The Sun. — London, England, 1844-09-02 00:00:00

Mee had ta ken ---- 'Ans e ., place, and, therefore, he felt bound to ti e , r ,_ t hat question in the negative. The Bth qi,ies ther Ip th il '' °'Y their Lordships to the judges was, " \\ he the ; ",,ere as any sufficient ground to reverse or vary ei th J e a "gnient on account of the sentences, or any, or zegarrd" them, passed on the respective defendants, <Nu been h a d part i cularly to the recogn i zances re on 4 1 1 ' and to the period of imprisonment dependent on „,e entering into I such'recognisances ?" Now, iivacnoirs question Judges saw no ground for vary 'eateoce the judgment on account of the Iti, ei ,. s pronounced. The defendants had, under , zite ' sentences, the power to enter into their recogni :andee.sT and thereby shorten the term of their sentence, p a3 , 1 ,, t was to be presumed that at the time the Court f lay :',. judgment, it took care the defendants should Ai l „Lune enough to enter into their recognizances. th e Judges concurred in agreeing, therefore, that es, 'til question must be answered in the negative. t4 9 ,tb :question was , "Wh et h er th ere was any suf the " grOlind to rev e r se th e j u d gmen t on ac count of n o bil ud gMents in th e ass i gnmen t s o f er r or coram stat e s d e . ; l. any or either of them, or of the matters ,of the n such assignments of error, or any or either be ot:'" ewer? Now upon this question it was to were s ., that the error assigned in the writs th e e ' wlt4 the exception of Steele's, the same. In that , e , Se of Steele, ho weve r, the error assigned was it c ue indict men t was no t proper l y f oun d, b ecause h ad not been stated on the back of the bill by the • ruts that the witnesses had been sworn. Now, ith respect to the error of fact alleged by all the Gel • ,re ee , rsers, the answer the judges returned to in thr kaordships was this, that the statute of Victoria, coq ~a t respect, repealled the former one, and that the It e C a e ,Pursued by the Court of Queen's Bench in lt es t 2 ", with respect to the swearing of witnesses, IN this accordance with the opinion of the judges. 4 6„ u ls Point they thought the decision of the Irish it ages was correct. From the preamble of the Act, tia l6t he expected that the alteration about to be . tis e t ',,,,, te d would be generel, and without exception, and ied. - " f a cting words accordingly were, that in cases of jar i cj ae nt where bills were to be laid before a grand the•Wn Ireland, the Clerk of the Crown at assizes, and Iv ' jer k of the Peace at the sessions, should make _ lna its i ", e rsenient thereon directly, to give this enactment th es i forc e th a t was t o ma k e it app li ca bl e t o a ll cases , etil e particulars officers must be taken to be named tita Le t Y 4 , 1 , 3 Y way of exampl e or instances, and not that the 4 4 was applicable to those courts only, of which 12 . 1 ,, 5 e Persons were the proper officers. It would be a of Tel m o d e ~, ''' introducing a restriction in the words Thiel medialre Act, to confine it to those courts only. t... Clerk of the Peace at sessions and the Clerk of the ft wn at assizes held offices and performed duties anal crs to each other, and that construction of the Act re: s ef . ed further confirmation from that part of it which t i e e i r red to the oath, for the latter part of the statute not t reci that the foreman of the grand jury should ah e ave the power of examining witnesses on oath lact7 names Were not indorsed on the back of the of trnent by th e Cl er k o f th e C row n, not the Clerk a e assize s . U pon a reas onable construction of asstatute, they thought that this ground of objection faet.4nsWered. And as to the assignment of error in ea . a ssigned by Thomas Steele, it was founded N v .. ' Part of the Act which was direc aft4 a nd not essential. He did not think st e t a Witness had been fully sworn and examined, de l) , t rite bill returned on his evidence, that it would ha an an Act of its legal operation that the foreman Th e ll eglect e d t o comp l y w i t h cer t a i n o f it s di rec ti ons . that it question they all concurred in agreeing lilestiell' n nist be answered in the negative. The tenth or ~,Put was this—" Is there any sufficient ground t aini .eve rsing the judgment by reason of its not con- ; Aft e e p g any entry as to the verdicts of acquittal ?" itie ta * a caref u l searc h ma d e a t th e Crown-office, no Ns tiee-0 f such an entry could be found where a party ea hush guilty of one part of the indictment they f " L leh he received judgment, and this practice Peas rt,!glit was in conformity with law, for it ap heirie,-„,Lruln Lord Hale that an entry of acquittal N I - .7, *le die might be entered for the defendant Were - ` e r a writ of error had been brought. They Ras t o o f ii , opinion, therefore, that the 10th question and - ,ue answered in the negative. Upon the 11th deli re ,ast question upon which he was anse,,;; e g his ' opinion only, he had in l'ati er ; n g the third question, anticipated those obser istated- w hich would otherwise apply. He had already liv ed that the opinion at which they had already ar tecerciWas) that a general judgment upon the whole r easo n w t as not to be reversed upon a writ of error by !!_ated i c p one or m o r e c ounts being bad. He had also 'flat th,2 s °Pinion th a t it w ould make no difference Porti on ' PUnishment was discretionary. The only the ent ry therefore, to be considered was, whether f or til y ~_ , uu the record, being " that the defendants d, W 33 : c'aences aforesaid be fined and imprisone That to itself a ground for reversing the ,Judgment. that f - e ° which their attention had been called to ~f. was, ht the word should be thei the defei.dant, or Th e - o en ees as aforesaid," IN.: fined n:ld imprisoned.. such Plain interpretatior of these words was this— el' d ". offences as were 'set out in those . counts . of the wh ,letm en t that were free from objection, and of pteh the defcrida:nts had been fo un d gu ilt y b y a pro t il , andirg of the jury. Th a t was th e o ff ences i n t h e i e : e u l i Gth, a n d a ll , su b sequen t counts, and he saw no o b- A: A t- pi to 'the word offences in the plural number. th e "id not thi n k th a t , i n po i nt of law, the words, as isj, Qi'Peared in th e recor d, f orme d a g round of ob ils ' e n. Ile, th ere f ore , th oug ht th a t this question e "--but he offered it as his own humble opinion— Ito be answered altogether i n the negat i ve. Isf;r: Justice PATTESON, i n d e li ver i ng his judgment, th e : that ther e was no diff erence o f op i n i on amon gst ue'r Lordships, except with regard to the 3d and 11th atiet, le ns• The 3d question was whether there was any of an ent ground f ur revers i ng th e i n dictmentby means N e n / defect in the indictment, or of the finding or tatli: ll ,,,g of the findings of the jury upon the said of t e- ;,""t• This question appeared to him to consist 11 , 4 3T I LParts—the first related to the consequence of `lst e , - ,',Lect in the indictment itself; the second to any re ka - ,",,n 1 the finding of the jury on the trial. With of to to the first he would take the liberty l t i eC' sw ,, er ing it, together with the 11th ques 4st ii; which he took to be in effect the same, ~attl - 9 ,,, 0 n1y defect in the indictment was in the 6th 4d Qu estion. .'" Counts, which were bad with regard to the Itt lid -e r sti ". He thought that the consequences of fits defect in the findings of the jury were cured, so e,f e o - i , t hey related to the 4th count, in consequence lef e J r 'ng a nolle prosequi with regard to one of . the th ei .' e ants, the Rev. Mr. Tierney. He did not think \ ‘ith l Y vas any ground for reversing the indictment def e ,:egard to the Ist and 2d counts, by reason of any lipp r e ‘ k tu the findings with regard to those counts. He of 4 r e ,"etided it was competent to find the parties guilty ,Was - h eas Piracy to do a part of a thing, and that there N. -4) ,„ v ,ariance between such a finding and the count the ... -1- bis appears to have been the opinion held in vre - 'e of the King v. Hallibany, 4 Barnewell and 4eds•swell. With regard to the other portions of the htt l e t : a g on those counts, he thought it might be re ad , - ;, a s surplusa g e. He would now proceed to the alte o : 4i nt, with which he would connect the 11th Th o ' l 'n, as he thought they were nearly identical. in " of counts was whether, in an "indictment consist- atiorieinecroaryt: A, B, C, where the verdict is guilty of and the counts A B are good and the antsy C is bad, the judgment being that the defend adis for the offences aforesaid, be fined and imprisoned, is c ell Judgment would be sufficient in point of law, I ;!,iti t °ll , n ed expressly to counts A and B, ca ? ? , Thi s Judgment be reversed on a writ of error . . 41 1 , 0 , 1" , t , as a question which would be likely to arise tie e - 1 . eases in the administrAtion of criminal jus in .; 1 ... t seemed to be argued that they should act it el cases upon the practice which_ took place C on . .. v ti eases, in which, if a verdict was given in a jacl e . '„, w hieh ' was bad, the Court could not pronounce eitl - ,. e nt in consequence of the uncertainty, and tli o iT;, there was an arrest of judgment, or upon the au- In , 1 2 of a late case there would be a venire de novo. or o - „ln'inal proceedings the verdict was merely guilty anal guilty, and there was in such cases nothing fos n ,"RPls to an assessmen t o f damages. The Court lle e : e u its o wn op i n i on as t o th e ju dgment, and no fore tai nts intv could arise. This reasoning, there - Was ) " i d` not apply in criminal cases. Butit RA co ntended that on general principles the that il ti. !at must b e h e ld to apply to each count, and aeve i c i r sentence must be held to be the aggregate of Was foot s eparate sentences, one to each count. This 1 11 00 ,","e first instance in which such a notion had been kle f 7. It had b ee n the custom in criminal courts 'nea's to pass judgment as a whole. It was 1 1 f r , O nly judgment. He was not aware an case in which a writ of error had that nunr°llght in any case of felony on the ground 11 44 • e of the counts in the indictment was bad ; teld, in, cases of misdemeanor such a case shou l d Pa, rat e arise, b ecause w h ere se parate counts laid se nis;enr o ffences, the prosecutor was generally put to offences l ieted • - I °n•The defendant might, indeed, be con aratnli On separate counts, but the judgment was Pavati,Yi Passed on s u ch separate classes of counts se ofeen''3', but th a t was no t a l w ays the case. If an th e ee w ere stated in various ways in various counts, ePint sent ence was general, and it was the universal Nt ' e n) that in such cases one good count a uld of sustain a general sentence. In the time 1 , L om ~ ,-,efqr, the-- Mansfield, a motion had been made e - • that the Lind in arrest of judgm h en ad t, on the ground cou r t i ndictmenth ad i contained one count, but the case s . always declined to interfere. Now, in those tee er ) . l 7 Court must have given its judgment in a lest 0 . / . l°l n, for as it did not admit the motion in ar oad ft ; JudgMent, it did not decide if the count was ter f t ; a sZt• Nothing could be inferred from the man ease ha ui ch judgment was passed at assizes. One eitic.„,,,arisen in which the superior Court had de hair that one count in an indictment on which judgment did ne e .en passed at the assizes was bad, but the count don e e recommend that the prisoner should be par ?' ~' which it would have recommended if the fact ,i4,l%coctnt liei t n i f bad was sufficient to as vitiate night the passed on any one count, the Court of Error could not interfere, because it could not tell that the judg ment hud net been passed upon the good count. This must be the case in cepital of fences, and must also be the case when the amount of punishment was fixed by law; and he could not see why it might not be so in cases where the punishment was discretionary. They were called upon to assume that judgment had been passed in respect to each count, and then to suppose that each count bad been properly constructed—that was the meaning of the words this psesent judgment fur his offences aforesaid. It had been said that a hardship would be inflicted on the defendants, beeause they could not, if again indicted, plead autrefois acquit or autrefois convict. With the good counts that could create no difficulty, and it was a fallacy to suppose it would create any difficulty with the bad ones. It did not he in the mouth of the prosecutor to take advantage and as long as the conviction remained, that would be considered as good, be the counts never so bad. Something had been said about the possibility of a pardon for some of the offences, and not for others. That argument went too far, for it went to show that a general sentence was always bad, even although all the counts should be good. There was the case of the Queen v. Young, and a still stronger case the Queen v. Powell, reported in 3 Barnewall and Adolphus. In this case there had been two counts in the indictment, one for an assault with intent to commit a rape, and another for a common assault. The verdict was, we find the prisoner guilty of the Misdemeanour and offence of which he is accused. The point to be decided was whether these were nomina collective, and if not to which of the two counts they applied, because if they applied to the second only the judg ment which included hard labour was illegal. The Court held that they were nomina collectiva, and applied to both counts. That was a strong presump tive argument in favour of the judgment being good, provided there were one good count. Assuming the judgment to be bad on the Ist, 2d, 3d, 6th, and 7th counts of the indictment, still it remained an entire and good judgment on the other counts of the indict ment, and could not be reversed. Mr. Justice 11Iaunn then proceeded to read his judgment. In cases in which the law had fixed the limits of the judgment, and had left no discretion to the Court, the Court in passing judgment could look to nothing beyond the law and the record, but in cases in which the law had left a discretionary power to the Court as to the amount of punishment the Court would and must look beyond the record, for if it did not there would be no reason for the discretion which had been left to it by law. It was moreover the practice to look beyond the record in such cases, and it was usual in passing judg ment to consider the evidence which had been given at the trial. In cases, also, in which the law only showed the kind of punishment—such, for instance, as fine and imprisonment—and left the amount of such fine, and the duration of such im prisonment, to be awarded by the Court, it was usual for the Court, in deciding on its judgment, to consider circumstances which did not appear upon the record. With respect to the question whether the record found any offence, and what the judgment should be, as no more was necessary to determine those questions than a right construction of the record, and a knowledge of law, they were fit subjects for a writ of error, by which the record was brought before a superior court of law. But the question of the amount of punishment was not the subject of a court of error, which had not before it the evidence given at the trial, or the other matters which determined the amount of punishment. It ap peared to him, therefore, that when the record showed that the defendant had been convicted of an offence for which he was liable to pay a fine, and to be impri soned and find sureties, there was no ground for re versingthe judgment, but there were other parts of the record upon which, if they stood alone, the judgment could be passed. If it were otherwise, it might well be that a judgment would be reversed by a Court, of error, which, in the case of the Court below, would have subjected the de fendants to the very same species and amount of punishment. He thought, therefore, that upon the record, neither in the case supposed by the third question, nor in that supposed by the 11th, could the judgment be reversed by a writ of error. i\lr. Justice COLTMAN said the Lord Chief Jus tice of the Common Pleas having delivered the unanimous opinions of their Lordships ex cept as to the third question, and the 11th, it was unnecessary that he should advert to any other than these two. The third question had already been read, and therefore he should not repeat it ; and to that question he answered that, in his humble opinion, there was sufficient ground for re versing the judgment by reason of the defects of the indictment, and by reason of the defects of the find ing of the jury, and the judgment thereupon. And he grounded his opinion on the reason which would be given at length in the answer to the 11 th question, which reason had been referred to, and which appeared to him to apply to all the defects to which the question referred. To the 11th ques tion he answered that, in his humble opinion, where an indictment consisted of three counts, A B and C, and counts A and B were goOd, and count C bad, and judgment were given against the defen dant for the offences charged, that he be fined and imprisoned, such judgment was insufficient in point of law, if confined expressly to the counts A and B, and ought to be reversed on error. He was well aware that a contrary opinion had existed gene rally among the members of the legal profes sion. But there was, he thought, no difficulty in seeing what was the reason of this ge neral impression ; and when they looked for any authority to support it, there seemed to him to be little or none. The authorities relied on arose on motions in arrest of judgment. The expres sions used referred to the state of things before judg ment was pronounced. They were quite true as ap plied to criminal proceedings in that stage, but the case might be different after judgment was given. The authorities relied on were the Queen v. Ingram, Grant v. Aspen, and the King v. Bedrick. His opinion was, that though the principle was true, with reference to that stage of the question, it was not true with respect to the case of a writ of error after judgment had been recorded. The for Mer had been made to the case of Young and others, in which two counts were good and two bad ; and in which the judgment was held to be good, notwithstanding the badness of two of the counts. But the objection raised to these counts was noticed in that judgment as groundless, nor did it appear to have been at all insisted upon in argument. Therefore it was to be considered, not as a decision, but as a precedent only ; and in a Court of Error, where-the question now arose for the first time, it could not, he thought, be considered as a binding authority. If they considered the question on principle, the argument in support of the sufficiency of the punishment seemed to him to stand thus—when there was but a single count in an indictment, as was the case in old times, although it contained several idle and superfluous allegations, yet if it contained sufficient pertinent matter to sustain a criminal charge, the Court was warranted in passing judgment on the whole count, and passing by the idle matter ; and in like manner, now that it had become usual to insert many counts in an indictment, if there were one good count and others which were bad, the Court might treat the bad count as idle and superfluous matter, and passing it by without regard, give the appropriate judgment which was united to the good count. The practice at the assizes was in conformity with this view of the case, when it was not customary to do more than give a general judg ment in the indictment without stopping to consider whether any counts were bad in point of law. But to this view of the case he should answer, that he did not consider the case of an indictment in a single count, containing some idle and superfluous allegations, could be placed on a footing with an indictment con taining superfluous counts—some good and some bad. For in the former case, the indictment professed to contain one criminal charge only ; in the latter, it pro fessed to contain several distinct charges in each count, as in the nature of a separate indictment. And he contended that the defendant was entitled to know on which count he was sentenced ; and the reason why he was entitled to claim that right was, that if con victed of an offence on an insufficient indictment, and if judgment was passed against him, he might plead the conviction to any other indictment as the same charge. In the case supposed, if the defendant were indicted for the same offence, and that it were in sufficiently charged in count C, how was the Court to deal with the case—how were they to know whether the party had suffered the sentence of the law or not ? It might be said that the Court had• only to look to the original record, and that they must be aware that the Court below, in passing sentence, was aware of the defect in the count, and did not pass any portion of the sentence with respect to it. That reasoning might be justif the Court were always infallible; but the presumption that the Court had not committed an error was not a safe one to act upon, and might be directly at variance with the fact. Surely there ought to • be some more safe ground on which to judge of what the Court had done. Every record ought to state expressly and explicitly what had been done, in order that the party might not lose the benefit of the plea which he was entitled to, and that the Court of Error might be enabled to see whether there had been an error committed, and to redress it if it existed. Lord Coke said, in the Third Institutes, p. 214, that in the case of an acquittal the Judges ought before judment to look into the old record, and upon due consideration thereof to cause it to be en tered. It was said by Lord Hale, p. 293, vol. h., that where the indictment was insufficient it was reason to have quod eat sine die special in the cause, and then the acquittal was applicable only to the in sufficiency of the indictment. The remarks of these two eminent judges were made with reference to the entry of a judment insufficient in fact. The judgment must, perhaps, have been free from error if it had been expressly confined to the good counts, and no judgment had been given on the bad counts; but where the judgment was, as in the case supposed general, it must be supposed that it had been given cn all the counts, and it had indeed ex pressly been said to be so, and one of the counts being bad, the judgment seemed to him to be erroneous. If they supposed a case which must be allowed to be possible, that the Court below, mistaking the law, passed judgment with reference to a count which con tabled no legal charge, and the party was sentenced under that count, his punishment would be manifestly unjust. It might be said that the Court, by whom the cause was first tried, knew that count C was bad; still the Court must have given judgment with refer ence to the bad count, and there would be introduced an inconsistency of a strange nature if the Court of Error, in looking to the record of the judg ment, held that it must be presumed that the Court below passed no judgment on the bad count. Such an inconsistency ought not to be admitted if the whole were to be considered as anything in the nature of a science, or anything more than a rude collection of arbitrary rules. It might be said that the rule was sufficiently established. It seemed to him that it was neither consistent with the dignity of the law as a science, nor, what was more important, did it tend to promote the ends of substantial justice if a judgment in such a case were reversed, and the defendants still remained liable to be pu nished on an indictment properly framed. In reply to the latter part of the 11th question, it appeared to him that if counts A and B were cer tain, and the judgment were that for his said offences he be imprisoned for a year, the same rule would ap ply, though partially only. And though the probabi lity in that case would be greater that judgment was given with respect to the counts A and B, and not with respect to count C, yet he thought it ought to appear distinctly on which count judgment was given. The judgment would be substantially correct, al though technically imperfect, which would not be the case under the former supposition. Mr. Justice WILLIAMS then read his opinion, to the effect, that although there were differences amongst the Judges upon the 3d and 11th questions, yet that the material difference was in respect to the latter. Before he should go to consider those differences he would premise, that on the merits of the case, properly so considered, there was no difference amongst his Learned Brethren, and that in the opinion of the Judges these were good counts which would sustain the judgment. There had, also, been no difference in the Court below upon the plea of abatement, that the finding was complete in point of law, and that the motion to arrest the judgment must be refused, because there were some good counts in the indictment. The objections were purely of a technical nature, and were to be examined in the spirit of exact and minute inquiry. He had said that the differences amongst the judges arose on the last question submitted to them by their Lord ships, and, in observing upon that question, he would draw the attention of their Lordships to this point—that there was no difference between this case and any other criminal case in which the verdict of guilty was recorded, one of the counts in the indictment being bad and another good. The Lord Chief Justice (Tindal) had told their Lordships that there was no difference of opinion amongst the judges, that some of the counts were good, and that the verdict was unexceptionable, and the sentence rightly recorded. He would come therefore to the 11th question, the last and most important. In answer, his opinion was that the finding was right throughout, and there remained only the question whether, upon an indictment in which there were good and bad counts, and a sentence of fine and imprisonment had been recorded, that sentence was to be reversed on account of the defi ciency of some of the counts. Now the constant opinion had been that where the finding was sustained by one perfect count, the sentence was not to be re versed. Perhaps, as some of his learned brethreen seemed to think, that was an old error, but if so it ought to be shown and not presumed. He was disposed to take the dicta of Lord Mansfield in the case of Grant and Assop, and in that quoted from Cooper 175, by the Lord Chief Justice. That Learned Lord held that in criminal cases, where one count was good, the ver dict was good. Surely that was entitled to some weight, being the deliberate and repeated opinion of an eminent Judge, not given as an ori ginal opinion, but as a statement of what had been decided. and acted upon by the Courts. The Learned Judge then cited two cases from Barnewall and Adolphus, in which the defendants were found guilty generally, and the Court of Queen's Bench decided that the badness of some of the counts did not vitiate the verdict, other counts being good. In the case of the King against Rhodes and another (Lord Raymond's Reports, 786), which was an indictment for subornation of perjury, the defendants were found guilty, and were sentenced to transportation; whereupon motion was made in the Court of King's Bench for arrest of judgment, on th►e ground that the assign ments of perjury were wrong in all the counts but one, and that, as the Judge had the discretion of awarding either transportation or imprisonment, and had chosen the severer punishment, he might have done so upon some of the counts in which ; the assignments of perjury were wrong. But, , in that case, it was ruled that if all the counts were bad but one, that was sufficient for the judgment of the Court. In another case, that of an indictment for obtaining money under false pre tences, there were four indictments, only two of which set forth the pretences, the defendants were found guilty and sentenced to transportation, and a writ of error was _brought. That case followed in point of time the case of the King against Mason, which esta• blished the rule, that were the pretences were not set forth the counts were bad in law. In the other case the badness of some of the counts was established, but the judgment was held good. Here he differed from his Learned Brother Coltman, and considered these cases in point, as the badness of the counts were placed beyond doubt, and the defendants were found guilty generally, the punishment being discretionary. It might have been imprisonment or transportation, and it was argued, as in the present case, that the Court might be influenced in its sentence by the bad counts. On these points he agreed with his Learned Brother Maule, who had before addressed their Lordships. Here he begged leave to state his opinion that the matter for the Court of Error was whether the Court below had acted according to law. The Court of Error could not say what the Court below might or might not have done, but whether what they hid done was lawful or not. There might be something on the part of the Court below to justify ani madversion. There might have been something un constitutional, but still that might not be illegal If the Court had sentenced the defendants to trans portation, that would be an illegal sentence; because transportation was not the sentence assigned by law to the offence. But as the sentence was justified by some of the counts, the sentence would not be af fected by the consideration whether there were not other counts which, if not bad, would justify a heavier punish ment. Itw as his opinion that it was of no moment whether the punishment was discretionary, or fixed by statute, the judgment must be considered as founded on those counts which sustained the verdict, and not on those which did not sustain it. The judgment could not be supposed to proceed upon those counts which were vague, and amounted not to any charge at all—nor on the finding of the jury which was bad in law, but on such finding as the Court might legally pronounce its judgment upon. What was there to make their Lordships think that the judgment was given on the erroneous part of the record, when the Judges of the Court below had declared upon the motion for arrest of judgment that it was not so. His answer, therefore, to the 11th question was in the negative. Mr. Baron GURNEY then rose to deliver his judg ment, but he read it in such an extremely low tone of voice as to be all but inaudible in the reporters' gallery. He said that he and his Learned Brethren were of opinion that the sth, Bth, 9th, 10th, and 11th counts in the indictments were good counts. The judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench in Ireland he thought might be well sustained. He was of opinion that the finding of the jury in the first count, which was a good count, was a defective finding. He could not distinguish between a bad finding in a good count, or a good finding in a bad count. They appeared to him to amount to the same thing. It had been contended, at their Lordship's bar, that inasmuch as some of the counts were bad, no judgment could be pronounced on the good ones. This argument was grounded upon the analogy which was supposed to exist between civil and criminal cases. It was much to be regretted that the rule existed with respect to civil cases, inasmuch as j us tice was frequently thereby defeated. But, in criminal cases, it always had been held that one good count in an indictment could support a judgment. It had been contended at their Lordships' bar that the judgment of the Court ought to have been to award so much punishment to one kind of offence, and so much to another. This was contrary to all principle of law. The Court before which any case was tried, always ascertained if there was one good charge, and then considered, in awarding punishments, the whole circumstances of the case. But this was not matter for consideration by a Court of Error. They had no means of judging whether the punish ment was proper or not. All they had to do was to consider whether the law authorised the proceed ing in the case. Mr. Baron ALDERSON next rose to deliver his judgment, and said, he felt that if their Lordships were to reverse the judgment in this case it would be productive of great inconvenience, and would involve a failure of justice in criminal cases for the future. It was with great satisfaction he found that this was merely a technical question, and upon its merits he agreed with a great portion of his learned brethren. of ii THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENINO, SEPTEMBER 2, 1844. SIP 'AU OF NEWS' The universal belief of the profession was, as long as he could remember, the same as that which was con tained in the report of the case Grant and Astell, and as !aid down by Lord Mansfield. The invariable answer given in Court to an application similar to that which had been made to their Lordships was, that it was immaterial to enter into the discussion, because there was one good count in the indictment. If they were to search the reports they would find many criminal cases in which judgment had been pronounced upon an indictment in which there were one or more defective counts, and yet it had never occurred that such an objection had been made the ground of argument in a Court of Error. This objection had always escaped the notice of the most acute counsel and the most astute judges. He thought that some of the difficulties were real, but that they were not all important 'in the present case. The law proposed no perfect rule—it knew that nothing was perfect, and it adopted the best rule it could. The question then was, was there any analogy between civil and criminal cases—he thought there was not. The course pursued in civil cases by the law was reasonable and just, but in cri minal cases it would be most unjust. In all cases, the Court of Error ought to see that the judg ment which was brought before it in error was right or wrong. He thought if the Court of Error found that there were good counts in the in dictments upon which punishment had been inflicted, they could not say that the Court below had made a mistake. If such was to be the case, many defendants who would be properly punished would escape. The Learned Judge then referred to the case of the King v. Young and the King v. Mason ' the former of which he considered almo s t a de c ided decision on the point. He thought there was quite sufficient to support the judgment of the Court below on this point. As to the second branch of the 3d question, it depended on the reasonable construction of the words of the judgment, which was that the defendant was to be imprisoned. Now, he saw no solid distinction between a charge improperly stated, but properly found, and a charge properly stated and improperly found. It must also be borne in mind that a Court of Error could not reverse a judgment upon the conjecture that it was wrong. He thought, in the present case, it was impossible to say with any certainty that there was any error. Whether the punishment was discretionary or not made no distinction. For those reasons, therefore, his humble answer to their Lordship's questions, both as to the 3d and 11th, was in the negative. Mr. Baron PARKE, in delivering his judgment, said that, with regard to the 3d question proposed by their Lordships, he regretted that, after fully considering it, he could not bring his mind to concur with the majority of his brethren respecting it. There were two counts of the indictment bad, there was no legal finding on three, the jury having found the parties guilty of more than one offence upon counts which charged them with one only, and the judgment was that the defendant for his offences aforesaid be fined and imprisoned. But it could not be said how much of the punishment was awarded for the offences of which the parties were not legally guilty. There were two modes by which apparently this error might be rectified—the first was, that the court below had awarded punishment only upon the good counts ; the second was, that the same punihment, the same irnpri-onment, and the same fine was inflicted for each and every offence. With regard to the first, it appeared to him that the Court must he taken to have given judgment on the counts which were good, and on those counts only. With regard to the second, it could not be supposed, from the language of the record, whatever might be said of the sentence and of the imprisonment, that the same fine was in flicted for each and every offence. Prima facie parts of the sentence was given for one offence and part for another, and the Court of Error could not apportion it, as they did not know the facts for which the fine was imposed. There was a prevailing opinion that one good count in an indictment would support a judgment. No doubt, in practice, judgment was often passed without adverting to the counts, and the judgment was never entered on the record, unless where it was required for a special plea. or for a writ of error. That opinion appeared to him to have grown up without adequate grounds. The rarity of writs of error in criminal cases was the reason why the attention of the profession had not been much called to these cases, and hence the opinion had been suffered to pass unquestioned. The dicta of Lord Mansfield and of Chief Justice Eyre had been al luded to, but in his opinion, after giving the matter the most anxious consideration, the utmost that the opinions of those Learned Judges went to was this, that when a general verdict was re turned it was sufficient to enable the Court at once to proceed to pass sentence. In the case before Chief Justice Eyre, as the punishment was a capital one, he was never called on to consider the point. In case of the King v. Young the objection which had been taken in the present case was not available, because in that case the defendant had been sentenced to a punishment in accordance with the provisions of the statute, and no part of that sentence could be ascribed to the bad counts. He doubted, therefore, if the received opinion. was so established by usage as to compel its adop tion. Allusion had been made to the inconvenience which would arise if that opinion were decided to be erroneous. He could not see in what that incon venience would consist. The only result would be this, that the defendants being entitled to an acquittal on all bad counts, the counsel for the prosecution would have to examine the record to see that judg- ment was not entered upon the bad counts. For these reasons, notwithstanding the respect which he entertained for the opinions of his brethren, he was compelled to differ from the majority of them on these points, and to answer the third and eleventh questions in the affirmative. Lord Chief Justice TINDAL said that Mr. Justice Coleridge (as we understood) was unavoidably absent from illness, but that he had sent his written opinion, in which he stated his concurrence with the majority of the Judges. 'The Loin CHANCELLOR—My Lords, I move that the further consideration of this question be postponed to Wednesday next. Lord BROUGHAM —And that the opinions of the judges be printed. The motion, with Lord Brougham's addition, was then put and agreed to, and their Lordships adjourned till Wednesday. The galleries and the space below the bar were crowded during the - whole of the proceedings. The seats at the foot of the Throne were completely occu pied by the eldest sons of Peers, and the attendance of Peers was very numerous. There was a crowd waiting outside the doors, anxious to hear the result. LLOYD'S SHIPPING.-(THIS DAY.) LONDON, SEPT. 2 . —Wind this day at noon, westerly, fresh breeze, and fine. e N i 1 i e n w g P O RTS3IOUTH, AUG. 31—Wi n d, E.S.E.—SId. Gipsy, South Seas ; Harwich, t y Y on o , rk N . ew S y Eu o T rk .. DEAL, AuG. 31: AND S EPT. I.—Wind, E . to E.N.E. Willem,l.—Prince Calcutta —Arrd. Boning, and Ceraur, for Batavia, and proceeded. Sld. Diana and S cot i a, M a d ras ; O cean an d of Wales, l Bebe, Ichaboe ; William Woolley, Valparasio ; Janet Willis, Demerara; Florence, Madeira ; Cecops, Quebec ; Seymour, Cardiff and Valparaiso. Arrd. Elizabeth, Quebec. SHOREHAM, AUG. 3 1.—Arrd. Matthew Thompson, St. Andrews. OFF DOVER, Arc. 31.—Iwee, Anthony, Lucie, and Mozambique, all from Rotterdam for Batavia. OFF THE WIGHT—M ag d a l ene Havannah for Bremen ; Condor , Mayo, Havannah for Hamburgh ; Amphitrite, Nickie, for Rotterdam. SOUTHAMPTON, SEPT. I .—Arrd. Lady Mary Wood steamer, Gibralter, left 24th instant. CARLISLE, AUG. 30.—The Sally, Detchburn, from St. John's, New Brunswick, on leaving Gilloth Bay, went ashore on Skinbuness yesterday and upset, but was righted after cutting away topmasts, and was towed up to Port Carlisle; crew saved. CLYDE, AUG. 30.—Arrd. Am an d a, Daves, St. John's New Brunswick. Sailed, 29th, Marion, Calcutta ; Ar cadian (steamer), Halifax ; Charleston, Blonde, and Onyx, Quebec ; 30th, Vixen, Port Philip ; Sidney, De merara ; Jane Christie, Berbice ; Magrana, St. John's ; Mary Allan, Montreal. DUBLIN, AUG. 30.—Arrd. Trial, Kyle, St. John's, New Brunswick. OFF WATERFORD, PRIOR TO AUG. 31.—Emulous, Barbadoes. AUG. 30. SS SherbrokeC, Quebec. i.. () IL R it K u , su, AUG. 27.—Sid• Energy, Quebec. LEITH, AUG. 31.—Arrd. West Indian, Ichaboe. DARTMOUTH, AUG. 31.—S1d. Malibran Bonny. O F F PLYMOUTH , AUG. 31 . — Tweed, Walker, Africa. SQ.EuLe.:,Necrig.ah7o._°',Alvrriii.lliaGnirirnadrlke Parker, William , Spence, St. Porto Rico; Sisters, Williams, Laguna ; Agnes, Braith , and Earon, Rushton, Vic toria, and Fenella. Sld. Perseverance, St. John's, New Henry Bliss Quebec; Mary Stoddart w J John's, h i t n e " s ,La New Guaira ; Brunswick;Au. S3ir lCape i ° H nA : l e y f a b r:n e G d , I SEPT.oc s o hP ad a rubseouupl;ai and Harmony, , Calcutta; Ge neral Wiltshire, Ichaboe; George IV., Rio Grande; Brunswick; Harriet, Cameona, Monte Video; Adams, Maranham ; Malabar and Pharsalla, New Orleans; Isabella and monteguma, New York; Bonanza, Newfoundland. , - HULL, AUG. 31.—The Mascencomb (Wisconsin) of Newfoundland, was fallen in with, 28th ult., about eight miles from the Outer Elbe Light Vessel, dismasted, and with signal of distress flying, and towed into Cuxhaven Roads by the Leeds steamer, arrived here. The steamer Hamburgh, hence, was passed 29th ult., towing the schooner Fear Not, with damage. The Rambler, Stephen from Konigsberg to London, was abandoned in .terl-3-d; r.‘ie\rnid't Reed, S to a sinking state, 26th ult. ; crew (except the master) saved. PLYMOUTH, AuG. 31.—Arrd. Ferdin an d, M ex i co for Havre, with rudder dam a g ed. JERSEY, Auc. 28.—S1d. Loyal Willi am , Newfound land. ArFrdil:3l,loeUtiTellu,neAirGa.noo 31 , .— vi Ii d, nd iitt E n .l fresh breezes.— uilia. AND 13tibltr Optitton. " Who runs may read." PO2EIGN. Notwithstanding the improved tone of the French journals noticed in another article, our readers will perceive that they are still ingenious in that species of discovery which is called " the finding of mares' nests." For example, the Toulonnais accounts in the following manner for the unwillingness of the French. Government to publish the Prince de Joinville's dispatch We are assured that the Prince de Joinville has dwelt upon the precision with which the eighty guns of the town of Tangiers were pointed, and he declares that they must have been served by Englishmen. He also mentions the complimentary visit of Admiral Owen's aide-de-camp, and his refusal to admit him into his presence. Other passages, containing more or less ill-feeling towards the English, have no doubt determined the Ministry in withholding the publication of his Royal Highness's re port." The National, in another passage, writes—" The bad feeling of England towards us is demonstrated every day by the clearest eridence. We have already cited various facts in support of our assertion, and we shall now give the following :—The Bey of Tunis is, like the Emperor of Morocco, our neighbour in Algeria. The Queen of England has sent him a present, consisting of jewellery, to the value of 8,0001. sterling. It is known that small presents cement friendship ; consequently, if the Bey of Tunis become the ally of England, he certainly will not remain the friend of France. In time of peace this would be but of little consequence, but in case of war, the hostility of the Tunisians would be troublesome to us. Thence it follows that, if England at present seeks their friendship, it is a proof that she entertains hostile intentions, and that we must redouble our vigilance." 'The non sequitur suggested, after the word " conse quently," is a curious specimen of polemical logic. The inference from the premises assumed by the National is not that which he thus deduces ; but rather that if the King of the French would make the Bey of Tunis a richer present than the Queen of England has tranmitted to him, the Bey would remain the attached friend of Louis I'hillippe, and not of Queen Victoria. This might nut be- absolute gallantry in the Bey ; but it would be, we suspect, the morale of Tunisian morality. W e find in the Frankfort Gazette des Postes the fol lowing extract from a letter dated Copenhagen, the 22d ult. :—" The death of the Grand Duchess Alexandra, wife of the presumptive heir of the Crown has inspired much sympathy, but, in a political point of view, the im pression caused by this event is quite different. The connexion which was formed between Denmark and Russia was not seen with pleasure. The marriage was even less popular in the Duchies. The presence of the Russian fleet has caused considerable irritation here. Serious fears wore entertained that the Emperor of Rus sia coveted both Copenhagen and Constantinople. At Stockholm the entrance of port had been fortified, to prevent surprise." Adrices from Tripoli, of the 12th ult., states that an insurrection had broken out in the Gerian mountains, and that Miludi Sheik, the ex-Minister of the deposed Mahmudi family, had placed himself at its head. A body of Turkish cavalry, marched against them, had been repulsed,,with the loss of their Colonel, Ismail Bey, who was either killed or taken prisoner. The son of the Pacha was preparing to embark for Bengazy, to assume the command of the expeditionary army. It was rumoured that some Frenchmen were directing the movements of the insurgent mountaineers, but for this report there seemed little foundation. _ Athens appears to have been recently the seat of serious disturbances, which are described by the Greek Observer, of the 19th ult., to have occurred on the 16th, three days previously, on the occasion of the elections. The mayor having presented himself before the hall in which the electors were assembled, at the head of a party of gendarmes, previous to the counting of the votes, the people opposed his admission, and a collision ensued between them and the military, in which one man was killed, and several wounded. The King imme diately repaired to the scene of these disorders, and was enthusiastically cheered by the multitude. The Ministry had resigned on the previous evening, and the people, hearing that Coletti had undertaken the construction of a new Cabinet, retired quietly, and tranquillity was re- stored. The Gazette de France states, as a rumour, that Baron Athalin, first aide-de-camp to his Majesty, had left town for London. Great interest, and more uncertainty, attach to the rumours touching the fate of the renowned Abd-el- Kader. The Siecle has the following passage, quoting from Marshal Bugeaud's dispatches :—" In the opinion of the entire army," says the Marshal, " the battle of Isly is the consecration of our conquest of Algeria, and ought to accelerate the conclusion of our differences with the empire of Morocco." This expression may account for the pacific news which was current at Marseilles, and of the surrender to us, by the Moors, of Abd-el-Kader. Such a report, however , requires confirmation. The Journal des Debats states that, notwithstanding the positive assurance given in several journals that the Emperor of Morocco, after the battle of Isly, sent a detachment of his 'guard to arrest Abd-el-Keder, the Government had not received, up to a late hour on Fri day afternoon, any confirmation of such a report, and that such reports should be received with a certain reserve. The Paris correspondent of the Times remarks, " That _ • the Emperor would . readily accept them (the new terms about to be proposed by the French Cabinet to Abder rahman), is also generally believed, but the difficulty that prevented his acquiescence in the original terms still exists in the person of Abd-el-Kader. How long it or that redoubtable warrior may continue to exist, con stitutes the entire question. That he will submit is not to be expected. That (as rumour states) the French Government have set a price (two millions of francs) upon his head must be a calumny. That some of his own followers or emissaries of Abderrahman may at tempt his life, is quite possible, but there is nothing be fore us to show that with the very best intentions the Emperor of Morocco can, or could, expel him the empire. The pacific arrangement of the affair, though more pro bable than it appeared some days since, does not there fore appear at hand." From other advices, also, it ap pears that the rumour as to the taking of Abd-el-Kader was still very prevalent, but the French Government had yet received nothing to confirm it. There is no doubt, however, as to the existence of a circular, in which Marshal Bugeaud announces the sending out of 400 cavalry by the Emperor of Morocco against Abd-el- Kader. Some of the Paris journals state that a letter has been received by the Minister of War from General Bugeaud, announcing his return to Oran, and his having left the command-in-chief of the army on the frontier with General Lamoriciere. Some affect to consider this as a clear proof that the operations for this season are over. The Moniteur Parisien announces that copies of the letters exchanged between the son of the Emperor of Morocco and his father, together with a diplomatic cor respondence, were found in the Moorish camp. They were inclosed in two chests. A large convoy of gun powder had likewise been intercepted by the French. The Debuts says—" It is known that Captain Bouat, Governor of Senegal, who had left Paris to join the French squadron at Cadiz, could not arrive in time to take part in the operations against Mogadore. It is he whom the Prince has charged with the duty of bringing to the King the colours taken from the Moors. He will arrive probably to-day at Paris. As this brave and able officer was lamenting, in presence of the Prince, his hav ing arrived too late for the attack of Mogadore, the latter said to him—' My dear commandant, you wore taking part with us although absent, for it is to your excellent information that we owe a great part of our success. " The Courrier Francais states, that at ten o'clock yesterday morning Lord Cowley went to Neuilly, and had a long conference with the King, M. Guizot, and another personage, believed, it says, to he Marshal Sebastiani. " Marshal Soult," says the Constitutionnel, "has re ceived a new and most earnest invitation to return to Paris, in order to give his sanction to the determination come to in the negotiations with England." The Constitutionnel states positively that Baron Atha lin has left Paris for London, with letters to many in fluential personages in England, and among them one from Lady Cowley to the Duke of Wellington. The Revue de Paris says :—" Accounts have just been received from Messrs. Garella and Cortines, the en gineers who were sent some time since by Governmen to survey the Isthmus of Panama. The full results are not yet known, but it is said that they reject the idea of a railroad, and decide in favour of a canal ; the great object being, not the mere conveyance of merchandise across the Isthmus, but a union of the Pacific and the Atlantic, so as to enable ships to pass from one to the other in a few hours, instead of having to go round South America, after doubling Cape Horn." A Morning Contemporary observes :—" Our letters from Constantinople show that there is not the slightest ground for the assumption that the Turkish fleet (the departure of which from the Dardanelles supplied to the French Government the pretext for nearly doubling its already extensive fleet in the Mediterranean) was ever destined for Tunis." The pacification of the Lebanon, in which a Turkish Commissioner is still busily em ployed, seems to have been the actual object of this armament. Wultusch and Petronevitch have been allowed to re turn to Servia. The Commissioner sent into Albania to inquire into the grievances complained of by the people of that province, has returned to Constantinople. The trial of the Albanian prisoners is over ; 500 are con demned to different degrees of punishment, of whom twenty-eight to death. The Sultan has, however, com muted the punishment of the latter to the galleys for life. The Russians are said to have suffered severely in the Caucasus. A great sensation has been created in Malta by a recent act of the Government in respect to the coin in circulation. The South American dollar had been forced by the Government, at the fixed value of 4s. 4d., which was more than its real value. It appears that these dollars are of no defined weight, and the consequence has been that a great quantity of coin has been intro duced, the value of which is under 45., though circulated at 4s. 4d. Latterly, however, the public offices h ave refused the light coin, and the consequence is an im mense loss to the public, besides an immense incon venience, of which the Malta papers speak in the bitterest terms. The Madrid papers announce that the elections pro mise to be very favourable to the Government ; an un a opponents, s tlken care b o t t o frontier, with hints as d s h c ea o cn u ud b ri t ed e a d the he t r se n tan b r u e f t nl o ep r cht t o h rb e s y G a cs o e rn v o e d r n gt m h e et n h t e h r d to the danger of returning. M. Cortina, so long the object of angry menaces, has at length been compelled to withdraw out of Spain. H e has taken refuge in France. It seems to be the general impression in Madrid that Narvaez, at the earnest and reiterated instance of the Queen-Mother, is resolved to co-operate with her in bringing about the general "restoration" of the whole of the Church property. That is to say, we imagine, the unscrupulous intriguer and reckless adventurer is pledged to aid an infatuated woman in the attempt to divert from its appropriation to the State purposes and financial difficulties of their distracted country, as well as the portion of Church property which remains un disposed of; as the proceeds of that large portion which has been already sold. The prospect of resuscitation, moral, political, or constitutional, seems to be, day after day, becoming more and more hopeless to a State which ought at this moment, instead of being overwhelmed in the most shameful degradation, to be taking root among the foremost nations of Europe. COTTAT-1"11811XOTILABLZ. The Duke of Wellington is expected to leave Apsley House today, on a visit to her Majesty at Windsor Castle, where an illustrious circle have been invited by the Queen to assemble during the week. The Duke and Duchess of Buckingham's grand fete at Stowe, in honour of the Marquis of Chandos attaining his majority, is fixed to take place to-morrow se'nnight, the 10th inst. The Earl and Countess of Ripon and family have left Carlton-gardens, for Leamington Spa, Warwickshire, where they purpose to make a journey of several weeks. The Earl and Countess of Egmont arrived at Chelten ham on Wednesday last, from Ireland. The Earl and Countess of Sandwich have, during the last week, been entertaining a party at Ilinchinbrook, near Huntingdon, for the races there. The Earl of Mansfield has left Caen Wood, Hampstead, for Scone Palace, Perthshire. Viscount and Viscountess Palmerston, by the last let ters from Germany received by the family connexions, had left Ems, where they passed four days with Lord and Lady Beauvale, for Wiesbaden, at which spa th?. Marois and Marchioness of Lansdowne and Lady . Louisa Fitzmaurice are staying, as also Viscount Ebrington. After a sojourn of two or three days there, the Noble Viscount and Viscountess were to go directly to Berlin.. Lady Heytesbury and the Hon. Miss A'Court ll shortly leave Brighton for Dublin Castle, to join the Lord Lieutenant. The Lord Chancellor is expected at his residence in George-street, Hanover-square, to-day, from his seat Turville Park, near Henley-on-Thames, where the Noble and Learned Baron and family intend to pass the autumn. The Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone will be unable to join his col!eagues at the Cabinet Council to-day, the Right Hon. Gentleman with a party of friends being at Fettercarne, N. 8., enjoying the sports in the Highlands. His Excellency the American Minister has gone on a tour in Scotland. wascELL.&NEOI7B. Lady Byron, the widow of the deceased poet, visited Newport last week. On walking out on Friday (says the Monmouthshire Merlin) a bust of her husband caught her view in a shop in High-street, and her Ladyship went in and gazed for some time at the likeness of her " lost Childe Harold." _ _ A novel kind of depredation has recently been com mitted in the neigbourhood of Milton, near Wychvvood. Persons have gone into the fields where wheat has been standing in the sheaf, and, putting the end of the sheaf containing the ears of wheat into a bag, thrashed out the corn, and set up the bare sheaves again, as they found them, carrying off a good grist. A gentleman residing at Woolwich has recently be come possessed of a manuscript of extraordinary interest, the rough draft of Bonaparte's celebrated letter to the Prince Regent on his surrender to the English in 1815. In a note appended to it, General Gourgaud states that it is the " rough draft of the letter which the Emperor sent me to carry from the Isle of Aix to the Prince Re gent of England on the 14th July, 1815." Yesterday morning the river again presented a most extraordinary appearance, in consequence of the tide, which became so low at one period as to cause almost a suspension of the navigation of the steam-boats, particu larly above bridge, where several got aground for some time, but with considerable difficulty were able to pro ceed to their respective destinations well freighted with passengers, which the fineness of the weather had attracted. Verily children do put strange questions to their papas and mammas, sometimes, to wit :—" Pa, why do you wear straps ?" "To keep my trousers down, John." " Pa, why do you wear braces ?" "To keep my trousers up, John." " Well, pa, that is funny." Pote, in his History of Windsor, speaking of its dis tance from London, observes that " it is not past halfe a day's journeye removed from that flourishing citie." It is now not past half an hour's journey, but approachable in eighteen minutes. Great alterations since Elizabeth was Queen. HONEY AND COMMERCIALNEWS CITY, QUARTER TO THREE. The transactions in Cotton were of a limited character, and owing to the abundant supply buyers had an advan tage. Sales 2,500 bales. Shares were quoted as follows : —Chester and Birkenhead, New, 21i ; Chester and Holyhead, 6i ; Dublin and Cashel, 7 ; Edinburgh and Glasgow, 641 ; Glasgow and Dumries, 11. 3s. 6d. ; Gran Junction, Halves, 108 ; Ditto ' Quarters, 39a ; Great Western, Halves, 83 ; Liverpool and Manchester, New, 35; ; London and Birmingham 321. Shares, 37 ; Manchester and Birmingham, Quarters, 5 ; Manchester, Bolton, and Bury, 115 ; Midland Counties, 105 ; North Union, 1241 ; Preston and Wyre, 17.1 ; Out— S h—- _astern, 37i ; Ditto, New, 111. There were late accounts in town this morning from the Cape of Good Hope, namely, to very nearly the end of June. A Government minute had been issued by order of Sir Peregrine Maitland, for the purpose of encouragirg the arrivals of mechanics, labourers, &c., to the colony, where hands of almost all descriptions were very much wanted. From statistics that have been made out respecting the wool produce, this important fact is elicited :—ln the three months before the present state ment was completed, the exports of the flour from the Cape amounted to 847,5141b5. In the same period of time ten years since the shipments were but 52,7921b5., showing an increase of at least sixteen times. The general exports from the colony were also on the ad vance, wines perhaps excepted. On the coast there were about 40 vessels taking in guano. It is asserted upon com petent authority that one mercantile firm has cleared not less than 20,000/. to 23,0001. by being first in the field and importing the new manure into Portland. From Natal, the, advices received on the present occasion are not of any interest. In the " City Article" of Saturday, a singular misprint occurred. It is there stated that the Wellington, Captain Chadwick, " has just come up the river, with a fine cargo of British manufactures, from New York." Quite the contrary, she has just left for New York, with an excel lent cargo of British goods. ra The Consul Market opened this orning with great firmness, and the price touched 99, but a sale of 50,000/. by an influential broker caused a reduction to 98i- for Money, and to 98i for the Account. There is not any news of interest from the Continent this morning. The present price is 98-a both Transfer, to-morrow, and for Account. The price of Exchequer Bills is at 755. to 735. premium. The other Stocks are a trifle lower than yesterday. The alterations in the Foreign Funds have been very slight. Mexican, Dutch, and Brazilian Bonds have been Hat. Spanish Consols are quoted at 22i ; and the Three per Cents. at 33?,- The principal changes in the Share Market have been a rise in London and Birmingham Railway to 122 prem., and in the Great Western to 65 prem. The other shares are much the same as on Saturday. BRITISH FUNDS THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK. (From the Official List.) Bank Stock ..... 199 3 per Cent. Reduced Annuities 99 %%% 3 per Cent. Consols. Annuities 9 8%%% 3 per Cent. Reduced Annuities New 3% per Cent. Annuities...—. .......... 101 100%3( Long Annuities, Expire sth Jan. 1860 12% Ditto 30 Years, Expire sth Jan. 1860. l2 3-16 Consols for Account ........ ........ India Stock Exchequer Bills, I%d. 156 d. 10001. 1 .....».«.„.„.„.„.. „..........• 74.73 pm. auw.••..•-• •••••••••••• 00000 ..... •••••••••••• 75 74 pm. Ditto 5ma1 1..„.„.„. „..... ............ 75 74 pm. Ditto Advertis e d ......... FOREIGN FUNDS THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK. Brazilian Bonds, 5 per Cent. B 4TA r i Columbian Bonds. Mexican Bonds, 1837. 5 per Cent . ................ 95 U Ditto for the Account... " .... ............... ..... 35% 3 / 4 Portuguese Bonds. 5 per Cent. ............ Ditto Converted 44 Spanish Bonds, , Five per Cent 1840 22% Ditto for the Account ...........»....«.» 22,4% Ditto Three per Cent. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• -- Ditto for the Account ..„.«.».»...........• 333434% Dutch 2% per Cents. ..... ........... ........ Dutch 5 per Cent 5.•.............•........•....•..• lO O 3 / 4 % 50‘ New Loan. 5 per Cents. (1837) PRICES OF SHARES THIS DAY AT ONE. RAILWAYS. PAID. PER RRARIL Birmingham and Gloucester lOO .." .... 109 to 108 Ditto New ............ ..... .. ........ ... 1734 26% ... to Bristol and Gloucester 3O .... ..... 54 Chester and H01yhead............... 5 ..... .... 67 - Dublin and Ca5he1....... ........ ..... 2% 7% to —. Eastern Counties ..... ...." .... .23 ......... 11%% to Ditto New Register . Z....Bl. 65. Rd....... 134 - % Edinburgh and Glasgow ............ 50 .....».. 66 65% to 66 Grand Junction to -- 100 219 Ditto Shares 5O ..„..... 109.... ..... to Great N orth of England... ..... „ 196 •••••••• to 140 Great Western .. ......«.».„.«.«.. 75 .... to 25 Ditto Fifths .................». ....... 12 .... ~, Lancaster and Carlisle. ®London and Birmingham. loo_ 221 London and Blackwell. .„....„.».. 16% .o"" „ 0 , 76% to 9 i t s London and Greenwich . 12% ......... - A London and South Western ...... 41% ...... 81 to 82 Ditto Eighths ..............„.».„.. 54.."" ..... ,I'„ . I " ' 7 a Lynn and Ely-- ........... -"* ....... 70 ..... .... ......... to -. Manchester and Leeds.. ...... - ..... 30 Manchester . 1 .... to 52 Ditto % Sh ____are5.......... .. ..... .... iv, .... ..... s i, to Manchester and Birmingham .... ~! 109 to 108 Midland Counties ................... 1 00 _1( 4 1% to 45 1 4 Newcastle and DarlingtonJunct... 2 2 1 .» ...". 3 to 28, North British ......................» 2 Norwich and Brandon ..........„ : ... ..... im _— South Devon South Eastern and Dover ..... 3 1 7 1 Z %... to 32 . Ditto New ......""."r" .... 18 ..... .... 27% - to Y o r k and Norwich to York and North Midland Ditto 14 Share s 20 37 U it% to -- P a ris and Orleans Paris and R0uen............. ........... so Rouen and Havre. MANCHESTER STOCK EXCHANGE, AUG. 31.—We have again had a dull market, and but little business done. Lancaster and Preston, Quarter, 2* ; M anc h ester and Birmingham, Quarter,; Midland, 104 ; Manchester and Buxton, 1i ; Manchester, Bury, and Rossendale, 6k. NEW POSTAL ARRANGEMENT FOR SEPTEMBER .•—• This morning the following notice to the public, relative to a postal arrangement for the present month (Septem ber) was issued by the authorities of the General Post office, St. Martin's-le-Grand, viz.:—On the morning of the 17th of this month mails will be made up at the office for Chagres, Santa Martha, Carthagena, and San Juan de Nicaragua, and the mails for those places will be made up in London, and dispatched on the morning of the 17th instead of on the 2d of each month. 'When ever the 2d of the month falls on Sunday, the mails will be made up and dispatched on the previous evening, and whenever the 17th of the month falls on Sunday, the mails will be made up and dispatched on the following morning. SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. STIRLINJ RACES.—TH lIRSDAY. The Forth Stakes of 20 sovs. each, h ft, with 25 a dd e d, for two yrs old colts, Bst 71b, Und fillies, B s t 411 ) . T. Y. C. (4 Subs.) Mr. Merry's Collier, by Sheet Anchor ... (G. Noble) 1 Lord Eglinton's Pythia, by St. Martin 2 Sir J. Boswell's b c by Galewood, out of Madame St. Clair 3 Won by half a length, after a fine race. The Gold Cup of 100/., with 50 sovs. added to a Handi cap o:* 15 sovs. each, 10 ft, and 5 only if declared. The second saves his stake. (19 Subs., 5 of whom declared.) Two miles. Mr. Merry's Armytage, 4 yrs, ist 91b ... (G. Noble) 1 Mr. Johnstone's The Era, 4 yrs, Bst 31b 2 .5 to 1 agst The Era (taken). Won by two lengths. Thu Members' Flate of 501. Heats, once round and a dis. Mr. Ramsay's Whistle Binkie, 5 yrs, Bst 121 b ... 1 1 Mr. Dawsou's The Biddy, 5 yrs, Bst 91b 4 2 Mr. Merry's Cable, 5 yrs, Bst 121 b Captain Griffith's Bugle, 6 yrs, Bst 131 b Mr. Merry's Patrician, aged, Bst 131 b The first heat was won by a length, and the second easily. The Hunters' Stakes of 3 sovs. each, with 21 added ; five yrs, list 71b ; six yrs, 12st 41b ; and aged 12st 101 b ; thorough-bred, 71b extra ; gentlemen riders ; two miles (4 Subscribers) ; were won cleverly by Mr. Robertson's Arnagill, 6 yrs (Captain K. Erskine), beating Mr. Wan chope s Erato, 5 yrs (Mr. W. H. Johnstone), and Sir J. Hampson's I'll-see-you-through-it, 6 yrs, by half a length. The Buchanan Stakes of 3 sovs. each, with 50 added. Heats, once round. (8 Subs.) Mr. W. R. Ramsay's Lady Skipsey, 4 yrs 2 1 1 Mr. W. H. Johnstone's The Era, 4 yrs 1 2 dr First heat won by a length ; second in a canter. (RECEIVED THIS DAY.) STIRLING RACES—(CONCLUDED). FRIDAS.—The King's Park Stakes of 501. each, 20 added, for colts, Bst 71b; and fillies, Bst 41b. T.Y.C. (4 Subs.) Mr. Merry's Collier, by Sheet Anchor (Noble) I Mr. Ramsay's Milden, by Inheritor Won by a neck. The Bannockburn Stakes of 20 sovs. each, 10 ft., with 20 added.—No race. The Burgh Stakes of 5 says. each, with 25 added. Two miles. (6 Subs.) Mr. Ramsay's Whistle Binkie, 5 yrs walked over The Falkirk Stakes of 3 sovs. each, 1 ft., with 25 added, once round (8 Subs.), were won in two heats by Mr. Wenchope's Erato, 5 yrs (W. Noble), beating Sir J. Boswell's Interest, Mr. Anderson's Maid-of-the-Mill, and three others easily. The Sanch:.'e Stakes of 5 sovs. each, 2 ft, with 5 added. .The winner to be sold for 1501., &c. _Mats, once round and a distance. (6 Subs.) Mr. Robertson's Arnagill, 6 yrs (W. Noble) 1 1 ' Mr. iNferry's Christopher, 5 yrs Sir J. Boswell's Geneva, 3 yrs dis The St. Ninian's Free Handicap of 5 sovs. each, and 25 added. One mile. (6 Subs.) Mr. Ramsay's Lady Skipsey, 4 yrs (Robertson) 1 Mr. Bobertson's Arnagill, 6 yrs . Mr. Merry's Cable, 5 yrs 3 Sir J. Boswell's Geneva, 3 yrs Mr. Wanchope's Erato, 5 yrs Won on the post by a head. FLANDERS MAIL. BRUSSELS, Auc. 29.—His Majesty the King will go shortly to the camp at Beverloo. The King will go into mourning for 11 days on occa sion of the death of her Imperial Highness the Grand Duchess Alexandra, consort of Prince Frederick of Hesse Cassel.. On the 27th the Minerva, Captain Theissing, arrived at Antwerp, having on board the crew of the English brig the Providence, of Newcastle, Captain Elliot, bound from Memel to Boston, in England, which was aban doned on the 20th inst. It seems that Captain Elliot was on the 16th of August in the Cattegat, where he was, run down in the middle of the night by a large vessel which carried away her bowsprit, and proceeded on her voyage. Captain Elliot could not distinguish to 11 hat nation it belonged. The men immediately hastened to the pumps, and found that the Pro vidence was quite dry. It was not till the 20th that it sprung a leak, and that water rose so rapidly that the crew was obliged to make their escape in the long-boat, the ship threatening to sink every moment. They were at that time 120 leagues west of the coast of Norway. After being tossed about for two days, they had the good fortune to fall in with the Hanoverian barque the Minerva, the captain of which took them on board, and afforded them all the assistance that their situation re quired. BRUSSELS, AUG. 30.—The King and Queen of the Netherlands have arrived at Weimar, the King on the 27th in the evening, and the Queen on the morning of the 28th. On the 28th a destructive fire broke out in the fine cloth manufactory of M. Hofermans, at Dixon, near Verviers. The upper part of the building, containing the machinery, was destroyed. The two neighbouring manufactories of Messrs. Bleyforest and Desert sustained some injury from the measures taken to preserve them from the fire. The loss is estimated at 15,000 or 20,000 francs. The whole is insured. THE GREAT SWIMMING MATCH FOR FIFTY POUNDS ASIDE.—This morning the great contest between Pewters (the London champion) and Hounslow (the Oxford champion), came off in the Serpentine, Hyde Park, in the presence of a great number of spectators of the highest re spectability. Both men having obtained so much notoriety as first-rate swimmers, any comment would be superfluous. The conditions of the match were—to swim once across the Serpentine to a flag, and return to the starting-place. In betting, both competitors were freely backed at even ; and the signal for starting being given, the men plunged into the water, and swain away with great swiftness, and kept an equal position for some distance. Pewters was the first who reached the opposite side ; the men walked out of the water to the flag, and immediately returned for the winning goal, both making strenuous exertions, Pewters slightly in ad vance ; and, after an admirable contest, Pewters came in the winner by twenty yards. The match created great interest among the promoters and admirers of this useful science ; and although the race came off as early as seven o'clock, there was not less than 800 persons present. The distance, which is about 400 yards, was swam in five minutes. The British and North American Royal mail steam-ship Britannia leaves Liverpool on Wednesday, for Halifax and Boston. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has to acknow ledge the receipt of 100/., to be placed to the credit of the nation, transmitted to him in a letter signed " Peccavi."— Downing-street, August 31, 1844. SMUGGLING FROM HER MAJESTY'S SHIP THUNDER. —The Board of Customs, upon receipt of the depositions against R. J. Ruffels, a waterman of Chatham, taken before the Mayor of Rochester, Mr. L. Allen, on Monday the 26th ult., and which appeared in The Sun of last week, directed Mr. W. Sawyers, the collector of customs at Rochester, to proceed against the prisoner, and also the gun-room steward of the ship, under the 49th and 85th sec. of the 3d and 4th William IV., cap. 53, for the penalty in each case of 1001. The case was accordingly investigated before the Mayor and o ther Magistrates for the borough of Rochester , whenßuffels was fined in the full penalty of 100 L, and Richards, the steward in the mitigated penalty of 25/. THE EXHIRMON OF FINE ARTS AT WESTMINSTER HALL—On Saturday, the exhibition at Westminster Hall, of the cartoons, fresco painting, and sculpture, finally closed, having been on view two months. During that period, from the Ist to the 15th of July, visitors were admitted by the payment of a shilling each person, and for the last six weeks, with the exception of the Saturdays, the exhibition was free, and many thousands were present each day. There were one hundred and eighty-three works of art, of which eighty-four were specimens of fresco painting and cartoons, and 99 of sculpture, there being 58 contributors of the former, and 69 of the latter. Last year the number of competitors was one hundred and thirty-two, who forwarded one hundred and forty cartoons. Of these twenty-one re ceived rewards, but sixteen of them have only appeared before the public this year. Above a hundred of the con tributors, on the last occasion, have sent in no specimens. The whole of the works must be removed in a few days. Owing to the activity of the police, who were daily on duty, we have not heard of any robberies taking place. SOUTHAMPTON, SEPT. I. The Peninsular and Oriental Company's steamer Royal Tar, Captain Henry Foster, arrived this day at half-past eight P.M., bringing the following mails--from Gibraltar, Cadiz, Lisbon, Oporto, and. Vigo. Her dates of departure are as follow :—from Gibral tar Aug. 24th, Cadiz 25th, and Lisbon 27th. Ships of war iying at Gibraltar—Her Majesty's ship Formidable, 80; Scout, 20; steamers, Ueda and Sydenham ; Acheron, sailed 24th, with Malta mail; two Danish frigates and one steamer, one Norwegian corvette, one Sardian corvette, one United States store ship, and one French steamer. Cadiz—Three French steamers, one American frigate, and one Spanish corvette. Lisbon—Her Majesty's ship Caledonia, and three French steamers. Specie on board-11 packages. List of Passengers—Mr. Lang, Colonel Dumford, Lieut. Dundasa, Mr. Beckwith, Mr. Mulcasten ' Mr. Trupi, Mr. Pridgen, Mr. Coalback, Mr. Lawrence , Mr. George Warre, Mr. M`Carthen, Mr. Dunlop, Miss Bell, and Mr. Porto. CAPTAIN WARNER'S INVENTION. —M. Jobard, of Brussels, w ho has devoted much attention to pyrotechnic works, has communicated to the French Government what he states to be the compos i t ion o f Captain Warner's destruc st re o n a gt w h, h c ic o h nt i a s in p i l n a g ee a d tkhielougsruaamlm chargefouflmthi e rocket, of which the body is twice destruc tive power. It consists , he says, of a Congreve roc k et , ma d e in this way :—The head of it is composed of a hollow iron. n co a n te e, o o f of mercury,great as long as those in general use. He discharges his projectile from • ' a directing tuba from the port-hole of the vessel, and on a level with the water, so that his projectile, skimming along the waved, which support a part of it s weight, fixes it self the side f t the enemy's vessel, wh ere i t b ur 0 fulminating powder, and, making s s, w h e en the fire resches the sinks it at an immense opening in once. The proper range of this rocket is only three or four miles, but Captain Warner imagines he can send it five or six by discharging it from a cannon. He does not say that h e w ill attain his object in the first attempts but he will try on until he succeeds. CAPTURE OF Two SLAVERS.—Her Majesty's sloop Star arrived at Ascension on the 7th of July from Prince's Island (Cape Coast) after a successful cruise of five months on the west coast of Africa, during which time she captured two slavers—a small schooner and * large brig upwards of 500 tons register—both of which have been proved lawful prizes. The comma nder and some of his officers had been ill, but none ha d died, with the exception of the purser, who died on shore in the hospital on the Bth of July from the effects of the climate. The surgeon was still unwell. The commander and his officers and crew were all in good health at Asccnsi' n. The Star was to sail for St. Helena about the 15th of July. farmers are that the harvest is pretty w ell over, the. mere are beginning to discharge the ir labourers or lower th, it wages. In several parishes near Lewes, this has beets, done, and the winter is again looked forward to wi:b, dread by the agricultural population.—Brighton Herald, It is said that Count Protasow, President of the Synod of St. Petersburgh (sent to Rome on a :reds/ mission by the Emperor of Russia), has been received with every distinction at the Papal Court; and that the long existing Church difficulties appear to approach to s satisfactory settlement. His Excellency M. de Bcuteni• ff. who, since his arrival at Rome, resided in locanda, has just taken the palazzo Gustiniani for a term of six years. —.Dublin Evening Post. in ort ip !nt, lest Les' Ns s nee sea ill on• the nee dr in' ; el , for O•