The Sun. — London, England, 1850-07-12 00:00:00

'HE ASSAULT ON THE QUEEN. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT OLD COURT. (Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON, Mr. Justice PATTESON, and Mr. Justice TALFOURD . TRIAL OF ROBERT PATE. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) William Baker Lea, examined by Mr. ,COCKBURN—I drive a cab, and I remember I used to drive Mr. Pate in 1847 regularly every day. I was obliged to be at his house punctually every day at a quarter past three. I used to drive him down Brompton-road over Putney-bridge to Putney-heath, to one particular spot, where he got out. He then walked through the thickest of the bushes in the heath. He always went the same way, and I used to meet him at a pond on the other aide of the heath. He used to stand at the pond looking in tently into it, and suddenly ho would start up, jump into the cab and tell me to drive off as fast as I could. Soon afterwards he would tell me to pull up and go at a foot pace. I drove him along Roehampton-lane to Barnes common, where he woull again take a walk amongst the bushes. He always got down and got up at two fixed spots. We returned home over Hammersmith-bridge. He always be haved very strangely in the cab, and no matt , er whether it hailed or rained, he took the same walk. In winter it was dark before he reached the common; he always had a small stick with him, wbich he used in a very strange manner, and people used to stop me and ask if he was mad. I hare repeatedly been stopped by gen tlemen in that way. This lasted from fifteen to eighteen months every day. At first he paid MB 10s., but one day he said he would only pay me 9s. He always paid me in shillings in a row, with the face of the man upwards, and always looking the same way. He paid a shilling and a penny for toll gates, which ware always laid on the cushion of the cab. The cabmen on the Piccadilly stand always made ob servations about his conduct. Cross-examined—Sometimes he used to get wet through, which always pleased him, and after running over the thicket, he would return and say he had much enjoyed the hail storm. By the COURT —lt is now two years ago since I ceased to drive him. Sr. Charles Mason, examined by Mr. HUDDLESTONR —I keep a livery stable. in Park-lane. I know Mr. Pate. In 1846 he used to hire my horses. On one occa sion he had an accident with one of them. Since 1847, I have seen him three or four times a week, passing down Piccadilly, and latterly I have observed that he has been very strange in his manner; indeed, last May, I told my foreman that I thought he was losing his senses. Mr. Jas. Storton, examined by Mr. COCHBURN—I am a surgeon, living in Sutton-row. In 1849 the sister of Mr. Pate came to live with my family. Mr. Pate used then to visit me. In 1848 I met him once in Kensington gardens, and as I thought he was insane, I told my wife, who was with me, not to attract his attention. His look was always that of a man whose mind was vacant. I did not know him then, but when he came to see his sister, after 1849, I had conversations with him which still induced me to believe that he was insane. On one occasion when he visited me there were some gentlemen of classical attainments present. I advised him now;tbat he had left the army to go to college, and obtain s classical education to fit him for some other profession. He said, " Oh! I don't believe there is a man in England who could teach me or anybody else the classics." Ultimately I thought it ne cessary to communicate with his father, who is a friend of mine, on the subject of his intellect. George Feron Gardner, examined by Mr. HUDDLE-. rresp.—l am one of the Burlington-arcade beadles. I have frequently seen the prisoner passing up and down Piccadilly. His manner was always strange and eccen tric, so much so that people used to say he was mad. Ur. Inspector Squire, of the Metropolitan Police, examined by Mr. COCKBURN—I have known the pri soner from his belt's; much about town. He always car ried a stick with him, which he used in a very strange and wild manner, which induced me to give him the name of " cut and thrust." Cross-examined—l have known him for some two years and more. I never directed the police to watch him. John Murray, exami ne d by M r . H UDDLESTJNE —I am keeper of the Buckhill-gate of Kensington-gardens. About two years ago he passed through the gate every day at one o'clock. He behaved himself always in a very extravagant manner, but never spoke to any one. The O'Gorman Mahon, M.P., examined by Mr. CLARKSON—I am acquainted with Mr. Pate. I have known him 10 or 11 months, and I have had repeated conversations with him. From the first day I ever saw him I concluded that he was not sane, and subsequent experience confirmed me in that opinion. Cross examined—He always behaved as a gentleman. He had the instinct that naturally guides animals, and I do not think he would do an ungen.lemanly or dishonest act. Re-examined—He is the last man in the world whom I thought would have been guilty of a disloyal act. The Rev. Charles Driscoll, Lecturer of Bow Church, examined by Mr. lIIIDDLESTONE-I have met Mr. Pate at Mr. Storten's, but before that I knew him in the street by sight. The conversation I had with him induced me to think he was not in his sound senses. On the evening of the 27th of June I was going to dine at the Army and Navy Club, when I saw Mr. Pate standing at the west gate of Cambridge House. He appeared more excited than usual, and his manner was altogether strangely wild. Cross-examined—He generally threw his heels up so high that I was often surprised how he sustained his equ'librium. It was more his manner than his conver sation that induced me to thick him insane. Dr. Connolly, re-exatnine I Is; Mr. COCKBURN—I am a physician, and have devoted my attention very much to insanity. lam physician to the Ilanwell Lunatic Asylum. I was applied to by his family last Nivember, when his previous habits were described to me, and thinking he was improving in them by going jet i society, I recom mended that no steps should be taken to irritate him. I have seen him since he has been in custody, and in my opinion he is of unsound mind. I form that opinion in • considerable degree from the conversations I have had with him. In his present state he presents an ex ample of a person of very slender mental power, of no ambition, and altogether unfit for any occupation of life. In conversation he is able to distinguish between right and wrong., but otherwise I think he is not. Cross-examined—His disposition is frivolous and idle. Ile is well aware that he has done wrong. By the COURT—fie has no delusion, such as _fancying himself the Emperor of China. Re-examined—He does not deny having done this, but he can give no account of it wheeever. He seems to have acted uncler some strange morbid impulse. Dr. Munro, examined by Mr. HUDDLESTONE—I have had five interviews with the prisoner since he has been in custody, and from my observation of him, and what I have beard to day, I certainly believe him to be of unsound mind. From his own lips I have had an account of how he left Ireland in 1844, and certainly then he was labouring under delusion. Cross-examined—He was aware, perhaps, that ho was doing wrong in many things; he certainly is capable of distinguishing between right and wrong, but he is, never theless, suffering from morbid insanity. Re-examined—His whole history induces me to believe that he is decidedly insane. Mr. Baron ALDERSON remarked that that was a question which must be lest for the jury and Court to decide. So long as he remained on the bench be would not allow medical men to take upon themselves the func tions of the Court and jury. Dr. Munro had only given his opinion; he was not aware that he had done wrong. This was the defence. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL replied, reminding the jury that if they were of opinion that the prisoner was incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong, he would be subjected to imprisonment for life, while, if they found otherwise, the punishment would be of a more minor character. Now, it was said that as there was no motive for this act, it must have resulted from mad ness; but if he was not mistaken, from the earliest ages of which they bad any history or account, persons in elevated situations had been the subjects of attack and insult at the hands of parties who were anxious to obtain a morbid notoriety. It was this very knowledge, backed by experience of similar oc currences in modern times, which induced the Legislature to pass the Act under which this prisoner was arraigned, and before the jury could acquit him of the offence with which he was charged they mustbe satisfied beyond the possibility of doubt that his mind had been so impaired that he could not distinguish between right and wrong. This was no new doctrine. It was a rule laid down by no less a judge then Lord Hale himself, and if the jury would just consider for one moment they would see that the maintenance of this rule was for the interest of the public. Some short while ago. hniveier c the rule of law in deciding sanity or in sanity in cases or t his nature was settled by the judges upon questions propounded by the House o f Lor ds arising out of the doubts which had been created by kl‘Naughten's case. It was then laid down that if a party was sensible of doing injury at the time of his committing an unlawful act he was liable to be punished for it, and the immediate question for jury now to decide was this—did the prisoner know and feel that he was doing wrong when he struck the Queen? if be did, then they must convict him accordingly, but if, on the other hand, they did not think he knew what he was about, they must , acquit him on the ground of insanity. Well, then, was the eviaence they had to-day incon sistent with the existence of a state of mind capable of discriminating between right and wrong ? Certainly it • . established ;bat the prisoner was an extra ordinary and eccentric man—it did not prove that he was so mad as to make him an irresponsible agent. The past conduct of the pri soner must convince everybody that be knew he was doing wrong. For instance, immediately after he was taken into custody, he was so far alive to his own interest, that he warned the witnesses to think before they spoke, while he observed the blow could not have been a hard one, clearly showing that he knew what he was about and leboured under no mental delusion or disease which should excuse him from the consequences of the act. Mr.-Baron ALDERSON, in summing up the case, told t h e jury that there could be no doubt as to the fact that the prisoner struck her Majesty with some degree of violence, and therefore the whole question to be decided turned upon the state of mind he was in at the time the act was done. Now, it was clear the prisoner .was in his sound senses to-day, and it was for him to .1. . . irhve that-he was of unsound mind when he committed thik , offence. Now had the evidence proved that? The jur4 ust take this as the law , that before they could must eould ' acqdit prisoner on the ground of insanity, they -fie sit fled that the prioner's insanity indu ce d the cons ii: Inittesi'la the offence. be was charged with. It vita iticlolusion to suppose that insanity necess ar il y _.,/ rendered a man dispunishable for an unlawful act; be fore that state of things could exist it must be shown that the disease of the mind under which the prisoner laboured rendered him incapable of judging between right and wrong, or whether at the time he was betrayed into the act he knew that thb act was a wrong and un lawful act fur him to do. Now, did the evidence adduced for the offence accord with those prin ciples ? True, at one period the prisoner appeared to have laboured under a particular delusion, but although that delusion might have been a very good defence, were they trying this unfortunate gentleman for the murder of the messman, it was no more a defence to this case than it would have been a defence to an action had he seduced his neighbour's wife at the time the delusion prevailed. A man might be insane on one subject, and sane on every other, and if he com mitted an unlawful act, which could have no possible reference to the particular point of delusion, it by no means followed that he was irresponsible for it on the ground of insanity. These were the principles which ought to guide the jury in disposing of the present defence. The Learned Judge, after recapitulating the evidence, commenting upon it as he went along, left it for the jury to say whether they were clearly satisfied that the pri soner was suffering from a disease of the mind, which incapacitated him from judging whether the act which he had committed was right or wrong for him to do. If they were convinced that he was unconscious of what he was about, they must acquit him ; but, on the other hand, although they might believe him to be an eccentric character, which made it a matter of regret that he had not been taken better care of, yet, if they thought be was sufficiently sane to distinguish between right and wrong they must convict him accordingly. The jury retired at 20 minutes past three, and did not return into court until five minutes past seven, when they gave a verdict of Guilty. The prisoner was immediately called up for judgment. Baron ALDERSON addressed him to the following effect:—Robert Pate, the jury have found you guilty after a very long and patient inquiry, and there can be no rea sonable doubtith at they have come tola right conclusion. At the same time it is quite clear that you are a person of very eccentric habits, and in some degree differing from other men, and it is probable that it has pleased God to visit yon with some mental affitction, for which you are to be pitied. The offence you have committed, however, is one of a very serious and important character. You have been found guilty of striking a female, which, for a soldier, is a very shocking thing; but when it is con sidered that this female was your Sovereign, that she was one entitled to the respect of the whole country by her virtues and her exalted position, that act which, in an ordinary case would be a very serious offence, under these circumstances became truly serious. How could it happen that you, a soldier of the country, could insult one beloved by all, on account not only of her exalted station, but by her domestic virtues? Yet, this was the object of your attack, and whom you insulted by a blow. Considering the station of your family and your own position, the Court will not inflict the disgraceful punishment of whipping upon you. The Court has some respect for you, thong's you had no re spect for others. It will still, however, do its duty, and pass such a sentence upon you as will prevent you, at all events for a long period, from doing any further mis chief. I would fain believe yon were not in your right senses at the time you committed this act, and it has long been the boast of the country that no man of sane mind could be found capable of committing an attack on his sovereign, but at the same time I think the jury were quite right, upon the evidence that was adduced, in not acquitting you upon the ground of insanity. Under all the circumstances, the sentence that I feel it my duty to pronounce upon you is, that you be transported beyond the seas for the term of seven years. The prisoner heard the sentence without betraying the slightest emotion; and when the Learned Judge had concluded his address, he bowed to the Court, and im mediately turned round, and without uttering a word, retired to the gaol. The trial lasted nearly nine hours. FORGERY.—John Jones, a respectably dressed young man, pleaded guilty to an indictment charging him with forging a cheque upon the London and Westminster Bank for 2501, and was sentenced to ten years' transpor tation. POST-OFFICE ROBBERIES.—Joseph Hillier, aged 35, a postman, who was indicted for stealing a post letter contain ing two half-sovereigns, the property of the Postmaster- General, having pleaded guilty, he was sentenced to ten years' transportation. Eduard Hawker, another postman, aged 39, pleaded guilty to an indictment charging him with stealing two post letters, containing two half-sovereigns and a sove reign, the property of the Postmaster-General, and was sentenced to ten years' transportation. LAW INTELLIGENCE. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Julyll. ;Before Sir J. L. KNIGHT BRUCE, sitting fur Sir J. WIGRAM.) _ _ _ THORNHILL V. THORNHILL. Mr. LLOYD appeared upon a petition asking leave to take a ward of the Court (a young lady) to Boulogne. It was proposed that the lady should be accompanied by her step-mother. The VICE-CHANCELLOR—I will not give her leave to go to Boulogne ; if she wishes to go to Dieppe she may. Why does she want to go to Boulogne? Mr. LLOYD—I am not instructed, Sir. The Vwn-CHANCELLOR—Leave to go to Boulogne I positively refuse. Mr. LLOYD said that last year the Vice-Chancellor of England MO given leave to the ward to go to Bou• logne or Dieppe. The VICE•CHANCELLOR—The Lords Commissioners may give her leave to go to Boulogne, if they think fit, but I positively will not. Itr. - LLorD-IThen perhaps your honour will gran leave to go to Dieppe. The VICE CHANCELLOR—No; not unless you give me a reason. Mr. LLOYD—She has some step•sisters at Boulogne, I am informed. The VICE-CHANCELLOR—I will not give her leave, At this time of the year there are a great number of applications to take wards of the Court abroad. SHERIFFS' COURT, July 11. (Before Mr. Under-Sheriff BIIIICHELL and a Specia; Jury.) RAILWAY COLLISION.-PHILLIPS V. THE LONDON AND ELACRWALL RAILWAY COMPANY. This was an action brought to recover compensation for injuries received by the plaintiff in consequence of the negligence of the defendants' servants. Mr. BEATAN stated the case for the plaintiff, who is a commercial traveller, in the service of Messrs. Foster, of Friday-street. It appeared that on the 7th of No vember last, about five o'clock in the evening, the plaintiff was coming up from Blackwell to London by railway, and when near the junction line at Bow, a col lision took place through the negligence of the railway officers, and the plaintiff and several other gentlemen Were severely injured. Mr. CLARKSON, on behalf of the plaintiff, objected to any statement being made as to accident to others, for the company had settled with them. Mr. BEATAN then called witnesses, who proved the accident, and that the plaintiff had been laid up from the 7th November to the 31st DecembeP, and was still suffer ing from a thickening of the skin over one of his legs; his expenses for medicine, &c.. was 101. Mr. CLARKSON, for the defendants, said it had been claimed on behalf of the plaintiff, that he should be paid for his loss cf time, bat it had been stated, and he would prove, that as to the loss of time, the plaintiff had been paid as usual by the respectable firm by whom he was employed. Mr. Prince Hoare, one of the firm, was called and proved this fact, and that they had paid another person for doing his work. Mr. BEAVAN replied, and contended that Messrs. Foster and Co. ought to be reimbursed. The Learned UNDER•SELERIFF said that it was a matter of difficulty to say what amount of da mages ought to be given fir bodily pain and injuries, but in such a ease it ought to be taken into consideration whether the injuries were caused by wilfulness or wantonness, or whether by sheer accident. The jury, after retiring, gave a verdict for 70/. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, July 11. (Before the CHIEF COMMISSIONER.) IN THE HATTER OF FREDERIC HOLDER. This insolvent, who had been a lieutenant in the 14th Regiment of Light Dragoons, was opposed by Mr. Hook, shoemaker, New Bond•street. Mr. COOKE supported the application for discharge. since a e March, uary. 184 1849. 8, It appeared th a t t h e i nso l ve nt h a d b een in prison sol sold his nearlyo o 6 commission i. of in thefo r , moneyl9 01. He placedand in the bands of a person named Bloxam to settle with his creditors, and he had been unable to obtain an ac count of its disbursement. Mr. Hook said he had no desire to sonment, but thought that efforts prolong the impri tain an account from Bloxam sho uld be made to ob cred i tors. , the money for the The CHIEF COMMISSIONER concurred ' cre ditor, and adjourned the case for a with the week for the attend.. ance of Bloxam: A NOVEL CASE.—IN RE LIEUT. CHARLES ABNEY NOITAT. This insolvent, a lieutenant in the 50th Regiment, who had been in the battle of Aliwal and other engagements in India, was to be heard to day , but was prevented I: t 4 his detaining creditor sending his discharge two or three days ago, and on the case being called the officer of the Queen's Bench reported that he was out of custody. Mr. COOKE (with whom was Mr. Sargood) complained of the trick which had been played to prevent Lieutenant Monet, who had been some time in prison, from being heard. The lieutenant, who served in all the late battles in India, and had been wounded, had unfortunately been mixed up in bill transactions, and had been annoyed by the 60 per cent. gentlemen" to make him sell his corn mission, which he would not do. Two days before his hearing his discharge was sent, as it was known his leave of absence would expire on the 14th inst., and no doubt it was intended further to harass the applicant. He (Mr. Cooke) had an affidavit of facts, and his appli cation was that the Court would dismiss the petition and allow one to .be filed under the protection statutes, by which the lieutenant would be protected when he re turned to his regiment. The Learned Counsel spoke warmly on the case, and said he felt for a man wbo had been treated in such a manner after the services he had rendered in India. Mr. DOWSE appeared for Messrs. Lyon, and stated that they bad nothing to do with sending. the discharge to the prison. The CHIEF COMMISSIONER granted the application by dismissing the petition. The insolvent would take what course he thought proper. A petition was immediately filed under the Protection Act, and protection granted to the Ist August, when the case will be heard before the Chief Commissioner. It is the first case of the kind that has occurred. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. HOME ClRCUlT.—Hertford, July 11. The commission for the county of Herts was opened on Wednesday, and this morning both Courts proceeded to business, the Chief B'iron presiding on the Civil Side and Mr. Justice Erie in the Crown Court. The business is very light, there being only 18 prisoners for trial on the criminal side. On the civil side eight cases are en tered, one of which only is to be tried by a special jury. The Chief Baron did not sit until twelve o'clock, and he had nearly got through his list at the rising of the Court. None of the cases disposed of yesterday contained any matter of interest to the public. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MANSION-HOUSE. William Robins was brought, in the custody of John Forrester, before Alderman Gibbs, charged with having stolen a cheque for Sal. 10s., the property of Mr. Newton, as the secretary to the St. James's Mu tual Association, their bankers being the London and Westminster Bank, in St. James's square. Mr. Muliens, of the firm of Bush and Mullen; at tended for the prosecution. It appeared that Mr. Newton was in possession of some cheques for the purposes of the association, which cheques had been signed by three of the direc tors, but which should be countersigned by Mr. New ton, as the secretary. These cheques had been placed by Mr. Newton in his desk, which he had considered a secure receptac!e, and he considered them safe, in asmuch as the additional signature of himself was required to make them negotiable. The prisoner had been at work for Mr. Newton in the reom in which the desk was kept on the Bth and 9th of July, in the afternoon of which latter day that gentleman missed the cheque above referred to. The cheque was presented in the usual course at the bank, and paid, the omission of the secretary's signa ture not having been noticed by the cashier. On as certaining his loss, Mr. Newton immediately repaired to the London and Westminster Bank, and was in formed that the cheque had been paid in 4/. and 10/. bank notes ; in consequence of which steps were taken to stop the payment of the notes at the Bank of England, and on Wednesday a man named Kennedy presented three of the 101. notes in question, for which he required gold. His answer not being deemed satisfactory, he was detained and introduced to Mr. Forrester. Mr. Mullens stated that after calling this evidence to substantiate the above facts, he should be com pelled to place Kennedy in the box as a witness against Robins. Kennedy was accordingly sworn, and he gave the following account of the matter :—I am a working upholsterer, and reside in Church-row, Stoke New ington. I know the prisoner, and have known him for nearly 18 or 20 years ; we have worked together. On Tuesday afternoon I saw him at the Admiral Dun can, in Soho. He said he wanted me to assist him in a job, and was to go with him. I said, " how about the money for the materials?" He said, "Oh that is all right enough." He then produced a cheque, and asked me to go out and get it cashed. I was tired at first, and stayed a little while, and then I said well, if he would go with me I would go. He said it was all perfectly right, but objected to go himself. The thing appeared filled up in the usual form, and although I at first hesitated, yet knowing the man so long, I went and got it cashed. He went as far as Waterloo-place with me, and said he would meet me at the Bell, in Pall-mall. I got the notes and money ,from Mr. Bardmore (a witness), and went to the outside of the Bell public-house. I saw the prisoner, and handed him the money, but be did not take it then ; and we went to a public-house at the corner, I believe, of Blue Cross-street, and he took a portion of it, and left 441. 55., exactly one half, in my hands. We then went and purchased some hair-cloth for chairs, and we were together very late that night, and yesterday morning I took the three 101. notes produced to the Bank, to be changed, and I wrote my name and address on them, and was then detained. I afterwards gave to Mr. Forrester an account of how I came possessed of the notes, and gave him up the money r ema i n i ng i n my pos session. Cross-examined by the prisoner —You had seen me four or five days prior ? 'Witness—Yes, several times. Did I not say to you what a pity it is that people should leave their money about, and that I had seen a cheque, and you said why did you not take it up, and we would square it ?—I do not recollect any such words.--(A laugh.) I do not recollect your men tioning such a thing to me before. Did you not take me to a friend to get that friend to go and get the cheque changed ?—No. I did not. I went to show it to a friend, because I had some doubts whether it was right, and I thought it was too large a cheque for one to pass in my position of life. Did you not say that if that party would go you would give him 201. to get it changed ?—No. The money did not belong to me, so I could not give it to him. Did not you, after you bad got this cheque changed, when we went to the public-house, put a 51. note apart for the person who gave you a little bit of advice how to change it ?—No. That was your doing altogether.—(A. laugh.) You said there was a third party in the business, and we had better give him the Si. to keep him quiet. Did you not say, after the money had been paid, " G2t a 101. note changed and give me 51., and I will give you a Si.note ?"—I might have said that. The prisoner —One party is as deep in the mud as the other is in the mire, my Lord, and no mistake. Did I not give you the five sovereigns and you gave me the 51. note? Witness—Yes, yes, that is clear. When we were at Mr. Lloyd's, where we had a glass of brandy-and-water, you pulled out of your pocket and gave me three 101. notes, one Si. note, and six 15/. Had you not in your posfession the same amount, with the 51. for this same party ?—Yes, that is right.—(Laughter.) I never had the whole of this money in my band, if you recollect ?—I wanted you to take it, but you said " Put it in your pocket and come on." The witness answered other questions in such a manner as clearly proved that his proper place was the bar of the court. John Forrester said I took the prisoner into custody last night, outside the Admiral Duncan public-house, in Compton-street, Soho, and conveyed him to Mr. Newton's house, where he was identified as the party who had been working there. I then told him he was charged with giving a cheque to a man of the name of Kennedy. He said he knew nothing at all about it. I then went to his lodging in Kingsgate-street, Hol born, and found a purse containing 23 sovereigns and a half-sovereign. The prisoner said the fact was, that he never would have thought of doing the thing if his co-partner, Mr. Kennedy, to whom he talked about the cheque, had not urged him to do it by saying they would square it. He said they applied to a third party, who, upon looking at the cheque, did not, being an experienced hand, like the appearance or date of it at all, and that they stopped his mouth with 51., but Mr. Kennedy was the most to blame. Alderman GIBES said he would send the prisoner for trial, and ordered the depositions to be made ou accordingly. TILE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 12, 1850. SOUTHWARK. Yesterd iy .Tfary Ann Herbert, a young married woman, was brought before Mr. A'Beckett, charged with swallowing poison, for the purpose of destroying herself. Mr. Humble, a surgeon, residing in the London road, stated that on the preceding night he was sent for to a house in St. George's market, where he was informed a woman had taken poison. On his arrival he found the defendant surrounded by several persons, and they pointed her out as having a short time pre viously swallowed some poison, contained in a paper, which she afterwards destroyed, in order that it might not be detected. He questioned the woman herself on the subject, but she refused to give him the slightest information as to the nature of the in gredients she had swallowed, and expressed her de termination not to submit to any operation to neu tralise its effects. He, however, told her that be should insist upon using the stomach-pump, and produced the instrument, telling her at the same time that he should have her held down if she did not submit quietly, and finding that she closed her mouth to prevent the introduction of it, he threatened to remove her front teeth for the purpose. She, however, now became alarmed that he was about to put his threat into execution, and confessed that she had swallowed a quantity of white precipitate powder. Upon being made acquainted with this fact, instead of having recourse to the stomach-pump, he administered the necessary antidotes, which had the . desired effect • but as she had expressed an inten tion to repeat the offence, he considered it incumbent on him to give her into c ' us . tody . of a policeman. The witness added that he felt i t . his duty to compla in of the conduct of: s t shi ezersons in the room, who refused bent titchuai ta o r n sl ats t l o on odrrueegmnshodoleraurev aware e tt api n yra y er particularly ehh e t t hoeh vy tetc hatoms had taken most thr oft submitting nt u hg n e d t r the oo om med i caldefendan t s smok i ng o k n,dg er h a us d b e a nd od ly , w po h w o, d a e l ; perfect ap athy. Mr. a yet pipesa toofna tobacco chair i n with inA ' B a n E s c w a e a r T ro theasked the har gdee.feanhddansthew replied a that she h ad Msay w r. as excited at the time, and that having the she to powder in the room she swallowed it, and now re gretted the act ; and she added that she had taken some spirits previously which caused her to do it. Her husband, who sa id he was a smith by tr a d e , on being asked why he exhibited such a total wan t o f feeling, knowing that his wife had taken poison, which it was probable would have killed her, and yet, he being acquainted with the fact, sat, smoking, regardless of the consequences, not even offering to render the least assistance to . the medical gentleman through whose instrumentality her life was pre served ? in a careless manner , said that he could not and that he knew right het) his wife taking poison, well that if he interfered in the business she would be likely to fly at him, and scratch his face ; and as he did not wish to be clawed, he thought it the most advisable plan not to interfere, but to let her have her own way. He knew her temper better than any one else, and when she had a drop in her she was very passionate and self-willed. Mr. ATECIEETT—Then because you were afraid your wife would have scratched your face, that is your excuse for not rendering assistance when you knew she had swallowed poison, which might have speedily ended in her death. The magistrate then said that he should call upon the defendant to find sureties not to repeat the attempt upon her life. The defendant expressed her regret at what had happened, and said that she should not act in such a manner again. The husband tendered to become responsible for her future behaviour, and his recognisance to the amount of 201. was accepted, and she was liberated, and they left the court together. LAMBETH. A respectable-looking young woman, dressed in deep mourning, waited upon Mr. Norton for bis as sistance in recovering property detained by Mr. Meddle, which belonged to his unfortunate house keeper, who was found dead in the kitchen of his house, the particulars of which ex t raor di nary occur rence must be fresh in the memory of our readers. The young woman stated that she was the daugh ter of the murdered woman, and had frequently ap plied to Mr. Maddle for her moth er ' s c l ot hi ng, and what little money she might have left. He refused to give them up, and a short time ago he atte n d e d a t this court before Mr. Elliott, and promised to give up all her property to her br o th er , w h o res i des at Ipswich. She (applicant) had received a letter from her uncle authorising Mr. Meddle to give her the property, and he st 11 refused. She now , th ere f ore, wanted his worship's advice and assistance. Mr. NORTON said that, if she was the daughter of the deceased woman, Mr. Meddle ought to restore the property to her, and not to her brother. Saunders, one of the summoning officers, informed the Magistrate that the applicant was an illegitimate child, and when Mr. Elliott was informed of that he agreed with. Mr. Middle that he had better give the property up to the deceased's brother, or his order, as Mr. Maddle resolutely refused to give it to the appli cant. Mr. NORTON asked the latter whether she had the authority of her uncle with her ? She replied that she had a copy of it, which she produced. It clearly authorized Mr. Meddle to give the property up to the deceased's daughter. Mr. NORTON asked her whether she had applied to Mr. Meddle with the original note ? Applicant replied that she had, and bad left it with him. He still refused to give up her mother's property, which mostly con sisted of wearing apparel, which might turn out use ful to her in her present position. Mr. NORTON said it was most extraordinary con duct on Mr. Maddle's part to refuse giving up the property to the daughter, especially after his promise to Mr. Elliott on the last occasion when he attended at this court. He thought some officer had better go with the young woman and see him about it. Saunders said that would be almost useless. Mr. Meddle would not give it up unless compelled by law. Mr. NORTON said the young woman had the au thority Mr. Meddle required, and he ought to keep his word and give up the goods. As he so often re fused he would see what a summons would do. His worship directed a summons to be served upon him directly to attend at this court and. answer for his conduct. The young woman thanked the magistrate for his kind interference, and left the court. The summons was instantly made out and placed in the hands of Saunders for service. [The following appeared in our Tnird Elition:of 'ast night :—] FRANCE. In the Assembly yesterday the discussion of the Law on the Press was resumed. The whole of the first article was adopted. Tne President then read the second article, which was similarly voted. It was as follows : _ " The proprietors of journals and periodical publica tions, at present existing, are allowing a delay of one month, from the date of the promulgation of this law, to accomplish the above formalities." " Art. 3. When the editor of a journal or periodical publication shall have been sent for trial before a Court of Assizes by a decision of the Court of Inquiry, for a crime or offence committed by the press, if a new deci sion of the same kind should intervene against the edi tors of said publication before the decision of the Court of Assizes, a sum equal to one-half of the maximum of the fines _he may have incurred for the new off-nce must be lodged, within the three days of the notification of each decision, even were the Court of Cessation appealed to against the sentence." M. de Tinguy moved the following amendment : " Every article on political, philosophical, or religious questions inserted in a journal, must be signed by its author, under the penalty of a fine of 500 f. fur the first offence, and of I,ooot. for the second." In order to prevent all false signatures,:M. de Tin guy asked that the author convicted of that fraud should be sentenced to a fine of I,ooof. and an im priionment of six months. - M. L avergue supported the amendment, but on the condition that the eautionnement and stamp be sup pressed. Its principle, he said, was eminently re publican, and he claimed for his political friends the initiative of a measure which must tend to moralize the press. M. Heurtier combated the amendment, which was supported by M. Laboulie, who contended that if journalism was a rostrum, as it was generally de scribed, the writer should boldly ascend that rostrum and fearlessly present his breast to the man he at tacked. If he was obliged to sign his article, the vile pamphleteer, who insulted the National Assembly, would consider before he dared to do so. Messrs. Canet, Larochejacquelein, and Chasseloup Laubat were next heard, after which a division having been called for there appeared for the amendment, 313 ; against it, 281. The amendment was accordingly declared to be adopted. This decision occasioned great agitation in the As sembly, and the proceedings were for a moment sus pended. When the sitting was resumed, M. Charancey, in the name of the committee, proposed the following additional paragraph : " The signature of the author sh a ll b e a ffi xe d to t h e original manuscript of the article, th e commun i cat i on o f which can only be required by th e A ttorney-General within tThe h consideration,e the Asse month m b lybeing followinga consultedits publication.", took th e p aragra ph in nd referred it to th e committee. SPAIN. Madrid journals of the sth have been received. The accouchement of the Queen was hourly ex pected. MADRID BoLSA, JUL! s. —The Th ree per Cents. were done at 33 for paper; the Four per Cents., at 14 for cash ; the Five per Cents. 12 13-16 ; the Debt without Interest, at 3i ; and the Coupons, at 71. ITALY. The Giornale di Roma of the I s t announces that the Pope has pardoned Count Carpegna and Si gno r Buzzi, who had served in the revolutionary army. Capanna, formerly in the service• o f th e R epublican police, has been given up to the Papal authorities by the French. The Messagere of Modena of the 2d states that Signor Gaggiotti, the notary who had made the inventory of the Pontifical Palace during the revolu tion, has been released from prison. In its sitting of the sth, the, Chamber of Deputies of Turin voted the Bill for the issue of 6,000,000 of Rentes by 119 votes to 28, a result doubly im portant, as it implied a vote of confidence. The National Bank B►ll was afterwards passed, as amended by the Senate, by 116 votes to 8. The Minister of Finance then deposited the budget for 1851. Signor Gavotti then addressed a ques tion to the Minister of the interior concerning the re-organization of the artillery of the National Guard of Genoa. The Minister answered that the National Guard could not possess special corps without autho risation to that effect. A discussion arose on the sub ject, and was adjourned to the following day. PRUSSIA AND DENMARK. A telegraphic dispatch from Berlin of the 9th in stant in the Kolner Zeilung announces that the official Staats Anzeiger of that. day contains a copy of the protocol which accompanied the Treaty of Peace between Prussia and Den mark as ratified by the two contracting Powers, while the Treaty of Peace itself is published by the Hamburgh papers of the sth inst. The same papers publish a proclamation which the Stadtholders have addressed to the inhabitants of Schleswig and Holstein. In this document the. Stadtholders say— " The treaty of the peace infers a recognition of the rights of our country, while the protection of those rights is left to us." The Stadtholders protest that they will do their duty, and that any attempt at invading the Duchies on the part of the Danes shall be opposed to the last iu their power. The Com mander of the Schleswig-Holstein army has published a proclamation, inviting the officers of the German Federal Contingents to enter the Schleswig-Holstein army as volunteers. The carriage which is to be used at the coronation of the Emperor of G a d: g s n t a ri , :,. says a letter from Vienna, was made in the reign of Charles, for the marriage of his daughter, A e. RIT T A h I3 ia L I3 B i T II Maria Theresa. Since that it has been used for the corona ion of the Emperors. The gilding alone cost 180,000 60flo:cooms.flo'rfihmte_paintings on the doors are by Rubens, and cost ong the Bills yesterday . printed was the Charitable Trusts as amended in additional powers to T C, li C a li te the cotinty . Courts, is expected to,pass this session, the third. yeu 9144 ultncilictiou iat9 the U9llO 9f 09=913g._ ,RwUhfaieShßgaiver,s.—Am IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, July 11. Their Lordships met at Five o'clock. PETITIONS. The Earl of FALMOUTH presented several petitions against any alteration in the original Ten Hours Bill. The Earl of LONSDALE presented several petitions from miners and others against the Coal Mines Inspec tion Bill. Lord BEAUMONT presented a petition in favour of a Ten Hours Bill. Lord BROUGHAM presented several petitions to the same effect. METROPOLITAN INTERMENTS BILL. The Earl of CARLISLE brought up the report on this Bill. Lord REDESDALE would consent to the bringing up of the report, and would reserve what he had to say on Vie subject until the third reading. The Duke of BE AUFORT presented a petition from the inhabitants of Erith, praying that the cemetery might not be established in that neighbourhood. After a few words from the Earl of CARLISLE, the report was received. THE LORD CHANCELLOR. Lord BROUGHAM had expresed his high satisfac tion at the putting of the Great Seal in Com mission. He understood that an end was to be put to that arrangement, he still continued of opinion that that arrangement was a good one ; but if any arrangement was to be made by which that Commission was to be terminated, and the Great Seal to be intrusted to any individual, he knew no person more fit than one of the most learned, able, and efficient lawyers in West minster Hall, and he begged to add that he did not know a rn nas honourable or more honest man to whom it could be intrusted than Chief Justice Wilde. ENCUMBERED ESTATES. The Earl of GLENGALL presented a petition from an individual whose estate had been brought under the jurisdiction of the Commissioners of Encumbered Es tates, complaining of the sale of his property to, pay off the encumbrances. It was a disgraceful and scandalous system to sell these estates in this manner, to pay off encumbrances. The Marquis of WESTMEATH said he held in his hand a paper containing twenty-one columns, and twelve of them were appropriated to confiscation, being adver tisements for the sales of encumbered estates. The Government had brought upon their heads the im precations of the higher classes of Ireland for having reduced them to a state of beggary and destitution. If Ireland was reduced lower than she was this magnificent country would go along with it. It was most unac countable that Englund should refuse to assist them. The Bishop of OXFORD presented a petition from the Church Union against the opening of the Post-office on Sunday; also several petitions from the clergy of various places against the appropriation of the educa tion grant. The Marquis of BREADALBANE presented several petitions against a Post-office Sunday delivery. BENEFICES IN PLURALITY BILL. The Earl of POWIS, in the absence of his Noble Friend (Lord Lyttelton), moved the third reading of the Benefices in Plurality Bill. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said he entertained considerable objection to the Bill. Ho believed it would leave to clergymen nothing more than a bare compe• tence; and the effect of that would be to bring into the Church an inferior class of persons, just as such persons were at present introduced into the Church of Ireland. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY defended the Bill, the principle of which was, that wherever the in come of a clergyman was sufficient to support him, the parishioners were entitled to have the benefit of his ser vices. The measure would, he thought, be productive of much good by enabling them ultimately to increase the incomes of the holders of small benefices. After a few words from Lord REDESDALE, The Earl of POWIS said the Bill proceeded on the very fair and intelligible principle that no two livings which were not contiguous should be held by the same person. The Bill was then read a third time and passed, with some verbal amendments. On the motion of the Marquis of LANSDOWNE the Elections (Ireland) Bill passed through Committee. INSPECTION OF COAL MINES BILL. The Earl of CARLISLE then rose to move the order of the day for the House resolving itself into a Commit tee upon the Inspection of Coal Mines Bill. In doing so be said be thought it was hardly necessary for him to do more than remind their Lordships of the appalling accidents which had taken place from time to time for many years past, attended as they were with so many consequences of penury, misery, and ruin, in the coal mines of the country. In 1835 a report had been made to Parliament on that subject, by which it appeared that for the twenty-fiveyears previous no less than 2,015 per sons bad perished from explosions in collieries. In the year 1845, the number of victims had been 100; in 1846, 35 had been sacrificed ; in 1847, seventy-three persons had lost their lives in a similar manner; and in 1849, no less than seventy-five had perished from the same cause. But even these reports did not convey an adequate idea of the mischief done in this way. There were many persona not mentioned in these reports who were maimed for life, and many who died in a few years afterwards from the result of those lamentable accidents. He thought those were , sufficient reasons for some judicious and moral interfer ence on the part of the Legislature on that subject. And the attention of the Legislature and the Government had not been withheld from the question; but they had, for a long series of years, instituted inquiries into the matter, and made various suggestions on the point. In 1835 a Committee of the House of Commons bad sat to investigate that subject, and had endeavoured to explain the nature and extent of those explosions. In 1843 va rious individuals had formed themselves into a committee on this question, which had endeavoured to impress on the public mind the necessity of making further ar rangements to try and put a stop to the evil. Several distressing explosions had taken place in 1844 and 1845, and a report on the subject had then bean laid on the table of the House. Sir H. de la Beebe and Dr. Lyon Play fair had made a comprehensive report on the same question in 1846. They had stated that the evil prin cipally arose from a want of proper inspection, and a vicious system of ventilation in mines. In 1847 another report had been made in consequence of a fearful explosion which had taken place in the neigh bourhood of Bath (as the Noble Earl was understood). Now, all the reports made in this matter concurred in the view of the Government, and recom mended that inspectors should be empowered to con stitute an investigation, and hold communication with proprietors, with a view to carry out.essential improve ments for the management of collieries in the best pos sible manner. In addition to all the other information which they had on the subject in the wa y of reports, there bad been two from Messrs. Blackwell and Phillips, who had been appointed by the Secretary of State to investigate - that matter. In Professor Phillips's report it bad been said that immediate measures ought to be taken to examine into and obviate, if possible, the sources of danger in every colliery; that Commissioners should have the power of examining the various mines, or deputing others to do so. The measure they proposed was, that authorised persons should be appointed, not to interfere with the management, but to look into and examine and report upon the condition of these mines, and see that proper designs should be furnished for the working of the mines, in order that all those engaged in the collieries should know what they were about. The Bill which they had laid upon the table of the House proposed nothing more than what had been recommended in all the various reports. What the in spectors were to do was to point out what was defective or dangerous in the mines, and if not remedied they were to report the same to the Government. A map of the various mines was also required to be furnished. But the Bill proposed to inflict no expense whatever up on the owners of mines; neitter did they attempt to im pose any restrictions nor dictation with respect to the management. They only asked for the right of inspec tion, and the production of papers, maps, and plans, showing the position and locality of the mines. There might be cases where the working was carried on in a dangerous manner. In such it was to be hoped the Go vernment would be allowed to interfere by having the power of inspection, and the right to ask for the maps and plans alluded to. In conclusion, ho would only ex press a hope that their Lordships would not oppose that endeavour to provide for the welfare, comfort, and safety of so many. of their poor fellow-countrymen.—(Hear.) The Earl of LONSDALE (who was very indistinctly heard) was understood to say that he could not see how the interference of Government in that matter could have the effect of preventing those melancholy accidents. They might take what powers of inspection they pleased, and what measures they could devise to prevent them, and yet accidents of that kind would occur. Could the Bill of the Government prevent those accumulations of gas which sometimes took place? He should say not. The Noble Earl here referred to, and read extracts from, one or two of the reports presented on the subject. In Bel gium, where a system of Government inspection pre vailed, the number of deaths from explosions from 1844 ts 1848 had been 580. In the district of Newcastle for six years. according to the returns, the number of deaths (as the Noble Earl was understood) was 562. Some time ago certain parties were called upon to make a recom mendation with respect to the means to be adopted where there was an accumulation of foul air; and what they had suggested was the formation of linen pipes. One professor in his report had stated that he found no colliery well ventilated, and that all were in a bad state; while another had asserted that the cases in which bad ventilation existed were exceptional ones. It would be said hereafter that they had admitted the principle of the present Bill, and if the power it sought for was con ceded, it might be contended that more power was ne cessary to carry it out.—(Hear, hear.) To show that the agitation which had existed in some parts of the north of England on this question bad not extended to Wales, where collieries were extensively worked, he had to remind their Lordships that he had that day . pre sented a petition from persons engaged in the collieries of Wales praying that they might not be subjected to any interference of the kind proposed. It was the interest of the coal owners to have their pits well ventilated, and precautiononthem by againstthe a t accidents, oppa g eof the because works,the insds adoptentailedby v e e pensions up to widows and children nthet or i e n t hwecaaßss scarcelyitself,where the accident was attended with loss of lif e , was very Objectingill con T s h id e er m a a b r le q . uisof move that it be committed that day three mont h s. a Bill of this important nature should b e i ntroduced at so timel a tteoap givee rio a d fi o d f l the session, faird LONDONDERRY si much less to the numerous amendments which the Noble Earl opposite proposed to make in it. What they had to consider was, whether the Bill would remedy the evils complained of. In the first place he had to remark that though Many new collieries had beenopened of late years, the number of . resid.ents.,laa..,b y no means in creised in proportion t o th e number of persons em- , ploed. It was proposed to give to the Secretary of State a power of appointing an inspector of mines, who should examine them and make his report to the Secretary of [State. He wished to know what course the Secretary of State would pursue in cases in which a difference of opinion existed between the inspectors and the managers of coal mines. It was only fair, if Government took upon them the duty of inspecting and providing for the security of coal mines, that they should bear the expenses of any loss arising from acci dents in those mines. He strongly objected to the powers proposed to be given to the inspector, more especially to that power which would authorise his call jog for maps and documents connected with the col lieries, and, if he thought fit, publishing the m in his re port. He also objected to malting the coal mines liable for the expenses of the inspection. It was highly objec tionable to create an impression in the minds of the por sons employed in collieries that the proprietors were nut so anxious as they ought to be to adopt all precautions necessary for the safety of the persons so employed. Ile much doubted whether any good had arisen from the agitation of this question. It would be impossible fur the Secretary of State to appoint any person as an in spector who could know as much of the state and work ing of the collieries as the managers of the collier:es. Objecting strongly to the power proposed to be given to the inspector of calling for documents he hoped some limisatton would be made in that respect. Ile trusted the Noble Earl would postpone the further consideration of the Bill. Lord WHARNCLIFFE said the objections to the Bill were founded entirely on misconception, and ho be lieved the northern and midland districts to be quite friendly to the measure. The Bill then passed through Committee with amend ment, which were ordered to be reprinted. On the motion of the Earl of CHICHESTER, the Larceny Summary Jurisdiction Bill passed through Committee. O❑ tho motion of Earl GRANVILLE, the Sheep and Cattlo Contagious Disorders Prevention Continuance Bill was read a second time. On the motion of Lord LANGDALE, the Court of Chancery Bill passed through Committee. Thoir Lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 11. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of Yesterday.) CONVICT PRISONS BILL. Sir G. GREY moved the third reading of the Convict Prisons Bill. Lord MAHON said that no opposition had hitherto been made to this Bill, and he believed none was in tended, but he could not allow the Bill to pass iti last stage without expressing the happiness he felt that the °pillions he had always held with respect to the treatment of • convicts had been responded to, by so great an authority as the present Earl Grey. He could not, however, but express his regret at the course that had formerly been pursued by that Noble Earl with reference to transportation; he alluded to the forcing of convicts upon reluctant colonies. The Noble Lord in adopting that course had damaged greatly the system of transportation. Sir G. GREY expressed his opinion that the present measure was of a kind which, while it maintained the punishment of transportation, would ultimately contri bute to the prosperity of the colonies to which convicts were sent. After a few words from Sir J. PABINGTON, Mr. SLANEY expressed his conviction that the sub ject of prison discipline was regarded with more san guine expectation than could be justified by the circum stances. In his opinion measures for the prevention of crime were much needed, and he hoped to see one brought forward in the course of next session. Mr. HENLEY expressed his general approbation of the present Bill; but he objected to one of the clauses towards the end of tho Bill, which concentrated the powers of the governors of Parkhurst, Pentonville, and Millbank in one individual. After a few words of explanation from Sir G. GREY, The Bill was read a third time and passed. POOR RELIEF BILL. On the motion that the House resolve itself into a Committee on this Bill, Sir H. WILLOUGHBY objected to that part of the Bill which gives power to the guardians of any union or parish to raise out of the poor-rates funds for the pur chase of burial-grounds. He did not object to the ari -1 largement of any existing burial-grounds out of the rates, but simply to the creating of particular burial-grounds to be used specially fur the burying of paupers, which, in his opinion, would be distasteful to the feelings of the poor. Sir JOHN PAKINGTON took that occasion to ex press his earnest hope that this was the last of those an nual poor•law Bills, because he was convinced that the present practice of introducing such Bills for the pur pose of amending the poor-law had the effect of render ing the law on that subject extremely complicated. Sir GEORGE PECHELL also expressed his dissa tisfaction with the present complicated system of poor laws, which those annual Bills only tended to aggravate. Mr. SLANEY likewise expressed his wish to see an early consolidation of the poor-laws. Mr. BAINES said it was his intention to ask for leave to bring in a Bill to improve and consolidate the law of settlement; and with respect to the present Bill, one consideration operating on his mind in asking the House to pass it, was the circumstance of the Committee of the House of Lords now sitting to inquire into the opera tion of the law relating to parochial assessments, and which Committee had not yet made their report. The necessity for every clause which he bad introduced into this Bill had been impressed upon his mind by circumstances which had arisen, and for which the law in its present state afforded no adequate remedy.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped the House would permit the Bill to go into Committee; and, if so, be would then be prepared to make a statement which would disarm much of the opposition manifested towards it, especially that of the Hon. Member opposite (Sir II Willoughby). The House then went into Committee on the Bill. Mr. MILES expressed a hope that when the lion. Member (Mr. Bailie:o brought forward his Bill next session with respect to the law of settlement, he would bestow his consideration on the neees,ity of reconstruct ing the urban as well as the rural unions. Clause I was then agreed to; but clause 2 was with drawn. Clause 3 was agreed to, with an amendment that the parish childre❑ between the ages of ten and sixteen, in tended to be sent out under it to the colonies, should, previous to their emigration, have given their consent to such emigratio❑ before two magistrates. The other clauses of the Bill were then agreed to with some verbal amendments. Three Lew clauses were proposed and agreed to. On the motion of Mr. BAINES, The CHAIRMAN reported progress, and the House adjourned at four to five o'clock. The House resumed at Five o'clock. PETITIONS. Sir H. VIVIAN presented a petition from a place in Cornwall against certain clauses in the Savings Banks Bill. Sir W. JOLLIFFE presented a petition from a place in Surrey against certain clauses in the Highway Bill. Several petitions were presented against Sunday labour in the Post-office. Mr. DISRAELI presented a petition from the clergy i❑ the diocese of Oxford, praying for a better court of appeal in ecclesiastical cases. Mr. HUME presented a petition from Paisley praying that no restriction might be put on the increase of beer shops. KENSINGTON-GARDENS. Mr. B. COCHRANE gave notice that to-morrow ho would ask the Government whether they would support an address to her Majesty, praying that she might allow a part of Kensington-gardens to be set aside fur eques trian exercise. SANITARY STATE OF BRISTOL. Mr. 11. BERKELEY wished to know what progress had bee❑ made by the Board of Health to bring Bristol under the operation of the Health of Towns Act? Mr. BOUVERIE replied that inspectors had been sent to Bristol, and upon their report a. provi sional order would be made, which would be sub mitted to the approval of the local body; but there was no reasonable probability of Bristol being dealt with by Act of Parliament this session. ACCIDEN CS IN MINES AND COLLIERIES. Mr. HUME presented a petition from Ashton•under Lyne signed by between 6,000 and 7,000 per sons employed in mines and collierie9, pray ing that inspectors might be appointed to inquire into and report upon the state of mines and collieries. The Hon. Member took the op. portunity of asking the Secretary for the Home Depart ment whether there was any probability of the Bill which had been introduced into the House of Lordzi, being passed this session? Sir G. GREY said the Bill which he had prepared was read a second time in the House of Lords the other day, and he hoped it would be brought cl,wn for the consideration of this Hotter, at an early period. EXPORTS. In reply to Mr. ANS'ITY, Mr. LABOUCHERE said a return had been prepared by the Board of Trade with regard to foreign tariffs, and to the tariffs of our own colonies, and the reason it had not been laid on the table was that some of the colonial returns had not been received. The Secretary for Foreign Affairs had sent instructions to our consuls abroad to send copies of all foreign tariffs to the Foreign-office. CAPE OF GOOD HOPE. In reply to Mr. ADDERLEY, Mr. HAWES said that according to the letters patent both Chambers in the Cape of Good Hope would be elective; but he could not say what construction lawyers might put on the Charter. PUNISHMENT OF DEATH. Mr. E WART, after presenting petitions in favour of the abolition of the punishment of death from Liverpool, Brighton, Shrewsbury, Sunderland, Glas gow, Colchester, Edinburgh, King's Lynn, the Liverpool Peace Society, and other places, proceeded to bring on his motion fur leave to abolish the punishment of death. He said he assuredly should not again have brought forward that motion, if it here not for the increasing conviction in his own mind of the .justice and expediency of the measure he advo cated, and unless he had been convinced that there was an increasing public opinion on this subject through out the country, and that that public opinion con tinued to receive accessions from day to day. On former occasions this question had been argued by . figures, which had been triumphantly ap pealed to on both sides. He believed that on both sides of this question it was a drawn battle; but be thought, on the whole, the weight of statistics was on the side of the abolitionists, and that the mitigation of the punhiiracnt of eicatL, whemor it had taken place, had ith been attended not only without danger, but also ' s security to society. On this occasion he s hould take no statistical view of the subject. He should ende e i " .. your to sho w t h e t t h e present system of reta i n i ng the pu e nishinent of death w as i ncons i stent w i t h t h at grea t object of all puni s h men t— name l y, the certainty of punisheeent: which wa s l a id d own b y Blackstone as be i ng t h e proper principl e o f a ll pun i shment, and with which no punish mentt. could b e ra id t o be effectual for He believed if any gentleman would consult the return s which we re l a id upon the table of the H ou se would find many cases of murder in which prison) a had been acquitted, not because juries en tertained.„! doubt of the cr i me , b ut a d read of the pun i shmen t. bt u , would refer t o t h e cases of Jane Mitchel l , tr ied s , Newcastle on the 20 h of February, 1849; that of R,e l ; becca Smith, t r i e d at D ev i zes on the 9th of August, to the same yea r; a: d S ara h White, tried at t h e Centra l i ; Criminal Court on t h e 10t h of January, 1850. . 1 ° r two first cases th e j ury recommended the prison:. :to mercy in cons{ quince o f the i r ant i pat hy to II punishment. I n th e l ast case the tame f ee ling . p duced the jury to return a verdict of not guilty; When we have suc h cases o f t h e l aw b ecom i ng power o .' o through its own severity, he thought the time was e re , for some int er f erence . Th ey h ad the testimony °f7l3;sir tices Coltman an d Ahl erson t h at j ur i es often ga ve oe verdicts :n the teeth of law and evidence in co nseetoe na of their gr ea t di s lik e to the punishment ; s° beyond thi s th e p r i soners were oftentimes more desireus ef being tried for murder rather than for a smaller (dee:: because they h a d a f ee li ng that j uries would acquitthe They had the opi n i on o f C h i ef Justice Wil d e, Jasti,ehebe Wight man and Coltman, besides several members of the Irish bar, against the puni s hm e nt of L e e Atb• e d If there was one thi ng on w hi ch he was more con vinced than another, i t was t h e pur i ty of the motives w"li.or influenced the Ri g h t H on. G entleman the Secretary the Home Departm en t, b ut i t did h appen that t he Pu hitt were very much p er pl exe d to know for vised reason one criminal was repr i eve d by hilne„-eer another criminal puni s h e d. H e was at a l oss to "" on what ground the Right Honourable Gentlenis would oppose the mo ti on w hi c h h e now proV e t a ed. On a former occasion th e Ri g h t H on. Baronet Weetted capital punishm en t oug ht on the ground of a certa in _ finite idea, which he su pp ose d ex i sted i n the m i n ds of the population on the subject. That, however, was not ° the the case. Another opinion which he formed was, th st f b e public were in favour of capital punishment, but na were to call public meetings all over the country, e s ss , take their opinion on the subject, he would find that they were decidedly opposed to retaining punishment. The Hon. Member concluded by V et / the lines of Dr. Johnson, favourable to the abolition capital punishment:— " Shall then these fears await, no wishes rise, No prayers assail the justice of the skies? • Enquirer cease—petitions still remain, t ie Which Heaven may hear, but speak to man in ‘, : s i . ou this species. u He moved for leave to bring in a Bill for the ithe' l I of the punishment of death. • re' Mr. HUME s econ d e d t h e mot i on. It was i n their se: collection that p un i s h ment of death was i n fli c ted '!„ trifling offences, and so they continued untilSjuror s is r i : oaths refused to find verdicts sanctioning such Pstl°,,,or ments. They saw the same occurring in cases 0 , "' sec t der. For five years ending in 1844 the numbers sooli .wat of murder and acquitted on the ground of insanity " ty • twenty-three e and from 1845 to 1849 there were f°r a o f eight so acquitted; whilst last year sixteen accuseio, murder were permitted on that plea to escape the P un ed ment of death. Look what improvement they had effectrey by abolishing the punishment of flogging in the ° tt e and the navy, and yet that mode of punishenee t t he been strongly advocated in that House. He doubted _ Le efficacy of the capital punishment, and he was S ure 0 ; might do far more good to society by giving an else t ple of a merciful spirit on the part of the Goveril on . itself. That would t en d to h umanise the poPultittor• All should be taught that life was given by the Cr, e t i e g and that no man h a d a r i g h t to take i t away. Be lie o ar that revenge ought t o b e a l together exclude d fron , looo legislation, and that the safety of society ought a s t he to be the rule and guid e , h e s h ou ld b e happy to °- punishment of death abolished. take the Sir G. GREY concei ve d it t o b e hi s d uty to tap - met same course upon that which he had taken upon f or r• occasions when the H on . M em b er f or Dum f r ies (7 s i t Ewart) bad brought forward his motion, namelYt t ; the the House not t o enterta i n a Bill for the abolit i on 0 ado punishment of death. The grounds upon which h e r•atete this request were th ese : t h at he believed the mat pt nonce of that punishment as a part of its , penal law was indispensably necessary for t he . s ee terests of society, and imperatively demanded by the , hic h gard to the protection and security of human life w sesi r the community had a right to expect from the ts e e ' este ) ment and Legislature of this country.—(Hear , ue lie g They were not now, it should be remembered, de s i e . with those cases in which capital punishment was for flitted fir crimes of a comparatively light character.; _ .tit since the year 1841, not one person had suffered a c e le ' l i, in this country, except for the crime of wilful sod t e r, berate murder.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member ofe Montrose said we had no right to take away e l b e i which God had given; but upon that point he nin s 4 o o. to express a to ally different opi n i on . Did the To t e Gentleman mean to s a y t h at i f a person came to t h away his life he would not be justified by the la w so on of God and man i n ta ki ng away the life of that Pea if in order to preserve his own?— fleas hear.) I %,,ti - so, did it nut necessaril follow that the state w as j fied imposing capit a l punishment for the preser" of innumerable lives; for he believed that the preser t he Lion of innumerable lives was the result of continuing stt el punishment of death. The abolition of this lari e w- o an have the effect of increasing the destruction of, uu beld life, and he contended that human life was 0 1 4 o u r sacred by the maintenance of this law as a part 49.1 ee l criminal code.—(Hear.) It was said that thispanis e h ei nes s had no terror s ; b u t, j u d g i ng from the opinions el";fillont sons who wer e th e most competent to form an 01)00st he believed that it was t h e most terrible, and the eat dreaded, of all p un i s h ments t h at could be inflicted; the t he thought, theref o r e , it s h ou ld be preserved for e of crime for which al one it was now inflicted—the aloe. wilful and deliberate murder.—(Hear, hear.) Th e e .„ e et, Gentleman said th a t it was a most uncertain punisuwinere but test it as he mi g h t , h e would find that it Was her, certain in its appli cat i on and i nfliction than an y of or penalty on the statute book. Out of nineteen case .01 capital convictio n l ast year fifteen were executed m ots regard to the remaining four, he was not Prep s S ir with the p ar ti cu l ars to explain the reasons for - t he not being carried into effect. He could assu r° 4t ete . House that the duty of the Secretary of was not that which it was supposed t° that His Honourable Friend seemed to think ne e it was a mere lottery whether the capital sel l i si e t i e d was carried int o execut i on or not; that it dePe,"toe, upon the indvid ua l c h aracter o f the Secretary of Sight who, if he wer e a person o f b enevolent character , re a o v supersede the l aw a l together and refuse to allow to capital punish men t to b e enforced. But acc ordTg ro , his (Sir G. Grey' s ) v i ew o f the duty he had to P eri° he he conceived that he should be grossly henviolatiogs trust reposed in hi m if h e allowed the feelings of volence to interfere with the execution of the law , , t he less after full co ns id erat i on an d communication wit'nold judge he w a s sa ti s fi e d t h at t h e case was suc h as vv-i justify, accordi ng t o th e pr i nc i ples upon which the s ought to be executed, either a commutation or a r e t he sion of the sentonce.—(Cheers.) What would he on. result if this punishment were abolishes? Tfic eggs Gentleman said that revengeful and vindictive fe e it en ought not to enter into the execution of t h s e et eall but vindictive feelings formed an element " - t hat nature, and the Hon. Gentleman must be awar e oete vindictive passions existed in human nature. The fitted Gentleman said that a murder was never comet_, without calling forth express i ons of abhorrence and bite. cration against its perpetrator on the part of the Pub fle rse But what was the effect now? The public saw the ° Led* of justice towards the offender. They saw him ar r- s - delt It was known there would be a public and a fair de' that the evidence for the prosecution and for th e fence would b e b rought before ajury, and that i f a ,Cesed viction to o k p l ace the law would inflict a dese'sl punishment. But suppose this law were abolishetLecer that it was generally known that a murder, 11 1 1 D og, , atrocious or revolting the circumstances of it, wou' s , t , be followed by the capital conviction and execut t ed the criminal, then private revenge would be ..b.0.- 0 ,4 for that legal adjudication which now took plae e ' e eld personal violence, as the result of that revenge, i c- e se follow. Having quoted an extract from the rePor t i re ' Committee of the House of Ccnamons in favour 0 t he taming capital punishment f or t h e crime of mur derp or , Right Hon. Gentlem an p roceeded to say, in answer t° the Hume, that he deni e d t h at public opinion was agefl ) ,.. s " e it' continuance of th e p un i s h ment. True, the publicly No pressed opinion was in favour of its abolition• t he doubt it was eas i er to get up a meeting in favour 0f et abolition of t h e pun i shment of death—and he rejoi ee ft tes it—than it wa s to get up a meeting in favour of re' 0 ing the punishment. Never in his experienc e bet Secretary of State had any individual, or a Il l e ath, of Individuals, asked that the sentence of "" of passed upon a person convicted of the cril t ich murder should be carried into execution. he a thing had never been heard of. And t h e refor e hic h asked th e H ouse not to be led by the petitions w s eer had been presented, by applications in particular e s t he or by public meetings on the subject, to believe tf" t ea lis general feeling of th e coun t ry was i n favour o f the (700 Lion of the punishm en t o f d eat h . H e had strong rser/thet for beli ev i ng th a t suc h was not the case, and beet very great terror would be spread abroad throng f e l' the country if the crime of murder were not to b , e beee lowed by the puni s h men t o f d eath. F o r t he reasons he trusted the House would not assent t ° motion. od er Mr. BRIGHT said, th a t th oug h the su bj ec t ° discussion might not h ave ma d e muc h progress ilied, House, yet that out o f t h e H ouse i ntelligent an° °tee men in vast numbers were of opinion that the ti me s od come when capital punishment might with safeti f propriety be abolished. Ad m i tt i ng, f or the solo ° e p gument, that society had the right to take away b 0 twit life, he would ask, was it politic and expedient alai' 0 0 0. • punishment of death should continue? The Right, 0 0 6 Baronet had told th e H ouse t h at there was now on ly be crime punishabl e w i t h d eath in this country; bat t he must be aware th a t w i t hi n the last 90 years, sine; this e accession of Ge orge 111 ., the criminal co d e 01 country bad excluded capital offences to the nuni b t e s bie not less th an 240. I t was found that the whole 0,, se' brutal and crue l system was an entire failure; el : " hod cordingly, during the last 90 years capital offence° ca re been red u c e d f rom 240 to one. But wore we lees s e nt of now than we were 50 or 60 years ago on soe, ° ,ll - e er , the mildness of the criminal code?—(Cries of bear.") The Right Hon. Baronet had drawn a s s- t - be" ture of what would happen if the punishment we,_ l " G eo tle' • fished. Let him remind the Right Honourable u ce e man that the same arguments were used, and e ee lish" more,fearful picture still of the consequences 01 6 , s - ti tle' ing it was exhibited by the Right Honourablo s t r man who filled the office of Home Secretary Tv fi t,t t iod ago ; but there no reason whatever for °Q. 4 1 4 ,, 1 th , ,' th,