The Sun. — London, England, 1832-02-27 00:00:00

rranchise, could prove its falsehood by esta blishing, either at the hustings or any where else, his superiority to any legislator of the house of Buckingham. Though we do not contend tit .t London—like some other capitals—should enjoy any peculiar privileges because it is a ca pital, we must maintain, that its numbers, wealth, and intelligence, shall not be pleaded, as a title of disqualification. Circumstances, which in other cases confer aright, should not, in the case of our great city, he brought forward as grounds for re fusing one. London has more than a million of unrepresented inhabitants ; hut that is no reason why they should be insulted or provoked by a resistance to their legitimate claims. London householders pay nearly as great an assessment as half the kingdom ; but that can be no reason why they should have a less voice in the repre sentation than boroughs cohieh have few or no houses to assess. But we are told, in a real or well-affected alarm, that the proposed new con stituency of the metra , polis will form a mere mob,—that every election will he a scene of tumult,—and every successful candidate a de magogue or Jacobin. Now, if any ground ex isted for this fear, it might be pleaded as well for refusing the elective franchise to Leeds, Manchester, or Birmingham, as to Marylebone or Lambeth. It is true that in the four metro politan districts there will be. a great body of elec tors, but we see no more reason why they should get more riotous in nercising a great political duty, than in any other public meeting which tley can call any day in the year. If the votes be taken in districts—so as to avoid the necessity of great assemblages—even this objection—small as it must always appear to those who have witnessed, without terror or dismay, the po pular storms of Covent-garden—will be obviated. If we even grant that great multitudes generally display little moderation or wisdom ; or, in the words of Cicero, " Si illy undx commitio rum tit mare profundum et immensum sic effer vescunt quodam quasi xstu, in tanto impetu studiorum, et motu temeritatis modum aliquem et consilium et rationem, requiramus we sec no reason why they should be more mis• chievous at an election, which gratifies their love of power, than at a meeting to petition for their rights, at which they might express dissatisfac tion. Then with regard to the election of de magogueS, or enemies of our form of Govern ment, by the metropolitan districts, no supposi tion, we think, can be more senseless or absurd. Westminster is at present in a similar situation with Marylebone after the passing of Reform. Has not Westminster the other day returned a man of talents, a man of rank, and a placeman But even on the most unfavourable hypothesis possible, even on the supposition that the whole eight new metropolitan Members should be se lected from the dregs of revolutionary folly--and he sent into the House of Commons under pledges of political mischief—what could they do against the other 650 Members Wedged to support the laws and institutions of the country? In such case it would not matter whence the disturbers came—whether they were elected by a small or great number of people,—by one mob or another : they could only bc eight on a divi sion—their numbers would alone tell, and their weight would scarcely be felt in the scale of a hostile assembly.— Times. There are so many and such contradictory rumours afloat respecting the Reform Bill that conjecture becomes more perplexed as the day of trial draws nigh. It is still questioned by some whether Ministers have obtained the consent of his Majesty to make Peers; and it is assumed by manv that, without such consent, the Bill would have no chance of passing the House of Lords in any shape that could he reconciled with its avowed principles. We do not sec the force "of this latter assumption. On the con trary, there are many reasons why the House of Lords, constituted as it is at present, should wish to do away the impression of its former vote ; and, while those reasons exist, there ap- pears to be no great rashness in supposing that the House, without any change or threat of change in its internal condition, may decide upon a different course from that which had be fine exposed it to so much public odium. This process would, in all likel.hood, be much faci litated by the knowledge that Ministers had such a power at their command, and therefore many friends of Reform have exhibited impa tience at its being kept a secret. To speak without any affectation of speaking from autho rity, we think it probable that Ministers have the power alluded to, though from motives of delicacy they have not thought proper to proclaim it. Every thing that has occurred of late proves the best understanding between the King and his Alinisters. Even the rebuke to the Dublin Corporation, trifling as the circumstance may appear in itself, is evidence of a perfect under standing in those quarters ; and the fact that Ministers have not yielded a single point of any consequence since they brought forward the pre sent Bill, comes strongly in corroboration of the opinion that they not only feel their strength, but feel that it is sufficient to carry them through their undertaking. Such an exercise of the pre rogative as some of our contemporaries are now calling for with all their might, is certainly ex posed to many objections. In courtesy to the Sovereign, therefore, if for no other reason, it should not be avoTved while there exists a hope that it may be dispensed with. The debate which stands for to-morrow, on the question for giving additional representatives to the metro polis, will probably let in some light upon the darkness which hangs over all speculation at present. That the Ministers will carry it, we have no doubt ; but, if they carry it by a large majority, we shall have more confidence than ever as to the final result.—Morning Herald. There has been distributed a " Return of the name of every parish in Ireland in which an agreement has been made under the Tithe Com position Act, distinguishing tithes held by eccle siastical persons or lay impropriators, and the amount of composition in each case." From this return it appears that compositions have been entered into in 1,507 parishes, and that the total is 433,9041. 6s. I4d. Of which these are payable to lay impropriators, 65,9351. Is. -1- 1 2 -d., to ecclesiastical persons 357,6681. 9d. Id., to any other person or persons 10,3001. 15s. 7d. The parishes in which compositions have been entered into amount to about two-thirds of the whole. Supposing the tithes of the remaining parishes of equal value, the whole sum from tithe would be about 700,0001. Besides this source of income, the Church of Ireland pos sesses glebe lands to a large amount, besides the estates of the Bishops, which alone amount to. about a million of acres of the best land in the island. For a Church without a people this seems a tolerable endowment. The settlement of the tithe question from several considerations must he much easier in Ireland than in England. The whale of the tithes paid to itnpropriators cannot in Ireland amount to above 90,0001. The individuals interested in opposing a settlement of the question out of the Church must, there. fore, be few in number. Dr. \Vhateley, though a churchman, has not the assurance to maintain that the Church ought to receive one-tenth of the gross produce of the land. Speaking of the transfer of the tithes to a Board, he says, " if the Act were so framed as to authorise the Cor poration to take less than a real tenth of the gross produce, which would be very fair, because the tenth of the gross produce would be often enor mously greater than our ancestors contemplated to be given to the clergy; I do not think the clergy would be likely to complain." The truth is, that in all countries in which tithes are or . have been paid to the Church, except England and Ireland, the tenth of the gross produce nei ther is nor ever has been taken. The tithe is never taken from green crops, and only from cer tain crops on the lands which have been in cul tivation from tune immemorial. The same rule, too, applies to the claims of the Church which is applicable to all other claims. In Spain, for instance, a custom of forty years with respect to tithes becomes law. In England and Ireland, • individuals have been shamefully robbed of their estates by the Church, and the impropriators treading in the paths of the Church, through the application of a series of most unjust rules, as Baron Wood has distinctly shown. This in justice is known nowhere but in these islands. No law to favour the Church, at the expellee of other property, is known even in the do minions of the Pope. What the clergy of England and Ireland claim—the tenth of the gross produce—was formerly considered the whole disposable revenue of a country ; and in most countries the tithes were divided between the Sovereign, the Clergy, warriors, &c. Thus, for instance, according to La Linde, the " Tithes of Biscay are shared by the Kings of Spain as Lords of Biscay, and the tithes paid to them are called Realengos, by the grantees of the Kings called Mercenarios, by gentlemen, who defended the country against the Moors, or founded churches, or rebuilt them, that they may defray the charges of war, or repair and adorn the churches, and these are called Deviseros ; and they may bequeath them in any portions among their children. The rest of the tithes belongs to the Clergy." But in all Catholic countries the property of the Church seems still to be considered in a great measure the property of the poor, and the Clergyman who saves money out of his ecclesiastical income for other than pious purposes is looked on as a dishonest man. In the pastoral charges of the Bishop of Salamanca, Inquisitor-General of Spain, pub lished in 2 vols., in 1783, there is an excellent charge on the best means of relieving the poor. The Inquisitor-General does not blame the Clergy for bestowing too little in charity, but wishes them to adopt a rigorous parochial system, and avoid giving relief to va grants. The claims of the poor on the clergy he admits to the fullest extent. " If charity (he says) becomes other men, there are particular reasons why we should attend to the poor, be cause we live on the fruits of the sweat of the poor; the estates that we possess, or rather ad minister, are their patrimony, their endowment and heritage, which we hold only in deposit for them; so that, without violating justice, we are bound to attend to the wants of those who are within our respective territories. The Catholic Church has always recognised the validity of the original distinction of Church property ; and in practice the great fault of the Catholic Clergy is that they are too indiscriminately charitable.— The consequence of this indiscriminate charity is, that numbers live in idleness on what they receive from the church. But because the Ca tholic Clergy are too charitable, that is no reason why, in settling the question of tithes in a Pro testant country, where the clergy act on the good old maxim, that charity begins at home, some re gard ought not to be had to the wants of the poor. We always suppose that existing interests shall he respected ; but in future let it be under stood that the Church is not the patrimony of the Aristocracy, but the patrimony of the poor. Morning Chronicle. The question of the metropolitan representa tion, which approaches the moment of its de cision in the House of Commons, seems to ex cite a degree of anxiety which we cannot quite understand among our radical contemporaries. N'Ve think they may well dismiss their apprehen sions upon this subject. It is scarcely to be ex pected that the House of Commons, a majority of which has decided that it was right on the part of Ministers to give away five millions of the money of the impoverished people of Eng land to facilitate the completion of a diplomatic business—a majority of which has decided that Lord Plunkett is an infallible and immaculate Judge in a question of.pounds, shillings, and pence, ill which he is himself personally inte rested—a majority of which has decided, in effect, and in repeated instances, that the demerit of being surrounded by land not the property of any adherents of the Ministry of the day is ground enough on which to disfranchise otherwise unoffending boroughs— it is not, , we say, to be expected that such a House of Commons will opp ose the mandate of the Administration when it is only required to give to the tag-rag anti bobtail of the metropolis the power of electing about one-third of the number of Members of Parlia ment that are thought sufficient for the sober, industrious, and intelligent kingdom of Scot land. It is to be sure obvious enough that the wealth, intelligence, and respectability of Lon don and its environs will be deprived of repre sentation, and that their deprivation will be the more complete in proportion to the number of Members to be sent to the House of Commons by the district they inhabit ; but this, so far from being a reason why our radical contemporaries should have any misgivings upon the subject, is really, as it appears to us, the strongest possible ground upon which to rest their confidence that the rational and conservative proposition of the Marquis of Chandos will be at once and contemptuously rejected. What single feature is there in the Bill, what point in the policy of the Government, what solitary vote of the House of Commons, to justify the apprehen sion that in this case the influence of wealth, intelligence, or respectability will he regarded, and that the passion of the rabble for political power will not be fully gratified ? Nothing is more notorious or undeniable than that in most of the parishes in and about the metropolis where the vestry clerk, the rate-collectors, and the beadle, are elected by the householders, one of two things constantly occurs. Bribery, di rect or indirect, governs the election, or a fierce clamour is excited against the candidate who has the misfortune to be patronised by the more opulent classes of the parishioners ; and under favour of this clamour, founded generally upon falsehood and misrepresentation, the pet of the rabble gains the day. There is scarcely a parish, where the system of popular election to its stipendiary offices exists, in which there is not a coterie of persons or the lowest character and most depraved habits, who know ' where the numerous body of householders are to be found who can be brought to the poll for any purpose, and by any body who will qualify them to vote by paying up their rates, which with a sagacious view to this chance they keep systematically in arrear. This knowledge, which we need not say it is impossible for any respect able man to acquire, the club of idle and profli gate sots, generally in the case of a contested election, contrive to turn to good account. In a large proportion ofcases they sell the office, which to all outward appearance seems to be filled by the free voters of a majority of the pa rishioners ; and in consequence the parish gets a collector who probably in a few months makes a purse and runs away, or a beadle who preys upon vagrancy and misery, and practises brutality as a means of extorting bribes. This we believe to be no exacrfferated picture of the effect of the household right - of voting in the small affairs of a parish. And what right have we to expect that when the same class of voters have to elect Members of Parliament they will exercise this higher privilege more ‘lisely or honestly ? It is quite certain that the Members for Westminster and Southwark have not for many years been elected by the wealth and re spectability of that city and borough, but by the lower classes of householders, who happen in both cases to be sufficiently numerous to over power the higher ; and, when the standard of personal respectability by which men are mea sured who now aspire to be Members of Par liament is considerably lowered, as it cannot fail to be by the general operation of the Reform Bill, it seems but too certain that all the machi nery which we now see so constantly and efficaciously at work in parochial elections will be brought to bear with equal force and ana lagous results in the election of the metropo litan Members of Parliament. Still our radical contemporaries need not feel alarm on account of the amendment to be proposed by Lord Chaudos. In sheaving that the scheme of me tropolitan representation is absurd and pernicious we merely intend to revive their drooping cour age. It is absurd and pernicious, and therefore its adoption is the more certain. For our own parts we feel but little interest in the matter, and incline, upon the whole, perhaps rather to think that the Bill is more coherent and less unjust with the metropolitan universal suffrage clause than it would be if this clause were ex punged. The rabble of Preston are to be disfranchised because their right of election has the fatal blemish that it is an ancient right. Without this surely the Bill would be incoherent. But then, again, the rabble influence in our future House of Commons must at all events, and by all means, be made greater than in the present, or here would be an incoherency still more monstrous and inexcusable. Accordingly four new Prestons are to be created in the out parishes of the metropolis.—Morning Post. The recent discussion in the French Chamber of Deputies, relative to the Polish refugees, served to illustrate, even beyond former examples, the state of abject terror to which the Ministry of the once great and powerful French nation are reduced on those questions in which the Russian Autocrat takes a peculiar interest. Yet in reference to this debate the Courier says— " In the conduct of Casimir Perier, and that of his colleagues, during the Polish war, there was great generosity, and the assistance subsequently afforded to the Poles will prove a lasting monu ment to French liberality. Whatever may be the future fate of Poland, she will not have to reproach either the French Government or the French people." In this passage two things are confounded, which are, and which will, remain through all future time essentially distinct — namely, the conduct of the French Government and the conduct of the French people to the heroic and ill-fated Poles. The one was as much disgraced by a treacherous and cowardly desertion of the cause of Poland, as the other was distinguished by a manly and generous sympathy for the vindicators of Polish rights, and the victims of Muscovite oppression. Can we forget the accusation which, just at the close of the Polish war, the Polish Committee in Paris made against both the French and Eng lish Governments, of having persuaded the Ge neralissimo of the Poles to remain inactive, after the great and successful displays of valour which his army had made in the earlier part of the d d id Et t l i g o - t r c i a s m k p a a b ig a t t i t , lo u p t h o o n in a t s e s r u o r e a s n s c io e n s of that F Fra f nce c l e and Eng land would secure the eventual independence of Poland without further effusion of blood ? Can we forget the memorable words of Sebastiani when he heard. of the " great murder of' War saw ?" " Order reigns in Poland," said th e French Minister for Foreign Affairs. It was the order that despotism establishes when the freedom of a nation perishes. It was the peace of desolation—th e tranquillity of the grave ! • .Can we forg e t th e c h arges w hi c h t h e C our i er Itself made against the representative of our Go vernment at the Court of St. Petersburgh when it denounced Lord Heytesbury as lending all his influence to assist in crushing the cause of the Poles ? But we must do the Courier the j ustice to say that it does not excuse the English people for their cold and heartless conduct with regard to a cause which so deeply involved the interests of justice and of humanity. The French people, indeed, opened their purses to the plundered and destitute Poles ; they poured " oil and wine" into the wounds of the sufferer ; but English generosity looked coldly upon him who had " fallen among thieves,' and passed by " on the other side 1" In the debate to which we have alluded Casimir Perier said " The misfor tunes of the Poles were not to be attributed to the Government, but to those who gave them bad advice." Well might there be exclamations • in the Chamber of " This is the doctrine of the Holy Alliance !" And when Lafayette, ad dressing the President of the Council, said, " If you know who it was that gave that advice, name them," what was the answer of the Presi dent of the Council ? " I am not now called upon to answer questions ; when I have facts to state I candidly bring them forward ; and if I wished to fix a responsibility on any one, I should not hesitate to name him. I affirm again that bad advice has been given. Open the .Journals, anti read the numerous repetitions of advice to the Poles not to acknowledge the authority of Russia. Nations may rise against oppressive and tyrannical Governments; but they ought to calculate all the chances of such insurrections, to be ready to meet the conse quences, and submit to them." The Courier says, " Casimir Perier, in this debate, stood the fire of his opponents nobly, and was the victor." If to rely on what is false in fact or absurd in argument be to meet a political accusation nobly, the conduct of Casimir Perier was undoubtedly noble. But as to the Poles lie acts the part of one of Job's comforters : he judges of the merits of their cause by its success. Alas for the revolution which placed Louis Philippe on the throne of France, and raised Casimir Perier l i to the station of Prime Minister ! Alas for that revolution, if the inhabitants of Paris had sat down to calculate the consequences of resisting the disciplined troops of Charles X., instead of yielding to the sudden inspiration of patriotism in assailing the despotism of the ordinances ! The French Minister talks of the bad advice given to the Poles not to ac knowledge the authority of Russia. Why should they acknowledge the authority of Russia ? They were not the subjects of Russia. The Czar, as such, had no dominion over them. When Poland was raised into an " independent kingdom," at the Congress and by the treaty of Vienna, it was upon the ground of being. a check upon the ambition of Russia ;—so it was stated by Castlereagh and Talleyrand. Yet the sceptre was placed in the hand of the Emperor Alexander, as King of Poland ; but Poland owed no allegiance to him in the character of Czar, and consequently the Poles were not placed under the authority of Russia, to which State they were allied most impolitically in a federal union. But Casimir Perier should re member that the insurrection of Warsaw was, at the time, the salvation of France. Until that event the tyrant Nicholas never recognised the title of Louis Philippe, or even admitted the tri-coloured flag into his dominions. Thus the Government of France received the " certificate of their existence" by means of the Poles, whom it first betrayed, and then persecuted.—Morning Herald. The Reform Bill, and its safe passage through the House of Lords, by means of a creation of Peers, or without any creation, are still the main subjects of discussion with our contemporaries. Respecting the Bill itself* there need be no fear— there need be no doubt. If it do not pass under the auspices of the present Ministry, it must pass under the auspices of another. The English public is now too well informed of its rights to be deprived of them by any change in the ma nagers of State affairs ; and no Tory Cabinet can possibly be concocted w hich has not a Reform Bill in its hand—not only quite as effectual for the remedy of national grievances, as that now un der consideration, but more liberal and more satis factory. That the Tory party, after setting its face against all Reform, is perfectly capable of such conduct, we not only believe, but know— for we have seen their three Bills; but, on the other hand, are Englishmen capable of placing confidence in men who, in the first instance, op• posed all Reform, atal now, for the sake of office, would even shake hands with the advo cates of universal suffrage ? There is also another consideration to be gravely reflected on when the ultimate result of the Reform Bill is questioned—and that is, the honour and pledges of the Cabinet—the present and future ex istence of the present Administration. Lord Grey, it is well known, is attached to " his order," and is extremely anxious that the Reform Bill should meet with its approbation without any addition to its numbers ; but, on the other hand, is it possible for any human being to be so much attached to '' his own order," or so reluctant to add to its numbers, as to degrade himself in the estimation of the public, and to destroy the measure on which his immortality would be built, by refraining from doing that which he has not only the power to do, but which the public, which drove him into the King's presence as the man of its choice, calls upon him most imperiously to do ? The thine is incredible in whatever way it may be viewed. Lord Lord Grey may be anxious to " give time and place for repentance," to those of '' his own order," who formerly opposed the Reform Bill ; but if he has continued in office without full leave to create as many Peers as may be necessary to carry the ardent wishes of the people of England into effect, he has not only ruined the party to which the country has given its c onfidence, but consigned both himself and it to perpetual conduct rpetualoh?- loquy ! Is Lord Grey capable of such We rlo not believe it. He cannot be capable of it, any more than the King can he capable of re fusing to his Ministers the power to do that which he is most anxious to see accomplished ; and whatever doubts, therefore, may be enter tained by others respecting the ultimate result of a Reform in the representation of the country, we boldly say that, for our part, we entertain none. Lord Grey is not the man to yield even to the King, and the King entertains by far too largely the opinions of his subjects, not to give him full power to carry his wishes into effect. — Morning Advertiser. We see with pleasure, that Mr. E. L. Bulwer has given notice of a motion to repeal the Stamp duty on Newspapers and the Excise on Paper, and to substitute in their place a trifling payment on the transmission of Newspapers by post. So that, after all the expectations held out by our Liberal Government, of the abolition of this most disgraceful of taxes, at their hands, they have left the work to be performed by an indi vidual Member, whom they probably will not even support in his endeavours. We should scarcely envy the reflections of a conscientious Whig leader, after his not impossible ejection from office, on looking back to the opportunity he had so shamefully omitted of breaking down this odious barrier between the people and the Might he not say—" The curse of my party has fallen on my impotent efforts : I could not when I would, I would not when I could !" This should be inscribed over the door of the mausoleum of a Whig Cabinet. We trust the Press will not fail to aid Mr. Bulwer in his meritorious effort ; not because it is their own cause, but, through them, of the country, whose best interests-are, more particu larly in conjunctures like the present, vitally con cerned in lowering the price of useful knowledge. The Ministers must not attempt to urge the argument of revenue. It is no defence of the worst of taxes,—to say nothing of the produc tive a mount of a small postage, the extent of w hich, in the probably great increase of the cir culation of Newspapers, is not to be calculated. Independent of this, such a defence, in the mouth of a Ministry that owe office wholly to their having prekiously maintained a different language, is preposterous. If the revenue should s uffer, let them go the round of retrenchment. which they have only begun in the Navy Board. Is nothing to be done, for the sake of knowledge and education, by our Liberal Government, with the Customs, the Excise, and many such strong holds of ignorance and idleness ? The Pension List, we know, is sacred.—Spectator. THE GLASGOW MAIL ROUTE.—We be lieve that nothing definitive is yet known respecting the projected alteration of the Glasgow mail route from Don caster to Penrith. It is stated, however, as probable, that the mail will be continued on its present line from London to Leeds, but that its speed will he considerably accelerated between London and Grantham, and that from Leeds it will nor th road at Weth er b y, b y wh i ch a b out two m il es a nd a quarter proceed will be along ad vantage gained b y th e super i or i ty o f t h e road.—Doncastep -1 Gazette. savedngthe Collingham road to join the great in distance, and a considerable WINCHESTER, FEB. 25. Mr. Justice GASELEE arrived here at half-past five o'clock this day, and having opened the Com. mission adjourned the Court to ten o'clock on Monday. The number of prisoners for trial are about eighty, of whom thirteen are indicted for murder, eight for burglary, eight for robbery, six for offences against the game laws, one for an offence inter Christionos non nominandum, one for manslaughter, one for an attempt to poison, three for setting fire to a farm-yard, and the remainder for minor offences. The Civil business is very light, though the at tendance of the long-robed gentry is unusually heavy. READING, FEB. 25. Mrs. Ann Merceir, the wife of Mr. Mercier, en gaged as an upholsterer at Windsor Castle, was charged with the wilful murder of her infant, aged twelve days. When the indictment was read, a most distres sing scene occurred. t the hearing it (the Iv ate merit of the child's death) Mrs. Mercier (a very in teresting young woman, of about 26 or 27) became greatly agitated, and then fainted—and, during the trial, she was supported in a chair by her husband, who manifested almost as much agitation as she did herself. Mr. O'Reilly said—l am a surgeon at Windsor. On the 11th of December I was called in to attend Mrs. Mercier in the night. On my going to her house I saw her, and I inquired where the child was. The body was produced to me ; it was not quite cold. It was in a sheet, covered with blood. The head of the child was nearly severed from its body. The child must have died in a moment. Mrs. Mer cier was in bed. She cried out—" Here ! I have done it." Her manner was peculiarly wild. I felt her pulse and looked at her tongue ! her pulse was very quick, and h , r tongue very dry. I thought her labouring under mental aberration. I was shown a penknife, covered with blood. Mary Dowries said I was the nurse of Mrs. Mercier. I attended her at the time of her confine men% She appeared to be going on well up to two days before the night in question. She was then crying, and said she thought the child was ill. I saw her again in the evening, and she appeared in a distressed state of mind. I had known her and her husband before this time, and they appeared to live very happily. Cross-examined by Mr. SWABEY—This was Mrs. Mercier's first child. She nursed it affectionarily, aid was much frightened when she thought the child looked ill. . Mr. O'll illy recalled—Having heard the evidence I conceived that Mrs. Mercier was labottrUtg under temporary derangement ; and my opinion is strengthened by what I myself witnessed at the time and afterwards, when Mrs. Mercier said that it wa arceovradl i xe between the Guilty he Devil o p Mr. Justice TAUNTON directed that the unfortu nate prisoner should be detained, and taken care of till his Majesty's pleasure should be known. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, FEB. 25. PHILLIPS V. TIIORNTON AND WEST. This was an action to recover compensation for work and labour and services done and performed by the plaintiff for and on behalf of the defendants. The declaration also contained a count for money had and received, and the sum claimed by the plaintiff was upwards of 11,000/. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (with whom were Mr. FOLLETT and Mr. DEACON) stated the case for the plaintiff, who for many years vevious to 1827 had been master of the ship Margareita, and supercargo of other vessels belonging to or chartered by the defendants, who were well-known merchants re siding in London, and trading extensively to the West and East Indies, and the Island of Java. In 1815 the defendants established a house in Batavia, and in 1819 a brother of the defendant Thornton, Mr. Robert Thornton, went out to manage the con cerns there. He was accompanied by his sister, Miss Eliza Thornton. Mr. It. Thornton continued to conduct the business in Batavia for three or four years , when in the course of one of his coasting voy ages he unfortunately fell in with pirates, by whom he was most cruelly murdered. After his death the extensive concerns of the defendants in Java, were conducted by Miss Eliza Thornton, an intelligent, active, and extraordinary woman; and from the correspondence which had taken place between her self and her brother, the defendant Mr.R. Thornton, would show not only her competency to conduct the concern, but also that her management was highly approved of by the latter, who commended her in the warmest terms, informing her that she had the reputation of being a merchant of first-rare abi lities; and that in India she was regarded as a god dess. In one of his letters the defendant Thornton had desired his sister to marry whenever she pleased, and to set down 10,000/. of his money as her dower. Miss Thornton continued in this way to conduct the business from 1823 to 1827, having the commitl la% er the charge of property to the amount of up wards of 300,000/. In 1827 the plaintiff arrived in strongßatavia, as commander of one of the ships belon g in g defendants, ecommeTdl a a r t r i d on br f i r n o g in in to his sister, in which he sugges ted the l t t o ete th r ie of r advan tages likely to accrue from the p laintiff remai ning out to manage the trading along the coast , and stated bringing the w i th defendant him a Thorn ton the competency of the first officer of the ship which the plaintiff - commanded to bring her home. The plaintiff accordingly did remain, and on the 21st August,lB27, married Miss Thornton, and continu e d to y conductthe trh ethel a business tmteard rria imarriage of ot leavingdefendantsiep laa with i n t h a man nermi s in which s Thornton so as to elicit their highest comm en d at i ons. I n a she appointed her husband and another gentleman her executors, and the plaintiff continued in Java, con ducting the affairs of the defendants up to 1830, when he came to England and solicited a settlement of his claims on the defendants for the services he had performed; but Mr. Richard Thornton refused to come to any settlement, or to refer the claims of the plaintiff to arbitration, and had thereby obliged the plaintiff to bring the present action, by which he sought to recover compensation on three points — first, for his services prior to his marriage with Miss Thornton—secondly, for his services during the con tinuance of the marriage; and lastly, for his services after the death of his wife, for whose services before her marriage, although of tile most valuable descrip tion, the plaintiff could not make any claim. The services rendered by the plaintiff to the de fendants in various parts of India were proved by several n s o v t i i t s n c e o s s r e r e s s p w o l n i o had trad d ence etw b etween nw Misshim, n l Thorn to n acnaeldlveedril and Captains her a p brother,ptraoiln,es o proved the he vessels srseesles declar at ionsn I t e defendant, rea is(o)of examined, e defendant n proved, daanndt and read in evidence. Th e pl a i nt iff' s s i ster was also Thornton, as to th e va l ue o f the plaintiff ' s services. Several their evidence went to show the extent of the de fendant's business in Batavia; - and that the business was entirely conducted by the plaintiff. Sir JAMES SCARLETT, on behalf of the defendants, commenced by stating that his client, Mr. Thornton, disl not hesitate to admit openly by his Counsel that which in one of his letters was stated, that he corn mencel his education in the lowest form of a Blue coat School, and after an a pprenticeship at 51. a year, was put forward in the world by the benefi cence of an uncle, and from a very humble begin ning had become one of the most eminent merchants in the city of London, carrying on business and trading to all parts of the world. Tha t his sist er had done important services to the firm in Batavi a he was also ready to admit, but with these servi ces it was not for the Jury to deal, their duty being con fined to those rendered by the plaintiff, and which had been rendered by him under a contract, which the Counsel on the other side had not thought pro per to produce. The plaintiff had been engag e d b y the defendants as master of the ship Margaretta, and under the contract which he should produce was to have 101. a month as Commander, and the same pay to continue dining the period he might be engaged on shore in India. Soon after the plaintiff's arrival in India Miss Thornton made preparations for send ing to• the West coast of the island of Sumatra for a cargo of pepper, and as she had been informed by her brother's letter that the plaintiff was compe tant to act as supercargo as well as master, he was engaged to conduct the vessel chartered for this coasting voyage. When the preparations were com pleted the plaintiff demanded 200/. for the voyage, in addition to his stipulated allowance, and refused to undertake the voyap-e unless these terms were complied with. Miss Thornton was, under existing circumstances, induced to accede; and, being at that time in a bad state of health, embarked on hoard the same vessel, with the intention of pro ceeding as far as Padang'. On arriving at Padang the plaintiff positively refused to proceed further on the voyage unless Miss Thornton also proceeded with him, and which she at last consented to do. It was after this voyage, and on their return to Ba t 'via, that the marriage took place. To that mar riage the defendant, Mr. Thornton, had entertained a most decided obj,cion. Nevertheless the plaintiff had been fully paid, even beyond the terms of the contract, anti was actually himself considerably in ch bted to the defendants. Commission was only chargeable as between firms with distinct and sepa rate capitals, and never between the various branches , of the same firm. Several witnesses were examined, and produced a number of accounts, which went to show that the plaintiff had been paid, and that he had never thought of charging the defendants with commission until his return to England. The Jury, after an absence of about a quarter of an hour, returned into Court with a verdict for the plaintiff—l/images, 3,000/. The verdict was received with strong marks of approbation by a very crowded Court. The trial occupied the entire day. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, FEU. 25. M ' NEILE V. REED. This was an action bronght by the plaintiff to re cover compensation from the defendant, for the breach of a contract which he had entered into to take him into partnership, thereby preventing his going to India, in the command of one of the East India Company's ships on a double voyage. The plaintiff is an officer in the maritime service of the Company, and was going out in the command of one of their ships, when negociations were en tered into with the defendant, Mr. Shakspeare Reed—a partner in an extensive • rope-manufactory —relative to his being admitted to a share in the concern. M. 'toed, shortly after the death of Mr. Muspratt, son of Mr. Muspratr, the East India Di rector, a junior partner in the house, met a Mr. Cat stairs, a relative by marriage of the plaintiff, and, informing bin) of the loss he had sustained, wished him, as he had done on a former occasion, to recom nd Zt u iti so t the 1 ) 1 o ' ( t ) t u s n e g . C who a rs t a m i tiaig might take ly a a f t r e i r a s t i a v w e mention, d to him the circumstance, and it finally was settled that he should be introduced to Mr. Reed. The introduction took place; and upou Mr. Clrstairs stating that Mr.M‘lsiTeile had good interest, and was likely materially to forward the views of the house, it was agreed that he should be admitted into the firm. Mr. Reed also observed that, as he had half the profits of the house, he could make the agreement; but as the partnership of Mr. i%luspratt did not terminate until Christmas, this being about June, Mr. M`Neile should employ himself in selling rope among his friends ; receiving a commission of two pounds a ton, and should at Christmas be admitted a partner with a fourth share. Mr. Rited's letters also held out every pro spect of the agreed arrangement being carried into effect. Mr. M'Neile accordingly canvassed his friends for orders ; but being unfortunately taken ill, the commission he received from the house only amounted to 791. Mr..Gallilee and Mr. Louch, the two other partners of Mr. Reed, who had all along manifested a great unwillingness to receive Mr. M‘Neile, on seeing that his expectations were not so great as they had been led to believe, carried their objection to an absolute refusal to ratify the contract entered into by Mr. Reed, to whom the plaintiff, on hearing of the refusal, wrote, and re ceived an answer, , tating that he had used all his endeavours with his partners ; but as he (plaintiff) had not the interest which he supposed he had, he might still continue to sell rope on commission, and might in every respect consider himself as con nected with the house of Reed, Gallilee, and Co. This, however, did not satisfy the plaintiff; and he now brought this action to recover compensation for the special damage he had sustained in conse quence of abandoning his proposed trip to India. On the part of the plaintiff, witnesses were called to prove, first, the contract, and secondly, the special damage. Mr. FOLLETT, for the defendant, took several I objections on points of law, and argued that there I was no contract here which could be enforced, either by an action for damages at law or by a bill of equity. rim Learned Counsel cited two cases in support of his objection. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff— Damages 5001. SURREY SESSIONS, FEB. 25. Ann lioniface was indicted for feloniously stealing several pieces of wooden machinery, the property of Joseph Milton. The prosecutor and prisoner are proprietors of shows at fairs, and on the Bth instant the prose cutor missed several pieces of wood belonging to the machinery of his exhibition. The prisoner was seen to steal the property, but the witness, a girl about 15 years of age, and a dancer on, stilts, who was called to prove the fact, on being examined, stated that she was entirely ignorant of the obliga tions of an oath, or of a state of future rewards and punishments. The witness knew a church from a house, but was never in a place of Divine Worship. The COURT decided that she was not a competent witness. The prosecutor, Milton, was a showman, and 66 years of age. When questioned by the Counsel for the prisoner, he evinced the most lamentable want of religious or moral instruction, not appearing to understand the tenets of any faith. The prisoner was acquitted. The ignorance of the witnesses caused the utmost surprise in Court. That one of the main features in all the works front the pen of the a uthor of " Darnley," was a deep penetration into human nature, and a just appreci ation of human character, under every degree of shade and circumstance, has long been apparent. He has, nniiet how ever, reserved die full display of this essential attribute of for it is well known that martial achievements Genius faor subject jnecetw peculiarlyw ork , ' A fi l t e t t e n d oir t s a of, ii Great display Common- a 1 dhP:ar:se:;:slOng been his favourite study. But in this predi lection Mr. JAMES is by no means singular, for most of mexoureaPhlteingneSelljeABKBinPEAtlßieE himself,‘‘ tented field," and selected warriors for the heroes of their most ohuavregMdtt dramatists, their illost famous tragedies. On the 23d inst. in Harley-street, the lady of Le Marchant 'Thomas, Esq., of a son. On the 24th inst. the lady of J. Reid, Esq , of Charlotte-street, Bloomsbury, of a son. MARRIED. On the 21st inst. at Peover, Cheshire, the Rev. G. Pitt, the youngest son o f 'l' . Pi tt, Esq., o f Wi mpo l e - s t ree t, t o Ch ar l otte Augusta, third d aug ht er o f Sir 11. M. Mainwaring, Bart., of P T;i ' l e t r he C : l 2: ' k e l sl in ir s e t.. at St. Pancras, Mr. William Batt e n, o f Glon caster-place, Walworth, to Miss Elizabeth Buckredge, late of Rodney-buildings, New Kent-road. DIED. On the `_'4th inst. at Champion-hill, Emily Bletsoe, the eldest child of Mr. John Robert Payne, :of the Ordnance-office, Tower. On the 23d inst. at Normanby, the infant son of Sir Robert Sheffield, Bart. Onthe 2-2 d inst. at Thatcharn, Berko, G. J. W oo d, E sq., o f s g U a l u nv: htr o l foli Y e iea f ‘ i V i e 3 Valniz(el,thi Dorset, to M ar y, th e younges t l .:sq. late of Star Stile .Halstead. PAINTED AND PUBLISHED BY MURDO YOUNG, AT 1111 ,UN OFFICE, 112, STAAND, LONDON. •