The Sun. — London, England, 1822-02-15 00:00:00

THE LONDON JOURNALS. EXTRACTS raom THE DULY MOANING PAPERS. February 15, 18'2'2. [MORNING HERALD.] We hear that the Message from Throne, this evening, will :le to the following effect :—The King proposes to give up a half a million yearly, out of the Civil List. A proposal is to made for paying off the 5 per Cents. and creating a Stock in 4 per Cents to the same amount. The saving annually to the country, provided this exchange be carried into effect, will amount to about 11- millions. Reductions are to be made in the ex penditure of the Government generally to the amount of about 1,1- millions. For clearness sake we repeat the items as follow : M illions. The Ring - - • Reduction of the 5 per Cents. to 4 per Cents Reduction in the Government expenditure The above items of .3.1 millions, added to the stir phis of 31 millions, as stated in The Morning lie rtild lately, will make a real Sinking Fund of seven millions, applicable every year to paying off so much of the National Debt as seven mil lions will effect, and taking the three per Cent. Consols at the price,. even of 80, the seven mil lions would cancel, every year, eight millions and three quarters of three per Cents., paying an in terest of 9.6 4 2,5001. It is, however, said, that re lief is to be afforded to the Landed Interest, by a reduction of the taxes on malt, leather, soap, candles, &c. which, if the case, will lessen the sum above stated, annually available to the dis charge of the debt. The debate upon the motion of Sic Robert Wilson has done all for him to which he was fairly entitled. It has allowed him to place his own statement of his own case before the em pire, with the utmost latitude and detail—and left public opinion to decide between him and his Majesty's advisers. Prima facie, the priva tion of the advantages of a profession to which a man has devoted a great portion of his life is a harsh visitation, which requires to be justified. It now remains for every individual to judge for himself whether the conduct of this gallant Oil ter on the disastrous and disgraceful day of the Queen's funeral, is an adequate justification. Fortunately there is no material variance as to the language used and the conduct pursued by Sir Robert 'Wilson, between him and the Noble Secretary at War. But public opinion is the only tribunal to which the Executive Go vernment in this case is responsible. The Con .stitution gives the Crown this :discretion over the army, and though, like all its preroga tives, liable to abuse—yet for wise purposes. One fact in the history of Parliament is alone `sufficient to prove that Sir Robert Wilson had no claim to an investigation of this act of the Go vernment towards him as an officer on the army half pay establishment. It is, that in the year 1734 (we believe,) a Bill was brought into Par liament providing that no officer on the half-pay should be deprived of his commission without a military inquiry. The Bill was thrown out — which proves two things—that the Crown has the right to deprive officers on half-pay of their commissions without inquiry—and that it then was the opinion of Parliament that the Crown ought to have this right. The only question is, whether the act was just or unjust ; the only judge is the public—and the controversy is so thoroughly hackneyed that we shall leave it as it stands.—(Mid.) [MORNING POST:] Much importance is justly attached to the ex position which the Marquis of Londonderry is to make in the House of Commons this evening, of the views entertained by his Majesty's Ministers on the subject of Agricultural Distress, Public Expenditure, and all the great questions mate rially connected with the welfare of the Stnt-• whole system of policy which it :,.,:ticended to pur stip in order to meet. t ,.,,,idgate, and, if possible, tp surmount. fis , l difficulties of the times, will be Unfolded to the knowledge of Parliament and of the country, and submitted for consideration, not for instant decision, to the wisdom and patrio tism of both. Rumours have been circulated, and attempts have been made, to anticipate what the Noble Marquis may have to express or to propose on this occasion. This has been done for the evident purpose of impairing its effect ; but the nature of his communications, we have reason to believe, will be too gratifying to suffer any injury from the activity of those, who, if they cannot prevent relief from be ing granted- to a suffering land, wish at least to rob her of the joy which relief should bring, and to defraud its bestowers of the grati tude Which it should excite. We shall not fol low Oe .example which we reprove. We shall not antieipate that, of which we can - haVe no cer- taitvni definite knowledge; but this we can say, becanse it does not rest on mere assertion, but is proved.by acts, that Ministers have manifested a laudable spirit in coining forward in a ready and manly manner to encounter at once the great and manifold difficulties df the present crisis. Awful a§ is the - responsibility under which they labciur, loud and afflicting as is the cry of distreis by which - they are stunned, and commanding as I .dee the calls made • by • the landed in terest,• they have neither sunk beneath the magnitude . ' of their. charge, nor sought to evade its weight. by putting off the hour of investigation and settletnent. They have antici pated' even the , Representatives of -those who Most complained-; and at the very opening•of the Session they gave pledges,. which in its 'Second Week- they are now redeeming. This evening Will; we hope, shew how sincere they are' in the course which they- have- adopted, and that the recommendation of economy , and retrenchment uttered from the .Throne was not•a mere sound intended—to soothe .and to-deceive; but.a. word spoken in truth and in power, a charge meant to be sacredly observed, and a law equally operative on the Tenant• of palaces and the inhabitant of a cottage. - . [NEW TIMM] D'• A general expectation seems to prevail in the City,thaetlie measures to be proposed by Ministers will at once shew a strong determination to support I public credit, as the best means of ultimate benefit to agriculture, and also will evince a determination to carry Retrenchment through all ranks of the State. In consequence, it is strongly appre-1 hended that the great measure of paying off the! Five per Cents will soon be put in train. That Stock, therefore, has declined in price ; and Consols are advancing. They yesterday closed at 788 for the Account. The late Opposition' , speeches in and out of Parliament have done little toward recommending the views of the speakers to the nation at large. One or two ge neral observations on them may perhaps assist in affording a criterion of their real utility. In the first place, their general tendency on the present, as on all other occasions, is to discourage the people from all rational efforts toward the com mon security. W hen we were at war with the French Republic, we were told that it was use less to contend against Republican principles. When we were at war with the French Empire, we were told it was in vain to resist the Impe rial arms. When the seamen mutinied at the Nore, we were told that the seamen must be conciliated and not coerced : the same was said of the Manchester rioters : and the same is now , said of the Irish rebels.—ln the second place, their tendency is to disunite the people. The Manchester Yeomanry have been insulted in or der to flatter the Norfolk Yeomanry. When trade was at a low ebb, and the price of corn high, the manufacturers were told that they were sacrificed to the landed interest. Now that bread is cheap, the farmer is told that he is made a victim to the unjust claims of the fundholder. When Ministers applied a part of the Sinking Fund to the necessities of the State, endeavours were made' to render , the funded proprietors clamorous and disaffected; now that Ministers have declared they will main tain the principle of that fund, the other classes of society are animated against it as a " foolish and extravagant system." So long as civil and military offices were kept up on the large scale which the public business demanded, the lover classes were told that it was a wasteful and pro fligate expenditure for purposes of corruption and despotism : as soon as retrenchment begins to operate beneficially, we hear nothing but complaints of the cruelty of turning off poor clerks, and of suffering those who have fought the battles of their country to pine in indigence and neglect.—Thirdly, for all the evils so elo quently and so pathetically described, the greater part of the orators point out no distinct or intel ligible remedies ; but satisfy their own con sciences, and amuse their hearers, with sounding phrases that mean ❑othing ; pointing out a land of promise on Cape FIN-away, or on the moun tains of Air-shire, like the adventurer in The Fairy Queen : . . . . far off they many islands spy, On ev'ry side, floating the floods among ; _ Then said the Knight ; Lo ! I the land descry ; Therefore, old Sire, thy course do thereunto apply. That may not be, then said the Ferryman ; Lest we unwitting hap to be foredone; For those same islands, seeming now and then, Are not firm land, nor any certain won ; By straggling plots, which to and fro do run In the wide waters ; therefore are they hight The wand'ring islands, which, I warn thee, shun ; For they have oft drawn many a weary wight Into most deadly danger and distressed plight. —Fourthly, Whenever a luckless spokesman on the Opposition side (to use a Scotch law phrase) condescends upon any certain and tangible point of policy, a warrior, out of his own squadron, is sure to attack him without mercy. If one avows himself the patrols of Annual or Triennial Par liaments, another cuts him down at once with a sarcasm on " little nostrums and big blunders." If an eloquent Lawyer, in a speech of four hours, urges the House to come to a Resolution, that reducing the taxes would relieve the distresses of the agricultural interest, up starts a files Ackates of his own, from the Stock Exchange, ana u3aerti, that if the House were to resolve any such thing, " it would deceive both itself and the country. [THE TIMES.] If the day. on which Sir Robert Wilson hu manely Interfered to pacify the mutual exaspera tion of the ,Guards and the people, and to save both parties'hcrn further suffering—if that were, in its occurrences, - a melancholy day, so was that other day, on which redress was denied by Par liament for the wrongs inflicted on the gallant officer, one which has produced in every honest mind a crowd of melancholy reflections and fore bodings. No one doubts the prerogative of the Crown to dismiss an officer from the army at its own pleasure ; but no person has yet been hardy enough to say that such a prerogative stands on any higher ground than that long list of other prerogatives, which are granted solely for the good of the realm, and which, in conferring aiarge discretion on the Sovereign, render his official ad visers responsible for its exercise 'in exactly the same proportion. As Sir Robert Wilson does not quesion the legal existence of the power which has oppressed him, so Lord Londonderry does not venture to -deny his own responsibility for' having called that power into action. In words, his-Lordship admits that he must answer for the advice he gives; but the. drift of his conduct is to establish. the right of crushing, and to annul the obligation of answering. For what is the difference between the brave Officer who has been punished, and the Ministers whOm he accuses of having wrongfully punished him ? Sir Robert Wilson affirms that he is innocent and' the Minis ters unjust, and asks leave to bring fort and direct and formal proofs in defence of both these pro positions. The Secretary of State, on the other hand, attempts to fasten the 'stigma of misconduct by force of his' own unsupported authority, ..but shrinks from the production of evidence, or the institution of any thing under the name of investigation. • Now this is . . equal' effrontery towards the public and cruelty' towards the party who calls for redress, inasmuch as he assumes for his own word- the credit Which belongs only to a legal and impartial sentence. And, in .the furtherance of his deter-. ruination to evade, in fact, .the responsibility, .which in words Lord Londonderry thinks it de cent to recognize—what confusion has he thrown into:the debate'. To prove that Parliament ought not to redress the wrong, or visit upon Ministers the abuse of their discretionary power, what is the expedient to which the Noble Secretary has resorted ? He quotes an opinion of Lord Erskine, which alleges that an officer, dismissed without cause assigned from his profession, " has no re medy." Where ? In Parliament ? No ; but in a " Court of law !" Had the King's Court sup plied a remedy, why appeal to Parliament?— But the Minister who strove thus to perplex a plain question, cannot be deceived by his own sophistry. He knows well, though hitherto not experimentally, that offences which the King's Courts cannot punish, come peculiarly within the range of Parliamentary cognizance. [BRITISH PRESS.] With reference to the acknowledged preroga tive of the Crown to appoint and dismiss the officers of the army and navy at its pleasure, we must say that much misunderstanding prevails. The Ministers argued this matter as if a preroga tive of the Crown were of a nature too sacred to admit of the slightest discussion ; but if such a doctrine were permitted to prevail, our boasted liberties would soon lie at the feet of the executive authority. We never denied the ex istence of the right of the Crown to dismiss officers from the army, even without trial ; but we still contend, that, for the exercise of this branch of the prerogative, as for that of every other part of it, the Ministers of the Crown are responsible, and ought not to refuse the means of inquiry. It is the undoubted preroga tive of the Crown to make war or peace, to con clude treaties with foreign States binding the sub jects of this realm, to reject Bills, to disso:ve or summon Parliament, and even to exchange or surrender colonies to other Powers at its own will or caprice. The mere announcement in the Gazette or by royal Proclamation that this realm is in a state of war with a foreign Nation, gives eo in stanti a constitutional right to the King to raise whatever armies, or to equip whatever fleets, he may think proper. But is there a man in the empire who would seriously contend that the Mi nisters of the Crown could venture to stand up in Parliament and refuse all explanation upon any of these matters by a cold and haughty reference to the royal prerogative ? This is a question too plain in the present state of our political know ledge to admit of dispute, and yet the principle that establishes a jealous watch over the Crown in these matters, governs with equal force the right of Parliament to inquire into the exer cise of the royal prerogative in all matters re lating to the government of the army. We be lieve that in importance this part of the prero gative does not yield to any of the others. The danger of abuse in the affairs of the army comes home more immediately to our dearest interests. Our liberties exist at this moment but by the sufferance of the army, and our only safeguard consists in the community of feeling which may be presumed to prevail between the army and the people. If the power of dismissing officers of rank, who may by their conduct in Parliament have rendered themselves displeasing to the Mi nisters, he supposed capable of being exercised without the controul of 'Ministerial responsibility, what is to prevent the army from being gradually and carefully moulded into the mere instrument of Ministerial caprice ? Men of independent minds and honourable feelings will either retire or be removed from the service to give place to the profligate retainers of the Ministers. The army ,rill be degraded and the country enslaved. The House of Commons, in refusing to entertain Sir Robert Wilson's motion, forgot not only its duty but its interest. It is valuable now in the eyes of the Mini s t ers f rom th e p owers w. weh it is still capable of e xer ti ng , but shoo" its right to c on t rou l inrc divest itself of ~ery exer cise of th e p rerog P Nes of the Crown, it will instance the cease to be treed 2. with respect. [MORNING CHRONICLE. j The panacea of Lord Londonderry for the Agricultural Distress is to 'be communicated to the House this day. The impatience of taxation lately manifested throughout the country has, according to report, weighed so far with Mini sters, that the subject is to be introduced by a Message from the Crown, announcing the consent to a reduction of 300,0001. in the Civil List, and recommending a proportional reduction in the salaries of all servants of the State. Such is the report. Of course it is not reduction merely that will satisfy the country. There are many cases in which abolition,ought to be resorted to. To the establishments of' the country at home and abroad, the test of utility should be applied. We wish for something more than merely lopping off from the income of a Lay Lord of the Admi ralty or other sinecurist, a part of the increase which it has experienced since the war by im provement in the currency. But though, in deference to the universal demand, some reduc tions will no doubt be made, we know too well of what nature they will he.—No, no, we may be assured that Lord Londonderry will run into no excess in this way.—;We have had but too many indications of the sentiments of Ministers with, respect to the repeal of taxes and the re duction of expenditure, to allow ourselves to be lieve that they enter too much into their panacea for the distresses of the country.—lf we had any doubt on the subject, it would be re moved by an article drawn up with reference to the debate of this day, earnestly recom mending to Ministers the previous perusal of a pamphlet, just published, under the 'title of an," Inquiry into the capacity of Government to administer relief, and into the best mode of ad ministering relief to Agricultural Distress." Our readers will see from the extracts which we shall give, how admirably the views of the writer of this pamphlet harmonize with those delivered by Mr. Vansittart, and from this coincidence, coupled with the recommendation alluded to, (particularly directed to the agricultural under 'standings in the House,) we may form a pretty safe guess as to the nature of the Ministerial re medy. Of the 56 millions (says the author of the pamphlet) raised annually in taxation, about 11 millions, or one-fifth only, has any possible con nexion with the land, as to its subject matter; and in all the articles of that eleventh (excepting only 1,400,0001. of the land tax) the agricultural pro-1 duce concerned is the occasion only, and not the subject matter, of the tax ; or, in other words, the tax is on the consumption and the consumer. If these taxes were removed (assuming for an instant that they could be removed), the same amount must be raised from the consumer by other means;. and, as the same sum would thus be subtracted from the general capital, or in come, of the consuming classes, the same amount only would remain to be expended in agricultural produce."—Here, in perfect ac cordance with the views of Ministers, the impossibility of any essential reduction of ex penditure is first assumed, and then we are told that while the amount of taxation continues the same, the shifting of it from one article to another becomes immaterial, because the tax being on con sumption and the consumer, an increased taxation on other articles diminishes by so much the means of purchasing agricultural produce. It is well that the agriculturists should know this, but it is also well that they should draw another conclusion from it, namely, that instead of shifting the taxation in question, they must put an end to it alto gether. They should learn the difference between productive and unproductive consumption. The money raised by taxes and spent by Government is spent unproductively. All are deeply interested in seeing that nothing more be taken in the shape of taxes than what is strictly necessary for the real exigencies of the State. Taxation is either paid from the capital or revenue of a country. In the former case a country advances in the career of ruin ; in the latter the taxation forms a deduction from the grand source of improvement, namely, the accumulation of capital.—A country pressed to the earth with taxes, and prevented from adding to its capital, can only be relieved in one way, namely, by a diminution of these taxes. Whatever is abated to the people enables them to extend their operations, and thereby be comes a prolific source of wealth : every increase of wealth operates as a diminution of the burden of taxation ; and a nation, though heavily taxed, may in this manner gradually outgrow its burdens, LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, FEB. 14. London Sittings after Hilary Term, before the LORD CHIEF JUSTICE and Common Juries. NEALE V. MASSON AND ANOTHER. Mr. SCATtLETT opened this_ case to the Jury, as one which world probably turn on a point of law, and which might as well be decided at once, as after a trial of two hours. The de fendants were ship-brokers, who, in August last, negotiated between the plaintiff, who was owner of the ship Bodington, and a person named Warren, for chartering the vessel on a voyage to St. Vincent, and Madeira. Mr. Neale gave to the defendants the ship's register, in order that the master's name might be endorsed on it ; but, subsequently receiving an en grossed charter party instead of a draught, and objecting to the captain appointed by the freighters, he refused to execute the contract, and Mr. Warren procured another vessel to perform the voyage. The commission of the brokers was to be two and a half per cent. on the homeward freight ; and because it was stipulated that the vessel should take in a full cargo, which would amount to 2,0001., they contended that they had a right to their commission, although the contract never was carried into effect. They therefore detained the register, and refused to give it up without payment of the full amount of this esti mated commission, and of some other small charges, amount ing in the whole to 541. 19s. 3d. This sum the plaintiff, in order to regain possession of the register, paid under protest, and now sought to recover it back having been illegally de manded of him. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE intimated a strong opinion that the defendants could have no right to detain the register, under any circumstances, for a commission on prospective freight, and Mr. MARIIYAT thought himself bound to lay the defend ants' case in evidence before the Jury. The statement of Mr. SCARLETT was substantially proved, except that there was contradictory evidence as to the ground upon which the plaintiff refused to suffer the vessel to sail : and it seemed doubtful whether he had objected to the appointment of the captain, and whether the draught of the charter party had been duly submitted to his perusal. But the LORD CHIEF JUSTICE held these disputed circum (dances quite immaterial to the present action. If there was an improper refusal to perform the contract, the parties aggrieved would have their remedy by a special action for damages. But it was clear that in this case no action could be sustained for any specific sum on the mere execution of the instrument. Had there been an express agreement that a certain stipulated sum should be paid, whether the vessel was lost or not lost, earned fright or earned none, then theremight be some pretence for saying that the broker had a definite claim. But there could be no claim for commission, except there was something received out of which commission should be paid. Now the rule was, that a broker might hold papers as alien, wherever he had present and certain demand, but never for a claim which possi bly might arise in future. He accordingly directed a verdict for the plaintiff—damages 501., the smaller item not being thought worthy of discussion. Mr. SCARLETT observed that ,he had been a true prophet, for the trial had taken up just two hours. OWEN V. SMITE. Mr. CHITTY stated the substance of the declaration, which was in trover fora tilbury. • Mr. MARRYAT stated that the plaintiff had bought the til bury in question from a person named Birkins, had taken it to Cheltenham, and had sent it to the defendant to be taken care of for him, when Mr. Birkins , being apprised of the circumstance claimed a right to the tilbury, and indemnified Mr. Smith for, his refusal to deliver it to the owner. Proof was then given on the part of the plaintiff that he sent the vehicle to Mr. Smith, in London, and had since demanded it in vain. _ _ Mr. SCARLETT, for the defendant, contended that the whole was a swindling transaction, and that Mr. Birkins had a right to reclaim the property out of the possession of which he had been deluded. He had sold this gig and two horses to Mr. Owen, who went also by the names of Hoare and Stephens, on condition that they should not be removed from his premises until they were paid for. Mr. Owen, under pretence of driving to the Tower, and. of letting his brother try the saddle-horse, obtained the carriage and horses from the servants of Mr. Bir kins, and then went off tb Cheltenham, where he sold the horses by auction, and offered to sell the tilbury. It was proved in evidence, that the plain tiffwrote to Smith under the name of Stephens; but it appeared that the tilbury and the horse first Old were paid for by a bill at one month, and that it was m order too indite Mr. Birkins to sell the second horse, that Owen promised to take away neither the carriage nor horses un til all were paid for. Birkins himself was called, but having ac knowledged that he employed the attorney for the defence, was dismissed as incompetent to become a witness. , On this evidence, the LORD Cu !Er JUSTICE held that the plaintiff was, in point of law, entitled to recover. Had there been no bill given, and the sale of all the property had been made on condition that none of it should be removed until all was paid for, Birkins might have reclaimed it on breach of the condition ; but the subsequent promise could not revive in him the right of which he was once divested. There were circum stances of great suspicion ; and as the value of the carriage had been fixed at between 30 and 40 guineas, the Jury would give as little beyond the smaller sum as they pleased. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, damages 321. LAMPON V. CORKE. This was an action on a promissory note for 401. At the time it was drawn, a release was agreed on, and the note re tamed until the release was executed, which recited that the 401. was paid. It appeared in evidence that after the note was deli vered to the plaintiff, it was altered by the insertion of the words "or order," by the defendant's attorney. This The LORD CHIEF JusTict held made it clearly void; and he further held, that the-xelease; though it would not have bar red an action on a valid note, was a complete answer to an ac count stated. He, however, directed the Jury to find a verdict for the plaintiff, with leave to the defendant to move to set it aside, and with an intimation that in point of law he must succeed. Mr. GURNEY and Mr. ALEXANDER were for the plaintiff; and NIL PULLEIi for the defendant. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Fts.l4.. . CHAMPION AND ANOTHER V. TERRY, • ' This was an action on a bill of exchange for 001. There were counts in the declaration on g oodi sold - and delivered. A quantity of raisins having been sold by the plaintiffs to the de fendant, through the medium of their traveller, a bill, in pay ment of the raisins, was with others put into the Post-office by the plaintiffs' agent, in a letter directed to the plaintiffs, which never arrived at its destination ; and the defendant now refused to pay the debt on the ground that the bill was not proved to. have been destroyed, and might therefore be brought against him at a future time. An indemnity was offered, and refused. The LORD CHIEF-JUSTICE in his charge informed the Jury, that the defence was good in law, unless they thought that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover on the counts for goods sold and delivered. The Jury found for the defendant. --... ARCHES' COURT, FEB. 14. IN THE MARQUIS OF DONEGAL AGAINST MAY, FALSELY CALLED THE MARCHIONESS OF DONEGAL. This cause, it will be recollected, was appealed from the Con sistory Court of London ; pending the proceedings in which Court, the next of kin protested against its jurisdiction, by rea son of the residence of the Marchioness of Donegal in Ireland, and of collusion between the noble parties. Sir JOHN NicHoLL, in pronouncing upon this appeal, ob served, that it was possible there might be grounds for such a charge, although most undoubtedly there was nothing to prove it before the Court. But on the other hand these noble parties might very naturally be anxious to ascertain,by a solemn legal de cision, what was their real and actual condition, more especially looking to the great interests which were here at stake. The Court would confess, however, that the present suit, upon the face of it, did seem to be a friendly one, though several reasons might easily be alleged to shew why it was not; and one strong pre sumption why this was not a friendly suit was to be found in the circumstance of the other parties having been cited to see proceedings ; of their bein g th us afforded the opportunity and means of probing, examining, and sifting every matter connected with this suit to the bottom. Whether the parties. in remainder might or might not institute another suit against; the Marquis and Marchioness elsewhere, it was not now ne cessary for the Court to inq u i re . It was, however, fully ne cessary that it should be jealous and vigilant in watching these proceedings, so far as the noble parties were concerned; but, was no such jealousy, was no such vigil a n ce necessary i n the case of the other parties who had been cited to see the pro ceedings ? They had great interests to look after, in any event of the present suit; and delay alone was an object of the utmost consequence with them. The witnesses who could be brought forward to depose to the age of Lady Donegal, at the time of her marriage, must be very old, seeing that she was said to have been born as far back as the year 1774 ; which was now nearly 50 years ago. By the death of these witnesses, pending the suit, the real truth of the case, and the ends of justice, might equally be defeated. It was evident to the Court, that if it should pronounce this marriage null and void, the parties cited would have a great interest in delaying that sentence; and upon all the grounds which had been stated, the Court thought that the Judge of the Consistory Court had done perfectly right in holding that he had jurisdiction, and particularly in not stop ping the principal cause, as instituted there, in conseque nce o f the assertion of this appeal. The Court, therefore, pronounced against the appeal, and it thought itself bound to add, with costs. [This cause will therefore be again continued in the Consii.. tory Court of London.] DREADFUL FlRE.—Thursday morning, about one o'clock, the hill part of Lincoln was terri fied by a fire which broke out in the stable of the White Hart Inn.- At a late hour on the Wednes day, the cries of a goat in the stable pierced the still night far and wide, making a prodigious out cry, and manifesting alarm with a degree of intel ligence scarcely less expressive than language and reason. Some persons coming along Eastgate, hearing the noise, naited to ascertain the cause, and soon perceived it. The alarm was given, and most of the Gentlemen in the neighbour hood pressed forward to give aid—engines were speedily procured, the Minister's alarm-bell was rung, and the utmost exertions were made to rescue the poor animals that were in the midst of the blazing litter and rafters. Three valuable hoises of the posting kind were destroyed; and five others Much injured, notwithstanding the most powerful exertions of all present to take them out of the stable. SHOCKING ACCIDENT.—Late on the evening of Saturday last, as some people were passing by a house where an old woman lived, in Robert's Wynd, Falkirk, their attention was attracted by an uncommon smell of burning issuing from the door; being anxious to learn the cause they forced it open, when horrible to relate, on enter ing the house, they found the old woman lying on the floor, in the agonies of death, with her clothes burnt to a cinder, and her body scorched in a shocking manner.—(Edinburgh Courant, Feb. 11.) On Tuesday two sturdy beggars were brought before Mr. Alderman HEYGATE, at Guildhall, by the constables belonging to the Mendicity So ciety. It appeared that one of them had been a few days ago referred to the Mendicity Office, and had been sent to the Society's Establishment at Paddington, to be set to work ; but he had neglected to go there, and resumed his former trade. They were both committed to Giltapur street Compter. The constables who appre hended these men informed the Alderman, that the Mendicity Society were now prepared to give employment to every able-bodied mendicant who came before them. About a dozen hackney-coachmen were yes terday summoned before the Magistrate at Queen-square, for obstructing the public high way, and refusing to depart when requested to do so by the officers, when the KING was going to open the Session of Parliament. Some of the defendants were exceedingly abusive to the con stables, insisting upon their right to draw up in. the line of procession. —These were fined in tlte• full penalty, 101., and others, who were less abu sive, in 51.; but those who it appeared came there through ignorance, and who willingly went away when desired, had the penalty mitigated, to 4Qs. BIRTHS. On Wednesday last, the Lady of Dr. Kerrison, of New Bur lington.street, of a daughter. esterday, the Lady of Rowland Alston, Esq. of a daughter. MARRIED. On the 4th inst., at Liverpool, Thomas Shaw Brandreth, Esq., M.A., Barrister at Law, formerly Fellow of. Trinity College, Cambridge, to Harriet, fourth daughter of the late Ashton Byrom, Esq., of Fair View, nQar Liverpool. On Thursday se'nnight, at Kenwyn, Matthew Roberts, Esq.. of Lemellyn, to Jenifer, widow of the Rev. James Ferrers, Vicar of Probus. Last week, at Stoke Church, Dock, Exeter, Mr. Edw. Roberts, aged 35, to Mrs. Anna Gow, aged 77. The bride was obliged to be taken to Church in a sedan chair, followed by a juvenile? crowd, who cheered the happy couple with loud huzzas. DIED. On Tuesday evening, at his house in. Burton-street,,Thomas Percival Crawley, Esq. in the 28th year of his age. Yesterday morning in Bolton-street, Piecadilly, Mary, the wife of Thomas Watford, Esq. On Tuesday, the sth inst. at Coolagh, in Ireland, the seat of her son Morty O'Sullivan, Esq. Mary, widow of the late Cap tain John O'Sullivan. At Sunday% Well; Ireland, on Saturday last, Mary, wife of Morty O'Sullivan, Esq. of Coolagh, and daughter of Roger O'Sullivan, Esq. of Gamnish, Berehaven. Printed and Published, for the PROPRIETORS, at the Stni• OFTICE, 112, Strand, by J _ARSTAIRS.