The Sun. — London, England, 1822-11-22 00:00:00

THE LONDON JOURNALS. !EXTRACTS FROM THE D AMY !HORNING PAPERS, Nprember 2'2, 182'2. [THE TIMES An Ordinance has been issued by the King of the Netherlands . , directing that as Flemish is the language of the arrondissements of Brussels and Louvain, all public functionaries who, by the Ist of January, 1823, are not masters of that language, shall be displaced ; that all public pleadings, proclamations, arrests of Government, civil contracts, and acts, shall, from the time above specified, be drawn up in Flemish. We believe that this ordinance will be agreeable to the great mass of the inhabitants of the countries specified ; but . as it is fatal to the numerous French who are employed in the Courts, Bureaus, and Offices Of Brussels, it is of course most clamorously decried by them and their adherents; and a hot paper war has commenced on the subject. [MORNING CHRONICLE.] The Spanish Constitutionalists have, by the confession of their enemies, made enormous ex ertions, and seem to approach rapidly to the ob ject they have in view, the complete clearance of the Northern Provinces of the bands of Priests and marauders, instigated and chiefly supported hitherto 'by the French Government. The pro gress of Mina has uniformly been marked by success, and seems to indicate wisdom of plan as well as skilful execution . The taking of Castelfollit has been followed by the taking of Balaguer, and the Insurgent Regency have deemed it prudent, before he approach nearer to them, and while they have yet time, to remove to Puycerda, a place on the frontiers, from which they may next make good their retreat to France. IItISH PRESS.] The Paris Papers up to Tuesday have arrived. The best possible comment on the official arti cles relatively to the policy of France towards Spain, which have lately appeared in some of their columns, is the confirmation given by those Journals to the statement that Quesada, one of the leaders of the Army of the Faith, had enter ed the French territory, and proceetied to Paris.' Is it to be supposed that if he did not feel as sured of the protection of the ruling Powers in that country, that he would take refuge in the very seat of Goiernment ?—The accounts from Spain of the progress of Mina and the Constitu tionalists are very satisfactory. The Cure Me rino, who has distinguished himself more by the courageous pertinacity with which he has baffled his pursuers than the greatness of his exploits, has at length been taken prisoner. [MORNING POST.] The Paris Journals to the 20th inst. commu nicate no intelligence respecting the intentions of the Government ; but that those intentions are growing more pacific may be inferred from the little notice taken of military movements and preparations, which, a short time since, filled all the Papers. A courier from Verona had brought dispatches on Monday morning to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, but their contents had not transpired, and rumours were immediately spread which had the effect of slightly depress ing the Funds. Two couriers were dispatched the same day from the British Embassy, the one to England, and the other to Verona. The at tention of the French Public, however, had been powerfully diverted from the contemplation of a Spanish war, by electioneering hustle and the struggle of Parties to secure the return of their respective Candidates. In this kind of internal war the influence of the Government has been generally triumphant, except in La Vendee, the Department where it might have been supposed to prove irresistible, and where, on the contrary, AL Manuel, one of the most zealous and distin guished leaders of the Liberals, has been returned by kt large majority. [NEW TIMES.] Mr. Bridle the object of Hunt's malignant and relentless persecution, was yesterday brought up for judgment in the Court of King's Bench. Our space would not suffice even for an abstract of the very numerous affidavits, with which Mr. Bridle was furnished ; for perhaps no man ever stood before a Court for sentence, with testimony to his general conduct and character so unequivo cally satisfactory and so truly honourable. We have had the satisfaction of perusing, all these affidavits ; and they certainly do exhibit a most gratifying picture of active, persevering, and constant humanity, in a situation 'in which that virtue is, peculiarly beneficial and praiseworthy. They show, , too, what is very pleasing to ob serve, a powerful sentiment of gratitude in the breasts of a vast' number of individuals, who, even in the fgrlorn and degraded state of pri soners, have experienced kindness and attention from their Gaoler.—Such is the man who has been sacrificed to the vindictive, malignity of a being like Hunt ! An error of the most slight and trivial kind possible was, committed by Mr. Bridle. Worn out with annoyance from a brutal wretch, a convict of the name of Gardner, he acceded to .the Surgeon's applying a blister to this fellow, who was perfectly un manageabfe, and who in the vulgar phrase " shammed sick." We do not justify this offence ; but trifling as it is, we say it ought to weigh as less than a feather in the balance against a life so truly honourable as that of Mr. Bridle appears from the mass of affidavits before us to have been. • [MORNING HERALD.] Our Corresp - ondent at Bayonne, in his private communication to us,.says, that the people of that town and neighbourhood are decidedly of opinion that the French army will enter Spain, and easily march on to Madrid, there being no Spanish army of any force between Bayonne and that capital. We begin to fear that such will be the case. We naturally deplore such a destina tion of the French Sanitary Cordon, which, if persisted in, is likely to prove of serious consequence to the Bourbon Family, both in France and Spain. But that the French King ain. has as much right to occupy Spain with his troops, as his brother of Austria has to keep military possession of Italy, or the Emperor of Russsia to hold Moldavia and Walachia, there can be no doubt, and, perhaps, the three Crowned Heads may have a secret understanding, that for the presect Franee shall have military occupancy of Spain, Austria of Italy, and Russia of as much of the Turkish dominions as she can get into her possession. As to England, it is probable the Holy Alliance thinks she has already a sufficiently large foreign territory in the East and West Indies,Greece,&c. England unfortunately cannot prevent all this, except she were to go to war, le result of which would necessarily be uncer- These Crowned Heads know, as well as the English people, that if England go to war, she must add to her unwieldy debt, or levy a pro perty tax of 10 or W per cent. so as to bring in 10 or 15 millions, and at the same time reduce, very considerably, the interest payable on the Debt—perhaps one half, which should produce another 15 millions ; for in the present state of England, 'nothing less than 30 millions a year would be sufficient to carry on war with any effect. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY,- NOVEMBER 21. Mr. WETHERELL, at the sitting of the Court, applied to his Lordship to fix Tuesday next for hearing two injunc tions to restrain from selling or otherwise disposing of certain salt-works. The LORD CHANCELLOR desired his compliments to be given to the Vice-Chancellor, with a request to hear them. This Court was so overwhelmed with questions of injunctions, that it could not dispose of appeal cases, of which some were seven years old. The public had a right to complain of this delay. Mr. SHADWELL said, that if next Tuesday could not be fix . - ed, any other day would do. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he could not fix a day. Lord Portsmouth's case must be decided as early as possible ; and the case of " Beer and Ward," involving a question that might much affect lunatics, would not he delafed beyond the shortest period in which the Court could dispose of it. Mr. HEALD said the bar were fully sensible of the incon venience which his Lordship complained of. THIRGAR V. MORLEY. This was a motion for a new trial. - The LoRD CHANCELLOR read the Lord Chief Justice's re. port of the case as tried before him upon issue from the Court of Chancery. The issue was, whether the plaintiff was entitled to one-eighth of the ship /Miley. The Jury found him en titled, and the Lord Chief Justice communicated to the Lord Chancellor that the verdict was satisfactory to him. Mr. HORNE appeared for the defendant to move his Lord ship to grant a new trial. Mr. Morley, who was confessedly a man of money, engaged in the building of a new ship. The plaintiff's nephew, Mr. Morgan, was to be Captain, and he and his uncle, the plaintiff , were to have 3-Bths; the defendant holding the other 0-Bths. That was, Mr. Thirgar was to have 3-16ths ; Mr. Morgan 3-16ths ; and Mr. Morley 5-Bths. But Mr. Morgan having the command of a vessel, and not choosing to wait for the building of the Morley, declined any share in her. His name was never entered in the register. It was not pretended that he had resigned in favour of Mr. Thirgar ; there fore, as 3-Bths were only mentioned for both, 3-16ths were all that the plaintiff could claim, and that they had formerly offer ed, and now repeated the offer. Messrs. CAMPBELL (front the King's Bench) and ROSE fol. lowed on the same side. _ . Mr. PARK (from the King's Bench) opposed the motion.— There had never been any division of the 3-Bths into two 3-16ths, but a letter from the defendant distinctly asked whe ther both names, or what one name, should be registered fur 3-Bths. Mr. HORNE replied. The LORD CIIASCELLOR.—I confess I cannot see sufficient reason for granting a new trial. There are difficulties in the case ; but if the verdict were the other way, it would not be more satisfactory to me. I lament that the Act of Parliament does not require the several shares as well as the names of shareholders to be registered. The defendant, Morley, was about to build a ship, to be called the Morley. The plaintiff, Thirgar, was to have some interest in her, and his nephew, Morgan, was to be the captain.' The plaintiff and his ne phew were to have 3.Bths. The builder went on until two instalments were paid. It appears that the plaintiff had made sonic advances. A letter was then written by the ne phew, stating that he would have nothing to do with the ship, as he could not wait till she should be finished. This is clear evidence against Morley, that the uncle was the person with whom all arrangements were made. A letter is then writ ten by Palmer and Tomlinson for Morley, inquiring whether both names were to be registered, or only one for the 3-Bths. One name could, not stand for the other in the register • but the inquiry whose rime was to be registered for 3-Bths clearly showed the view of the defendant then of the amount to be shared. Thirgar then says that he will have nothing to do with her. It might have been a question upon this, whether he did repudiate, or could`repudiate. It does not appear that this was urged on the trial. Thirgar was in fact registered, and a letter is written to him, stating that what belonged to him would be assigned to hint by bill of sale or otherwise, re gard being had to the expences of building the ship. What interest had he at this period ? Morgan claimed none. The Jury have been of opinion that it was 3-Bths, and I see no rea son to disturb their verdict. The letter of Thirgar, containing what is said to have been a new proposition, received no an• swer ; therefore, if Thirgar had any interest at all, it was 3-Bths. I cannot say that he had no interest, and that is a point that was not so much pressed as it might. Mr. PARK applied for costs. The Lonn CHANCELLOR.—This is not a case for costs.— If parties will make their contracts with so much ambiguity, they must suffer the consequence. FIELD AND OTHERS V. STIRRUP. Mr. HORNE stated that this was a motion to pay money into Court, and also to have a receiver appointed. The plaintiffs were assignees on the estate of Mr. Hewitt, a bankrupt. The defendant had kept house for the bankrupt for many years.— He did not mean to cast any insinuation against her on that ground. But his dwelling-house( Fairrnill-house, Henley-upon-Thames), some cottages, and several acres of land, had been conveyed to her by the bankrupt. This conveyance, the assignees con tended, was fraudulent. The defendant had also received money, by checks and otherwise, belonging to the bankrupt, of which she gave no account. The prayer of his motion, there fore, was, that she should be directed to pay into Court the money which she had received belonging to the bankrupt, and that a receiver should be appointed to receivethe rents and pro fits of the estate. _ _ _ The Loan CHANCELLOR inquired the value. Mr. HORNE-2,6001. or 3,0001. Mr. BARKER followed, and contended that the conveyance was voluntary. The Loan CHANCELLOR.—Why, then, apply for a re ceiver? Why not bring an ejectment? I think you might think it fortunate if this were not opposed. Mr. HART opposed the motion. The first point was the receiver. _ . The Lon") CHANCELLOR.—That is out of the question. Mr. HART.—Then the second question was whether any ba lance was due, and whether it ought to be paid into Court.— Now for this, he submitted, that an action at law would lie as well as a bill in equity. Mr. ROOTS (we believe) followed.—lt had been said that this conveyance had been kept secret.—What ! was she to pro claim it to all the world ? The LORD CHANCELLOR.—No, she was afraid, perhaps, Of Mr. Barber. Mr, lIoRxE replied.—He would not contend against his Lordship's opinion : but did not his Lordship think them en titled to any thing ? The LORD CHANCELLOR.—No. As to the bankrupt be ing in possession, thou . & personal property in the possession of a bankrupt be liable to his creditors, it is not so with his real property. I remember a rich banker proposing to bring in a bill to make real property liable ; but when I said it would be necessary to have all encumbrances ascertained, he became from that moment most anxious to prevent such a change.-- This motion must be dismissed with costs. The LORD CHANCELLOR, in the course of the day, stated that as the Recorder was to make his report to-morrow, lie could not sit in that Court more than an hour and a half, and that time he shouldrequire to prepare him for the duties he had to perform. He would not, therefore, come into Court at all to morrow. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Nov. 21. THE ILCHESTER GAOLER. THE KING V. BRIDLE. It will be recollected that this defendant, the Gaoler of Ildies ter, was tried at the last Assizes for the county . of Somerset, on an information filed against him by his Majesty's Attorney- General, charging him with illegally applying a blister to the head of' Thomas Gardiner, a prisoner in the gial,,and keeping him in a strait waistooat, and with acts of cruelty to another person, named Mary Cuer. The Jury found himluilty on the case applicable to Gardiner, but acquitted• him as to Cuer, and recommended him to mercy, on account of the excellent charac ter given him at the trial. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL now moved for the judgment of the Court, and the-defendant appeared on the floor. Mr. Justice BEST read the report of the trial. A-great number of affidavits were put in by the defendant. The first was the affiavit of Mr. Bridle himself, giving a history of his life, and of the circumstances attendant on the transac tion for which he was convicted. He stated that his father, a small tradesman in the country, with ten children, was unfortu hate in business, and entirely unable to maintain his family.— Determined not to continue a burden to his parents, under such circumstances, he left his home when between fifteen and sixteen years of age, and had ever since supported himself entirely by his own exertions. He first enlisted in a regiment of cavalry, commanded by Captain An derton, as a private soldier ; but having attracted the notice of his superior officers, was successively promoted to be corpo ral, serjeant, and quarter-master to the regiment. Having left the servicehe became 2d mate to a largepriton ship atWoolwich, and so conducted himself for six years in that situation, that the command of a large vessel was offered to him, if he would remain when he became candidate for the office of gaoler at Ilchesler. He was elected gaoler in preference to between 30 and 40 can didates, and immediately began to assist the Magistrates in a reform of the regulations and discipline of the prison. In this he succeeded so well, as to receive their public thanks, and brought the order of the gaol to so high a perfection, that the Magistrates of neighbouring counties sent individuals personally to inspect it, in order-that they might adopt its improvements in other prisons. In the twelve years and a half during which he filled that office, he received more than 4,500 prisoners under his care, from whom no complaint was ever successfully pre sented to the Magistrates, and none of whom left his care with out an expression of gratitude for his kindness. Gardiner, the man whom he was charged with illegally punishing, had been capitally convicted of housebreaking, but his sentence of death was commuted to la months' imprisonment to hard labour.— He refused to work ; he was guilty of a long series of refractory conduct, for which he was seven times punished—once for stabbing a fellow-prisoner in the thigh, without provocation, and once for picking the pocket of another prisoner of the few shillings which were all he had in the world. He was placed in solitary confinement; he still remained either insolent or sullen; refused to make any acknowledgment of his offence, and broke out into repeated imprecations against the defendant and t ,the Magistrates. Still the application of the blister was entirely unpremeditated ; it arose out of an accidental conver sation between Mr. Briar, the surgeon, and the defendant. As Bridle was walking round the prison, he met Briar, and asked how his patients were ? Briar answered, " Well ;" the de fendant replied, that he wished he could cure his patients as easily; and, after alluding to the case of Gardiner, said, " If I were master of the medicine-chest, I would try a dose of dirty physic." Briar answered, " I have not a dose, but I have a blister, which may do better." Bridle replied, "You know best," and walked away. The blister appligd, in consequence of this consent, was of the ordinary kind, and not of any un usual pungency. The defendant further declared, that he never, on any other occasion, administered medicine or a blister by way of punishment; that he had reduced the weight of irons in the gaol nearly one-half • that he had applied the savings of his income to the support of his aged parents, now almost 80 years of age; that 500 men, who had been under his care on board the hulks, had begged to be permitted to testify to his humane and benevolent conduct towards them ; that the most unfounded and atrocious statements had been widely circulated against him ; that he had been put to an expence by the prose cution which he was little prepared to sustain ; and, on the whole, he trusted that the sufferings he had already endured would be regarded as some atonement for the offence which lie had, in a moment of inconsideration, committed. An affidavit of Sir John Palmer Arland, 45 years a Magis trate, and 15 years chairman of the Quarter Sessions of Somer set, corroborated the defendant's statements respecting the im provements in the prison, the general approbation of the visiting justices, and the humanity of the defendant in attending on the sick and suggesting plans for the amelioration of the miseries of those committed to his charge. In this testimony other Ma gistrates united. Dr. Woodburn deposed to the attention of Bridle to the sick during the time when the typhus fever raged in the prison, at the hazard of his own life, and to the expres sions of thankfulness which they used respecting his exertions. Mr. Briar, the surgeon, made affidavit that th blister admi nistered to Gardiner was not dangerous, but might safely be applied to an infant at the breast. The principal turnkey and the constable of the prison concurred in the high character for humanity given to him, and in the statements made respecting the conduct of Gardiner. Persons who had known the de fendant from his youth, and in the various situations through which he had passed, deposed to his usual good conduct, and described him as uniformly kind to his inferiors, and respectful to those above him. Cain; Smith stated that he had behaved with equal humanity and firmness while at Woolwich, and that great numbers of those who had been under his care were eager to testify in his favour. Rebecca Webb, a poor woman, of Shepton Mallet, whose son was executed at Ilchester, de scribed the exertions of the defendant to obtain a commutation of the punishment, and the gratitude expressed by her son to him in the last moments of his life. It appeared that he had received the thanks of many of the inhabitants of Shepton Mallet on the occasion, and had obtained a similar compliment for his efforts to raise a subscription at the jubilee for distressed debtors. As the officer was proceeding to read the other affi davits, Mr. C. F. 'WILLIAMS rose and said, that there were many more affidavits to the general good character of the defendant, and to particular, incidents in which his humanity had been ma nifested ; but after what the Court had already heard, he should not feel justified in occupying more of their time uliless it was wished on the part of the prosecution. The Loan CHIEF JUSTICE asked if there were any affida vits on the part of the prosecution ? The ATT ORNE Y-GENERAL replied in the negative. Mr. C. F. WILLIAMS addressed the Court on behalf of the defendant, whom he trusted he might now describe as respect able, though unfortunate. When he had said a few words, the Judges consulted together for some minutes, during which he paused, but ultimately receiving no intimation from them, he proceeded. He urged that it was quite clear the defendantwas not called on to answer for inflicting a degree of punish ment'cruel or excessive in itself, but for authorizing a mode of punishment not authorized by law. This, undoubtedly, was an offence; but when the Court had heard the conduct which provoked the infliction—wherithey were assured that the blister might have been administered to an infant without injury—. when they contemplated that life of virtue, of humanity, and of usefulness which the defendant had passed—and when they thought on all he had already suff . ered, they would rather regret that such a man should thus he held up to public gaze as an offender, for such an. accidental fault, than desire to inflict on him any additional suffering.— The Learned Counsel then proceeded to contrast the charac ters of Gardiner and the defendant ; he dwelt on the hard ened villainy of the convict, young in age, but mature in crime, whom a capital sentence could not awe, nor mercy soften. He contended that this man had given false accounts on his trial of the conduct which led to the infliction of the blis ter, and reminded the Court that the .Judge had declared him unworthy of credit, unless corroborated by untainted witnesses. He then adverted to the whole course of the defendant—how, rather than break the bread which his father had hardly earn ed, he had gone out a youth to the wide world—how, amidst the temptations of poverty and friendlessness, he had been un spotted by crime—how he hail gradually risen from a private soldier to a respectable station in his regiment; how, in a situ-1 ation of extreme difficulty, lie had displayed both humanity and courage;. and in his conduct as a gaoler he had sustained an inquisition, the most severe to which any man's demeanour could be subjected. This man, who had been held up to the world as a." monster"—whose mental agony exceeded that of almost any human being—had acquired such influence over the minds of hundreds of desperate men, that when they were most tumultuous, if he went in among them unarmed, they became still ; he.had been the friend of those from whom their natural' relatives shrunk with horror ; he had been chosen to perform their dying wishes, and received their last blessings. When I the prisoners were sick, the first piece of bread broken, the first meat cut at the table of this calumniated individual, was sent to them ; their wants were supplied, their pains tenderly alle viated by all the means in his power, without restriction and without reserve. Even when they breathed pestilence, Mr. Bridle did not shrink from his duty, but ministered to their necessities at the peril of his life. It would, perhaps, be difficult to find any individual, who, in so humble a station, had opportunity for the exercise of such virtues, or who could produce so honourable tes timonals of his excellence. Five hundred individuals had eagerly pressed forward to give a triumphant refutation to the charge of cruelty which they heard with astonishment—who had nothing to gain from his favour, nor any motive but grate ful recollection to prompt them. Such was the individual -now to receive judgment; and well assured he (Mr. Wil liams) was, though in the unusual and delicate situation of the -Attorney and Solicitor-General, they might not feel at liberty to give free scope to their feelings, that those feelings would lead them to regret the duty they were compelled to perform. Mr. Justice BAYLEY asked if the defendant had not been dismissed from his office in consequence of this charge ? Mr. WILLIAMS replied, in consequence of this and of other charges. The accusations against him were as numerous as there were words in the language; they were the result of un paralleled malignity ; their author was a man who produced discord whereyer he came, like the champion of whom it was fabled that where his horse placed his foot, grass never grew ; of one-- • - The Lon]) CHIEF JUSTICE.—You had better say nothing of this. Mr. WILLIAMS proceeded.—lt was not necessary to his case to animadvert on the conduct of any one, when his client stood under so many favourable circumstances before the Court. For that public to whom he had been a men. , torious subject—whose mind must now be disabused of those prejudices which had long been working—he might venture to assert that no further punishment would be regarded with com placency ; and when the infliction of punishment was not at tended by general sympathy, it was worse than useless. The Jury who found him guilty, and who so earnestly recom mended him to mercy, had refused to receive any thing if it came from the defendant. In the name of hundreds of persons whom, in the depth of wretchedness, that defendant had con soled—in the name of those dying men who had blessed him for the last consolations they enjoyed—in the name of those Magistrates who had long witnessed his exertions for the re formation of the erring—in the name of all who had borne testimony to his life of humble but exemplary virtue, he called on the Court to regard him with mercy, and to pass such sen tence as they would desire to find registered in the great book of account in that day when all would need the compassion of a merciful Judge. Mr. ERSKINE and Mr. MANNING shortly addressed the Court on the same side. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that it was neither his duty nor his wish to withdraw from the consideration of the Court any of those topics of mitigation which the affidavits suggested. Let the defendant have the full benefit of his good character—of his dismissal from his office, which however was not only on this but on other charges—of all the expence which he had incurred, and of all the distress which he had suffered; but still the offence was one of a serious nature, calling for the animadversion of the Court. A gaoler was in a situation of grave responsibility and trust, and ought to be watched with jealous care. It was not because a man had been convicted of a capital offence—not even because he was stained with the most atrocious crimes—that he was to be consigned to the caprices of a gaoler, and visited with new and strange punishment at his will. An attempt was •now made, which lie was sorry to observe, to throw the suggestion of the blister on the surgeon ; but that surgeon was examined on the trial, and swore that the suggestion came from Bridle, and no question was put to him by the able Counsel for the defendant to shake his testimony. Even now it was admitted that Bridle suggested the adminis tration of medicine; and was it to . be endured that a gaoler should trifle with the health of prisoners under his care, by giv ing them medicine as a punishment ? The infliction of the strait waistcoat had been kept out of sight : but this proved that the painful operation of the blister was contemplated, and, in deed, so painful did it prove, that the sufferer rubbed it off against the wall, desirous, by so rude a process, of getting rid of the cause of his agony. Besides, how was it that this punishment, if there was no consciousness of its impro priety, never appeared at all in the book of occurrences sub mitted to the Justices ? How was it that it was never en. tered even in the surgeon's book, till six weeks after the event, and then appeared, not as a penal infliction on the obstinate, but a medical application to the sick ? If ever there was a case which called for investigation, it was this ; and pu nishment was necessary, not so much for the particular conduct of the individual as for public example. It must not go forth to the world that any man, of however high a character, (and the higher his character the more dangerous his conduct), should with impunity devise and put in execution new modes of punishment unknown to the English law. He did not wish to press for a vindictive punishment, but for such a punish ment as might express the sense of the Court on the offence,, and afford protection to the prisoner. He had now discharged his painful duty ; he left the case with their Lordships, and he felt assured that the public, with himself, would feel satis fied with such sentence as they, under all the circumstances, should deem just. The Judges consulted together for a few minutes, and then directed the defendant to attend again to-morrow and receive judgment. As he was under recognizance, they suggested that he should not be committed, to which assent was given on the part of the Attorney-General. Mr. Bridle bowed low to the Court, and withdrew. LIBEL UPON THE CLERGY OF DURHAM. THE SING V. JOHN AMBROSE WILLIAMS. Mr. SeARLETT prayed the judgment of the Court on this defendant, who had been convicted of publishing a libel on the Clergy residing at Durham. Mr. BROUGHAM rose to move an arrest of judgment. The defendant, he observed, had been found guilty on part of the first count of the indictment, and acquitted upon the rest. The indictment charged him with printing and publishing a false and . malicious libel " of and concerning the united Church of England and Ireland, and of and concerning the Clergy of the said United Church and the Clergy residing in and near the city or Durham and its suburbs." The first ground which he intended to submit to their Lordships in arrest of judgment was, that the offence charged in the indictment against the defendant was different from, and' other than the offence of which he had been found guilty. The second ground on which he intended to offer a few observations was, that the offence of which the verdict of the Jury had declared the defendant guilty, was too uncertain for judgment to be passed upon it. First, as to the description of the offence, and its diversity from that of which tbe defendant had been convicted. d. It was clear that the indictment charge , the offence by a certain description, as a libel of and con cerning the United Church, and of and concerning the Clergy of that Church, and ,the Clergy residing at or near Dur ham. He contended that it would have been a more distinct de scription of the offence if the words " of and concerning" had been repeated before the" Clergy residing at or near the city of Durham ;" but the omission of those words aided his argument, that no several offence, to wit, a libel on the Clergy of the United Church, residing at Durham, had been specifically charged, but that the offence charged was a libel on the Clergy of the United Church, and the Clergy residing at Durham. —They were both contained in one averment, and not only was there no count in which the libel was charged as against the Clergy of Durham generally, which it well might have been, but in the only count on part of which the defendant had been found guilty, there was one undivided averment, in which one part of the Clergy was not distinguished from the other. Supposing then that the libel charged had been " of and concerning A, and of and concerning B," even then the averments would not have been distinct, but that case would have been less strong than the present. Supposing again that the libel charged had been " of and concerning A and B," the description being one and entire, and A and B. being different parties, then again that would be a fatal description of the offence if the Jury returned a verdict of Guilty against A, and not guilty against B. On this point he would call to the recollection of their Lordships a case which had been argued a few terms since, he meant the case of Walker. In that case the offence charged against the defendant had been the publication of a libel upon the plaintiff; an attorney, and it was laid as a libel " of and concerning the plaintiff; and of and concerning the plaintiff in his capacity as an attorney." There had been no evidence at the trial of the second part of the aver ment, viz, the description of the plaintiff as an attorney, and the ground upon which the plaintiff had been nonsuited, and the nonsuit had been supported in Court, that the description of the libel had been of and concerning the plaintiff as an attor ney, and there being no evidence of the latter fact the libel was not proved. That case had not, however, been so strong as the present, because instead of A and B being here different per sons as in the supposititious case which he had raised, they were here included in one another. And even if, for argu ment's sake, they were to suppose that it was meant that the libel was against the• Clergy of the United Church, and of and concerning the Clergy of Durham, other than of the Established Church, then the whole meaning would be the same as if he said " of and concerning a community, and of and concerning A as a member of that community."— But it had not been found by the Jury that the libel bad been against the Established Church, and the Clergy of the Esta blished Church, for they had found Not Guilty on that part of the count, but he had been found guilty of a libel on some other parts. This led him to the second point which he wished to submit to the Court, viz. the uncertainty of the offence of which the defendant had been found guilty. It was one thing, he submitted, to set forth the Clergy of Durham and its suburbs after they had described the United Church, and the Clergy of the Established Church, and another thing to strike out the first part, or find the defendant not guilty as to it, and find him guilty of the latter part. Now, under the description of Clergy of Durham," not only Clergy of the Established Church but Sectarians might be included. Mr. Justice BEST—Are Sectarians denominated Clergy.? Mr. BROUGHAM—He submitted that they were in different Acts of Parliament ; and in particular he would refer the Court to an Act passed in the 48th of the late King, intituled " An Act touching and concerning the Clergy of the Church of Scotland." But even if any, doubt could be entertained as to the applicability of the word to Dissenting Ministers, there could be no doubt that it strictly applied to Ca tholics, because a Clerk of the Catholic Church might be come a Clerk in the Established Church simply by taking the oath of abjuration. .The next point that he would im press upon their Lordships was the uncertainty of the offence of which the defendant had been found guilty.. It was a libel on the Clergy residing in or near the City of Durham or its suburbs. Now who was to determine what was to be considered near-the City ? One man would fix it at one mile, another at ten, and another at twenty. Different men had different ideas as to dis tance, according to their own notion. The term " suburbs" was . also ambiguous, and this was not merely a libel on the Clergy in or near the City, but in and near the suburbs, the next near the suburbs, and last of all another approximation of near the city of • - , • • w bat Durham. Surely the Court would allow him to refer to„ po t had passed when it first granted the Rule, because if the Co had granted the, application for an information, on the‘rcht that the publication had been a libel on the Established been and if the only ground on which it had been granted hat.„ ti nd negatived by the verdict, then he contended that was pod- 6 " h a d, for an application in arrest of judgment. Their Lordsllif at the over and over again, in the course of the argument, publication was a libel against the Clergy of tile B-t fon of ment, and that it was necessary to grant them the protee , the Court. On no less than three occasions in the course of tu! argument had the Lord Chief Justice stated, that it vras,„ % a , libel against the Established Church ; and when lie (Mr. pi,. had contended that the libel was not upon the Church, .1 0 t the Clergy of Durham, lie had been told, that the words 02: ported a libel on the Established Church. Besides, in all . tn; cases which had been cited when the criminal information rt,u., been applied for, the libels had been of and concerning deft' nite and well known bodies of men. The first case referred to had been that of the Justices of Suffolk ; but that wes t ! body of men very definite, viz. those in the Commission of R" Peace. The next was a case of libel on the Justices of Middle' sex ; and the objection, that the description was not suflicient l Y definite, had been got over by an affidavit distinguishing saidstnanlisn. who the particular Justices were. In the case of the PiJa r g s v. Jenner, 7 Mod. 400, which was a case against the Direct° e of the East India Company, it had been contended in favouray; the rule, that to spe a k of th e E ast I n di a C om p a ny was 8 the ferent thing from speaking of Co unse ll ors ge nerally, because ed East India Company w a s a se l ec t b o d y ; but it had been agre on all sides, that the publi ca ti on o f a libel " ofand concerning, f was not an averment sufficiently definitive to support a bead r 1 libel. In the case of Serjeant Nott, a similar opinion had a d held. In the case of the King v. Orme, 3 Salkeld, 234, it been laid down, that a p u bli ca ti on aga i nst a particular ofaeiLv.. of men, as men of the g o wn , was no lib e l, b u t that the illeg be dual pointed at should he more particularly described. King v. Osborne Was the last case to which he would refer' The report of that case, as g i ven i n S wa i ns on's RePu.'-ot stated that it was an application for an information eg ai ati d the publisher of an account of the murder of a Jewe ss ° r. her child by certain Jews, then lately arrived from lately e u d se lib aga el if in e nl o l tugal. It had been set forth, that certain persons ut s tt m he u o ee s lne t g b etoa a htc r a b er a ;dt r h o aoe u ni arrived from Portugal, had been attacked in the city i t t b case there had not only been a libel, but a notorious bre a ; t he barbarous fi rn y t e h a se enut reflections objection and irn t o h oep r nde e r a i ns t h e t n ehw e e d i an ' w igi i e dt averments. a i g death . i eh of general as to render it difficult to sawho was meant, ha" ; 0 1/ briefly lay before the Court the grounds on which he thong e et new trial ought to be granted, if the Court should not coll ie to arrest judgment ; and he would but observe that even I • 1 i ° tiny could shew no more than that the rule for a ermine ' lf er tion had been granted on grounds which the jury by their v io l dict had negatived, still he thought that that was a Pod gl ar of application for a new trial. But his principal ground o plication was, that no evidence had been offered to prove u t :be the defendant had printed the libel, of publishing wh ich Jury bad convicted him. e irs s JusticeittrLEY.—Do not the affidavit state WL' o the printer and publisher ? bliea ti°3 Mr. BROUGHAM.—The witness who proved the Pu swore that Williams was not the printer. t t i " Mr. SCARLETT said that he held a paper (certainlY ' 1 , 1 , ° , de , number in which the libel was contained) published hY 1 ";4 0 ed, fendant in his hand, and in it this intimation was e nn „ -- cr hollt " Printed by and for the publisher, J. A. "- imams , • all communications are requested to be addressed." 101 4 Mr. BnouGuAm.—The last ground upon which be ie trouble the Court in his application for a new trial,, w ` - " es use misdirection of the Learned Judge before whom ,til e ; bid had been tried. His Lordship, in addressing the J ur ", i -'lone told them that the Court of King's Bench had been of o Pi is in) that the publication was a libel. Now he (Mr. Brot e rt; submitted that no such opinion had been given by . th e ,,, d o ter'. they had merely directed it:to be submitted to a Jul "'judg e He would ht mine whether it was a libel or not; and it was not for the exit it to say, " the Court has found this to be libel, and h as s to CHIEF at onion." at s TICE—TheJU Learned Judge did not saY dare say. , gone Mr. BROUGHAM.—The whole question ought tO n a l - piving to the Jury. He did not object to the Learned Judge he 0' it as his opinion th a t th e p u bli cat i on was a libel, but le be d jetted to the manner in which he had done so. h y y is said, "By law I am com p e ll e d to tell you that ut t on ly libel." Now the law did no t require that opinion, diet permitted it ; and h e (M r . B.) recollected that, s ince Me d , point had been under di scuss i on some y ears ago, a ea, a " Judge had said, in c h arg i ng th e J ur y, " I a m requitoriieda least I am expected, to give my opinion." The 101 0 ' Judge who had presided at the trial of the defendan t , i y esta: said, that any publication whi c h t e nd e d t o bring - 0 - 0 blishment into contempt was a libel. Now surd , ' or eve n too large a definition, because it might be innocen i ';ate praiseworthy, to bring some public establishments • vi biet, - tempt. Every thing depended upon the manner in d before was done. He recollected a case which had been tri, e be en for the late Lord Ellenborough, in which the charge hau, s - t h a libel on the Small Pox Hospital—an institution viot-hdis: originally been of great public use, but which, aftf i r ,:cbiet' covery of vaccination, had been rendered useless. 1.1 he Chief' • Justice on that trial had said, that the Institution in b `L e fit.o - ' might be a pest-house and a nuisance, rather then f:r inst ance ' Many other similar cases might he adduced ; as , . into eery the third Secretary of State's Office, to bring which lic ex tra tempt, and to represent it as a despicable piece pub en in t he vagance,_had been the attempt of many of the best iii country for the last ten years. • Mr. JUSTICE BAYLEY They have not done it by Publi cation. uti le o un , Mr. Bnotion ass agreed that every thing depende d nP° a s manner in which it was done. He had now pointed tnee - ee lieo upon which his application for a new-trial rested ; but 1, 1 . 1, with great great confidence on the grounds of his. first object' arrest of judgment. p a rule ti) The COURT, after a short deliberation, grant — g shew cause why judgment should not be arrested. COn ) " The defendant was not in Court when the preeee"i'ci"nee ou menced. He had been, we understand, in close atten L t ime the Court during the whole of this week, but retired sn un. before the case came on with the sanction of his Co up te r' der a thorough impression that it would not be heard_i res et t day, but he returned almost immediately, and 5va.7 . 1, 1 00 during more than two-thirds of the time which the a 46 ; - g i t ilO . occupied. This explanation may not be u nnecessarkp oi lies temporary absence, when according to practice he was view to obviate any unfavourably construc tion drawn r,,,acted to be present. r'2 l itif . THE KING V. JAMES GRIFFIN AND GEORGE - RLASSiiS e These defendants, who were convicted at the last Ken_ined in of a riot, and burning of two effigies of witnesses, e!were support of a proscution for smuggling, at Canter's.' ! u se 01 sentenced to six months imprisonment in Maidst one Correction, and ordered to find security for five years. THE KING V. WILLIAM GIBSON. CBObermu nd. - This defendant, who was convicted at the last .„,christ, Assizes of an assault up in on an Excisa Officer nam ed " n is iln in the execution of his duty, was sentenced to four o"`" prisonment in the House of Correction at Carlisle. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, N°l r '..?l: The Court sat for a short time this morning at Ivio but no case of importance came on. A. letter Naples (in the Journ al des Debats), dated Oct. 31, states that Vesuvius ctn.; tinued to throw out smoke and ash es up to tva'r day, when the sky began to look once filore i cie u r, and serene. Ottaiano and its envir ons ha d s. O fered most. In addition to the da ma g e done _la the soil, it is estimated that 50 acres of vitw had been destroyed. coP n nshi ll re l BIRTH. House, Ling daughter. , on ti d i a e y c l o as un t, te t s h s e i3 l r B o t w h ia in o s w tan w t, as a t s l a tr f ge t ` On Wednesday last, the Lady of Thomas J. Plat 4. ° ton-crescent, Esq., of a daughter. onday, the 18th George Gilbert' Currey, M.D. and F.R.S., of Balfl s ton, lk instant,A R R l a E t i lj i . . ir • l a 1, On Mtreet, to Mary, only child of the late John Dennis, of A Y Penzance. E Dal" On the 21st instant, Wm. Rowl , Esq . • , On the 21st instant, at Allhallows, Bread -street, E. —' o f 13. son, ll of Birthorpe, Lincolnshire, to Diary, daughter Fli tham, Esq., of Ingthorpe, near Stamford. adron Church, C°rl)* DIED. oate street, Lincoln's-Inn-fields; andeY-Green-street, Gr°s7 square, aged 58. min goy' On Sunda the 10th inst., at Chelsea College, cal l the iv,ll craft _ ,Adjutant of that Institution, and late CaPtau l ' Dragoons. the 6 1131 e Printed and Published for the PROPRIETORS, al _. CASSTAIRD Office, No, 112, Strand, by J. 13' of Grea t -4 - o. ( Nv _ I\TOT] GLOBE I/ r a "Y's 011; e n e wher r "' a 11111 R ' s q. deer; (141 I MJCEL nol L -ANT E . rsk'ult