The Sun. — London, England, 1832-08-02 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS, Upon the announcement of the Tithe Bill by Mr. Stanley some time ago, we took occasion to declare our opinion upon the subject, and we were, therefore, well pleased to find that the Go vernment, abandoning the future prosecution of the two measures threatened for the future regu lation of the church property and church esta blishment of Ireland, contented itself with an attempt to carry through, during this session of Parliament, the single Bill, enforcing composi tion in those parts of the country to which the former composition, which was optional, had not extended. Of this measure we have little to say, either in praise or in blame. In order to arrive at a final settlement of the great question itself—in order to save the property now un doubtedly belonging to the state from becoming the prey of the landlords of Ireland—and ultimately, we trust, in order to devote it to better purposes than it has been turned to in the hands of one party, or would be in those of the other— namely, to the improvement both of the moral and physical condition of the ignorant and wretched peasantry of that country—in order to do any or all of this, it is undoubtedly necessary to as certain the correct value of the property itself, and simplify the mode of securing it. As a means to wards this end the Bill in question does not seem objectionable; under its provisions, undoubtedly, an estimate of the value of the property to be re el iimed will be obtained, and its collection ren dered more easy. Nor can we believe that, if it had been introduced, unaccompanied by the pro posal of other and ulterior measures, it would have excited any opposition even in so irritable a people as that of the Sister Country. Accom panied as it was, we are not surprised that it should have had such an effect. But now, when these measures have been withdrawn,—when, from the declarations made by many Members of the Government, any return to them, even in another Parliament, can no longer be feared— when the Bill for a composition stands simply and singly before the House and the country, we really think that the outcry which it is attempted to raise against it, and the vexatious opposition which, night after night, pursues the measure, are as unjustifiable as they are mischievous. Above all, must we raise our voice against the conduct, which, now for two nights, has been pursued by a little trio of self-constituted Irish patriots ; a conduct which we can only cha racterise as alike absurd, factious, and disgraceful to public men. On Tuesday Mr. Leader pre vented the House of Commons from proceeding with the business of the country, by a threat of counting it, if any luckless Member, less gifted with the talent of enduring patiently the floods of wretched common-place which he and his assn. ciates might pour upon the remaining thirty nine, should venture to quit the House ; and last night Mr. Ruthven and Mr. Wallace seemed determined to bring the matter to a practical test, by inflicting upon their hapless audience a series of—we will not term them speeches—speeches, indeed, proh pudor !—but disjointed and unmeaning words, which, unless patience has made St. Stephen's her own, might well have afforded Mr. Leader the golden op portunity he sought. Really such conduct is puerile—it is worse—it is mischievous to the cause they pretend to serve, and disgusting to all its best friends. We tell those gentlemen that it is so—that they delude themselves if they imagine that Ireland, or the friends of Ire land in England, will view such proceedings with anything but disgust. We tell them that the real advocates of Irish rights and of the promoters of true Irish prosperity, see in such conduct nothing but cause for alarms ; but the ridicule, which should belong solely to the authors of it, may attach itself to the cause which these legislators are by their advocacy ruining. Let them abstain in future from such doings. Late as is the period of the Session, inconvenient as such a course would be, rather than permit the whole business of the empire to be delayed by the teazing and abortive pawings of little giants, miscalling themselves friends to .Ireland (for where are the O'Connells, the Brownlows, the Killeens ?), they may depend upon it, the intelligent and really patriotic of both countries will, at whatever sacrifice, rall' and convince then► that the House of Commons will neither countenance, nor submit to be dic- tated to or impeded in its course by efforts like theirs. Already we hear that an independent Member of Parliament has declared his inten tion of moving for a call of the House, should these proceedings be repeated ; and, if driven to this extremity, we would suggest for the consi deration of Messrs. Leader, Wallace, and Ruth. yen, with what appetite their Irish colleagues will cross . St. George's Channel, to resume their places in an August session ; and whether those who were the authors of the infliction will find ready fztvour in their eyes.—Morning Chronicle. The practice so scrupulously insisted on by gatemen, of involving diplomatic negotiations in the most profound mystery until the moment when they have come to a conclusive result, has surely prevailed too long for the true interests of those most concerned in such transactions. It cannot but soon ur.dergo such a modification as must confine it to being the exception, and not the rule, in the conduct of international communications—at least as far as regards Eng land, and all countries enjoying free institutions. The whole science of modern diplomacy is no thing better than elaborate iVlachiavelian machi nery for managing State affairs on good old right-divine principles—as much as possible to the convenience of Princes, and as little as pos- Bible in subjection to the influence of their sub jects. Its great professors were the cowled Padishalis of the Vatican ; such crafty and ambitious Monarchs as Louis the Eleventh of France, and the petticoat politicians, Queen mothers, and Cardinals, who came after him : in our own country, that imperious Suzeraine who would allow her faithful Commons liberty of speech to the extent of yea and nay ; and that master of the mysteries of kingship who " sharply reproved the same Commons fir de bating of matters fiir above their reach and capacity, and forbad them meddling with any thing that regarded his Government or deep matters of State." In modern times Met ternich, Pozzo di Burgo, and the Patriarch of France, are shining lights in the same sphere, before whom the brightest of preceding luminaries are shorn of their beams. 'Flie agents of this system are not men selected froin those whose opinions are as familiar to their fel low-citizens as their political actions are open and undisguised. In England they are not taken from amongst well-known public men. They are a class sui generis, regularly bred up in the schools of intrigue, and, like monks in the itomish Church, or special pleaders in law, in proportion as they are adepts i❑ their pro fession, and esteemed by their superiors, are they blind bigots or thorough knaves, incapable of wide and philosophical views, or dexterous in willing their knowledge to their own private in tereit alone. With such directing master-spirits and such instruments, diplomacy will never adjust the differences of nations according to a simple plan, or with truly honest intentions. It will not look at the subject-matter of its inter-. vention straightforward,.. or " oculo irretorto." It sqnintsat every thing, and sees every thing under such crooked and distorted shapes, as are most congenial to its sense of the moral line of beauty. Its efficiency depends upon dexterous duplicity ; its success is but superior overreaching. Upon one party or the other confiding in it, it entails mortification ; and in every seeming settlement of a difference it deposits the seed of numerous others, until the accumul ttion of dilemmas becomes inconveniently great and com plicated ; when war is invited to clear the score, that the game of finesse may be commenced with restored freshness and gusto. The conse quence has been that the civilized States of Eu rope are perpetually embroiled with each other, and are involved in as many and as bloody con- flicts amongst themselves 'as were the savage tribes that trod the aboriginal woods and savan nahs of America ; and such would be the story to the end of the chapter if the destinies of nations were for ever to be controlled by the tribe of diplomatic manoeuvres. They have met, however, like their masters, with a formidable antagonist in the Press, which with the eyes of Argus discovers everything in the way of State mystery, and with the hands of Btiareus disse minates its Sybiline leaves of information upon highway and byway, amongst Kings and crafts men, until nothing is left for the lying profession to exercise its vocation upon. Such, indeed, we should say, rather will be than is the result of a free Press. It is not so successful in its operations as yet, and the reign of Plenipotenti aries, with its whole corps, must still continue in opposition to . the spirit of our British Constitution and to the theoretic responsibility ofour Ministers for the consequences of their measures, both fo reign and domestic. What can be more unreason able than the present system of allowing Govern ment to carry on negotiations with foreign Powers, on matters of the deepest import to the well-being of this country, Without any sub stantial control upon their decisions—allowing them to secure themselves with the pretext of necessary mysteriousness from all inquiry into the arrangements by which the country is to be irrevocably bound ? When the veil is raised conventions are produced, and we must content ourselves with them for good or for evil. The Minister is in general, able to screen himself with his Parliamentary majority ; while the Op position, that might expose and frustrate an in choate design, is paralysed by the consciousness that the time for resistance has elapsed, and people acquiesce because what's done cannot be undone. It may still be admitted that there are cases in which secrecy of negotiation is indis pensable ;—it may be fully admitted ;—but we contend that such cases are, and should be, the few exceptions, while the general rule to the contrary should cover the majority of instances, and be the standing principle of our Govern ment. In all arrangements with foreign Powers, no proposition of importance should be pro posed or assented to by a Brish Cabinet without the sanction, express or implied, of Parliament. Had this course been hitherto adopted, England would have escaped many great vexations and innumerable misfortunes, some of which are felt at the present day—Castlereagh could not have smiled away her interests at the Congress of Vienna— we should not have been declared debtor to Holland or Russia—nor should we be paying off a loan raised by the Empress Catherine to carry massacre and partition into Poland ; we should not now have a Ministry, esteemed by the country, committed in a most discreditable manoeuvre to effect that object in favour of the man who, in more humane times, outstripped the cruelty of his predecessor; nor should we have that Ministry, as well as the whole nation, stultified by scores of protocols to settle a plain question, which should have been set at rest by by one. If we have been wronged, however, in these transactions, they are irrevocable, and we must submit ; but there is another, of a similar description, with which we are menaced, but which may, perchance, be arrested. We shall allude to it at present in a few words. The settlement-of-Greece treaty will be signed, sealed, and delivered, as usual, au secret. We ask Mi nisters shall it, when laid before the nation, con tain an assent to the young King's marriage with a Russian Princess? If this be so, or if, with such an arrangement as this in contemplation, England is committed to the guarantee of the Greek loan, then do we maintain that our Cabi net has been palpably befooled, and we are made the tools of Russian schemes and Russian aggrandisement. This may be rumour—it may be the truth. Is the country to remain in the dark respecting it to the last ?—Morn. Herald. Once more, in the name of the people of England, we demand of Lord Grey why lie does not—why he attempts not to—enforce the execution of the protocols, nay, of even one of the 67 protocols by which he has been raising to agony the public expectation during the last 18 months ? If the settlement of all disputes between Holland and Belgium was deemed by his Lordship necessary to the peace of Europe,l and the successive treaties contained in the pro. tocols were essential to any desirable adjustment between the Belgians and the Dutch, how comes it that such treaties are suffered by the British Government to lie for so much waste paper upon the shelves of the Foreign-office ? Here we are, for the first time since the peace, under a fearful deficit in the public income, as compared with the expenditure. Here have the Customs fallen off frightfully, because of the universal distrust and agitation of Europe. 'I . his country has been tormented by an uncer tainty as to peace or war, which paralizes and be numbs all foreign commerce, and which every Minister must be aware tends, more than a state of positive war itself; to dry up many of the most valuable sources of revenue. And why are such things tolerated ? Why has Lord Grey been the principal party to their production..? His Lordship, through Lord Palmerston, has been laying down the law, and prescribing and dictating to the Dutch and Belgians what they must do, and in what mutual relations they must be satisfied to stand hereafter, on pain of drawing down a visitation by main force from England and her co-protocolling Powers ; for be it remembered, that in their protocols each promises for itself, and for its partners, in the policy adopted by the entire body. Belgium obeys the orders implicitly, and fulfill s th e con- ditions imposed upon her ; thus affording proof not merely of the tractable and conciliatory dis position of the Brussels Cabinet, but of the di rect and honest purpose of France and England to abide, on behalf of Belgium, by the letter of the protocol treaties. Is it so with Holland ? No; she repels at once the most important proposi tioni made to her, and persists for months together in incurring the full penalty of coercion by force of arms, pronounced by the five Courts against whichever of the two disputants should set itself against their award. Then what prevents the five great Powers from acting upon their own reiterated pledges, and coercing the obstinacy of the Dutch King ? Had Belgium been the recusant party, ' it is plain that she would have been vouchsafed no such indulgence. Then the responsibility rests with Lord Grey, and with no other; for beyond every Minister of the Allied Governments has the Noble Earl expatiated on the necessity of preserving peace, and the urgency of some final arrangement of this untoward question. We can with difficulty credit the statements made, no matter, how grave and upright the authority, re earding the course of the British Government, and its motives for shrinking from the dis charge of a high and paramount duty. We dare not listen to any averment so calum nious, as that Lord Grey is disposed to shrink from the obligation of either calling upon the other protocolling parties to join him in com pelling Holland, lest they should refuse, or, jointly with France, if acting without them, lest they should resist the operation ! What, refuse to execute their own solemn engage ments, entered into, not abruptly or incon siderately, but after numberless negotiations, with the most ample knowledge of all the events which had taken place, and of all the interests at issue, —with an abundant cognizance both of things and persons, after full allowance being made for predilections, fox repuguances, for the means of restoring the status in quo between the rivals, and for the seemingly insuperable necessity of admitting the uti possidetis ;—after all this, is it possible for Lord Grey to impute to the allied Monarchs of Germany and Russia the immea surable baseness of forfeiting their own royal words, and discountenancing—much more re sisting—the execution of their own deliberate contracts ? If Lord Grey avows any such sus picion, not founded upon overt and demon strable acts, but only on his individual im pression of the corrupt character or worth less policy of the two Emperors and the King of Prussia, the suspicion is so of fensive and insulting as almost to justify, in those three Courts, a declaration of war against England. Lord Grey ought to be interrogated in Parliament upon the subject, and invited to declare-Ist, Whether he has ground for sus pecting that the Continental Courts hare been trifling for so many months, and laughing at King William IV.'s advisers ; or, otherwise,- 2d, What objection his Lordship has to demand of those Governments the discharge of their joint engagements, and the immediate exercise of a compulsory power over Holland, according to the terms of the treaty. We have never heard that any positive ground existed for antici pating a rejection by the three Courts of an of• ficial call upon them from England, to unite with her in enforcing the evacuation of the Belgic territory. If no such motive for apprehension can be alleged by Lord Grey, then is his Lord ship the sole cause why Belgium is still ousted of the possession of her own town of' Antwerp: but if materials whereon to build an alarm so humbling to the other Powers, and so exaspera ting to England, have really been before the eyes of Lord Grey, whereby it became manifest that Great Britain was, for nearly two years, dealing with a set of persons, who would swear one day and the next day be forsworn,—then was it doubly indispensable for the Prime Mi nister to throw himself on his country, —to let England, France, and Belgium under stand clearly what they had to expect from the honour of the Holy Alliance Courts, and thus relieve us from the perils of treachery, if not from those of open conflict. In one word, if Lord Grey's inaction proceeds from a dread that the Russian, &c. ministers have all this while been laughing at him, and instead of executing the protocols when required, will use them only to light their pipes, he endangers the best in terests of Great Britain, from a wish to avoid some personal mortification, by attempting this absurd delay. If he has no motive to suspect the covrotocol makers, but, on the contrary, reason to rely upon their assistance, then his apparent languor throws doubts upon his own sincerity. In either case, what will the British Minister gain ? He will not escape war by showin g the world that he trembles. He will not secure the confidence of Belgium, whose rights he abandons, by such a miserable, evasive protocol as the 67th,—nor of the French nation (we say nothing of poor Louis-Philip), by the readiness with whi c h h e rece iv es th e law from Holland, and her Muscovite Camarilla. We refer to our Brussels letter for proof of the im minence of that very danger of war, which our slow rulers pretend to avoid by hesitating and childish procrastinations.— Times. We have waited for some days in the expec tation that the Lord Chancellor would have something to say in reference to the matter alleged against him by Sir Edward Sugden in the House of Commons. He is, however, silent, and we are therefore compelled to recur to an affair which the Noble and Learned Lord seems desirous to leave in a very unsatisfactory position. It is only necessary to state a few facts, and to ask a few questions, in order to show that the affair cannot with honour to some of the parties be permitted to remain where it is. In the first place, it is a fact that such words were said, by one of the public Journals, to have been uttered by the Lord Chancellor, in his place in the House of Lords, as no man having the manners or feelings of a gentleman could by possibility have uttered, under anv pro vocation—such words, as it is universally felt, could be properly answered only by a horsewhip or a cudgel. In the second place, it is a fact that a Right Hon. Gentleman, the descendant of a Noble House, a friend and colleague of the Lord Chancellor, asserted subsequently in the House of Commons, or insinuated in a manner not to be understood, that the Lord Chancellor had communicated to him that these blackguard words were erroneous l y ascr ib ed to him. In the third place, it is a fact that the Journal which printed them, justly abhorrent of the sup position that such terms could have issued from the imagination of any person connected with it, reiterates its assertion, and offers to swear to it that they were the ipsissima verba of the Lord Chancellor. This is the actual position of the affair, and we think the public have a right to know a little more fully than they do at present who are right an d w h o are wrong. The imputation of wilful falsehood is added to that of gross, vulgar, an d unmanly scurrility by the turn given to the aff a i r i n t h e House of Commons by the friends of the Lord Chancellor. The world in general, so far as our observation extends, gives full c re di t to t h e accuracy of the report, fetid as it was, and the rather that the Journal in which it appeared is supposed to have often been favoured by contri butions from the pen of the Noble and Learned Lord. Nobody suspects the Right Hon. Friend of the Lord Chancellor in the Com mons' House of Parliament of fabricating a communication he did not receive. The ques tion then is, whether the scurrilous Lord Chan cellor is afraid to say from his own lips, in con tradiction to the reiterated assertion of the Journal whose columns had the misfortune to be soiled by the language imputed to him, what he has instructed his friend and colleague to say on his behalf ? If the Lord Chancellor used the language imputed to him, there can, we sup pose, be no doubt that he has added to this offence the baseness of instructing his friend to say that he never used it. His choicest nick names will, we have no doubt, find at last their proper owner. The Lord Chancellor will be cautious how he uses such language in future, if he has heard, as we have, that at the Clubs the odds are five to one in favour of the first men who commit such an outrage, be the scene where it may, be the rank and station of the offender what it may, having to undergo the discipline of the horsewhip, at the latest, on the following day.—Morning Post. A controversy of no inconsiderable moment, as regards not only the honour of England, but the general peace of Europe, is now carrying on, both on this and on the other side of the English channel, respecting the policy which it behoves the Courts of England and France to pursue respecting the settlement of the Belgian question, and the still more important matter of the edicts of the Germanic Confederation. By one party it is strongly advocated to he the bounden duty of France and England, not only to put an end at once by force of arms to the dilatory and deceitful proceedings of their col leagues in the London Conference, respecting the affairs of Belgium and Holland, but to enter their decided protest against the edicts of the Germanic Diet, as infringements upon the inde pendence of its states, and attempts to disturb the state of Europe as settled at the close of the last war; by another it is urged that we have already embarked too far in continental politics —and that whatever may be our obligations with respect to Belgium and Holland, it would be the height of absurdity to take special notice of what is going on in Germany, " without knowing how far the spirit of resistance exists among the Germans themselves." The two questions evidently merge into one—the right of interference on the part of France and England in the affairs of the continent--a right of which no possible doubt can now exist in so far as Holland and Belgium are concerned, for it is allowed and recorded in hundreds of protocols, and which we deem to be equally clear as regards the affairs of Germany. The questions at issue are not matters of internal regulation, but European questions—things affecting the balance of power in the great European world, and, as such, having an immediate bearing upon the welfare and prosperity of both France and England. In the case of Belgium and Hol land the right of interference cannot be dis puted, because it is based on specific treaties. In the case of the German States, should they re• fuse to incorporate the edicts of the Frankfort Diet with those of their separate legislatures, the right is equally clear, not only on the score of our national interests, but on that also of a gross and tyrannical attempt, on the part of others, to interfere with that which no country or state has a right to meddle with—the internal regulations of other States—their independence and right of legislation. And has not such interference been practised ? Has not the Frank fort Diet taken upon itself to legislate upon matters which are purely at all times within the province, and at the will and pleasure of inde pendent States ? And are England and France to look passively on, and let tyranny and despotism extend their hateful branches to the danger of her interests, and the ruin of others, who look up to them for protection ? Are they to permit the precedent to be established that the independence of States is nothing, and that their power of making laws for themselves may be exercised by others who have no interests in common with them—no right to intermeddle, but the right of power over weakness? We wish that a Chatham were now alive to chastise the authors of such cowardly counsels, and to tell the despots that the first attempt to enforce the edicts which they have promulgated, would be equally considered a signal of war as if they had attempted to take the Tower of London.— How the caitiffs would skulk at his frown ! How they would retreat into their dens, and be glad at any sacrifice to purchase absolution from the lion-hearted Minister ! But the times that are past are, we fear, no type of the future. The little obstinate King of Holland—obstinate be cause he is backed by the despot Courts—beards us with impunity ; and those who, had a Chatham or a Canning lived, would have trem bled at their own recent acts, even as the King of old trembled at the vision of the hand-writing upon the wall, pursue their froward course with out even the fear of giving offence ! My Lord Grey, this will not do. Reform is a blessing ; but the contempt and insults of Foreign Powers, Englishmen were not made to brook.--Morn ing Advertiser. A certain witty theatrical Lord, being asked 'Mademoiselle MA ss's family name was such, or whe- titer it was assumed, replied, I really am not quite cer tain, but I should rather think it was " un nom de guerre." TRAGICAL FATE OE BERNARDO, COUNT Or BARCELONA.—By the death of Louts, in 840, Cata lonia and Gothic Gaul fell to CHARLES, the youngest son of that Emperor. Indignant that in the division of the e mpire no portion was left for him, PEPIN, son of the rebellious Prince of that name, no sooner heard of his grandfather's death than he seized on Aquitaine. BER NARD° formed the party of the son as he had formed that of the father, and when summoned by CHARLES, his new sovereign, to do homage in person for his fief, he at first refused to appear, but not without assigning the most plausible pretexts he could for neglecting to obey. Soon hearing, however, that these reasons were unsatis factory to CHARLES, he hastened to disarm by his presence that Prince's anger. His arrest was resolved ; he fled ; his domestics were laden with fetters, and his moveable property seized. Feeling that he was unable to contend with so powerful a p rince, be forso ok , or pretended to forsake, waited on the King. He threw himself at th e roya l eet, protested tha t he alwa y s had been, and would always re main, faithful ; that the enemies of his sovereign s h ou ld also be his , and offered t o do battle with any one wh o PErtH, gained the advisers of CH ARLES , an d again should gainsay him. CHARLES believed, and pardoned h i m . In the wars which followed he remained neuter; but when, in 843, on a new division between the two brothers, Catalonia again fell to CHARLES, he begun to aim at independence. However cautious his proceedings, they reached the ears of his superior, who concealed his resentment, but meditated a detestable revenge. Being summoned to attend a convocation of the States at Thou louse, he reluctantly obeyed. On entering the assembly, as be knelt to do homage, CHARLES seized him with the left baud, arid with the right plunged a poniard into his heart. 'What makes this tragedy the more striking is the common belief of the times that the victim was the father of the murderer, who is said to have kicked the body, ex claiming, " Such is the punishment for defiling the bed of my father, thy liege lord."—Lardner's Cyckpuliai —History of Spain and Portugal. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. HATTON-GARDEN. Thomas Adams, a milliner and laceman, of No. 1, Swinton-street, Gray's Inn-lane, appeared to show cause why the Magistrates should not cancel an indenture and discharge his apprentice, Eliza Scott, aged 17, in consequence of his having as saulted and otherwise ill-treated her.. The facts of the case, as appeared from the evi dence of the girl, were these :—A few months ago she was bound apprentice by the parish of Clerken well to the defendant, whose wife was to teach her the art of a die-maker. On Friday se'nnight, after she had had her supper, she went into her master's parlour to curl her hair, and in doing so the light of her candle accidentally came in contact with some paper which covered the looking glass, and it caught fire. Her master presently afterwards came into the room, and on seeing what she had done, he scolded her and ordered her to bed. She went, but was unable to sleep, fearing that he would come and beat her, and on going down stairs on the follow ing morning, he desired her to go to a hairdresser and have her curls cut off. She refused to comply with the order, upon which he forced her down with violence on a chair and cut off a portion of her hair. She was dreadfully frightened and became unwell, and on the Tuesday following, having ob tained leave, she went home to her mother, who put her to bed, and she had since been seriously ill and attended by a surgeon. Mr. Philip Colston, surgeon, of Goswell•street, deposed, that on Tuesday he was called upon to at tend Eliza Scott, whom he found in a very pre carious state. She was insensible, and continued so for 48 hours. Witness bad no idea at the time he saw her that she would ever be able to leave her bed. The girl was of a weakly constitution, and fright would have a serious effect, and very proba bly act upon her in the way she was in when wit ness first saw her. She was now much better, and in the course of 14 days might be able to attend to her busirusi. Mr. LAING said that it waq a most extraordinary thing, that the mere cutting off the girl's hair should reduce her to the extreme debility in which she was; he could net give belief to it. He particularly in quired what state of health she enjoyed prior to the asssult having been committed ?—The girl's mother replied, that her child enjoyed good health, although she always appeared sickly. Duke, the officer, stated that the defendant was some time ago charged at this office with having violently caned one of his apprentices. The defendant, in answer to the charge, acknow ledged having cut the girl's hair, adding, that he did so in consequence of her having set fire to the paper over his looking-glass. He thought it a suf ficient provocation, and he acted as he had done, to prevent a similar occurrence. - The defendant was held to bail for the assault, but the Magistrates, having consulted together fora short time, thought there was not sufficient to warrant their cancelling the indenture of apprenticeship. They, therefore, ordered that the girl should remain under the care of her mother until recovered, when she was to return to the service of Mr. Adams. Q UEEN- S Q UARE. Yesterday, Thomas Lace, of No. 22, Bluecoat street, Westminster, and Joseph Drew, of No. 43, Collingwood-street, Blackfriars-road, were brought up in custody, by police-constable Cole, of the A division, No. 44, and placed at the bar before Mr. WHITE, charged with selling forged free admission tickets to Vauxhall-gardens. Mr. Thomas Griffiths, of No. 15, King-street, Westminster, deposed to purchasing two free-ad mission tickets for the Gardens of the prisoner Luke, for Gs.; he paid him 45., and he was to call again for the remainder; but he never came. One of the tickets was given to Dr. Randolph, of Par liament-street. A number of tickets were here produced by the prosecutors, which they had bought of the pri soners ; some of them were signed, "J. Hughes," and some, " J. P. Bisher." Mr. Gye, one of the proprietors of the gardens, said that they were all forgeries; they were quite different from any free admission cards issued from the Gardens. Mr. WHITE told the prisoners that they would be fully committed for trial at the next Surrey assizes, on three of the charges, and Luke was also commit ted for trial at the Middlesex sessions likewise, for the fraud on Mr. Griffiths. There were several other similar cases against the prisoners, which were not gone into, the above being deemed sufficient. MARLBOROUGH-STREET. Michael Lane, Daniel Hayes, Timothy - Hall, and Timothy Bryant, four savage-looking Irish labourers, were brought before Mr. DYER and Mr. CONANT yesterday, charged with being the ringleaders in a most desperate affray, which occurred on Tuesday evening in Orange -street, Leicester-square. John Holmes, Esq., of the Ordnance department, stated that the riot was of such a serious character, the whole neighbourhood being thrown into a state of alarm, that in order to prevent murder being com mitted, he thought it his duty to get troops, and station them at each end of the street, for the pur pose of separating the combatants, and preventing the escape of those who were concerned in the affray. Several witnesses were then called, from whom the following particulars were gathered :—A num ber of labourers were employed in making some alteration in the Government premises, lately used as barracks, in Orange -street, and about seven o'clock, Lane, one of the prisoners, was observed to conduct himself in a filthy way towards an old woman and her daughter, who were tying up a few sticks; and upon being repulsed, he seized the old woman by the hair of her head and dragged her along the street. Evans, an English labourer, who witnessed the ruffian's conduct, rescued the woman, and was himself attacked, which, however, he repelled by knocking the assailant down. He then resumed his work, conceiving the quarrel ended. Lane, however, went away to a neighbouring public house, where there were a number of his countrymen drinking, who, on being informed that Lane had got worsted, sallied out in a body, and, to the number of 20, proceeded to Orange-street, in order to avenge the defeat of their countryman. The first attack was on a carter, who was waiting in the streets with a load of bricks. A number of them surrounded him, and having knocked him down, proceeded with cowardly ferocity to ill use him; and concluded by throwing him into the " Bottom," a height of several feet, with such force, that it was at first conceived he had been killed. They then attacked the two or three English labourers who were on the premises. Evans was knocked down, and when on the ground, Hayes threw himself on aat h ht i meihribsoai labourer, caughte r d ae drbewatnii p aith se s udh ce l h i aG e v a dyo d r set icacredroitfdt‘tev: cro l w-bar, violence, a t in: h tci de a ,ha tiimsh brick. aetadrhmaa,dbl ano H nowd e t wrested it from him, the head of the man must have been smashed to atoms. (The bar was here pro duced, and appeared heavy enough to have killed an ox.) They then commenced an indiscriminate attack with brickbats and stones. Mr. DYER should inflict on them all the highest fine them SP/e.r,laohryimwphricishonteerliatwforafiti w x o e d ncn n t a h m s . e 1 y, TV ORSILIP-S T.REE T. Yesterday a middle-aged well-dressed woman, dame of Mary ng Barker, che u a circumstances;--- t fine an c e buxom s : It 4auo, t appeared, underlig N f fio.llm the complainant's state ment, named Ann Stephens, who was accompanied to the ,s sl office by two fine looking boys, was charged with t that she lived with Mr. Pierce , a schoolmaster in Hoxton, in the capacity of ho us ekeeper, which situ aloft she bad held for the last twelve years. Th e from two boys present were his sons by the defendant Ann Stephens, but to whom he had never been married. On Saturday evening complainant, with sir. Pierce, took all his pupils to the Mermaid Tavern, Hackney, where they were joined by some t o h t e h e t r friends, who were made up a there tit d e t f e e a n p d a a r n t t y. made her appearance with the two children, and annoyed her much by following her round the gardens, until they got to an unfrequented walk, when she struck her a violent blow on the back, which caused her to fall, and, on rising, she received another blow on her face, from the effect of which she bled profusely. Not satisfied with these blows, the defendant after wards, in another part of the gardens, kicked her on her legs. Mr. earville, a schoolmaster in Hackney, said that he and his wife were also of the party, and that he saw the defendant strike the complainant. Wit ness added that the conduct of the defendant was so violent during their stay in the gardens, that he requested his friend Mr. Pierce several times to give her into the custody of an officer, and that he (wit ness) would take the two children home in his gig. Mr. BROUGHTON—And did Mr. Pierce give her into custody ?—No, he ran away.—(A laugh.) The defendant, who, from illness, was allowed a chair, here fainted away. On recovering she informed the Magistrates that the complainant and Mr. Pierce were then living as man and wife; she had one child by him and five by another gentleman. Mrs. Barker, who underwent a smart examination by Mr. BROUGHTON, could not deny the fact. Mr. BROUGHTON—Mr. Pierce seems a very pro per person" to teach the youug idea how to shoot !" The defendant, in her defence, admitted having struck the complainant a slight blow, because her two children were not allowed to share in the festi vity of the evening. Complainant—Your Worships, it's all— Mr. TWYFORD—HoId your noise. We have heard quite enough of your iniquity. Mr. BROUGHTON, to the defendant—Are you supported by Mr. Pierce now ?—No. He allows me 6s. a week for each of the boys. The Magistrates having consulted, Mr. BROUGHTON observed that both parties were pretty near upon a par as to morality, and that they should impose upon the defendants a mere nominal fine of .55., or five days' imprisonment. The fine was immediately paid, and the parties left the office at different doors. John Heath, the boy, only eleven years old, who a week ago was remanded to prison for repeatedly robbing his father, under the influence, as he said, of an evil spirit, and also running away from school to Barnet, was yesterday again brought up for further examination. Mr. BROUGHTON—WeII, boy, how do you like being in prison ?—Much better than being at home, because in prison lam a good boy. If Igo home I shall be a bad boy again. Did you see the evil spirit there—the devil ?—No. Which would you rather do, go home with your father, or be sent back to prison ?—Go back to pri son, where I can be a good boy and say my prayers. (The boy's father here informed the Magistrate that, in consequence of the former examination of the boy having appeared in the newspapers, an ano nymous letter had been sent to Mr. Irving, the preacher, and that two gentlemen had since waited upon him, and questioned him about the boy, and said they should visit him in the prison.) Mr. BROUGHTON—WeII, boy, has any one been to see you in the prison ?--Nobody, but the schoolmaster. The father—Can your Worships get him into the Refuge for the Destitute ? Mr. TWYFORD-4 recollect the boy well. He was before me some time ago, when I sent him there myself, but they refused to admit him, unless I guaranteed the payment of 7s. per week. 'Now, I am informed, they are so full that there are eighty cases before them of a similar kind, where the mo ney would be regularly paid, but they cannot be admitted. Mr. BROUGHTON said he was at a loss what to do with the boy, and remanded him back to prison for another week. UNION-HALL. Yesterday a further investigation took place at this office, before Mr. MURRAY and Mr. CAPES, relative to the female whose body was found in the Surrey Canal on last Tuesday week, as detailed in a previ ous police report. Since the last examination of Jarratt, the man with wham the deceased woman co habited, another man (named Smith) has been taken into custody, and the following evidence adduced against him : - William Brown, an elderly man in the service of the landlord of the Duke of Wellington, in the Kent-toad, stated that on Saturday week the de ceased and a young man named King, who accom panied her, walked into the tap-room of the above house, between nine and ten o'clock at night, and had some beer together. The prisoner Smith was there at the time, and he was joined by the deceased, who went over from that side of the room where she was sitting with King, and they began to converse with one another. The deceased had a dark bonnet on, and carried a small basket in her hand, such as are used by females for carrying light articles; this basket she placed in the care of King, previously to her going over to that side of the room where Smith was sitting. After some little time the pri soner and the deceased left the tap-room and went out, and in about a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes, the former returned alone. When he en tered the tap-room he spoke to King, and asked him where the woman's basket and shawl were, to which King replied, by saying that he had no shawl, but that he had a basket, which was his own. They had some high words together on the subject, and King left the house some time afterwards, taking the basket with him, and on getting to the d oor h e asked witness th e nearest way to town, and he walked away in that direction. The prisoner Smith remained in the house until the time of closing, and then went away. In reply to Mr. Murray, the wit ness said that he thought it extraordinary at the time that Smith should have returned to the house and asked for the basket which the deceased had given into the care of King. The witness add ed, that he never saw the deceased after she left the house in the company of the prisoner. A man named Croker, who was present in the tap-room on the night in question, saw the deceased and the prisoner together. Some time afterwards witness saw the prisoner enter the tap-room alone. l-Ie did not see them leave the house together. When the prisoner came into the room he, wag , laughing, and said to some men with whom he had been drinking, that he had carried oil a nother man's wife. This was about eleven o'clock. After this, a young man named Anderson, a hairdresser, called witness out of the tap-room, and asked him to go and look a f ter th e deceased, as she did n o t retur n. Witness went down the turning near the D u ke of Wellington, and not far distant from a bridge which crosses a sewer, he heard some one approach, a nd supposing it to be Anderson who had previously asked him to look after the woman, he spoke, and asked if lie had seen her. Instead, at on d however,bpea thei pointed e f the dpr ; person being Anderson, it turned corner, out out tiears b , who ototohke placewitnesswtheie he left the deceased. to .a Stye the t was not the re at time.—The prisoner wao remanded. On the 28th ult. at Stanw il ic l k ß , Wilkins, of a daughter. On th e • of 30th ult. at Betchworth Vicarage, Surrey, the wife the ItevG. R. Kensit, of a daughter. N TH or S tliamptonshire, Mrs. Richard MARRIED. On the 19th u l t. at Steeple Aston, James Moncrieff Melville' Esq., of Priestden in the county of Fif e , t o A ugus t a , y o ungest daughter of the late Vice- Admiral William L e chmer e , of Steeple Aston, in the county of Oxford. O c n h the e ste r l , s E t t sq d t e ill st a s r o y i l , eh o o f n l e ), C h c u h r c h i; e J s toehrn to ri o pton Graceßrasrell daughter of thelate Sir Edward Knatchbull, oeMersham Hatcl ,, Kent, and the Dowager Lady Knatchbull, of Welbeck.street On the 31st ult. at South Stoneham, the Rev. Charles MT, Crawford, second son of William Crawford. E sq , o f D or ki n g,:: Eleanor, fourth daughter of Vice. Admiral Sir Edward Foot e ' K.C.8., of Hightield House, near Southampton. DIED. On the 30th ult. at Liddeard, Wilts, George Kibblewhite, aged 48, On the 31st ult. at Hastings, the wife of Henry Thack rah, Esq , and only daughter of the late Mr. Richard Ware. .„,„ i „. On the 30th ult. Mr. Sam. S. Mullins, of Staverton-row, ington, Surrey, aged 40. of On the 27th ult. at Sidmouth, Charlotte, yo u ngest daughter the late Gill Slater, Esq., of Li verpoo l , age d 53 years. On the 31st ult. at Keene's-row, Walworth, Henry Wegg' Esq., late of Greenwich, in the 56th year of his age. PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY MU RD 0 Y V U NG, AT TaE SUN OFFICE, 112, STRAND, LONDON.