The Sun. — London, England, 1844-01-26 00:00:00

tlitrb Xtittton ~I M lies s of I in rid. hilst tate ;y of i to with the wed fiber the sign 0 to cted na- 'roni mild iced y be and Ince e to able ille ided 3U9- fore thie IA ould eted ured was had g , on he i be ion* 'ate for We be 'log uc- Iver of big of •~ .- 'r,. , ,_ SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock. TIM WILL FORGERIES. N ANSION-HOUSE.-(THIS DAY.) 4-EXAMINATION OF BARBER, FLETCHER, AND Three o ' MRS. DOREY. oek this afternon was e hour fixed for the re- !lamination) of the persons charged with :the commission of wate4:eforgeries. A s soon as t h e d oors were opene d, t h e C our t „,crowded i n every part. , a lr• Clark son attended to conduct the prosecution; Mr. _ nynbe rs appeared for Barber; Mr. Ballantyne for Fletcher ; and Alt 'Wilkins for Mrs. benDorey th,,A ree o'clock ptieeisely the Lord Mayor took his seat on pi ;ch, and the prisoners, )lies. Henry Barber, Joshua t od e ` e _ . ",er, and Georg T he Dey were brought up in the . cuhs dapt the Foresters. male prisoners were plaeed in t e 14 1 l e the female was accommo d a t e d with a chair at the table ! diately below the bar. V_rr•eCalark,on—Let Griffin also be put to the bar. Frester —lle is not here yet, Sir ;he is gone for. eautl,wards of half an hour elased, however, before Griffin tir il . i?'s appearance, when he . was placed in'the dock Wilkins expressed a desire that Mr. Weare, the clerk of is .re shfield, shuuld leave the Court, so as to be out of Iseu lt!, unless the counsel for the prosecution would pledge them. that he was no to be examined as a witness. Ili' C larkson—l shall not pledge myself. s,,r• Wilkins—Then I desire he may leave the Courf. nth tilt'. Clarkson (after consulting Mr. Freshfield)—l shall not Weare. Wilkins—,Do you pledge yourself that Mr. Weare shall aftcheeparlirseodot a ? witness, either here or elsewhere , against any tilt'. Clarks on —l w ill not pledge myself to that. t ,r• Wilki ns —Th en I demand of you, my Lord Mayor, that pout(' be ordered to leave the .Court. t,r• Clarkson—Alr Wearer is the managing clerk of Mr. s to esn field.n this prosecution, and it may perhaps, although I th b „ 4 : 3t ?ware that it will be, but it may be necessary to io,:ne him, but surely that is no reason for turning the hurt o - who has assisted in managing these prosecutions out f • t o asr • Wilkins appealed to the Lord Mayor's justice ki desire Mr• `Ware to leave the Court, and to s et Weare 's sense of decency to do so. If he had %Z e n misinformed, Mr. Weare , s zeal in behalf of it le r °s. ecutien, had outrun his discretion, and he therefore , if sit I ntended, eithe r here or elsewhere, to examine him as a leavens against any of the prisoners, requested that he should the Court. The h 'a Loan Alsvroa (to Mr. Clarkson)—You do not intend „ rall himhere? The kslarkson—N o , my Lord. Loan MAYOR—Then I cannot see any necessity for his -..rTg the Court.. p t. Ze following witnesses were then . called . 11 e , Hawkes—ln 1840 I lived in Little Guildford-street, 1 „," *L I - square. I knew Mrs. Dorey ac Miss Richards. ss ee "" then an embroideress. I had lodged in the gh - „ e nquse with her and her mother in Berwick-street, 'all 'on me in the summer of 1840, and said I have to i;" to ask a favour f asked what She said, lis ett av e some lett ers o in y my . name to a Mr. Jones. I then iseti a t, 2 4, Little Guildford-street. I said I had no A llis " b • Shortly after that, •one letter came addressed to to na me of Jones, 24, Guildford-street. It was addressed 1,1,,,ke for Mr. Jones. I took it to Mr. Wybrow's, where th r was requested. Ile is a seller of music in Rathbone- e I left i t i n t h e s h op f or Mi ss Ri c h ar d s . Sh e t o ld me ker_ let ters related to some property, that I used to hear j a r° °ther talk about . No tt ' e „Ph Cookson—l • am one of the constables of Burton soa, '4lnher. I marr i e d a sister of the prisoner Fletcher, s h ave known him ft'om childhood. I had a son named Robert. tal o b., 4l ßurton i n 1839. My son Robert was a sailor. I was by Fletcher in June, 1839, to purchase a vessel for St VI Caine to Burton on the 13th or 14th of June. k r ' '''°llantyne asked to which charge the evidence applied ? C larkson—To all. !al ~;Pallantyne Then I object to it. I object to any gene %lee:mance, and — I ask under what charge Mr. Fletcher is It nosy examined ? 'tau • ei, C hambers also desired to know if the first charges were ti,,~e subject of inquiry, or if they were closed. the' Clarkson was giving evidence upon all the charges, and le teserPort of this evidence was to show that Fletcher was h t tg p• r eparations at that time for what he had done subs Velttl ls et kli h • ambers did not object to the adoption of thatcourse•— trasteZas anxious for was to prevent any prejudice from being Al e. saallantyne still objected, but ° Loo n Mayon decided to admit the testimony. tho4 l. e Clarkson' (to witness)—Did he say anything to you gettin g money? sabir• Ballantine objected to the question, as irrelevant to the toies e t tinder discussion ; and called for the decision of the t h :m . aYor o n the subject. Th Clarkson replied ; and tz e LO AD MAYou decided that the question might be put. ki t !lamination resumed—He said he was making money very atoloYu l mating out unclaimed dividends. I said, But , Sir , the .„ not afraid you should be overtaken He sai.d, But, ` - ``,„, ie s . .areidead, there is no fear whatever. I said, B ‘eres s- L•P°se you should be overtaken ? Oh, he said, send . you „ /t hot s — h: s eas• He mentioned the 'Ames of two parties for had got them, but one party is dead, and the other is b llie sa - ' custody, and I do not think :it desirable to name fte 11. 1 . 1 ' ° w• I have not had advice, but I think not. a• -0 told Me f M' Richards that he had got money for, i te it was only a e m e i s s u s m 200/. or 300/. Miss Richards ] aid her money se out in fancy goods and kept a stall in t ider ii ntn eon- He said the money came from unclaimed di }1144,1) and that he and his rogue of an attorney shared the o ' e r" - -that is the person not in custody yet. He said he had to e t - u a :t law with the Bank of England. That he advanced 350/. Pr op ",. ° , l nan to proceed against the Bank, because she had not lii ° e' ‘ i'Y to go to law with, he advanced the money to get it, Ai la '°,.gut it. I had at that time a daughter named Mary inci t 6 he was then living at Liverpool or Leeds. She was kft e , ed , up to London by him, and she came up. That was ot i ' nts visit to Burton. I think I have stated all that passed I "n 3 s .. ubject i o n f e un_c y laimed dividends. d Mr. Chambers—He did not mention the h t t° o l f e a x ny person who is in custody except Miss Richards. 01"". Ch bers—Can you write down the name of the rogue ) 4 4 1 1 attorney, who is not in custody, and hand it to the Lord Lf r or? Witness—l can if it be desired. • Chambers submitted that it should be done, which wasit~ i tl ed t o b y .Mr. Clarkson and the Lord Mayor. Wa r r. Chambers—Can you also write down the names and ki at esses of those other parties ? Yes, Sir. I have not seen %i nne• These communications were made at different ge e. ' „ during the three or four days he was at my house. tis ee t4 'd nothing about continuing or discounting such prac- Sses He did not . tell me how his rogue of an attorney hit>rthe plunder, nor did he enter into any particulars as to t /sr s • X e ol proceeding. The names of the other three parties trai ; ' - '°se of persons for whom he had got dividends. My ilo t , 4 1 : 1 1 the island of Sicily I was sent for to come to Lon tarri:u°ot a week ago. I -- cv . as in town on Monday. I had 11 on the preceding Friday. 11141.2.14 r• I 3 allantine—l live at No. 1, Hay-street, Burton-on 'tso er, and have been a constable since 1836. I lived 'Prop °- rars at Liverpool with my son. I did not "ntnri,„e to come up here myself. I received a 11. cation to come up on Wednesday week. That k l, i l i k , k e ,° o sequence of a communication I had myself "Vnlc• I have no doubt but that I made a communi 'as I wrote up to London, on seeing the advertisement in waoc ll - r i ," , three or tour days before. I went to Messrs. Fresh field, ° he ° L ue _Particulars I have stated. My daughter is here. I ' 4 Yas _ liv ;ng with me when I made the communication. It Itio '4t- ta 'Teets after I saw the advertisement before I wrote up. ''hes4 t e kilns, that there is any reason for my not having done Cs o „„ Pth il el arnined by Mr. Wilkins—l am appointed constable "nship. Ido nothing but constableise. I was . a I) 4j :r .t Barton before I went to Liverpool. I failed in htl i j, pb lSt And my creditors took what there was. I was not e ll :to "P! , nor did I take the benefit of the Act. There was cr t edi r' ll dinir- My landlord . seized . , and_ I . _ aft_er w w a a s rd a s t p L ai i d . a.,. - 11 041. ors %spat I could. I did nothing while 1 se upon part of the money that my l son 14 4 . Bo m . , I had myself. He was in the Liverpoe . - so lt was l'rom 1834 to not 1836 quite. I think I 11;arylebone. It was opposite Great Cross - e he I did net seek to get into any employment. I t lip' 4244. Ing at the Buis, in Leadenhall-street, since I came .1/7,yed .61 4 have seen the gentle,ma .. n . (Mr. Weare) twice. I n as, for • at Barto n for my travelling expenses. It cost me , 0 0 Fttdi rt 4 4 , Ine and my daughter by raillway. was not in Al y 1 Ronda •Mr Freslafield took my examination as t 10 4 r• t t i t es, I, do — Do you expect any money? Witness — Of - 44 W 11 * king,_ You expect to be paid pretty handsomely ? k t il tolyier" W hy for my time. I was a constable at the time °st ilt t _ Batton took place with Mr. Fletcher, and it is about u 11e, e ,,, 4 "t since I first made this communication. 'veli444hiced—lt was the magistrates' clerk of Barton who ed t v A e tne mone to come up. I tr V u rt Cookson— y l am the daughter of the last witness, L w a: i,, • ; t4 18391 came up to see my uncle Fletcher. n g in n Westmoreland - place , Southampton-street. I th,- betweenthree weeks and d a month. After I had A rd s , -r m . ° threeday he poke to me about unclaimed divi e.tteleLe t , hat s he was getting a great deal of money by c,}79 Chvldends. Otid tle ; l4 o l l,e o r n s e l f b t e i g to . d o raw o, you w r ho particular attention to actually had the iin- Vinence to seiz th e " was j ust _ emy cleoTairt, witnesses, that witness is the constable a t ' s eni or __!..lamined. He had written down the names of l at 'ar o,h _di -! had desired him, and when I attempted to look ve seized me by the collar and I thought he would Mr, ` w s s ed _lnl face. th •t tell c r w s°n—Cookson, how is this ? Cookson—l had °tt glit is !" the names to give to the Lord Mayor, and 1 4.2 he ,:et' gentleman had no right to look at them. ea li ,t rea r` coo Pe L T s were then • handed to Mr. Chambers, and he p_s_t a tr s . , clatouti es: lo n t t d o o vv . rit e the addresses of the parties, which he o - ^arti• e k e then recommended Cookson to leave the room. F% Mation resu d.—He said that he had got a great deal t tll ls t e l t ° I11 11 1) . unclaimed dividends, and that he had got it more the•e• I / A person of the name of Tucker frequently came (11, e al 7° said . w ays talked about money after Tucker went away ; a so,would d he would have e, he could get to„,_ y 0 as 1,•"le, • 41 4 asked how it was to be done ? n and he said, of d appear to be another person. I asked him how ; ° that I !Sa y 55 1 ,1 _ and he said it would be by false swear -1 „, w as "e said I should have to kiss the Bible, and i ti oo liah another person that I was not. I told him a s &,*! l e, a nd I should be doing very wrong to kiss the ring a curse upon myself. He said that was quite wos son ,. the flible was a fable, and if I went by that I should hem 1 1 :nid h s aa _ I told him I thought it very wrong, and d that asl kh . would l=ave him to do with it. He said if I would o er 144 . , t il_ha ,. e me, there was money he could get me time ail Ilia, unclaimed dividends were : I asked him, and s he he S i far as 1 can recollect, that it was something , 4, 48 _: inking Fund Commissioners. He mentioned Miss % Mr, 7 1 ,_ Person from whom he had got money. °ld h ask Mr •Clarkson if he were before a judge, kr e Rive • • Al • Cl ai . k no evidence as this? t, certainly should. YOu'irL"--Then I will pledge my reputation as a lawyer s,, t ;rtiel mo s. that no judge would admit it in evidence. It is `,,tn,st th e " oppressive attempt to prejudice the public mind 1 . 4 4 1 -oe,, Pr i ,,, is° ners through the medium of the press. 11, 4 1. W ilkie MAYOR decided that the question might be put. iv , rt he e e L ls o li 3 il r y he tri n a t g h i a st t r i a rLwor ni a s n o , n s . uffering from illness, "Whom do Lorde il i s e . Lox_ accuse you, my Mayor. to hick is scan alavoa—Then, Sir you accuse me of that 4 1 0ke That woman sent for , me, and stated she wished M r twoitikbizi‘slerias_heusnasye m std e, iff a e n r d en l t. refused to hear her, and told appl y l l l 3 atati o n to fir Ti t • Wilkii m tl;oll—Then she states that which is false. %A lt I. osen Hear toe„ tl ittte4i7.:t Y °R---1 will not hear you, Sir. What you altogether false. Mr. Chambers, as Counsel for Mr. Barber, bore his testi timony to the attention with which the Lord Mayor had con ducted the investigation, and the examination was resumed. A laty came to tea with us, and we afterwards went to her house t, tea. He said she was a nice lady ,and a confidential friend c 1 his. Ido not recollect any other occasion when I had a conversation with him about it. There was a shorr4o let in Pimlief', and he endeavoured to take it for me and his daughtcr. Ile said he could put us in there and do a great deal lot us. It was a high-rented shop, but no doubt we could snake it do if w e would try. He was to take it, and we were to pay him at some future time. Miss Fletcher's name was to be over the door. I declined to have the shop. The lady who came to lea and he fre quently talked about the unclaimed dividends. I do not recollect the street we went to to see the lady, except that it was near Oxford-street. We went to see her at a music shop, over which there were in large letters, the " Temple of Apollo." The lady we went to at the shop was called Miss Richards. I never heard her Christian name. I told my uncle frequently 1 could not do that which he had suggested to me. In consequence of that I left his house, for I saw that I was not treated with that familiarity which I had been. Cross-examined by Mr. Ballantine—l have been living with my father at Barton ever since I left Fletcher. By Mr. Chambers—l left Fletcher in December, 1839. He never mentioned to me that he had an attorney who shared the plunder with him. Tucker used constantly to come there. He was short, and had light hair. I never heard where he lived. My father did not communicate to me the conversation he had had with Fletcher before I left to go to London. Tucker used to come at all hours. I never saw any papers prepared by him. He would sometimes stay three or four hours. I never inquired as to his business. I thould know him again if I saw him, I have not been taken to look at any person bearing that name. Mr. Chambers—How many names could you give of parties for whom Fletcher said he had got unclaimed divi dends ? Witness—Three. Two besides the name of Richards. He never gave the addresses. He never said what had be come of the money that he had got. I understood that if I would do as he asked me we were to share-- .. —.— Mr. Clarkson—Among other names that he mentioned did he mention the name of Barber? Witness—He did. Mr. Chambers—That is fairness. After I had ;conducted the cross-examination with the greatest delicacy, the counsel for the prosecution put the name of my client in their mouth. I hope this will go forth to the public as a specimen of the manner in which this prosecution is conducted. It is wrong there is no doubt of it, and let those who are fair decide if it is wrong. —(Cheers. ) Mr. Clarkson—My Learned Friend has elicited the cheers of some persons, and he is welcome to them, but as my Learned Friend had alluded to names in his cross-examination, I had a right to ask for names in my re-examination. Mr. Chambers—l demand that in future proceedings here every witness, except the ene under examination, should be or dered out of Court. Mr. Clarkson—Why did you not do so before ? Mr. Chambers—Because I thought the case would be con ducted with forbearance and without laying traps. Re-examination resumed—He often mentioned Mr. Barber's name to me, but I never saw Mr. Barber. We were to have gone to him once, but we received a note from him. Mr. Chambers —All this ought to have been mentioned before. She might as well have mentioned Barber's name as the name of Richards or Fletcher. I shall demand a right to cross-examine. Mr. Clarkson—You may cross-examine as long as you like. Mr. Wilkins, in order to afford his Learned Friends time to cool--( A laugh )—would take that opportunity of apologising for the wrong which he had been induced to commit by attend ing too implicitly to the instructions which he had received. The Learned Gentleman then, in the handsomest manner, ex pressed his regret fortis warmth. Mr. Ballantine also bore testimony to the kindness and pa tience of the Lord Mayor. The witness then in answer to Mr. Chambers, stated that she had been talking to the attorney's clerk, while her father was being examined, but not on the subject of her evidence. Mr. Freshfield--I am conducting these prosecutions. I have been in the constant receipt of communications from England, Scotland, and Ireland upon this subject, and I think I shall be enabled to produce impartial evidence from Scotland, more particularly in the case of Stuart. Cross-examined by Mr. Chambers—l have not taken any steps to get any of those parties taken into custody who were mentioned by the constable of Barton. I do not think there wr.s any one of them unknown. Mr. Chambers—There is a gentleman we all know, whose name is Tucker. It is not that gentleman.? Witness—No. I may also state that what the witness stated with regard to Mr. Barber did not, in my opinion, afect Mr. Barber at all. Mr. Chambers—That is very kind of you. Mr. Clarkson, -We may go farther, and state that there is reason to believe that the person named Tucker is not an at torney at all. Mr. Clarkson thon applied for a remand, and gave his Learned F. iend notice that he should perhaps have to renew it, and he did this, in order that his Learned Friend might, if he pleased, apply to the Court of Queen's Bench. Mr. Chambers said that, seeing the great probability of this last case going to trial, and that his client's great object was to be restored to his fair fame and character, he thought in his fair, proper, and legal judgment Mr. Barber ought not now to ask to be committed on the first three charges. He had stated at the outset that Mr. Barber had acted only as a profes sional man, and he thought that what had come out this day would tend to his vindication, and would tend to show that throughout he bad only acted as an attorney, although he had acted indiscreetly as an attorney. It therefore became his bounden duty to proceed to watch the evidence adduced; and to express a wish that every name, every new discovery, should be the subject of inquiry, believing that every inquiry would be to prove Mr. Barber's innocence. After hearing Mr. Freshfield's evidence, he would not press for a committal, but would withdraw all opposition to the course which it had been proposed to adopt. He would not object to the further postponement of the case. Mr. Ballantine did not oppose the postponement. Mr. Chambers begged to say, that anything that he might, in the heat of the moment have said that might seem to have cast a reflection on Mr. Freshfield, had been completely soft ened down by the candid explanation which Mr. Freshfield had made, that what had been stated by the last witness did not, in his opinion, operate to the prejudice of Mr. Barber. He expressed his regret fur what he had been induced to say in the heat of the moment. The case was adjourned to Friday next, at eleven. THE LONDON GAZETTE. (THIS EVENING.) DOWNING-STREET, JAN. 24, 1844. The Queen has been pleased to appoint Robert Murray Rum sey, Esq., to be Colonial Secretary and Registrar for the Island of St. Christopher. WAR-OFFICE, Jaw. 24. Ist Dragoon Guards—Lieut. R. A. Moore, from 3d Light Dragoons, to be Lieutenant, vice Hawkes, who exchanges, Jan. 25. _ _ 3d Light Dragoons—Lieut. J. B. Hawkes, from lit Dragoon Guards, to be Lieutenant, vice Moore, who ex changes, Jan. 25 ; Cornet T. Penton to be Lieut. by purchase, vice Montgomery, who retires ; G. W. K. Bruce, Gent., to be Cornet, by purchase, vice Penton, Jan. '26. 7th Regiment of Foot—Capt. J. Lord Elphinstone, from half-pay Royal Staff Corps, to be Captain, vice C. Paget, who exchanges; Lieut. the Hon. W. Pakenham to be Cap tain, by purchase, vice Lord Elphinstone, who retires, Jan. 26. 10th Foot—Assistant-Surgeon J. Macbeth, M.D., from the Staff, to be Assistant- Surgeon, vice Tongue, deceased, Jan. 26. 18th Foot—Lieutenant J. W. Graves to be Captain, without purchase, vice Brevet-Major Largent, who retires upon full. pay, Jan. 26 ; Ensign F. Lillie to be Lieutenant, without pur chase, vice Venour, deceased, Sept. 14, 1843; R. Doran, Gent. to be Ensign, vice Lillie, Jan. '26. 21st Foot—Assistant-Surgeon C. Hart, M.D., from 47th Foot, to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Laing, appointed to 3d Light Dragoons. Jan. 26. 34th Foot—Lieut. J. Simpson to be Captain, by purchase, vice Duff, who retires ; Ensign W. L. Talbot to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Simpson; W. Warry, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Talbot, Jan. 26. 40th Foot—C. Roberts, Gent., to be Ensign, without pur• chase, vice Woodward, deceased, Jan. 2d. 48th Foot—R. P. Johnston, Gent., to be Ensign, without purchase. vice Pitt, promoted in the 57111 Foot, Jan. 26. 50th Foot—Lieut.-Gen. Sir J. Gardiner, K. C. 8., from 61st Fcot, to be Colonel, vice Lieut.-Gen. Sir H. Lowe, K. C. 8., deceased. Jan. 26. ----- 61st Foot—Major-General Sir J. Dickson, K.C.8., to be Colonel, vice Sir J. Gardiner, K.C.8., appointed to the 50th Foot, Jan. 20; Capt. E. R. Buller, from half-pay Unattached, to be Captain, vice R. Gloster, who exchanges ; Lieut. F. J. Stephens to be Captain, by purchase, vice Buller, who retires, Jan. 26. Ensign W. E. D. Deacon to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Stephens ; W. S. Greatheed, Gent., to be Ensign, vice Deacon, Jan. 26. 63d Foot—Captain T. Hamilton, from half-pay 27th Foot, to be Captain, vice J. Foulston, who exchanges ; Lieut. T. Harries, to be Captain, by purchase, vice Hamilton, who re tires ; Ensign R. P. Ford to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Harries ; G. Woodyatt, Gent., to be Eusign, by purchase, vice Ford, Jan. 26. 96th Foot—J. W. Preston, Gent., to be Ensign, without purchase, vice Grant, promoted in the 57th Foot, Jan. 26. 78th Foot—Assistant-Surgeon D. R. M'Kinnon, from the 2d West India Regiment, to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Mit chell, promoted in the 7th Foot, Jan. 26. 97th Foot—Assistant-Surgeon W. Braybrooke, from the 30th Footh, to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Wardrop, appointed to the 7th Light Dragoons, Jan. 29. Ceylon Rifle Regiment—Major S. Braybrooke to be Lieu tenant-Colonel, without purchase, vice Anderson, who retires upon full-pay ; Brevet-Major G. A. Tranchell to be Major, vice Braybrooke Lieutenant C. Warburton to be Captain, vice Tranchell ; Second-Lieutenant W. \Verge to be First- Lieutenant, vice Warburton ; F. A. Walter, Gent., to be Second. Lieutenant, vice Werge, Jan. 26. BREVETC—Capt. T. Hamilton, of the 63d Foot, to be Major in the army, July 22, 1830; Capt. J. P. Ripley, of the Ist European Regiment of Bengal Light Infantry, to be Major in the army in the East Indies, Jan. '26. COURT OF EXCHEQUER. Hilary Term.— Sever th Victoria.—Jan. 26. This Court will, on Saturday, the 3d day of February next, and on Monday the sth, Tuesday the 6th, Wednesday the 7th, Thursday the Bth, Friday the 9th, and Saturday the 10th, hold Sittings, and will proceed in disposing of the business pending in the new trial and special papers.—BY THE COURT. THE SUN, LOYDON, Vit. DAY EV BANKRUPTS. RICHARD TEBAY, plumber, Winchester, to surrender Feb. 22, at half-past twelve, and March 8, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee, Basinghall-street ; Finch and Neate, Lincoln's Inn-fields. MARSHALL BESWICK, wine-merchant, Norwich, Feb. 2, at half-past one, and March 8, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell, official assignee; Shearmau, Tri nity-place, Charing-cross. JOHN ROLFE, coal merchant, Uxbridge, Feb. 2, at half past eleven, and March 5, at half-past twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Groom, official assignee, Abchurch-lane ; Sleap, Middle Temple-lane, London. WILLIAM EVANS, miller, Borthwen, Merionethshire, Feb. 7, and March 7, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court. Bird, official assignee, Liverpool ; Lowe, Sweeting, and Byrne, Southampton-buildings, Chmcery-lane, London ; 'Jones, Dolgelly ; Curry, Statham, and Horner, Liverpool. JOHN RUSHTON, jun., livery-stablekeeper, Nottingham, Feb. 6, at half-past twelve, and March 5, at one, at the Bir mingham District Court. Christie, official assignee, Birming ham ; Brewster, Nottingham ; Smith, Birmingham. GEORGE IIORGAN, currier, Gloucester, Feb. 1, at twelve, and March 14, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court. Miller, official assignee, Bristol; Lovegrove, Gloucester. JOSEPH WILSON, linen manufacturer, Newcastle.upon and March 18, at one, at Newcastle v u Court. Baker, official assignee, T p y o n n e :T F y e n b e . u 7 , s at District el t en ' e Newcas tle-upon-Tyne; Plumptre, Temple ; Cram, Newcastle-upon- Tyne. JOHN FOTHERGILL, sen., apothecary, Selby, York shire, Feb. 6 and 27, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Hope, official assignee, Leeds ; Edwards and Co., Ely-place, London ; Haigh, Selby ; War d and Son, Leeds. HENRY HITCHIN, ironmonger, Halifax, Feb.' 12, and March 11, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Young, official assignee, Leeds; Slanry, Birmingham ; Bloome and Gatliff, Leeds. FIRST NOTICES. C. Coltson, wine merchant, Grosvenor-place, Kennington. J. Stott, druggist, Littleborough, Lancashire. C. Parsonage, retail butcher, Kirkdale, Lancashire. J. Lewis, tailor, Barford, Norfolk. M. Williams, publican, Pontypool, Monmouthshire. J. B. Fuller, attorney, Tenbury, Worcestershire. I'. B. Goode, attorney, Somers'..town. G. Perry, retailer of beer, Bilston, Staffordshire. H. Da! bey, tailor, Porchester-road, Bayswater. W. Kirrage, asphalte manufacturer, Norwich. W. Downing, leather dealer, Cleckheaton, Yorkshire. R. Crosby, linen-draper, Redcar, Yorkshire. W. Turner, plasterer, Ilalifax. T. H. Capes, attorney, Reedness, Yorkshire, J. Cornish, railway-contractor, Sheffield. J. V. Penfold, attorney's-clerk, York-row, Lambeth. T. Thompson, chemist, Harwich. J. Middlemass, carpenter, Tynemouth, Northumberland. J. Jones, broker, Liverpool. J. Smith, retail provision dealer, Wigan, Lancashire. C. Darcy, cow keeper, Charlotte-mews, Bloomsbury. J. Sabine, surgeon, Great Yarmouth, Norfolk. W. Alortlock, tailor, Essex-street, Strand. T. Bartlett, cabinet-maker, Cheapside. J. Sharp, cloth finisher, Marsh, Yorkshire. J. Cox, clerk, Broadley-terrace, St. Marylebone. S. Harper, attorney, High-street, Putney. W. Norris, butcher, St. Alban's. R. Hughes, milliner, Lower Tottenham, Middlesex. G. Warburton, saddler, Lymn, Cheshire. PRICE OF SUGAR. The Average Price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar , for the week ending Jan. 23, 1844, is 355. 74d. per ewt., exclusive of the Duties of Customs paid or payable thereon on the Im portati. n thereuf into Great Britain. COURSE OF EXCHA. Amsterdam CF. 12 6 Ditto, at sight Rotterdam U. 12 6i Antwerp 225 95 Harnburgh DI. D. 13 15 Altona Paris, 3 days' sight 25 70 Ditto, 3 months 25 90 Marseilles ..... . 25 95 Bout deaux 25 95 Frankfort on Maine 122 Petersburgh, 3 Us. ... 36fr Berlin... ... ...... ...... 7 Vienna, effec. fl. 3M. 956 Trieste, ditto Madrid Cadiz 36i Bilbao ...36 Barcelona Seville . ...••. INGE.- 1 THIS DAY.) Gibraltar .. Leghorn ..... Genoa ... 25 95 Milan Venice Naples ............. 391 Palermo, per oz 1184 1 isbon Oporto 524 Rio Janeiro 23 Bahia Buenos Ayres New York,2l days sight Philadelphia FRICES OF BULLION, PER 01 'Foreign Gold, bank:3 17 9 Portugal Gold Coin .. 3 17 5 New Doubloons 0 0 10 New Dollars... 0 4 93 ISilver in Bars... 0 4 11 IRELAND. THE STATE TRIALS. TENTH DAY-BY EXPRESS. (FROM OUR OWN REPORTERS.) DUBLIN, THURSDAY, JAN. 25. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. THE QUEEN V. DANIEL O'CONNELL AND OTHERS. The position of witness for the Crown, in a Go vrrnment prosecution, has often been bad enough in Ireland; but it does not follow that the people are destitute of all power of discrimination between the honest witness, and the man who gives his testimony from motives which are neither disinterested or inde pendent. For this reason, considerable regret has been expressed here to-day, that the Times should have been so misinformed as to state, in a leader of Wednesday, that every attempt is being made in Dublilt, to inflame the minds of the people against Mr. BOND HUGHES, by posting the wall with placards, describing him as a spy, a miscreant, &c. Nothing can be more unfounded than such an - assertion. I have neither seen any such placard, nor by inquiry can I discover any person who has. Indeed the impression s with respect to Mr. HUGHES is quite the reverse of unfavourable. before his evidence was given, and while it was un known what he was to be called to prove, it cannot be wondered at that some suspicion and ill-feeling should exist respecting him. But from the moment his evidence was published, not a word has been printed or uttered respecting him but what has been oomplimentary to him. The Dublin Press has been most scrupulous in making the amende to him ; men of all parties agree that his evi dence did him credit in every respect, and we may even say that he is rather popular than otherwise. Even among the lower classes the same favourable impres sion exists, and they draw a wide distinction between him and the other witnesses, who swore to the speeches as reporters. That there is any attempt to influence the minds of the people against him is a mere falsehood, which has been imposed on the limes, and may pass uncontradicted in London ; but read here, with the quiet and peaceable deportment of the people under immediate observation, such state ments appear absolutely absurd. SUMMARY of the STATE TRIALS. DUBLIN, THURSDAY, JAN. 25. (TENTH DAY.) The roceedings of to-day have been of the most uninteresting description —necessary to the case for the Crown, but exceedingly tedious to the portion of the public that happened to be hearers. Not a single witness was called throughout the day, which was occupied with the reading of articles and reports of speeches from the Freeman and Pilot news papers. These documents ranged over the whole space of time during which the monster meetings and the dinners by which those meetings were generally succeeded. Many of them having been given in the indictment, and again in the opening address of the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, they have been, to a consider able extent, omitted in the report. The closing of its case only depends on the extent to which these ex tracts and speeches may be read. There is no wish on the part of the traversers to prolong the proceed ings needlessly; but their Counsel consider it but fair, that if portions of speeches are picked out and read, as evidence against their clients, they have a right to have other portions read that may considerably alter or qualify the meaning of the others, when taken by themselves. The prin cipal speeches that have been read by the Clerk of the Crown are those at Mallow, Baitinglass, and Tara. The interest of the proceedings will now scarcely revive till the speeches of the counsel for the traversers commence. To-day and yesterday Mr. O'CoNNELL has not been much in the Court. He is busily engaged in the library among books and papers. If the reading of this documentary evidence pro ceeds no faster than it has done to-day, and if it is carried over the whole series of the meetings, it will scarcely be concluded till Saturday. The reading of the speeches at the Tara meeting was going on when our express left. MARKET INTELLIGENCE. (From the London New Price Current of Jan. 26.) SUGAR.--The transactions in the West India Sugar market have been a small scale only this week. To-day the small parcels of good and find yellow West India on show sold readily at full and in some cases at rather higher rates; inferior de scriptions brought fully as much money, and more desire was shown to do business ; in all 1,150 hhhds have been sold for the week. REFINED.—OnIy a moderate demand bas prevailed for Re fined Goods for home consumption this week, and rather lower rates have been accepted in some instances. Prices are still going down for Bonded Crushed Sugar, and the purchases made hsve been upon a small scale only at 25a 6d to 25s 9d per cwt for first quality. The market is still firm for Loaves. Treacle has been more in demand at lOs 641 to Ils. Bastards 18s to 19s for yellow, and at 14s to 15s 6d per cwt for brown. Pieces at 20s to 23s per cwt. To-day the home trade were large buyers of Refined goods, paying 75s 6d for Standard and 74s 6d for brown grocery Lumps. Ma unirrus.—Sugar of direct importation and of good quality has been sought after ; several parcels have been sold at former rates ; in one contract 800 bags were disposed of, the bulk at 63s per cwt for strong grey. EAST InDia.—Manilla Sugar has been little inquired for, and went rather lower. In Java prices are unaltered. This afternoon the demand for Bengal was checked by the advanced rates asked; at public sale, 1,334 bags were offered, the sound nearly all taken in is to 2s above the value—viz., good white at 68s Cd to 69s 6d, middling 67s 6d to 68s, ordinary yellow 60s 6d, middling 633, damp partly sold at 61s 6d to 695, washed 60a to 65s 6d, and damp yellow 57s to 60s per Cwt. FOREIGN.—YeIIow Havannah is held for late prices; white may be had at low terms; brcin and yellow Brazil are held for the former currency. , MOBASSES.—Purchases in West India cannot be made upon lower terms, but the amount of business done has been trifling during the week. COFFEE.—AII clean qualities of West India are much wanted by the town and country trade, and rather higher rates have been paid. This afternoon Ceylon Coffee was disposed of at 6d to Is advance ; unclean Berbice low middling at 88s, good and fine ordinary 60s to 65, low 46s to 50s; Mocha, mid bright yellow 70s 6d to 71s 6d ; Costa Rica taken in at 50s for good ord. Company's Java sold at 47s to 48s for good ord pale yellow ' • sea damaged 43s to 43s 6d for first class , and 36s 6d for second and third class. Sound good ord Ceylon at 64s 6d to 65s per cwt. COCOA.—The good and fine qualities of West India have commanded former rates, but inlet ior sorts are difficult of sale. In Foreign little has been done privately, Bahia taken in at 31s for good red. Rea.—The large public sales were brought to a conclusion on Monday ; the demand throughout was good for all descrip tions of black Tea. Green attracted attention. The trade oh the whole were disposed to get well stocked, at what may be termed low prices for black Tea. To-day there was little de sire shown to purchase Tea ; at public sale 5,777 packages were offered, 2,355 consisted of Pouchong, which chiefly found buyers at 4 1 4 d to Is for low spurious to good ord, being the full worth ; but of other sorts of Tea a small part only sold, yet former rates were sustained. CASSIA LIGNEA.—This afternoon Cassia Lignea was in better request privately ; good ordinary fetched 553 to 565, low middling to middling 57s to 625, good to fine WS to 67s per cwt. Rum, BRANDY, AND HOLLANDS.—JaMaiCa Rum, 34 to 35 per cent overproof rather high flavoured at 4s 6d, 33 to 35 per cent over 3s 4(1 to 4s, middling 3s ld to 3s 3d, and common 23 to 30 per cent over 23 10d to 3s per gallon. Leewards at. Is 10d to Is 101, 4d for common, and at Is lid proof for good brown. Demerara 35 per cent and upwards 2s 1041 to 3s. Proof Calcutta Rum at 1s 7d, with certificate. For Brandy advanced rates paid. Cognac best brands of the vintage or 1838, hhds at 5s 9d, puns 5s 7d ; 1839, hhds 5s 6d, puns 5s 4d ; 1840, hhds 5s 4d, puns 5s 2d ; 1841 hhds 5s 2d, puns ss; 1842, Mitts Sc, puns 4s 10d, and low to middling sorts 3s to 4s per gallon. Geneva for shipping Is 10d to Is Ild, and fine pale for home consumption 2s 4d to 3s per gallon. English Corn Spirits are 105 for large and lOs 2d per gallon for small parcels. Saco at I is 6d to 12s for common, and at 15s to 16s for middling bold Pearl ; 16s to 16s 6d for middling grey, and lis 6d for good middling. Sago Flour is 18s to 18s lid per cwt. Tapieca, fine at 6d to 61, good 4 3 4 d to sd, and inferibr 241 to 3 d; Jamaica Arrowroot fetahe€t 7d per lb for good, and Sr,Vincent_6o per lb. RICE.—For Java rather lower prices have been accepted. Aladras at easier rates. For Bengal prices are barely sup ported. Cleaned Rice at 21s to 26s fur Carolina, and at 133 to 17s per cwt for Patna. INnico—The quarterly sale of East India conbluded on Wednesday. To-day East India Indigo was sought after, and several parcels were disposed of at the rates previously es tablished. There has been an increased desire shown to buy COCHINEAL.— This afternoon three parcels of Cochineal, amounting to about 17 bags Honduras, were brought to public sale, and sold at steady aates ; silvers at 4s 2d to 4s 6d, and two blacks at 5s 4d to 5s 7d per lb. 01 t.s. —1 he trade have purchased common descriptions of Fish Oils with caution all the week. Seal, pale of first quality at 361 per tun ; Co I, 32/ to 321 lOs ; Southern, 331 to 37/ per tun for low to fine quality. Sperm 01 at 72/ for British, and 701 per tun , for American. Linseed Oil at 26s 6d to 26s 91 per cwt. Rape, pale at 36s to 36s 6d, and brown 35s to 35s 6d per cwt. Cocoa Nut Oil 32s to 33: per cwt. Palm, good and fine at 28s Gd to 29s per cwt. North American Lard Oil 421 to 43/ per tun. This afternoon Ceylon Cocoa Nut Oil taken in at 33s to 33s Gd for fine. Palm Oil sold, good at 27s 3d to 27s 61, low to mid 23s Gd to 26. 6d, and very low at 21s par cwt. Olive Oil brought advanced rates, Gallipoli at 46/ to 47/, and other sorts 42/ to 431 per tun, Tat.t.ow.—Town Tallow at 42s to 42s 6d per cwt, nett cash. P Y Candle on the spot at 40s 9d to 41s taken for first quality. For delivery 41s 6,1 to 42s for the last three months of the year. American Tallow at rather lower rates. To-day in Russian Tallow; 41s as the value of small parcels on the spot ; 2nd sort Yellow Candle 39s 5d to 40s 61 ; North American Tallow at 33s 3d to 40s 91 ; South American 38s 6d to 39s ; East India Tallow at 39s to 40s 6d ; North American Stearine Lard taken in at 34s 3d to 375; North American Lard 32s 91 per cwt. LAW INTELLIGENCE. VICE-CHANCERY COURT, Jan. 25. WARNE V. SMITH. Durin_g the arguments, Mr. WAKEFIELD objected to the case proceeding, as he was desirous of answer:ng certain affidavits, which had only been filed yesterday, reflecting on the character of seine of the witnesses for the defendant. The COURT ordered the motion to stand for Monday. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Jan. 25. LORD W. PAGET V. THE EARL OF CARDIGAN. Mr. Sergeant CHANNELL moved for a rule to show cause why the defendant should not have judgment, .as in the case of a nonsuit. The action was brought against the defendant for an alleged act of criminal conversation with the plaintiff's wife, and the cause was set down for trial at the last Guildhall sit tings, and was specially fixed for Friday, the 22d of December last. A few minutes before the Lord Chief Justice came into Court the record was withdrawn ; and it will not have been fcrgetten that Lord William Paget addressed on the same day, to the leading Morning and Evening newspapers, copies of a letter which he had forwarded to Lord Cardigan, charging him, in terms so coarse and violent, that it was considered necessary to suppress the greater portion of the letter, with having bought the plaintiff's principal witness, Winter, who had sud denle disappeared from the Guildhall, on the morning appointed for the trial. In support of the present motion, affidavits were made by the defendant, his attorney, Mr. Powell, and the clerks who had the conduct of the cause, stating, in the most positive and unqualified terms, that neither he nor they were, directly or indirectly, concerned in procuring the absence of Winter.—Rule nisi granted. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. CLERKENIVELL. FRAUDULENT PERSONATION OF A POLICE OFFICER.— ATTEMPT TO BRIBE A M A GISTRATE'S CLERIC.— William Taylor, a furniture dealer, residing in Turnmill-street, Clerk enwell, was finally examined on a charge of falsely and fraudu lently personating a police constable of " the detective force," under circumstances of a very aggravated nature. Mr. C. Stoddart appeared for the prisoner. Police-constable, 243 G, deposed that on Sunday morning last, between twelve and one o'clock, A.m., he was on duty in Cross-street, Hatton-garden, when the prisoner addressed him, saying he was an officer of the detective force, and that he could produce his authority, at the same time drawing from his pocket a pair of handcuffs. The prisoner then went to the beer-shop, No. 26 in the street, and knocked at the door. He was not admitted : and then requested witness to come to the door with him. Witness consented. They knocked at the door, and were admitted. When the prisoner entered the shop, he said," I am an officer of the detective force." Mr. GREENWOOD—Did he mention the name of the divi sion? Witness replied in the negative. The prisoner was given into custody by the barman. Win. Clarke deposed that he was acting for Mr. Hayes, the landlord, on the night in question, who lay in a room adjoining the shop dangerously ill, from a concussion of the brain. The prisoner had twice ineffectually attempted to obtain admission as an officer of the detective force, but as thu house was closed witness refused to admit him. Hei was admitted subsequently at the instance of the police officer. He wanted drink, which was refused. He then said he wanted to search the house. Witness directed the police officer to do so, and he did search it, even the room where the sick man lay. When asked for his authority, the prisoner produced a pair of handcuffs. His manner was boisterous and insolent. Witness at last gave him into custody. Mr. Joseph Liddell deposed that he was in the house on the occasion referred to. Had been sent for, as it was expected the landlord would have died on that night. The pi isoner was very noisy, and witness begged of him for God's sake not to dis turb the sick man, but the prisoner jeeringly said, " The sick man should have the physician before the undertaker." ' Mr. GREENWOOD—Are you an undertaker?--I am. When deposed force, det ec ti ve or o th er wise. the prisoner wanted to have the house searched 1 directed the officer Hayesthat might be disturbed. Inspector the prisoner was net a member o fhe t o do p s o e , l me tr. pol tn e a s y nt police Afr Mr. Stoddart said the prisoner had been in the Birmingham police force, and had been sworn in a special constable for the city. The prisoner had freequently assisted the police in de tecting thieves. He was not sob er ou th e n i g ht th e o ffence was committed.me.GßEENWOOD said, up on t h e prev i ous occas i on th e pri soner had produced a document purporting to be his warrant to act as a police-constable of Birmingham for the year 16.43. The paper, on inspection, turned out to be an ordinary notice to appear at special sessions in 1841, and of course no authority whatever. If he had been a policeman, the fact would have rather aggravated his offence. Prisoner-1 went tothe house on scent for a thief. Mr. GREENWOOD—You had no warrant or authority what ever. The law very properly looks upon this as a very bad offence. After commenting on the the Magistrate sentenced month's imprisonment. impropriety edil iinte p a o y f the a fi p n r e i prisoner's l e t s con duct, , e r Mr. Mould (the junior clerk) said, that in the early part of communication wished to o that speak he withdd the day Duke, the usher of th e C ourt tol d hi m th a t the pri soner not mt wish to any H He privatereplied to inter view with the prisoner. Wh en h e ( M r. M ou ld) . cam e into Court, during the momentary a b sence o f t h e M a gistrate, the the prisoner whispered to him, saying that he understood the clerk had great influence with the Magistrate, and that if he- (Mr. Mould) would exercise that influence in his favour, be would reward him handsomely. The proposal was indignantly re jected, but he did not consider it right to communicate the matter to the Magistrate until the ease was disposed of, lest it m i g ht create an unfavourable p re j u di ce i n hi s Worship's mind. Mr. GREENWOOD told the prisoner it was a most audacious proposal, and one for which he might be prosecuted at the Old Bailey, and if convicted severely punished. He would recom mend Inspector Penny to communicate the affair to the Com missioners of Police, who would say whether or not it was a case for prosecution. Inspector Penny having taken down the clerk's statement, promised doing so. The prisoner said he had not then the money to pay the fine. He was locked up. WORSHIP-STREET. Yesterday John Davis, alias James Blythe, Henry Robin son, and George Dirt, whose former examination for extensive burglaries, committed in the premises of wholesale firms in the City, have lately appeared in our columns, were brought be fore Mr. Bingham for the completion of the former charges, and to answer a fresh charge of burglary, committed in the warehouse of Messrs. Wood and Co., warehousemen, in Red Lion-court, Watling-street. The substance of this last charge was this :—Mr. Robert Oakley, Messrs. Wood's chief clerk, and who, with his family, resides on the premises, went carefully over the warehouse at twelve o'clock on the night of Monday. the 27th of November, and examined all the belts and fastenings, which he left secure; but at five the following morning he was rung up by James Brett, a City policeman, who on passing the door had found it open. As there were no marks of violence on the warehouse door or shutters in the lower part of the house, the upper part was examined, when one of the attic windows was found open, a corner of one of the panes, large enough to admit a man's arm, having been cut with a diamond, and an entrance ob tained here from one of the adjoining houses, as in all the other burglaries with which the prisoners have been found to be connected,. and the premises quietly quitted by the usual means of egress. On examining the warehouse it was found to be completely ransacked, and a large amount of property carried off by the burgla rs, among which was a quantity of plated articles from the private apartments, the whole robbery being so quietly effected that not a single member of Mr. Oakley's family was disturbed by the thieves. The prisoner Davis or Blythe, it will be recollected, was detained and given into custody by Mr. Sowerbv, a pawn broker in Shoreditch, while offering as a pledge a handsomely worked silver snuff-box, part of the produce of an ex t ens i ve burglary committed on the premises of Messrs. Riley and Storer, silversmiths, at the back of the Goldsmiths' Hall, and which forms one of the present charges against him, and on Taylor, an officer, searching him, in addition to a second snuff box of the same description, and a quantity of duplicates, three small gold seals were found in one of his pockets. Three seals were now produce& and sworn to by Mrs. Oakley, the wife of the first witness, who had used them only a few hours before the burglary was committed, and placed them in her writing-desk, which she had left in a parlour in the upper part of the house, but which desk was found in the morning on the basement story broken open, and its contents strewed about, the seals having been abstracted. The prisoner Davis had dealt for clothes with a tailor named Davies, residing in New Union-street, Little Moorfields, and between nine and ten in the morning of the 11th ult. the pri soner called at Davies's house during his absence from home, and, producing a large brown paper package, requested the wife's permission to leave it with her till he called for it. She consented, and heard nothing further of the prisoner for a fortnight or three weeks afterwards, when she read an account of his examination at this Court on the other charges ; and becoming alarmed lest she should become implicated with him, she broke open the parcel, and found its contents to eens:st of part of the property above described ; and beino satisfied it was the produce of another robbery, s h e repacked the parcel, directed it to the Police-court, Worship -street, and carrying it over the water, sent it to this Court by the Parcels Delivery Company. The depositions being then taken by Mr. Vine ' the chief clerk, all the prisoners were fully com mitted to Newgate for trial, Hirt on one charge of raceiving, and Robinson upon three, and Davis upon five charges of burglary. I lin the House of Lords, the Address in answer to her Majesty's Speech will be moved by the Earl of Eldon, and seconded by Lord Hill. NI N(, JANTTARY fig, 1844: IRELAND. THE STATE TRIALS. (NINTH DAY.) (FROM OUR OWN REPORTERS.) DUBLIN, WEDNF.SDAY, .TAN. 24. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. THE QUEEN V. DANIEL. O'CONNELL AND OTHERS. (The examination of James Healy, continued from our Third Edition of Last Yght.) Don't they usually take advantage of these large meetings, and hover about the precincts of them, to sell these ballads ?—I should think so. - They hover about the outskirts of a meetings, and en deavour to retail these things for profit ? Every place where they think they can make sale of them. And I believe at assizes, while the judges, are sitting in the criminal courts, these ballad-singers are generally to be found in the vicinity of the courts ?—I have seen them there. With respect to the persons that had on their hats the words ‘' O'Connell's Police,' I ask you as a fair and honest man, upon your oath, did not those people contribute to the pre servation of tt.e peace and order ?—Saw them exert themselves. That is no answer—Did they clear the platform?—They may have intended to keep the platform clear, and to keep order about it; heard a man named Walsh give instructions to the people to keep order and quietness about the platform and pavilion. Were they peeled wands they had in their hands ?—The 3ticks they had were smooth, and very slight. They were not pieces of timber?—They were pieces of timber. Oh ! they were of course made of timber, but they were not what you called on your direct examination pieces of timber. 1 he Attorney-Genersl—That was not what he said. Mr. APDonough—l beg your pardon, I insist I am right; he ealled them pieces of timber, and then went on; but it is of no consequence. Wei , ou here on the entr of George the Fourth into re y Dublin ?—I was not. Yuu wero at the 11Iullaglimast dinner ?—I was, but not all the time. One of the mottoes, you say, was, " No Soxon—(Laugh ter) butchery shall give blood-gout for a repast ?—( Loud laughter. )—Yes . There was something better for ropast on that occasion, I believe ?--Some appeared not to be satisfied ; the dinner appeared to be rather short. You say another motto was—" Ireland dragged at the tail of another nation."—That was the purport. Mr. 11I'Donough—A good heavy load she would have, would she not? Mr. O'Connell—And a strong tail.---(Laughter.) Witness—There was a private carriage in the procession. Did you take down all tke mottoes?-- I did not. Why did you not take them down ?—Because I thought it was no consequence. present to distinguish the cards distributed at the Asso ciation from those distributed at the meeting. Suppose the documents were not printed by the order or with the know ledge of the Association. then it was competent for the "traversers to rebut the evidence, aad produce the printer Rho slid print them, and let him say for whom they were executed. He contended that the evidence could not be refused, as it was given as part of the 7es pesta of the case, and that the docu- ments were circulated by the Association. The documents were circulated by the Association at the meeting, because the No hundred and fifty thousand persons who composed it could not hear all that was said by the speakers. He, therefore, under all the circumstances, submitted that the document must be used in evidence, and let the jury set what value they might on it afterwards. The Chief Justice was of opinion that the document should beadmitted on evidence, but he did not say what effect it would have as evidence. At the same time, he thought it ought to be laid before the jury, and let it form a part of the case on which they were ultimately to give their judgment. Mr Moore and Mr. Monahan objected to the admissibility of the document on different grounds; but he would not say they did agree on both grounds of objection. However, it was to Mr. Monahan's argument he would at present direct his observations and consideration. Mr. Monahan said it could not be proved that the document was circulated with the consent of the par ties, or with the views of those who called the meethig, and, therefore, it could not be admitted as evidence. Let him see how the case case stands ; he supposed that nobody would aleny that evidence was alrezdy before the Court and jury of the existence of the Repeal Association, which consisted of a great body of persons, wh o h a d assem bl e d f rom time to time, and held large meetings ; nobody would deny that. It could not be denied that the leaders of that Association were in the habit of knowing where such meetings were held, and that they were called by the authority of the Asso ciation, of which the several traversers were proved to be members. In furtherance of the objects of the Association, and for the purposes of those meetings, the practice wa , , for some time before the meetings, to publish the fact. It was deemed advisab'e, before the meeting at Mullaghmast, to have a great monster meeting, or provin• cial - 'eting, or, as it w- ialled he Le' ' filar-'' meeting, or, as it was c, t, !luster Declaration for Repeal, and this was done, and the meeting was called by placard to assemble on the Ist of October, at Mullaglnnaht, and that place was accordingly appointed as the scene of that, great monster meeting, and it should be recollected the plan was so appointed before the Ist of October, the day on w hich the meeting was held. It was in evidence that instructions were given to Air. Brown, the printer of the Association, by the secretary of the Association, to print and publish a nuin ber of advertisements calling that meeting, and that auch in structions were complied with, and the advertisement was cir culated. That placard called a meeting of the province of Leinster to assemble at Mullaglimast on the Ist of October, and Mullaghmast was the place named by the parties call ing the meeting. The people called on to attend that meeting got a very significant hint of what they were caleil together for, as it was stated at the foot of the advertise ment, " Remember Mullaghmast." That was to bring the matter to their recollection. They had it in evidence Perfectly harmless?--Quite so. that Mr. O'Connell attended at the meeting, and ex- Not material ?—Just so. plained very fully why the scene of the meeting was chosen Therefore you did not take them ?—Just so. at Mullaghmast. Mr. O'Connell made two speeches —One The witness then left the fable. in the morning, and one in the evening, at the banquet. The Attorney-General called on the Clerk of the Crown to Mr. Barrett, another of the traversers, was there, and also read the ballad that was circulated at Mullaghmast. made a speech, and both the traversers stated that Mullagh- Mr. Moore said the evidence of the last witness, as he un- mast was chosen for the meeting for a particular purpose, derstood it, was this, that there were papers distributed or sold and that it was done firmly and deliberately, and chosen i n th e course of the meeting ; that he himself purchased one before hand. It should Hot be forgotten again that which he had lost ; but he got the d ocement i n ques ti on from the people were called on to remember Mullaghnrast. another policeman, with a mark upon it. Under those circus's- What was Mr. O'Connell's object its fixing on Illullagh stances he did net consider that document admissible. mast as the place for the meeting, but to bring to the re- The Solicitor-General said the witness saw the other police- nrembrance, and perhaps to the f clings of those assent man put a mark upon it. bled, the scenes alleged to have taken place there in former Th e Chief Justice said Mr. Moore was not acquainted with times ? Whether that was likely to produce excitement or the entire of the witness's evidence. not he did not say ; but one of the reasons given by Mr. Mr. Moire said he had been out of Court during a part of it. O'Connell himself for assembling there was to bring to the Mr. M'Donough said they had an additional objection. recollection of the meeting the treachery and cruelty of the They contended upon the evidence that that document was Saxon race, atal the want of safety there was in dealing ss jib net receivable. Very great latitude had been allowed in them. The people then were invited to come to Mullaghmast cases of conspiracy where it was fair to he inferred that the as a provincial meeting, and consequently a very great one, arid distribution of the document was in furtherance of the common ttse invitation or summons to them was given expressly by the object, and by some of the conspirators; but he (Mr. M'Donough) Association through their officer and secretary, Mr. Ray, and had never heard, and he apprehended there was no authority the cards were printed by Mr. Brown, the printer to the Asso to show, that where if was proved, as in this case, that in this ciation. Now, where Mr. O'Connell and the Association took vast and peaceable assemblage, persons either hovered about the upon themselves to collect the people together, in such crowds, skirts of the meeting, or mingled with the crowd for the purpose to the amount of 250,000, it was worthy of consideration to of selling badads ; persons who were proved to be in the habit of say whether it was not an illegal act. He would not say watching large meetings toget an opportunity of selling their bal- whether it was or was not, but he said that those who lads or songs,—it would he unjust in the last degree to inculpate ventured to collect the meeting, must abide the consequences those who took no part in their sale, and never sanctioned of their own act as to what was done connected with the meet their being sold or distributed. There was not the remotest ing. There were 250,000 persons assembled together at 111u1- connexion between any of the traversers, or the parties who laghmast. The first thing done was the handing about a paper convened that meeting, or whe held that meeting, and the purporting to be a full and true accountof the dreadful slaughter ballad sellers, and the witness upon his examination admitted or murder at Mullaghmast on the bodies of four hundred that the people paid snore attention to the speeches of Mr. Roman Catholics. Whether this was given away as a donation, O'Connell and the other gentlemen than to the ballads. Those or whether it was sold, did not appear to him to be of touch ballads were distributed by sale amongst the people, not as the consequence. Their being circulated and distributed over the ac t o f the persons connected with that meeting, and he would field was a necessary consequence of the assembling of the su b m it that, under the circumstances, the document in ques- people at the place to hear and receive a history of what had oe tion was not admissible. curred b efore Mr. O ' Connell addressed them on the subject. Th e Attorney-General said there was no proof that ballads He could not pass ever the fact that Mr. O'Connell, in the of that description were in the - habit of being sold at large two speeches which he made, and Mr. Barrett, in the one assemblies. which he made, drew a picture of what had occurred at Mul- Mr. M'Donough contended that the witness on cross-exami- laghmast similar to the one presented for sale to the people. nation alluded to a temperance meeting consisting of 300,000 They all concurred in their representations of what took place persons, and admitted that ballad singers were there distribute three hundred years before, by those who were of Saxon con ing their ballads. nexion—the treachery and cruelty they practised, and that The Attorney-General said there was no evidence of ballads they could never be trusted again. So far, therefore, from Such as the one in question being sold at that temperance being unconnected with the professed object of the meeting, meeting. it seemed to him to be intimately connected wills it ; and it Mr. M'Donough admitted that that portion of the evi- wou ld b e i mposs ib le to call the attention of the jury from the deuce did not include this particular document. It was fact that 2510,000 persons were assembled together by adver not for him to say what evidence would be adduced by the tisement ; and it would be for them to say whether the history traversers, in reference to that ballad ; but th e y had the of the slaughter or murder said to have taken place was net evidence of Mr. Brown, the printer, the authorised agent of connected with that meeting. He had not, therefore, the the Association, to show that he never printed anything of the s li g ht es t d ou bt t h at the objection to the evidence ought not kind, and that such a document was never put into his hands. to be allowed, and that the document was admissible in evidence. Besides, they had in evidence that these ballads were sold ; ar.d, Mr. Justice Crampton said lie was of the same opinion, that was it not in accordance with their knowledge of probabilities the evidence was admissible, his reasons for which he should that, if those ballads were sanctioned by the traversers, they state very briefly. It was admitted on both sides that tire would have been distributed gratuitously? How monstrous document was one of importance, but whatever the nature or would it be if, at the vast temperance assemblies sworn to by character of the paper was, it appeared to him it could nut be the witness, some person in that crowd sold ballads, and that rejected as evidence. With regard to the objection urged Father Mathew was to be put on his trial for those ballads, and against it, it must be clear the meeting at Mullaghmast was one tales of ancient history were to be given in evidence against of the overt acts in the indictment, and the acts and declarations him ? If such a doctrine were admitted it would he in the of all persons who formed that assembly became, therefore, of power of any designing person to convert a perfectly legal as- importance to consider ; prima facie all persons there be sensibly into an illegal one. longed to the meeting, therefore every person Insight disconnect The Attorney-General quoted the King v. Hard, to show himself from it by evidence. The act and declarations of one be that the ballad was admissible in evidence. What was the came the acts and declaration of all, if they were considered to evidence at present before the Court? Th e y h a d it proved act in concert, and therefore it was that what was said by one by Mr. Hughes that Mr. O'Connell at that very meeting at in one part of the field, though it might he a quarter of a Mallaglimast said that ," he had chosen it (meanin g the Rath mile off, became evidence against the other who might be on of Mullaginnast) for an obvious rea s o n —th e y were upon t h e the platform. Herewas an assembly for the purpose of dis- ' precise spot on which English treachery, and false Irish tree- cussing a particular thing, and a paper was distributed by chery, too, consummated a massacre unequalled in the crimes thousands amongst the assembly, and what upon the face of it of the world." Ile said, that was a fit pl ace , i n th e ope n air, did it purport to be? It drew particular attention to the place to assert their determination not to be destroyed by treachery ; of meeting. Now let him suppose, as put by the Counsel for and that while he lived they Lever should. That the meeting the Crown, that some person in a different part of the field was not held there by accident but by design, and that where read out this paper aloud, would any one contend that it could his voice was then ra i se d th e yell of dispair was once heard not be received in evidence. No doubt it would be so re from the victims wh o had fallin b eneat h th e s wo r d s of the ceived. He was of opinion from the beginning that that ob- Saxons, who delightfully ground their victims to death. That jection was perfectly untenable. three hundred unarmed men were slaughtered in the mer- Mr. Justice Perrin said that it appeared in evidence that riment of the banquet, leavi ng their wives and children to from morning till night (these were the words of the witness) drop useless tea rs over the m . This (continued the Atter- several persons were engaged in circulating— in crying about nev- Gen eral) is the eontente of the old Irish history, through the meeting, those documents—that was publicly which was printed and circulated at Mullaghmast. Mr. stating the substance of them, and no person interfered to pre- O'Connell could not be heard by 3 0 0,000 Men ; but it was vent, or repress, or stop them. lle did not say to what effect proved that the contents were spoken at tire dinner in the the evidence would be; all he said was, that under those cir pavilion. He (the Attorney- General) for that reasons proposed cumstances it was impossible to exclude that evidence. lie reading it. It had been circulated amongst the hundreds did not mean to say that it would go to affect the Association, of thousands who could not hear eh. O'Connell, but could or to connect it with them directly, but that was a matter for read it. The " Voice from the Grave " was also used at the the jury to decide upon ultimately, considering the evidence Pavilion, aand it was clearly admissible in evidence. A for and against the prosecution. distinction had been taken that it was inadmissible he- The document was then handed in and read. It purported cause it had been sold ; but surely it was not because a to give " a full, true, and accurate account'' of the terrible penny or a half-penny might have been got for it that it was massacre of four hundred Irish Catholics at the Rath-more of to be rejected. There never was a case where the admission of such Mullaghmast. The first paragraph contained a statement of evidence was of more importance. It was circulated at a meeting the cruelty committed on the occasion referred to, and pro assembled for the purpose of creating discontent and disaffection ceeded to give an extract from Taaffe's History of Ireland, amongst leer Majesty's subjects. The slaughter committed 100 wherein the massacre was described as occurring during the years ago, was, for this purpose, revived in the minds of the reign of Queen Mary. Some comments followed, wherein people by this " Voice from the Grave," combining all these Mary was designated as Bloody Mary. The document eon circumstances together, the documents were clearly fit to be eluded by giving a summary of different authorities as to the given in evidence. He put it in evidence to show the mode date of the massacre ; and the author, having satisfied himself adopted of circulating such sentiments among the people, and that it occurred during Mary's reign, proceeded to show that relied as an authority upon the case o f t h e Ki ng v. Hunt. lie whether Cath o li c i sm or P rote , tant i sm were tr i ump h ant i n concluded by saying, that it w as f or t h e J ury to cons id er h ow England, Ireland was always treated by English rulers e ith far Mr. O'Connell and the other traversers were connected equal barbarity and t reac h ery . with its distribution. Mr. Whiteside applied to have a copy of this document fur- Mr. Monahan (for Mr. John O'Connell) said, that the doe- niched him. They wished to have the name of the printer. trine advanced by the Attorney-General was unsupported by The paper was handed to the Learned Gentleman. authority. If he recellected the opening statement of the At- The Attorney-General then put in a copy of her Majesty's torney-General, he said that he had the printer of these docu- speech as evidence, requiring as much of it as related to Ire ments, and named as such a person called Hanvey, who lived in land to be read. Fisliamble-street. He had not, as he did in the case of other Mr. Moore objected to its being produced. documents, produced the printer to prove that they were got The AttorneyeGeneral was very much surprised at. the °b out by the directions of any particular person, or the objects for jection. There had been in the course of these trials several which they were printed. There wa s no e v id ence that they speeches of Mr. O'Connell proved, in which he commented on were published by any one charged with th e con s pi rac y. The the speech of her Majesty at the prorogation of Parliament, Attorney-General had not, as in the case of Brown, produced taking sentence by sentence, and he apprehended a document any person to prove that they emanate d from Mr. O'Connell so commented on might be taken in evidence. It was alleged or the Repeal Association. On the Contrary, it was likely that it was not the speech of her Majesty, but the speech of that the document was published by this man ( Hanvey) for her Ministers—that it contained language only fit for a fish profit that it was iris own act, and n o t th a t o f any one woman—that it was a Billingsgate speech—and other observe charged with the conspiracy. He did not object to th e placards tions of an extraordinary character were made respecting it. being given in evidence, b ecause t h ey were openly and publicly Ile therefore asked, quite as a matter of course, that the Nor exhibited at the meetings ; but there was no p roo f to show tion of the speech so commented on by Mr. O'Connell should that these papers were expo se d i n th e presence of Mr. O ' Connell be put in, it being clearly a matter of evidence. oi his friends, or that they had any knowledge of their con- The London Gazette of August 25th, and the Dublin Ga tents• lie did not say that it was nece ssar y t o prove t h at the :etre of August 29th, wer e th en p u t i n , an d th e por ti on o f her c i rc ulation was the act of Mr. O'Connell or any o f th e tea- majesty's speech referring to Ireland, and expressing her de versers, but it should be p rove d, th a t it was d one with the know- termination to maintain the Legislative Union between the or at least adopted by, some one of them. No doubt b u t countr i es, were then read. ledge of, formerly evidence in cases of this sortwas permitted to an extreme James Irwin, station-house clerk of the Liverpool constales ; yet they had not , on the other hand, cited any case lary, sworn—lle said he was at Liverpo o l on the 13th of Oc length similar to the one before the Court. If the circulation was an tuber. He saw placards of a particular description posted in object with the Association , they would not have charged for various parts of Liverpool. Ile took down one of the placards it ; a few pence was of no value to them. It had not seen which he produced. It was a copy of the address to all the proved that the publication was with the knowledge or sanction subjects of the British Crown, containing a statement of the of the Association, or in furtherance of its objects. The At. grievances of Ireland, and which Mr. O'Connell had wished to torney-General, when commenting upon it in the presence of have in circulation in all the towns of the empire. The name the jury, ought to have stated that it was a slaughter committed of Mr. Brown was attached to it as printer. by Catholics. Mr. Charles Vernon called—Held the situations of Registrar Mr. O'Connell—l said a slaughter of C a th o li cs by Catholics. of Newspapers in the Stansp.office ;it was in his office that Solicitor-General—The question: for the Court was, should the declarations made by the proprietors and publishers of these documents be admitted or rejected. If admitted it newspapers were lodged. The newspapers themselves are also was open to the traversers to giv e an y explanation lodged there as published. lie had here the declaration of Mr. about them which they could. He thou g ht th e y ought to Barrett, as proprietor of the Pilot.—( Declaration produced.) be admitted upon two distinct grounds. F irs t, th e y were He had seen Mr. Barrett write, and that was his hand. Had part of the res gestw, tine character of the meeting, the also the declaration of Charles Gavin Duffy, as proprietor of transactions there, the circulation of such matter as was con - the Nation. lie was not acquainted with Mr. Duffy. The tamed in the documents, he would assume bore directly upon declarations was lodged at his office in the r egular way of busi the charge in the indictment. Th a t c h arge was o ne of en- ness.—(Declaration produced.) Had the declaration of George tering into a conspiracy to excite animosity amongst her Ma- A t ki nson an d D r . J o h n G ray as propr i etors of the Freeman's jesty's subjects ; and the proper means to be used for the sup- ,journal; E. Duffy was the printer. Il e was not acquainted with porting of that charge was to prove the large numbers at these Dr. Gray's writing, but he had seen M r . D u ffy wr i te; it was meetings, the notices which convened them, the harangues the practice for papers to be sent to his office signed which were made : and they (the Crown) were then proving b y the publisher, as required by Act of Parlia what occurred at one of these meetings. Mullaghmast meet- merit. The documents which are now handed to me, are ing, it should be observed, had been called by advertisement, accurate and authentic copies of the original declarations duly and it was proved that Mr. Brown, the printer of the signed before Mr. Cooper, the Comptroller and Aecountant- Association, printed that placard or adver ti sement , calling General of the stains .$ Stamp I epartment. They bear the signatures g respectively of Richard B arre tt, J o h n G ray , G eorge Atkin the meeting. He did not care whe t h er the placard callin that meeting was circulated gratuitously or sold for son, Edward Duffy, and Cha r l es G av i n D u ffy. Th e l a tt e r money, as it did not make any material difference for gentleman is registered as the sole proprietor, printer, and pub his purpose ; the advertisement calling that meeting was fisher of the Nation newspaper. part and parcel of the meeting itself, He differed Mr. Smyly—Have you with you at present any copies of the widely with Mr. Monahan, for it was not necessary Nation, Freeman's Journal, and the Pilot newspapers which for the Crown to show any authority from the Association were left in your office ?—Yes, I have—here they are.—( Wit calling that meeting, as the advertisement was sufficient for the ness produced a file of newspapers.) Crown in that case, and it did not lie in the mouth of the Asso- Ilave you got the Nation of the 10th of June ?—Ycs ; i ciation to say they are not responsibl e f or th e consequences has the signature of Charles Gavin Duffy. when the meeting did not take place. Had henot prinutfacie Mr. Smyly—Turn to the leading article of that paper. evidence there that several documents were circulated at the Mr. Whiteside objected to the copy of the newspaper being meeting, stating the prof esse d o bj ec t s of that meeting ? put into the witness's hands at the present stage of the pro such documents might be circulated by O'Connell's Police, c eeding s , lie (counsel) had not had the opportunity of exa or by the Repeal Wardens, for all inc knew, before the m i n i ng t h e cer tifi e d co pi es o f d ocuments which had been " meetine ; and was it to be said that the thousands of h an d e d i n . Th e y h a d no t as y e t b een rea d, nor h a d t h e hand those documents which were circulated at the meeting, writing been proved ; and, under these circumstances, it was were calculated, without the knowledge of the traversers, manifestly premature to ask any questions relative to the news was he to be told that there was not a case of prima facie paper. evidence to go to the jury, and let them take it as they night ? The Attorney-General—You may have the original docu- Mr. Monahan asked, why not prove that the document was ments to examine, if you wish, Mr. 'Whiteside. rioted by wish or authority of the Association ; but he did not The documents were handed to Mr. Whiteside, who having c ant to prove that, as it was given as part of the res gesta of examined them, said that he considered the evidence on this tee ease; suppose the Association had circulated their printed branch of the case wholly defective. The declarations pur cards— ported to have been signed in the presence of a Mr. Cooper, Mr. Whiteside—l beg your pardon, there is nothing private the Accountant-General, but not a tittle of evidence had been out the Association, all is done publicly. The Solieitior-General said he would use that expression at was a person h av i ng f u ll an d competen t iatau.llthlr;riCtyo,opienr point of la.v, to take such dechrat'on. The Learned Coun sel referred to the case of the King e. White, in support of his position, that it was necessary to prove the competency of the officer. Attorney-Genet al-1f I mistake not, the witness was asked . why thcr Mr. Coo; e: was not the proper officer to take these atileas its, and he answered distinctly in the affirmative. Air. Whiteside—Oh, you are labouring under a sad misap prehension. No such question w.is ske:i him at all. Witness—Alr. Cooper is the props r officer to take in decla rations. Mr. Whiteside—Now, how do you know that, Sir ?-1 never saw his commission ; but I have no doubt of the fact, for I have been acting under him for several years. Alr. Whiteside—ln what capacity P—As registrar of news papers. I presume that Mr. Cooper has a commission, but never saw it. Mr. WEteside—My Lo r d s , it is abs o l u t e l y i ncum b ent on tliem to adduce proper evidence to prove the authority of Ali. Cooper to take the declarations. Attorney• General—l do not take the &me legal view of this point as my Learned Friend ; but Mr. Cooper is in Court, and, for Mr. N'hiteside's gratification, we will -4Ye him exa mined. Jonathan Sis•on Cooper sworn and examined by Mr. Smyly —.l am comptroller and accountant-general in the Stamp de partment. I have held my office for twenty years. It is one of the ditties of my office to take newspaper declarations. The declaration now handed MC was made by Charles Gavin Duffy and was sworn before me on the 18th of Nov., 1842. Saw it signed by Mr. Duffy. The declaration now handed to me is that of the Freeman's journal, and was signed by Dr. Gray, Dr. Atkit.son, and Edward Duffy, on the Bth of Feb., 1841. Mr. Barr, ft's declaration was signed in my presence on the Bth o Dec., 1837. Cross examined by Mr. Whiteside—l have a commission, but ;t is not here ; can't say that 1 know Mr. Duffy. Ah ! why did you not tell me that before ? How thee can you swear to his handwriting ?-1 know that the party whose signature is affixed to that declaration signed it before me ; he was present %Ihen he signed it.—(Laughter.) 1 ant obliged to you, for that information, Sir. You don't know Mr. Duffy ?—No, Sir. bank you, Sir, that will do.—(Laughter.) Do you read the Helical debates in the Evening Maitl—Sumetimes, per laps, 1 do, but very seldom. Do you read the Nation, or the Freeman's Journal ?—No, he only paper I read is Saunders's, in th e morning. Ila !'yOupatronise frigid Saunders, do you ?—(Laughter`. —Sometimes I do. - The Repeal debates appeared in that paper as in every other paper, and yet you s(c they have selected some journals fora conspiracy.. i\fr. Whiteside submitted that there was no particular evi dence of the publication, and in criminal cases the rules of evi dence should be strictly observed. The signature should be proved by some one. who knew Mr. Duffy. The Attorney•General—The newspaper was published in Dublin under the terms of the Act of Parliament, and there is a heavy penalty imposed on any person publishing a news paper, without lodging the proper certificate, that certified his bail, produced from the Stamp-office, t:ic place where it ought to be. Under these circumstances, the question for the consideration of the Court was—whether the certificate signed by this gentleman in the presence of the proper officer, and who represented himself as Charles Gavin Duffy, and by whom the paper was since regnlarly published, was trot primajiwie evidence • and some of th e wit nesses for the Crow.) proved that Mr. Duffy, as editor and pro prietor of that paper, attended at the meetings. The Attorney- General then read the Sth section of the Newspaper Act, 6th arid ith William the Fourth, and submitted that, under its terms, the evidence offered was admissible. Judge Perrin—Can't you prove the handwriting and get rid of the argument. Chief Justice—The rule of law is the same in civil and cri minal cases. the ir. decl a ration. ‘ vlites iN e_My Judge P err i n —S ure M r. Cooper said that Mr. Duffy signed Lords, the first newspaper published by the proprietor of the Nation is dated the Bth of October, and the de , niment Mr. Cooper proved is dated the 18th of Novem ber, so that it cannot be the right document. Mr. Brewster cited the case of Mayne v. Fletcher, in 9th Barnewall and Cresswell, page 38:2, and contended that, in asmuch as the title of the newspaper corresponded wi.h that set forth in the declaration produced out of the custody of the proper officer, it was evidence of its publication by the party charged. The paper was entitled " The Nation, published every Saturday, at No. 12, Trinity-street, where all commu nications were to be addressed," and the matters set out in the declaration corresponded with that, and he now submitted, on the authority of the case quoted, that the Crown were not bound to go farther. Mr. Whiteside—That is a different view to that taken by the Attorney-General and Mr. Smyly. To the witness—Hand me the first copy of the Nation newspaper. Mr. Bret ster—No question can arise except as to the paper we offer in evidence. Judge Crampton—Does not this plainly appear, that one Charles Gavin Duffy is the proprietor, editor, and printer of this newspaper called the Nation, and the only difficulty that suggests itself is the identification of the particular individual, as there may be two or three Charles Gavin Duffys. We have evidence on our notes that the traverser here is the editor of the Nation. Mr. Whiteside—Your Lordship will excuse me for saying that there is no legal evidence yet to that effect. Judge Crampton—That is not exactly what I have, but that the traverser is editor of a newspaper, and was recognised as such at meetings of the Association. Mr. Whiteside—With the greatest respect I think your Lordship is confounding two distinct things. Mr. Brewster cited another case in which Mr. Justice Bay ley delivered a judgment in England, on which they also relied in support of their arg ument. Judge Crampton—Here is the evidence 1 alluded to. In the evidence of a witness named John Jackson, he says that Mr. Duffy of the Nalion attended at a meeting and handed in so aid Mr. Whiteside-1 thought your Lordship had struck out his evidence from your notes altogether. That's the man from Kiltush, who reported after a manner, or took them from the notes of whoever happened to be next him. Chief Justice—\‘ hat do you say to Mr. Brewster's case? Mr. Whiteside—Why, that puts it better for the Crown than it was put originally ; but I think they must give some evidence to identify the person on trial with the person who signed the declaration. The slightest evidence in a legal form to identify those parties will make out their case, but without it I rely on my objection. Air. Tomb called their Lordships' attention to the Bth section of the Newspaper Act, tilt and 7th William the Fourth, which enacted that every such copy so produced and eertitied, is to have the same effect, fur the purposes of evidence, against every such person named as aforesaid, to &l intents and pur poses whatever, as if the original declaration had been produced evidence, and then proved to have been duly signed by the persons appearing by such copy to have signed it. Mr. Bennett—lie is described in the indictment as Mr. Duffy, of Rathmines, and the description in the declaration is the same. 31r. Whiteside—l adroit all that ; but suppose the declara, tion was produced, you must give some evidence of identity. The cases in England are express upon that point. Mr. Brewster said, that in the case of the King against Ilutton, in the State Trials, page 307, the Court ruled that they were only required to produce the declaration. Mr. Whiteside could riot see what that case decided. Mr. Justice Crampton—Suppose there were two persons of the same name on trial on the sane charge, and evidence exactly like the present was brought forward, which of the two is the person that is conclusively bound by the Act of Parlia ment—which of the two is the evidence against? Solicitor-General—Against either. Mr. Justice Crampton—lf it be evidence against either, you might have the two men convicted on the two indictments, upon the same paper, of which it was alleged only one was the proprietor. In my opinion very slight evidence, in addition to the statutable evidence, is required. For my own part, I have no difficulty in point of fact, fur I find on my notes, in the first instance, Mr. Duffy described by a witness, who was very fully and very ably cross-examined, as being the editor of the Nation. I think that Mr. Whiteside is right on the ground he takes—that something in addition to the statutable evidence is required. Attorney-General—The Court is not to infer that a person has been carr3ing on the Nation as Charles Gavin Duffy, the person being actually another person. Mr. Justice Perrin—The question is, whether this is that Charles Gavin Duffy. It is not denied that some Charles Gavin Duffy is publishing the Nation, but the question is whether the traverser here is he. Mr. Justice Cramptun—l think you will find that Jackson, in his evidence, said " Mr. Duffy of the Nation." Mr. Whiteside—We understood that to be proof that Mr. Duffy was a member of the Association, and nothing more. Mr. Justice Crampton thought that was a scintilla of evi dence that he was editor of the Nation. Nlr. O'llagan said he would suppose that there were two Mr. Duffys at the bar, and, then, should it not be proved which of them was the proprietor ? Mr. Jackson, the reporter,. had not stated that Mr. Duffy was the proprietor of the Natiol„,, but that a Mr. Duffy had handed in money. He would not say that the traverser was not identified, but he was not iden tified as having signed the certificate. If two Duffys were at the bar, clearly one should be identified ; and that applied equally in this case, where the witness had not identified - Duffy as the proprietor. The Chief Justice said lie was nut satisfied that the Crown had given sufficient evidence of identity in the case. At that stage the evidence was imperfect. Mr. Bennett said he thought the Act of Parliament was sufficiently plain to render discussion unnecessary. The Chief Justice said the point did not coast within the meaning of the Act. In the case before the Court proof was required that Mr. Duffy was the proprietor. The Act required that he and his publisher sign a declaration. They had signed it, and, if nothing more was required by the Act, that declara tion would be evidence against any person signing it as pro prietor or publisher. That was a document by which the party was bound. But, to prevent any difficulty, the 6th section contained another provision—enabling evi dence to be given against the proprietor or pub lisher in a summary way ; and that evidence was the certi ficate signed by the proper officer of the Stamp-office, and if he had been there to give evidence in place of Mr. Cooper, all might be right. The Act provided, that upon producing a copy of that document, certified under the hand of one of the Com- missioners, and upon proof of its being signed in his hand. writing, it should be received in evidence against any person named in the certificate. Oh (continued the Chief Justice), on reading the Act I am now of opinion that the statutable. proof offered is sufficient. The Attorney-General said he could give other proof aXpr ts ,, prietorship, but he would not, except the Court decided the point against him. Mr. Justice Perrin said that the declaration o! the Attorney. General was rather inconsistent w►th the, course he had pre viously pursued. He had given proof of the handwriting of Mr. Barrett, and he had done so of Mr. Duffy's handwrittutf too, by Mr. Cooper, until Mr. Cooper failed upon crosS.exa mination. The Solicitor-General said, if the Court required proof of the handwriting of Mr. Duffy, the Act of Parliament would be declared nugatory. The Act guarded against the difficulty of proving handwriting by compelling the proprietor to go before the officer ; arid as his person may net be known, and his writing not capable of proof, the policy of the Ad only requires— Mr. Whiteside—The title of the Act of Parliament is wrong, Mr. Justice Crampton._Mr. Whiteside, surely you are not going to amend the title? Air. Whiteside—Oh, yes. The Act ought to be entitled thus:—" Whereas the Crown ought to be able to prosecute any person in the community, and whereas the Crown cannot always do so if proof of identity be required ; be it enacted that no such proof shall be required." Mr. Justice Crampton said he had some difficulty in coming to the same conclusion as the Lord Chief Justice; but he ab stained from pressing his own opinion,. because hotorco.oorp tiered there was abundant prima facie of the PrteePrrieprovtd Lein.. in 31r. Duffy. Mr. Jackson, the r t eror was , present, Ira had e ' attended a meeting at which Mr. Du n y he described and at w hich he handed in nmortliata was net evidence him as the proprietor of the fourknow m ee tings, and calls him the in tact, as present at three or tinsel for the tra f ► ire Nation all through. 'was. He describes him, proprietor of p r o . lr Justicer iet o o r sh tr i versers had not cross - examined . be d d not '\ra h t si ow l i o ; on that point. he was not satisfied with the proof of fered. The spirit of the Act was certainly to remove the diffi culties of roof —formerly it was necessary to prove publication Perrin said 4 I, t .