The Sun. — London, England, 1832-04-25 00:00:00

EXAMINATION OF MR. ADAMSON. Last night Mr. James Adamson, the solicitor of Ely-place, Holborn, against whom a warrant was obtained at Bow-street in the course of last week for an indecent assault on a lady named Burns, whose husband keeps a classical academy at Ken nington-cross, appeared before Mr. MiNsHuLL to meet the charge. Mrs. Burns having been sworn stated, that on the Bth ce March last she went to the house of Mr. Adamson for the purpose of asking him to extend the time of a bill for 251. from two to four months. A female servant opened the street-door, and she was shown into a back parlour, where she saw Mr. Adamson, who told her, when she stated the ob ject of her application, that he would consider of it. A knock then came to the door, and 3lr. Adamson said, " I know who that is," and then said, " will you be kind enough to walk this way ?" showing her into the front parlour. Knowing that she came to ask a favour, she did not wish to object, but took her seat near the door. Mr. Adamson then ob served that it was a very cold day, and asked her to draw near the fire. She consented and drew near the table, on which were two decanters of wine and two glasses. This was between five and six o'clock in the evening, and she (Mrs. Burns) was not aware at the time that Mrs. Adamson was from home. Mr. Adamson then asked her to take a glass of wine,which The declined doing, but subsequently took half a glass. He then began to talk about the bill, and asked her if her husband was not a cross man, and if she did not feel her time pass very dull at home in consequence of his engagements. She replied no, and added that she was so much engaged with her family that she never felt the time hang heavy on her hands. He then observed to her that he was very awkwardly situated himself, his wife being ill at Brighton, and said he was obliged to live in a great house alone, which was very unpleasant, adding, " Do you think your husband could spare you to live with me as my uousekeeper ?" She replied, " you had better ask Mr. Burns that question yourself," and in order to put a stop to such conversation, the told him that it would take very little to make Mr. Burns jealous. He then attempted to take hold of het hand, and en- iatiy or defeat the Nit. The whole force of the t)bjection, and the whole-scheme of-the pretended 3 mprovement are founded in hypocrisy or delusion. There are not above five cities or towns m the ex isting li s t o f pl aces ent i t l e d t o elective rights, where the 10/. householders will form a ecnsti tuency which can be considered as Inconveniently large, we mean London,Wesuninster, Liverpool, Bristol, and Southwark ; and of these ) four pos sess aiready a body at electors not much short of that which the Bill will create. Westminster, Liverpool, London, and Southwark, will obtain a better, but not a much more numerous con stituency, and certainly will be as well protected from the influence of mobs and mob orators after Reform as before. Of the great towns which' are to be enfranchised, three only, Leeds, Manchester, and Birmingham, can be brought within the range of the alleged objection ; and even in the constituency of ttrase places we see no ground for anticipating the existence of a rabble, or apprehending the dangerous influence of democratic or republican opinions. Making the proper deductions for 101. houses occupied by females, f or t h ose l e f t empty or held b y non residents, and for those deprived of a vote by other causes, the whole number of electors in these three immense manufacturing towns put tnether will not amount to 20,000, out of a wealthy and enterprising population of nearly 330,000 ! Has this the character of universal suffrage ? Are these the mobs to be dreaded by persens who support the pot-walloppers of Pres ton, and evince no alarms for the elective tu mults of Westminster ? " But the metropolitan districts," we think we hear the Anti-Reform alarmist exclaiming,—" the metropolitan dis tricts, what can you say to them ?" We have already expressed ourselves at length on this subject, on the day before the second reading of the Bill in the House of Lords, bat shall, per haps, trouble our readers with some additional observations to-morrow.—Times. In the 109th number of the Edinburgh Re view, with an early copy of which we have been favoured, there is an able article on Dr. Nares's Life of Burghley. The reviewer endeavours to solve that peculiar problem in the History of England—the facility with which the people so frequently changed their religion at the command of the Government. His opinion differs from that which is generally received ; for instead of placing it to the account of' the absolute power of the Government, and the abjectness of the people, he attributes it to the independence of the people, and their indifference respecting religion. " The History of the Reformation in England (says the Reviewer) is full of strange prohi mns. The most pro minent and extraordinary phenomenon which it presents to us, is the gigantic strength of the Government contrasted with the feebleness of the religious parties. During the twt lye or thirteen years' which foll..wed the death of Henry VIII., the religion of the State was thrice changed. Protestantism was established by Edward ; the Catholic Church was restored by Mary ; Protea'antism was again established by Elizabeth. The faith of the nation seemed to depend on the personal inclinations of the Sovereign. Nor was this all. An Established Church was then, as a matter of course, a persecuting church. Edward per secuted Catholics, Mary persecuted Protestants, Elizabeth persecuted Catholics again. The father of those three Sovereigns had enjoyed the pleasure of persecuting both sects at once ; and had sent to death on the same hurdle the heretic who denied the real presence, and the traitor who denied the royal supremacy. There was no thing in England like that firm and bloody opposition which in France each of the religious factions, in its turn, offered to the Government. We had neither a Coligni nor a Mayenne ; neither a Moncoutour nor an Ivry. No English city braved sword and famine for the reform doc trines with the spirit of Rochelle; nor for the Catholic doctrines with the spirit of Paris. Neither sect in Eng -lind formed a league. Neither sect extorted a recantation from the Sovereign. Neither sect could obtain from an adverse sect even a toleration. The English Protestants, after several years of domination, sank down with scarcely a struggle under the tyranny of Mary. The Ca tholics, after having regained and abused their old acen dency, submitted patiently to the severe rule of Eliza beth. Neither Protestants nor Catholics engaged in any great and well-orgidzed scheme of resistance. A few wild and tumultuous rising=—suppressed as soon as they appeared--a few dark conspiracies, in which only a small number of desperate men engaged—such were the utmost efforts made by these two parties, to assert the most sa cred of human rights, attacked by the most odious ty ranny." The Reviewer then notices the solution of the problem, by describing the English Monarchy in the sixteenth century as an absolute Monarchy. " The truth (he obseri es) seems to be, that the Go vernment of the Tudors was, with a few riccasioaal de viations, a -popular Government, under the forms of des potism. At first sight it may seem that the prerogatives of Elizabeth were nut lens ample than those of Louis XIV. —that her Parliaments were as obsequious as his Parlia ments—that her warrant bad as much authority as his lettrc-de-cachet. * But the power of Louis rested on the support of his army. The power of Elizabeth rested solely on the support of her peo ple. Those who say that her power was absolute do not sufficiently consider i❑ what her power consisted. Her power consisted in the willing obedience of her subjects ; in their attachment to her person and to her office—in their respect for the old line from which she sprang—in their sense of the general security which they enjoyed under her Government. These were the means and the only means which she had at her command for carrying her decrees into execution, for resisting foreign enemies, and for crush ing domestic treason. There was not a Ward in the City—there was not a Hundred in any Shire in England, which could not h ive ovirpowered the handful of armed men who composed her household. • • 4 • • The English, in the sixteenth cer.tury, were beyond all doubt a free people. They bad not, indeed, the outward show of freedom, but they had the reality. They had not a good Constitution; but they had that, without which the best Constitutio❑ is as useless as the King's proclamation against vice and immorality ; that which, without any Constitution, keeps rulers in awe—force, and the spirit to use it." The Reviewer, after some further il lustrations of his doctrine respecting the independence of the people, proceeds to observe :—lt is absurd to suppose that, if the nation had been decidedly attached to the Protestant faith, Mary could have re-established the Papal supremacy. I: is equally absurd to suppose, that if the nation had been zealous for their ancient religion Eliza beth could have restored the Protestant Church. The truth is, that the people were not disposed to engage in a struggle either for the new or for the old doctrines. Abun dance of spirit was shown, when it seemed likely that Mary would resume her lather's grants of Church pro perty ; or that she would sacrifice the interests of E.ng ;and to the husband whom she regarded with unmerited tenderness. The Queen found that it would be madness to at.enapt the restoration of the Abbey lands. She found that her subjects would never suffer her to make her here ditary kingdom a fief of Castile. On these points she en countered a steady resistance, and was compel'ed to give way. If she was able to establish the Catholic worship, and to persecute those who would not conform to ir, it was evioent:y because the people cared far less for the Pro testant religion than for the rights of property, and fur the independence of the English. Crown. In plain words, they did not think the difference between the hostile sects worth a struggle. There was undoubtedly a zealous Pro testant party, and a -callous Catholic party. But both these p.rties were, we believe, very small. We doubt whether both together made, at the time of Mary's death, the twentieth part of the nation. The remaining nine teen-twentieth halted between the two opinions ; and were not disposed to risk a revolution in the Government for the purpose of giving to either of the extreme factions so advantage over the over." • We suspect that in every part of Eur Ope the cafe was not materially ditferent. The motive for the reformation in Germany, Sweden, and Denmark was the wresting property from the Church. From the moment that it stipulated in Germany that the going over of a Prince or Lord to Protestantism should not necessarily be attended with a power to dispose of the revenues held by the Catholic Church, there was Rot another conversion, and the Catholics and Pro testants kept their respective grounds. The . i people f o ll o wed th e i r Princes like flocks o f i' sheep. The number of indifferents has bee n constantly diminishing in England, through the labours of the Dissenters. The Church of England had the 19-20ths of indifferents, as the Church of tome would have had if the Church of Rome had been established. At the time of the Revolution the Dissenters formed a very small portion of the population, as may be seen from a statement of particulars in " Sir John Dalrymple's Memoirs." What zeal the Church of England evinced down to our own times has always been (with the exception of the Revolu tion, when they trembled for their property) against the Dissenters ) that is, the religionists who were not indifferent. Bishop Burnet, in the conclusion of his history, remarks, that the Clergy had a leaning to Popery, and were " severe towards the Dissenters." Bible reading was called Metho dism or Puritanism,and aperusal ofJohnWesley's Journals will show that everywhere the Clergy excited the mob to use violence towards all who were in earnest regarding religion. Such was the dread of Bible reading entertained by the Church of England, that even in the reign of George the Third five Students were expelled, by a decree of the Vice-Chancellor, from Oxford, for the crime of reading and talking over the Bible, and, upon being questioned on the Thirty nine Articles, putting what is called the evange lical interpretation on them. In spite, however, of the discouragement of the Church of England, the Dissenters now form somewhat more than one-half of the whole population. In that very county (Lancaster) which is so much distin guished for its hatred of Dissenters, and in which Dr. Currie, in 1793, could write, " I was called to Wigan the other day, and saw two or three thousand men burning Tom Paine, and shouting ' Church and King !'—of the whole of the number, I was well informed, there were not ten who knew the alphabet," the Dissenters now form a large majority of the population. The Dissenters have lately distinguished themselves by their liberality in support in the ministerial plan of education, the only plan, as is well known, by which it is possible to have anything like general education in Ireland. But the Church of England, however indifferent in matters of religion, is never indifferent when the object is to check education. All of a sudden, the same clergy who not many years ago opposed themselves to the circulation of the Scriptures without note or comment, and deemed it better that children should not be taught to read than suffered to read the Bible unaccompanied by the Church Catechism, now affect a wonderful zeal for the . Bible, and call out " The Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible," because were Ministers to adopt a plan of education in which the whole Bible should be placed before children the Catholics could not benefit from it. The object is quite clear—to withhold education from the great mass of the people of Ireland. The clergy of the Church of Ireland, though sworn to maintain schools, had neglected that duty, and applied otherwise the funds destined for the education of the poor ; and now they wish to add another injury to the many of which they have been guilty towards the Irish people. But our contemporary (the Standard) abuses the Dissenters for not lending themselves to the in terested views of the clergy of the Establish ment : " There are," says our contemporary, " two classes into which Dissenters are divided ; they who affect to he religious, for the sake of dissent, and they who dissent sincerely, for the sake of religion. The first are worthy of all contempt; the second entitled to our highest re spect : but bow are we to distinguish betwe-n them ? Their feeling towards the Established Church furnishes a perfect and obvious test. " Dissenters who separate for the sake of making car nal divisions will naturally hate an establishment whose comprehensive toleration has comprised, for successive centuries, a greater congregation of Christians than was ever combined, without coercion, since the foundation of Christianity. They who dissent from motives of base lucre, envy, or perverse ambition, will as naturally hate, and seek to destroy the Establishment, by whose poverty they can make themselves rich, and by whose ruin they can hope to exalt themselves—such Dissenters would seek an alliance with Popery, or Mohammedanism, or fiend worship, for the purpose of overthrowing the Church of England—such Dissenters, in fact, we find did form an alliance with Popery arid tyranny in the person of James 11., in order to carry on the common war against the Church." We have more pleasure in adverting to the second division of Dissenters, the men who dissent for the sake of seligion. They know well that in doctrine these is scarcely between their own creed and that of the Church any es stntial difference, and, th,)ugh dissenting from it, they will never put their hands to the destruction of a Christian community possessing and imparting the means of salva tion ; they will not be arra}ed amongst the enemies of an establishment which has proved the bulwark of Pro testantism in Europe ; they will not become the auxili aries of intolerance, so far as to teach, by their ingratitude, the danger of that toleration by which the Church of Eng. land is so gloriously distinguished ; they will not league themselves with a sect whose tenets they believe to he damnable and idolatrous, in order to overthrow a Christian establishment, from whose creed they do not materially differ. Lastly, they will not, for such an object, trample the Scripture itself under foot ; they will at least choose some other footstool whereby to climb into the breach." The Dissenters know pretty well the nature of the toleration which they would receive from the Church of England were it in its power to be intolerant. The reign of Charles and James, the manner in which the Nc,n-conformists were hunted, the cruel persecution of the Scotch Presbyterians down to the Revolution, suffici ently prove what toleration Dissenters would re ceive from the Church of England. Fortu nately, since the Revolution, the State has ceased to abet the Church. The State controlled the Church ; but the Church, on that account, was opposed to the State, down to the reign of George the Third. To put down the High- Church persecuting spirit, the Government was obliged to put an end to Convocations. Many liberal men there have been in the Church of England ; but as a body the Clergy have always been distinguished for illiberality. The Dissen ters know this—they are quite aware of the kindness they would receive at the hands of the Church, were their fate in its hands. We ob serve from the Scotsman, that the true Presby terians of Scotland (the Seceders) have not joined in the base cry of the High party, though several of the Presbyteries of the Established Church have disgraced themselves by the cry. In Scotland, hoWever, the matter is entirely con fined to the Clergy.—Morning Chronicle. The state of the Government and people of France at the present moment compels us to recur to the language, with a variation only of the tense, which we thought it our duty to employ immediately after " the three glorious days of July." We then said that France would gain nothing by her Revolution ; and we now, not with any feeling of unworthy triumph, but In the spirit rather of rmlancholy and regret for the fate of a noble, spirited, but infatuated nation, ask those who were the loudest in their applause and gratulation of that Parisian crime and na tional calamity what has France really gained by it ? In asking this question we invite a com parison, not between what France is now and what she was under the rule of her ancient and red ored dynasty, but between what she , is itnd the. worst that can be imagined aj the result of those Royal Ordinances by whiph her last legitimate Nlonarch endea voui•ed in vain to protect his menaced and endkngered throne. Could France, in conse quence of the success of those Ordinances, have been in a worse predicament than that of be holding in the worthless wearer of her Crown, as she now beholds, a person the object of uni versal hatred to every party, sect, family, or in dividual of the nation, with the exception only of those in whose minds measureless contempt has left space and scope for no other feeling ? Could any state of things have been produced at once more degrading and unfortunate than the actual character and condition of the French Ad. ministration, unpopular with all parties, trusted by none, tolerated in power for the moment by the Royalist and Movement Party which divide France, because it is equally hated by both, de pendent for its precarious existence upon the life or death of a single individual, and sure to be crushed by any accidental occurrence which may for a single instant disturb the nice equilibrium of passions and of interests? Could the Royal Ordinances have led to more impri sonments for political offences, to more vexa tious and arbitrary proceedings towards the con ductors of the Press, to more flagrant violations of personal and political independence ? Would the Chamber of Deputies which might have been elected in virtue of the Royal Ordinance for that purpose have consisted of persons more base, cowardly, treacherous, selfish, and worthless, than those Members of the Reformed Parliament of France, who have just deserted their post at a moment when all their efforts to reassure and tranquillize the public mind, and all their case to provide for the public safety, were imperi ously required ; who cared not how much they increased the terror, aggravated the malignity, augmented the distress and confusion of a fatal pestilence, so that they could obtain a slight chance of greater safety to their own dearly cherished persons; who displayed the immediate representatives and dele gates of the democracy in a light not un worthy of their origin, in ignominious contrast with the comparatively manly, generous, and patriotic conduct of the French Chamber of Peers, degraded and polluted as that Chamber has been by revolutionary infusions and exci sions ; who set the Ministers of the Crown an example of dereliction of duty which encouraged, if it did not justify, those congenial Ministers in dismissing the P a rli a m en t o f France, with so much of precipitation and panic as to forbid even the decent and ordinary formality of an Address from the Crown ? Do we not see the mercenary troops of France greatly increased since the Revolution ; the public expenditure grievously enhanced ; the people exposed to heavier bur dends, while their interrupted commerce and sus pended industry would have rendered even their former burdens intolerable ; the populace of' Paris and the other great towns restrained from open insurrection by the presence of a formid able standing army ; the boasted civic force, the guardians and support - of' the revolution, dissolved in some parts of France, overawed elsewhere by mercenary bands, paralysed in Paris by the experience they have already tasted of the bitter fruits of popular change in the institutions of the State, and still, merely in dread of the uncertain future, tolerating, although with im patience, the Government which they detest and despise ; the mercenary troops of the Govern ment faithful and united only because they are above the level of the general misery, and because, where destitution is universal among the whole of that class of society from which mercenary troops are drawn, a regular supply of the neces saries of life becomes an irresistible bribe ? Every traveller who returns from France, all our correspondents in that country, concur in state ments of which we have not here attempted the slightest exaggeration. What, then, we repeat the question, has France gained by her revolu tion ? The punishment which awaits every people who are eager for political change, and do not sufficiently calculate its risks.—Morning Post. nat. are the real While Lord Palmerston pleasantly rubs his hands, and, with a self-approving smile, says, " Well, I have at last caught two of the slippery eel-like diplomatists in the net of ratification," the refractory King of Holland, who well knows the game that, by the secret connivance of the Holy Alliance, he is playing, also smiles in a spirit of self-sati4action, and says, " Well, I have caught the Belgic Governor of the Pro vince of Luxemburg in a stronger net than that which entangles the Plenipotentiaries of Austria and Prussia. The Maison de Surete is not so easy to break through as a Metternich ratifica tion." So it appears that no sooner is the ac knowledgment of the independence and inviola bility of Belgium by the " Great Powers" placed beyond all doubt, according to the statements in the Ministerial papers, than the territory of that State is most audaciously violated by the armed agents of the King of Holland ; and a public functionary of Belgium—the representative in the Duchy of Luxemburg of that independent Government—is seized at his country-seat by a gang of rufliam, gagged, and carried off to pri son,—a Dutch General recognising the capture as perfectly right and justifiable, and the Dutch King subsequently " ratifying" the General's opinion on the proper mode of enforcing toward Belgium the principles of international law. What a commentary upon time sort of pacification which the long labours of the London pro tocolists have produced ! What dignity encir cles the Crown which has been placed upon the brows of Leopold ! Scarcely had he ascended the Belgic throne, with the olive branch in his hand for a sceptre, when he was obliged to take the field, and fly for his life at the head of his gallant army." French bayonets alone averted the catastrophe which would have put an end to his Kingship almost as soon as it was created. Ever since the warlike King of Holland has not ceased to beat the alarm-drum in his ears. Ever since he has been labouring under the con stant apprehensions of a Monarch enthroned upon gunpowder, to whom a spark might prove fatal. Meantime the political friends, who in duced him to abandon his peaceful retreat of Claremont for that dangerous elevation, leave hlm in a position both pitiable and ridiculous, while they talk of settling the disputes of Hol land a n d B e l g i um by protocol, treaty, and rati fication, but permit the Dutch King to heap what insults he pleases on the head of the pa tient " Majesty of Belgium," who expects that he will be able to afford protection to his " faith ful people " when he obtains it for himself. If . • this last aggression of the King of Holland, in violating the territory of Belgium, and seizing the person of the Governor of the Duchy of Luxemburg, be not chastised by the Great Powers as a contempt of that dictatorial autho rity which they have assumed, in constituting themselves into a sort of Supreme Court of po i t'cal Judicature to settle the disputes of the tvv,, onel pths, then, Ae inuA ady, the Great Pulver:, only encouraging Hollgicl not to accept terms, while they punish Belgium for her y submission to their assumed authority. No can doubt that, if a similar act of aggres had been committed by the Belgic Govern t upon the territory of the Dutch King, it Id have been instantly and indignantly de need and chastised by those Powers who F upon the violent acts of the " enlightened" William with so much indulgence. All - that has occurred in this matter, since the consultations of the Holy Alliance were opened under the auspices of Lord Palmerston at the Foreign office of the British Government, confirms and strengthens the opinion which all reasonable people entertained, that our Government showed a remarkable lack of wisdom and foresight in departing from their avowed principle of non intervention, to mix itself up with the concerns and embroil itself with the disputes of Belgium and Holland, which, after the quantity of time and diplomatic ingenuity and ink expended in settling them, are, we venture to sav, as far from being settled as ever. As to Poland— although driven into resistance to the Sovereign, who only derived his authority from the Treaty of Vienna, and who had violated all the terms on which that authority was conferred upon him, by acting in defiance of the Charter and Con stitution of that unhappy country—there was no intervention. Belgium and Holland are two States pretty nearly on an equality, and ought to have been allowed to adjust their dis putes between themselves in the best way they could. If they had, this embroiling question would have been set at rest long ago. If Belgium single-handed could not have esta blished her independence against unassisted Holland, she could not be qualified for free dom. But what comparison could be instituted between the magnitude and the resources of the two States of Russia and Poland ? Yet our Government left Poland to perish without even a manly remonstrance in her favour ; but the Holy Alliance were against intervention in the one case and desired it in the other—and so our counsels were shaped accordingly.—Morn ing Herald. The frequent occurrence of the circumstance of the Commons having of late made "no House," and the delay which has been thereby thrown in the way both of public and private busi nes, has become a subject of very general anim adversion ; and proves either that our Legisla tors are very indifferent about the duties they were so very lately deputed to perform, or else are the too ready and accommodating tools of those whose conduct of public afl'airs it is their duty to promote on the one hand, and to watch with a scrutinizing eye on the other. Ministers, we imagine, cannot be unaware that they are charged hod: by friends and foes with being the direct or indirect cause of this ; of either winking at or encouraging Members in thus absenting them selves from their duties, that they themselves may he exonerated from labours and from contests to which some of them, at least, feel themselves un equal. If this be true, it implies an imputation both upon their talents and integrity ; if it be untrue, then it behoves them, as men of spirit, not to rest quiet under a censure which every one knows they can, if they please, immediately remove. At any rate the subject is one of in finite importance to the country. Little has, as yet, been done by the House of Commons beyond passing the Reform Bill—the month of May will be considerably advanced before the House meets again—there are notices already in the order-book engrossing every day till the Sth of June ; and we strongly suspect that, when subjects of infinite importance, such as the currency, the Irish Poor-Laws, the Bank and East India Charters, and various others which have been year after year postponed, are mentioned, we shall have the old answer rung in our ears, that it is " too late in the Session" to entertain them. Even the Anti-Reformers themselves might, in this respect, for once do some service to the State ; and, unless they wish to see their own sentiments falsified, and the last of the unre formed Parliaments descend to the tomb of the Capulets a practical incumbrance to the State, they will exert themselves to exhibit it in a more favourable light to the country than such frequent neglect of its duties can be said to do. On the other hand, if there are among Ministers or their underlings some who, either from indolence or actual inability to perform the task assigned them, tacitly or openly encourage Members of the Le legislature in these breaches of their solemn en gagements to the country, such persons, as me❑ of honour, should cease to allow themselves to be an incumbrance to the State. Few men, it is true, see or have the candour to admit, their own insufficiency ; but those who cannot or will not see should be made to hear. They should remember that the lookers-on see more of the game than the players; and, if these were now to speak out, we suspect they would unhe sitatingly declare that there is among the present race of public men more than one who has had cards dealt to him which he is totally incapable of playing.—Morning Herald. dem; men sedu stud that sist 1 hand in or aske Jured to prevail upon her by all sortb of argu , both religious and otherwise, to endeavour to re her. He talked to her as if he had been ki►►g some novel—said he was not immaculate — he was but a man, and that no man could re loving a pretty woman. She forcibly drew her I from his, and jumped half-way across the room, der to reach the door. He followed her, and her if she would consent to settle the affair, telling her that she should have great things at her command; hut she indignantly told him that he was mistaken if he supposed she would enter into any arrangement with him at the expense of her virtue. Mrs. Burns paused here, and appeared somewhat agitated. Mr. MlNsuuLL—Did he prevent you from going out of the room ? Mrs. Burns—He did, for some time. Mr. Mimi-luLT.—Then that is your charge. Now, Sir (turning to Mr. Adamson), you have heard what the lady has sworn. Mr. Adamson—l swear by the Almighty, that 1 never so much as touched the hem of her garment, and never laid a finger on her. Ihe fact is, that I was at dinner on the day in question, when the ser vant told me that a female wished to speak with me. I went to the parlour, and there saw Mrs. Burns. I asked her if she wished to speak to me in private. She replied yes. Mrs. Burns—'Tis false, I never said so. Mr. Adamson then went on to say, that he asked Mrs. Burns into an adjoining room, where she pro posed, on behalf of her husband, that he should take his acceptance at four months instead of two. He replied that it was impossible he could do so. He then asked her how it happened that she should come about such a business and not her husband. She answered that her husband was so much en gaged that he could not find time to come, and she then begged and prayed of him to take the kill at four months, and hinted that she had walked all the way from Kennington, not being able to pay for a conveyance, on purpose to ask him that favour. Seeing that she was fatigued, he asked her to take a glass of wine, to which she readily consented, and wanted to drink out of a dirty glass that was on the table, but he said to her, " No, you shall have a clean glass," and then he rang the bell, and told the cook to bring a clean glass, which she did. One of his clerks also came into the room, and he would call both him and the cook to say whether they observed any thing improper pass between him and Mrs. Burns. Mr. Adamson then proceeded to cross-examine Mrs. Burns, and asked her if she made any noise while he took those alleged impro per liberties with her. She replied, that she did not make any noise until she forced her way into the ball, when she called her brother Charles, who was waiting at the door for her, to come to her assistance. Mr. Adamson—After you left the parlour, did you not stop conversing with me in the passage for at least five minutes ? Mrs. Burns—l certainly spoke to you in the hall, but the street-door stood open at the time. You then told me that probably you would take the b►ll at three month's date. Mr. Adamson said, that the charge was a mere attempt to extort money from him, and evade the payment of the bill, for the amount of which Mr. Burns had been sued. It was most singular, he said, that the charge should have been suffered to stand over for six weeks, and still more singular that it should not have been preferred at Hatton-garden office, where, subsequent to the alleged assault upon his wife, Mr. Burns had been fined 51. for assaulting him (Mr. Adamson). A gentleman, who attended on behalf of Mrs. Bui ns, said that as soon as Mr. Burns learned how his wife had been used by Mr. Adamson, he sent him a challenge, which Mr. Adamson declined to accept, and, finding that he could not have satisfac• tion as a gentleman, he knocked Mr. Adamson down in Hatton-garden, and was fined .5/. for the assault. Mr. Burns—And if I had sent a bullet through his head, he would have been rightly served. Mr. MiNstium. said he was somewhat puzzled to understand what had occasioned so much delay in making the application for the warrant, and why the present charge had not been mentioned at Hatton garden when Mr. Burns was there charged with the assault upon Mr. Adamson. Mrs. Burns—We took the earliest means of ob taining redress, arid applied to Mr. Harmer, but he said that there was no law for us. Mr. MiNsuuLL—But why was not the matter taken up by the Hatton-garden Magistrate ?—Mr. Burns said, that when he was charged with the as sault, he stated the cause he had received, and said, that he conceived himself justified in what he had done, as Mr. Adamson had attempted to seduce his wife. Mr. Laing, the Magistrate, however, would not hear any explanation, but fined him 5/. at once, saying he had nothing to do with provocation. The gentleman who attended for Mrs. Burns then said that every thing had been done on behalf of that lady to obtain redress sooner, and that applica tions had been made both at Union-hall arid the Mansion-house, but without effect, as the offence had been committed in Middlesex. Mr. Adamson said, that if the rent due by Mr. Burns bad not been peremptorily applied for, the present charge would never have been made. The fact was, that the husband, and not the wife, was the complaining party. Mrs. Burns—lt is my charge, and not my hus band's. I have been grossly and shamefully insulted. Mr. MINSHULL was desirous of knowing whether Mrs. Burns stated the circumstances of assault to her husband as soon as she reached home. Mrs. Burns replied, that when she got home, she told a lady who was now present, how she had been treated by Mr. Adamson. She was afraid, how ever, to tell her husband the circumstance all at once, fearing he would at once proceed to take vengeance " on the fellow who had dared to insult her." He heard of it, however, soon after, and walked up and down Ely-place both by day and night, in order to meet Mr. Adamson and chastise him on the spot. Mr. Adamson begged of the magistrate to allow him to call forward his clerk and cook, in order to prove that they saw nothing improper between Mrs. Burns and him. Mr. MESSllULL—Certainly, call forward whom you please. Mr. Key, clerk to Mr. Adamson, was then sworn. He stated that he was in the house on the Sth of March, and as soon as dinner was over he went into the office, and subsequently went into the parlour, where he saw Mrs. Burns and Mr. Adamson sitting. The former appeared perfectly composed, and he (witness) did not perceive the slightest impropriety on the part of Mr. Adamson, whose habits he knew were quite at variance with any thing immoral. He had known Mr. Adamson for a long time, and believed him to be a strictly virtuous man. . _ Mrs. Burns—The assault was not committed until after this gentleman had left the room. The cook was then called forward—She said, that on the evening in quertion she went into the par lour with a clean glass, which her master had or dered. She saw Mrs. Burns there, but could not perceive any thing in her manner to indicate that any rudeness had been used towards her. Mrs. Burns—You never came into the room at all, and I never saw you on that day but when you opened the door for me; besides, your master could not have required a clean glass, as there were two on the table when I entered the room. Mr. Adamson produced a letter, which w as written by Mr. Burns on the 16th inst., and th e object of which, he said , w a s to intimidate him (Mr. Adamson) and compel him to forego the claim which he had against Mr. Burns. Mr. Burns denied that the letter was written with any such design. After some further altercation, Mr. MiNstruLL said that no d ou bt an assau l t h a d sbeentheho u should s ir c proved,uriustilcon and,ea Mr. y b llnch it was attended, he without v passing a n y o pi nion a s to Adamson to put in bail to meet atiy charge which Mrs. Eurni - , [night think ()ropier to prefer against hint at the Sessions. Mr. Adamson accordingly put in the required sureties, and the parties left the office. MARKET INTELLIGENCE. LONDON MARKETS. (From the London New Price Current of yesterday.) SUGAR.-The reduced stock of West India Sugars, and the determination of the buyers not to purchase except for their immediate wants, produced a great stagnation in the market last week; the estimate of the sales of Muscovades was only 1,000 hhds. and tees. The stock of West India Sugar is now 5,609 hhds. and tees., which is 3,054 less than last year. The stock of Mauritius 43,136 bags, being 9,059 less than last year. . The delivery of West India Sugars last week 1,394 hhds. and tees., being 998 less than last year. The delivery of Mauritius 8,522 bags, being 1,265 more than the corresponding week of 1831. The Sugar markets are shut this morning, on account of the holyday ; the market will open tomorrow. The stock of Refined on sale is now so very limited that the holders evince no disposition to meet the offers of the export houses, which are low; the wholesale grocers are purchasing scarcely any thing for the home consumption of the country ; the quots,. tions were in consequence nominal during the last week. EAST INDIA SUGARS.-About 8,000 bags of Mauritius Sugars were sold last week, the brown and low yellow about 495. a 525. fully supported former prices, the coloury sold still low in proportion, but the whole went off with briskness, being much wanted, on account of the scarcity of West India destriti= lions, and being 2s, under the prices of West India. The Corp pany's Bengal Sugars, 8,642 bags, sold Is. 6d. above the last sale ; yellow good 245. a 245. 6d., white 255. 6d, a 295. 6(1. ; about 8,000 bags Manilla and Siam were brought forward; about one half were taken in, good yellow Manilla 245. and T.'s., good white Siam 245. 6d. a 255. I FOREIGN SUGARS.-There were very few purchases of Foreign Sugars reported last week, the advanced price having checked the request ; the following is the currency :-Bahia, good brown and yellow, 21s. 6d. a 225. 6d., white low to good 235. 6d. a 275. ; Rio fine brown to good yellow 20s. 6d. a 235. 6d., ord. white 245. 6d. a 305. 6d. for fine; Pernams fine yellow to ord. white 235. a 265., good white 295. There is a report of a cargo of Foreign Sugar having been sold at Is. advance, but we believe there is no truth in the report ; the market is, however, likely to rise, as the failure of the crop in the Brazils is certain•: Average price of Sugar 1/. 9s. per cwt. COFFEE.-There was no public sale of Coffee last week, but the favourable accounts received from Holland occasioned a brisk demand by private contract at full Market prices; about 5,000 bags changed hands at the following prices :-lifireil good to fine ord. 565. a .595. ; St. Domingo pale to good ord: 575. 6d. a 58s. 6d. ; Cheribon and Ceylon 555. a 565. The trans actions in British I'lantation were on the most confined scale ; no Jamaica was offering. There were no public or private sales of Coffee this day, but the market has a firm appearance. RUM, BRANDY, AND HOLLANDS.-The Rum Mar ket is very dull, as few holders will sell at any reduction. There is still an inquiry after Brandy. Geneva is unvaried. HEMP, FLAX, AND TALLOW.-The Tallow Market continues to advance firmly, but there are no extensive pur chases at the improvement. In Hemp or Flax there is no ' material alteration. IRISH PROVISIONS.-In the last week the import of Foreign Butter was 3,256 casks, of Irish 2,214 firks, and of Bacon 5,274 bales; in addition to which we have had a further' import of nearly 2,000 bales of Bacon yesterday. Fine Friesland Butter at the quay we quote 965. a 98s; Cork and Limerick of fair assortments Nis. a 82s. ; Carlow, as to quality, 78s. a &25., and Waterford 665. a 725. landed ; the sale for Irish Butter, however, is ver► limited at these quotations. There is a heavi ness in the Bacon Market, and although we quote singed Wa terford landed 50s. a 525., and Limerick 495. a 505., the trans actions at those prices are confined to necessitous buyers; at 50s. on board for forward shipment there are several sellers of Waterford Bacon, but the cheesemongers consider the price much too high to tempt them to go into purchase. Bale Mid- \ tiles sell very slowly at 40s. a -185. and tierce Middles as to qua lity we quote 465. a 50s. landed. Bladder Lard 60s. a 665., and Irish Hams, as to weight and quality, we quote 565. a fibs. and landed. In Beef and Pork not much doing, but late prices are supported. SILK—The Market is not so brisk as last week, but prices are better, and good articles meet with a ready sale at an ad vance inferior articles are fetching better prices. TEA.—The Market is dull. Boheas that cost 2s. are now at id. premium, and in Congous but little doing. FRUlT.—There is little alteration in Fruit; the sales arc inconsiderable. SALTPETRE.— Saltpetre is dull and lower, sales. at Ills, a. 345. COTTON.—The Market is firm. INDIGO.—There is no material alteration in Indigo since the sale at the India House, the particulars of which we gave last Tuesday; there are fewer parcels on the Market than usual after an East India sale, the prices are fully supported, and there are a good number of buyers at India House prices. ASHES.—Ashes at public sale last week realized quotations, and went off better than was e pected. OlLS.—There is more doing in Olive Oil, and prices arc rather looking up ; Sperm and Common Oils steady ; Linseed Oil more inquired for, and prices rather improving; in Rape - Oil for forward delivery there are large purchases, though for or esent use there are sellers. TURPENTINE.—Not any froth arrivals of rough ; the Market very firm. RICE.--There are no sales of Rice reported. COUNTRY CORN MA Rht, OU RING 711 L WEEK. Wheat. f Barley. Oats. I Beans.. ------. Per Quarter. s. to s. s. to s. s. to s. s. t o a . Boston .. 60 —1) I 20 33 .—. Gainsborough ..... 61 38 20 35 Grantham , - 57 65 37 44 18 25 37 39 Grimsby 56 66 28 36 16 22 28 56 Horncastle 56 63 30 35 16 22 30 34 Lincoln —....--.... 56 61 39 41 18 21 31 36 Spilsby _ . 58 62 30 38 18 22 32 05 St din tbrd 5O 67 31 38 21 24 98 18 York--.--... 53 64 30 41 16 25 30 40 LEWES" MA It K ET.— April 24. White Wheat (per quarter)* J.:3 4 0 to £3 8 0 Red ditto ..—.. . 16 0 3 4 0 Barley-- 1 4 0 1 7 0 Oats, New ----..... 1 1 0 1 3 0 Pease - 1 15 0 1 17 0 Oil Cake, New---*......., 12 0 0 per thousand. 0 0 per th NORWICH, April 21_ Wheat (per qr.) ...., 60s 675. 725. Beans (per qr.) ..........., Ws. 37g. 8ar1ey........,..,.,.,..... 235. 325. 345. Pease, Grey 345. 38.5. Oats —,....—....... 2(ls. :2.35. '27s. Flour, fine (per sack) 4Ss. 54 CANTERBURY, April 21. :xis. to 68s. to —43. Wheat, white. red------ 50s. to 6:3s .-- Old— —s. to Barley, Dlalting 325. to 355. Grinding.. 245. to 305. Oats 2os. top.. -- Old— —s. to Beans 325. to 37s 386. to 406. Pease 38s. to 40.,. Grer 31s. to 375 • . MANCHESTER, April 21. Wheat, per 701 b. 9s. 6d. to 9s. 9d. Red 9s. Isl. to 9s. es Barley, per 601 b 5 0 5 3 O a t s 3 9 4 0 Beans, per Imperial quarter Pease, White, per Imperial bushel 5 0 6 6 Malt, per 6 Imperial bushels 42 0 47 0 Flour, per Sack of 9.801 b EXETER MAR. Ileef (seore)--Ss. Od. 9s. 6d. Mutton (113.)--0 51 0 6 Veal and I arnb-0 6 0 7 Pork 0 4 0 6 Geese (each) —.A 0 5 6 Ducks icouoleN., 4 0 5 0 Fowls I 0 4 0 K 1 s E , h T , S a t. 7 b A u i s )r h il el 2° ) ....8 . s.od. 85. 66 Barley ...........—..............,4 6 4 9 Oats 9 3 '2 5 Beans 5 6 6 0 Butter (lb.). 1 0 1 3 Eggs (12) ....---.........0 0 1 ~ Potatoes (peck) ...0 6 0 i IRISH M s. d. a s. d. Cork 25 0 29 Limerick ‘27 6 30 0 ‘Vaterfordj26 0 29 0 Cloninel ...29 4 30 0 Carlow 0 29 0 Beef, I Mutton, per lb. per lb. Wheat, Bailey. ,per barrel per barrel 20 stone. 16 stone. ARKETS. Oats. per barrel 14 stone. Flour, per cwt• s.d. a s.d. s.d. s.dls. (1 1 , a st. s. d. s. 120 150 j 90 109 15 0 18 6 5 0 15 13 0 14 0112 0 13 616 0 19 0 0 0 15 1 1 4 3 0 0 1 1 5 5 6 01 1 1 0 1 ( 0 ) 1 10 2 0 0 . 1 ) 7 0 6 0 1 2 9 1 0 010 0 16 120 16 ojl3 6 13 9 17 0 19 0 13 0 16 o_!' Pork, per cwt. •-• f :3d. 4th. L ...... .. 5" 8 . dil e ,. d o, 59 0 4 f.. or, 5.150.wa 6b •06°' icis 0 55 0 ""' KILKENNY.—Butter —3 to ;—s. per cwt. ; Wheat 255. to &.. per barrel ; Flour 20s. to 345. per bag ; Oats 9s. to 10 s. par 'W. ref ; Barley 13s. to 15s. ; Beef 4d. to 54. per lb. ; Mutton p, to sd. ; Potatoes 2d. per stone ; C oa l s l s. 2d , per cwt.; 133v,.c Pigs 325. to 30s. per cwt. Cork Id. a did. a d.i 3 1 1 31 fi 3 6 5 4 5 5 6 . 4 5i 0 0 s. d. a s. 29 0 32 084 31 0 35 OSO 32 0 38 o 9 330 36 6 78 00 0080 limenck— Water ford Clonmel Carlow.— s. d. SO t 72 ( SO 75 t 75 ( s. d. 68 0 640 70 0 BIRTHS. yofo On the 20th inst. at Ramsgate, the lady of Capt. John late 50th Regiment, of a daughter. On the 24th inst. in Argyll-street, the lady of W. J. NeW t°''' Esq., of a son, still-born. of r 4 On the 2 - .3d inst. at Grosvenor.pl ace , !qrs.:Robert wing, daughter. th e On the 17th October last, at Bellary, in the East Indic 6 i i tc. lady of Claude Adolphus Roberts, E s q., Deputy Judge Adv o e" General, Madras Army, of a son. MARRIED. C‘ On the ` 1 5(1 inst. at Will e r se y, Gloucestershire, Mr. . 1 * .. Bailey, of London, to Miss Mary Lesingham, of W orc ester' be ll On the 7th of O c t o b er, at madras, George Augustus Can' , to Bright, Esq , surgeon, in the East India Company's Emily, elde s t d aug h ter of Dr. M‘Leod, super i ntend i ng soil of the same se rv i ce. Rev. O tt On the 24th inst at Clapham Church, by the Bright, M.A. J ames Ri c h ar d Perceval Bright, Esq., surgeop Brighton, fo Sophia, second and youngest Service,t of J o p d au ghter Hatchard, Esq , of Piccadilly and Clapham-common. DIED. On the 24th inst. at Blackheath, Elizabeth, third claUgl of o f of Mr. Frederick Helsel), c,f America-square, in the 19th year her age. ,- urtl i On the 19th inst. at Shooter's -bill, Alexander Harry, .0- son of Capt. Forbes Macbean, Royal Artillery. Uri ( ' On the 23d inst. in Harley -street, Mar y , wife of John 1.41. Es q., in the 21st year of her age. g r aitl i On the 23,1 inst. at Upper Baker-street, William -- Buckley, Esq., at the advanced age of 37. who On the 19th inst. at the Elrnes, near Lymington, ?n or ' ~, , ,are; third cclroa arunkf es, the i o rDd i ,0 0 ,2: iiii2*g:ll,thrlitt,oet eldest d, eti agedc ' s r at i r n o g ios l fft e .esu: T ao a , tx : ni l t o ieho r e , xa z in i na g edt e , d e Niartle•hams in that county. s Suffolk, the Bev. , 17, - ,,, • Ifin' t Ou the 21st inst. at Hastings, Maria Theresa, wife of f,tr-- D : ee n‘. Viscount henamm :Gla' and Recto r I . lecw. PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY MURDO YOUNG, Al -- StrN OFFICE, 112, STRAND, LONDON.