. There was no offenco which he was disposed to punish more severely than the diabolical one of being in any way instrumental in the ruin of female innocence, and he wished to impress upon the police the obligation they were under to give all the protection they could afford to poor young females who were exposed to the industrious villainy of the women he alluded to. The escape of Susan Purr was, in Sir Peter Laurie's view, attributable to Ann Kean, who gave the alarm to the police, and acted in sueh a manner as entitled her to very high commendation. The little girl, whose father is dead, and whose mother's intellect has been affected by the calamities of her family, became an object of much interest, and Sir Peter Laurie stated to her aunt, who was in attendance at the police-room, that he should use his influence to gain admission for her into one of the great institutions of the metropolis. The two prisoners, as there was no evidence against them calculated to show that they had done any mis chief to the child, were discharged, upon their promise to appear, if required to be present, upon the apprehen sion of the female who stole the bundles. ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR. Lord DINORBEN presented a petition against the union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor. Lord KENYON presented a similar petition from the University of Oxford. The Earl of ROSEBERY presented a petition from several dissenting congregations in the town of Birming ham against the Dissenters' Property Bill, stating that it was likely to be attended with most injurious effects. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. The Duke of WELLINGTON gave notice that on Tuesday next he would move that the House, at its rising do adjourn to the 16th instant. IRELAND -THE STATE TRIALS. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said that in pre senting the petition, of which he had given notice for to-morrow, he would not offer any other observations, or raise any discussion on the state of Ireland. He was induced to take this course for two reasons. The first was, that he was anxious to know what was the Govern ment plan relating to the municipal and electoral franchise, a measure on which subject they expressed their inten tion to bring in. He thought that this plan would be submitted that evening in the other House of Parliament ; but in consequence of the state of public business there, it was not likely it would be brought forward that night. Lord BROUGHAM—The state of public business there is, that there is no House.—(Laughter.) The Marquis of CLANRICARDE —That was one reason, but another and much more serious reason for his coming to the decision which he had was, that the pe tition alluded to the administration of justice in Ireland upon which he certainly would feel himself Called on to make some observations. It would be quite impossible for him to do so without adverting to the recent trials which had taken place in Dublin. There was every reason to suppose that some proceedings connected with those trials would come before the House in its judicial capacity. Therefore, to dis cuss the question at the present time would be highly improper, because his Noble and Learned Friends on either side of the House would be quite disabled from offering any opinion on the subject. He would therefore present the petition to-morrow, without offering any observations on it, but would give notice that he would call the attention of the House to the pe tition immediately after Easter, and would probably move that it be referred to a Select Committee. Lord BROUGHAM could not help expressing his concurrence with his Noble Friend, as to what he consi• dered his duty upon that important subject, and he (Lord Brougham) could not but consider that the same principle would apply to the motion of which notice had been given by the Noble Marquis near him (Lansdowne). There was tne of two courses open to his Noble Friend. He could adopt the course taken by the Noble Marquis (Clanricarde), and • pos'pone his motion, which he (Lord Brougham) thought would be the better way ; or he could take the other course of having it most distinctly understood, that there was not one word to be introduced into the discussion to-morrow which could in any way affect the pending law proceed ings, or relative to the present aspect of affairs in Ire land. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE entirely concurred in the propriety of not entering into a general discus sion on the state of Ireland ; but he could not agree as to the expediency of putting off his motion with respect to the challenging of jurors. In answer to a question which had been put to him (the Mar quis of Lansdowne) in that House when he had given this notice of motion, he had stated his inten tion was not at all to interfere with any proceedings that had taken place in the late State trials, but to have a prospective inquiry as to the course to be taken by the Government for the future in Ireland with respect to the challenging the jurors. His motion was grounded solely upon the expediency of making known the in structions given by the Government to the officers of the Crown in Ireland for their future guidance. He should, therefore, allow his motion to remain, on the under standing that there should be no reference to the conduct of the Government in the late trials. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the result of the motion of the Noble Marquis would be, that their Lordships would be informed that the course which had been adopted by the present Attorney-General had been precisely the same which had been adopted by his pre decessors, and he had no doubt but that such a statement would be satisfactory to the Noble Marquis. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was confirmed in his resolution of bringing forward his motion to-morrow by what had just fallen from the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack. Nothing could be more beneficial to the Government, or give greater satisfaction to the country than the announcement that such was the inten tion of the Government as to the challenging of jurors. Lord BROUGHAM would only add, that if his Noble Friend thought that he (Lord Brougham) was to be precluded from giving his opinion on the whole sub ject, if it should be submitted to their Lordships, he would find he was msstaken. If any Noble Lord, in the course .of the discussion, should allude at all to the conduct of the Government in the late prosecution, or to the conduct of the Court before which the cause was tried, he should feel it to be his dut7 to give his clear opinion upon the subject. If that subject were once gone into it would be impossible for any one to say where the debate would end. Lord WHARNCLIFFE was understood to say that there would be no ohjection to the production of the papers. The Marquis LANSDOWN said that his motion would not go to the inculpation of the Court before which the late trials had taken place. Lord CAMPBELL understood that it was agreed that during the discussion there should be no allusion to the late trials, because that subject would be brought judicially before their Lordships by writ of error. His own opinion was that the discussion could not be en tered on with advantage. There would be great difficulty in separating the legal from the constitutional question. It was much more expedient, in his opinion, that even now they should no further refer to the more difficult and delicate question which must, from what he had heard, sooner or later come before them. Let it not, however, be imagined that because he (Lord Campbell) and others abstained from giving any opinions upon the subject now or to-morrow--that they admitted ' the recent proceedings to be constitutional, or that they in any way sanctioned the conduct of her Majesty's Go vernment. ECCLESIASTICAL_ COURTS BILL. On the motion that the Report on this Bill be brought up, The Marquis of NORMANBY said he must take that opportunity of strongly expressing his dissent from the principle of this Bill, and also from the grounds on which it had been proposed. He did not know why the discussion of such a Bill should be - left solely to the Noble and Learned Lords in that House ; and having attentively listened to every word which had been uttered CLERKENWELL. A young man, named John Smith, rather genteelly attired, was charged with attempting to commit nume rous - frauds on housekeepers. It appeared from the evidence that the prisoner has been for some time in thehabit of visiting houses which have lodging bills in the windows, on pretence of taking apartments. The rooms shown to him invariably suited his taste, and so anxious was he to conclude the bargain that he always insisted :on leaving a deposit. For this purpose he drew forth a sovereign or half a sovereign (he never had any small change), expressed a wish to leave five shillings as a guarantee for his return, and having, obtained the change, walked away, leaving the landlady quite pleased with the punctuality of her new lodger. Failing to come, however, on the day ap pointed, the lodger was suspected, and the deposit, on examination, turned out to be a counterfeit. On the pre vious evening he went into the coffee-shop of Mr. Hitchin, 15, Colonnade, Russell-square, and asked for a pork pie; which was supplied him. In payment he threw down half-a-crown, a genuine one ; the change was laid on the counter, but whilst the landlord was engaged in other matters, the prisoner put ono of the two:shillings in his pocket, and left a bad one in its place. He then re membered that he had a penny, which he wished to pay for the pie and get back his half-crown. The landlord, however, discovered the fraud, and upon charging the prisoner with it, he instantly swallowed the base shil ling, and then in a daring manne )11 ill dandlord and police at defiance.—The prisoner was remanded. DARING ROBBERY.--Two women of the town, named Reeves and Holland, were charged with robbing Mr. Briggs, an artist, residing in Moorgate-street, of a gold watch. The prosecutor was returning from a dinner party last night along Holborn, between 12 and 1 o'clock, when he was accosted by the prisoners. They asked him to treat them, which he refused. When he entered Gray's inn -lane, one of them pushed him into Fox-court, the other threw her arms round his breast ; he shouted po lice, and a constable, 35 G, came up. They were secured, and Mr. Briggs then found that his watch had been removed, and that his gold chain had been cut or broken. Every search was matl for the watch, but it i could not be found, and it s believed that the prisoners threw it away when they saw the officers coming up. Mr. Briggs was perfectly sober. The prisoners, who did not deny the charge, were re manded. Sixty postage stamps have been rece i ve d b y M r . Combe, the sitting Magistrate at this Court, for the re lief of Mary Anne Hartwell, whose case appeared The Sun about a week ago. The benevolent donor re quested that the receipt of the stamps might be ac knowledged in The Sun, as from H. C. E. S. Our Reporter has been requested to state, that whe the period of her imprisonment had transpired, Baylis , the messenger of this Court, by direction of the Magis trate, conveyed her to an asylum, in accordance wit h. the wish she expressed on her trial. She, however ; re - fused to enter the asylum; and there i s too much reaso to believe that she has again resumed the same profli - gate course of life which, on her examination, she seemed so determined to abandon. The stamps lie at the Police -court, and will be re turned to the donor, if he wish, or applied to the gene ral purposes of the poor-box. The admirers of Fornasari will regret to hear that he is now suffering so severely from water on the chest as t o prevent his singing; and it is in contemplation to send fo r ramburini, who will shortly be in Paris. _ _ _ Mr. Higham, Secretary and Comptroller-General to th e Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, had an interview with the Chancellor of the Exchequer yesterda y at his official residence in Dowsing-stree • We are gratified to be able to state that the sub seription for the widow and children of the late Chief Office r of Police is going on well. The amount up to last night wa s about 600/., independently of a sum of 500/., which th e commissioners voted at a special meeting last night. Th e barristers present at the late assizes contributed nearly 40/. to the fund.—Brighton Gazette.