The Sun. — London, England, 1822-04-12 00:00:00

THE LONDON JOURNALS. EXTRACTS FROM yin: IJA.I LY MORNING PAPERS, April 12, 18/2. Ertew Tints] ;Title trial of the Indictment preferred (at we know not whose instance) against Sir John !Sewell, the President of the Constitutional As sociation, and Messrs., Murray, Clarke, and Sharp, members of that . body, is appointed at Callahan for to-morrow. It stands at the head of the list ; and we understand will positively come on at nine, o'clotk in the morning.—The respect which we owe to the,Court, and the anxietywhich we feel to avoid, every thing which might be construed into an ,attempt to prejudice -the,administration of public justice, forbid us to ipaice the leant remark on this extraordinary" proceeding. • We shall act, on this occasion as we did i,n regard to the action against the Manches ter Yeomanry ; reserving all that we have to say on the Origin of the prosecution, the mode of drawing up the indictment, and the character of the Witnesses, until . after the whole shall have come under the consideration .of a Judge and Jury. For the present it may be sufficient to mention, that among the principal witnesses who Lre expected to be produced on the part of the presecutton, are Dolby, Benhow, and Thelwall. [THE TIMES.] The verdict in the late action for damages at Lancaster, brought by . one of the unfortunate wounded men against the Manchester Yeomanry, was published in our paper of yesterday. It will be, viewed, no ; doubt, with very opposite senti ments, not only. by politicians of opposing par ties, but—tvhat is deeply to be lamented--by the different classes of society. - Our respect for the laws of England, and our solicitude for the pub lic peace, must ever restrain us from speaking too freely of transactions, Wherein the forms of law and justice have not been overthrown or disre garded. We forbear on that account to enter any further upon the subject of the cause just termi nated at Lancaster than by observing, that al though the witnesses. may have sworn truth, the _Judge laid . down 'law correctly, and the jurors brought in a conscientious verdict, the ge tweral result is not of a nature to assuage the ap prehensions of those who saw, in the deplorable proceeding at Manchester, a precedent for mili tary -precipitation and violence hereafter; nor to soften the exasperated feelings of those who felt secure that in the laws of their country they would find reparation for what they conceived to be their unmerited sufferings, and protection from future disturbance in the exercise of their ancient pthilege of meeting for a redress of wrongs.- [MORNING CHRONICLE.] We refer to the communication of our City Cor-. respondent (see another column . ofthe SUN) for an account of letters froin Odessa of the 15th., in which it is stated that dreadful excesses had taken place at Constantinople on and previous to the 11th March, and that insults bad been offered to the European Ambassadors. This account coincides with that of a letter from Odessa of the 19th March, with intelligence from Con stantinople to the 7th, in the Allgemeine Zeitung, a Journal of which the intelligence respecting Tur key and. Greece has almost uniformly been excel lent; though it generally comes to us in a mutilated cad disfigured shape through the channel of - the French Journals. ; In the-letter in question, after detailing the excesses which followed the rejec tion - of the Ultimatum, the writer observes, " What might have been foreseen six months, ago has now taken place. The European-Diplo matists have altogether mistaken this people. All the arts of diplomatic refinement are throWn away on the bloody and inflexible Mussulman, aryl in, the very moment they. think,they have made. an impression. on him, ,he relapses into his original savageneas. We will not.pre.tend to de termine what these six months negociations have availed, but streams,of blood have h the interim been '.poured out." And this scourge of humanity, this Pest:fence, must, it seems, be continued for the sajle,of Qritish Interests, and the Holy Alliance. (;-od forbid that British Interests should be con nected with .any thing sOltorrible and monstrous!, No ; car Ministers are as ignorant of British in , terests as we are persuaded they are false inter wter of; British feeling, when they contend for the existence. of a system of massacre and extirpa- ' tiers, asnecessarYtn or wished for by the nation. By" . .tai;ing part with the Turks- against the Greeks, as they have done in so shameless . a manner,"and pretending . that .all this is necessary to . lkitish; interests, they .hold us up to the world . as monsters rather than human beings, as. a people without morality, withoutfeeling, and capable of sacrificing millions of our species for supposed, interests of: the Most vulgar nature: We wish that ,too.,,rnyCh countenance had not been given to the suspicions which the conduct of Ministers in this reHpect is, but too much calcUlated, to ex cite by ,the indecision of those who may almost be. said . to have turned back after putting their hands to the plough, and given rise t 9 expecta tions from them which have.not , been realized. EMORNXNG ,POSTI . . . .Th* trial at Lancaster against, the Manchester Yeottanry . is at le.ngth . terreinated l . and, as every impartial and dispassionate man in the kingdom must have anticipated' the. jury had scarce any hesitation in , returning a-; verdict for the de fendants. We, shall not dwell,. at .present upon the object of the persons , who. really instituted ° those proceeding s ; but of this there can be no question—that Redford, ,the , wretched plain tiff, was merely a stalking-horse fOr men. per, haps actuated by veryj laudable motives,-,but certainly. either, ashamed. or. afraid to avow them. Durin the trial -we of course carefully abstained from offering a single observation in anywise re lating to. it,; and nowt that the question is open for discussion, we think it quite snperfluous_to say one word on the merits of the case. it may however: be permitted us to remark, that Mr. Serjeant ilullock, in his statement for the defen dants, pertinently expressed his surprise.that a Lancashire pauper should be able to employ a powerful Bar of Counsel, and send two hundred' miles to Chancery-lane for a Solicitor to sue the defendants, after a lapse of nearly three years : we also think the circumstance curious. But it would be more curious still if those who have been loudest in their clamours against the Consti tutional Association, as " a crew," and " a gang," and every thing else vile enough for a Billingsgate designation, should themselves be found the very component parts of a secret combination of Ra dicals to proSecute the Manchester yeomanry.— We should like to know, for 'instance, who will pay the Solicitor's bill of costs in this action, the Lawyer's fees, and the witnesses' viaticums. These expenses cannot be paid out of the Man chester subscription, for that has long since been exhausted in various ways, - and before the late trial commenced somebody, or nobody (as Ave suppose it will prove), owed 7 or 8001. of Ra dical charges besides, incurred in consequence of that affair. Putting, then, altogether aside 'the principle on which the Constitutional Associa tion is formed, how can any man who has sanc tioned the Manchester subscriptieil and the Lan caster clubbed action object to the Members of that Society, or any one belonging to it, for le gally prosecuting seditious publications 7 . We surely ought to take the beam out.of our own eye before we take the mote out of our bro ther's. In another point of view, however, we are exceedingly glad that the action has at this distance of time been brought against the Man chester Yeomanry. The public mind is now ex tricated from the confusion and alarm in which it was immediately subsequently to the 16th of August, 1819, and can look , down upon the events of ' that time with a calm and reflecting eye. [MORNING HERALD.] _No decisive or satisfactory accounts were re ceived. from the east or north of Europe in the course of yesterday. Mercantile letters received in the City, joined with the aspect of business on the Stock Exchange, gave some check to the general opinion of the breaking out of war.— On the other hand, the German and FlanderS mails continue to repeat the rejection of the Russian proposition by the Divan, on the 28th of February. Still the Austrian Observer, which is the official paper of the Cabinet of Vienna, is silent on this subject. For several days, during which the public rumours have been most, likely to,provoke this oracle into speech, not a syllable / has it published—waiting, perhaps ; to utter its wisdom with more security after the fact —or, more probably, unwilling to compromise the Go vernment, of which it is the semi-official trum peter, at a moment when the question of peace or war is at its crisis. We sometime since stated that a movement of separation 'from Spain had taken place in the Spanish part of the island of St. Domingo—or, perhaps, we should rather say, of Hayti. An American Paper, which reached us yesterday, contains the Declaration of Independence. It is dated the Ist of December, 1821. The form of Government to be established is not expressly stated, nor is there the slightest manifestation of a disposition to unite with the portion of the island which, since the death of Christophe, is fallen un der the government of Boyer. It is probable that the intention is to erect a new Republican State, to form a member of the great Confederation of Colombia. " Long live our country—Long live the independence—Long live the Union of Co lombia," are the formulary prayers with which the document concludes. The intercourse be tween the City of Saint Domingo (which is in this part, of the island) and Caraccas and Cuba, has been extensive and varied. It is a curious fact stated in the Declaration, that it was at Saint Domingo that the youth of those latter I places received their education.—(ibid.) • [BRITI.II PRESS.] The Washington Gazette, in speaking about the contemplated recognition of the Independent Governments of South America by the Govern. meet of the United States, says," It is currently reported that the Government of France has dis patched a Charge desAffaires to Caraccas, for the purpose of recognizing the independence of Co lombia." The improbability of this report bears with it a sufficient refutation ; the King of France has had no cause of hostility towards the Spanish Monarchy, nor is he so indifferent to its friendship as to.act so unfriendly a part towards Spain, and to pursue his own exclusive interest without a regard to the just claims of the coun try, or to the wishes or intentions of the other Powers of Europe. The Washington Paper admits that the President's Message had created a strong sensation among the foreign diplomatic corps resident at Washington. We collect 'froM the context that this sensation was under stood' to' be one of surprise and disapproval ; but the water adds, that " this is natural," as the ad'rnission of four or five American mem ters into the family of nations is an event of much importance to the Old World, which has so long held that very portion of the western he misphere in bondage. In this limited view of the 'subject, the Minister from Spain alone ought to have felt. the "-strong,sensation" to which the writer has alluded, •for it was Spain alone that held that part of the western hemisphere in bondage. With the exception of Spain, there is not a country in Europe that would not be benefited by a general recognition of the inde pendence of, the South American States, and if any surprise or disapprobation were evinced by.., the diplomatic corps generally, it was at the suddenness with which the Government of the United States now departs from a principle which i • t. has ,hitherto, in unison with the other Go vernments of the civilized world, sanctioned' and pursued. Mr. Jones, a .Member of the House of Representatives, who had four years ago' sup ported a motion for the recognition of the southern GOvernments, very properly asked, on the receipt of . the • President's Message, ..in what the situation of those Povernrnents now differed from what it • was when he was in the minority-of .forty-five on that ques - tion ? There was indeed one essential difference in the circumstances of the respective periods—four Years ago the Government of Spain had not consented to the surrender of the Floridas. This 1 recognition, be itremembered, does not create these Republics : their progress has been gradual from oppression to rebellion, from rebellion to revolution, and from revolution to actual inde pendence. For this independence Europe has been prepared, consequently " the adding of four or five American members to the family of nations," however important the event, is not one which is calculated at this moment to excite a very strong sensation. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF KING'S . BENCH, APRIL MILLER AND ANOTHER, ASSIGNEES OF BENJAMIN, MAG NUS, AND GARLAND, V. AARONS. This was an action by the Assignees of Benjamin and Co. to recover from the defendant the sum of 4,1441. under the fol lowing circumstances:-In the year 1813 the defendant had deal ings with Messrs. Benjamin and Co., and was bail for them in several actions which were commenced against them. At that time the firm of Benjamin and Co. were under serious embar rassments, though not absolutely in bankrupt circumstances.— On or about the 12th Nov. 1813, Magnus and Garland (Benja min having gone to Gibraltar on the business of the house) as signed to the defendant a Cargo of cotton, valued at 4,0001. and upwards. Subsequently, a commission of bankrupt was sued out agdinst Benjamin and Co., and the Assignees brought the present action to recover back the amount of the cargo of cot ton, on the - ground that the defendant was, at the time of the assignment,, aware of the insolvent circumstances of the firm of Benjamin and Co. Parole and documentary testimony was given at considerable length on this point. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, in summing up the evidence to the Jury, defined the term i nsolvency in a trader to mean reiterated irregularities in his payments, although at the time, if all his effects were sold, he might be able to pay . every one twenty shillings in the pound. The single - question in the cause was this, did the defendant know of the bankrupts insol vent circumstances on or befote the 12th of November, 1813 ? The Jury, without a moment's hesitation, found a verdict for the plaintiffs for 4,1441. WESTMINSTER SESSIONS. 'THE KING V. KELLY. FRALTD..-.Wm. Kelly, a miserable looking old man, was in dicted for fr..udulently, and by false pretences, obtaining the sum of ss. from Mary Burke, widow. Mr. KNOX, in his address to the Jury, for the Crown, ob served, that this prosecution was instituted by the Lords Com missioners of the Admiralty with - the view of protecting rela tions of seamen, who were daily and hourly defrauded by men who made it their business to lurk about the public offices con nected with his Majesty's Navy. Mary Burke was called, and stated, that she was the widow of a seaman, and bad a son about 18 years of age now serving on board his Majesty's ship Topaze, on her passage home from the East Indies. In February last, the little furniture she ha& was seized upon for rent, and being totally destitute, she went to the Navy-office to inquire if her son would soon be home, as she knew he would assist her when he did return. She could get no satisfactory answer, and was returning when she was ac costed under the archway of Somerset-house by the prisoner, who asked her if she had got her business settled ? She said she had not, and told him her story. He had a roll of papers in his hand, and seemed in a great bustle. He told her it would be foolish" to spoil the sheep for a ha'p'orth of tar," and said ..that for the value of 3s. 6d. or so, he could get her busi ness done. They walked on together, and he afterwards said that she must bring her papers the next day, and for 6s. Bd. or 7s. he would get her 41. or 51. and all the intelligence she could wish for about her son. • She-had not a sixpence in the world ; but having told her story to her landlady, the latter lent her a gown, with liberty to pawn it for ss. which she did, and the next day took it to the prisoner, telling him that was all she could procure. He said, in a conversation that then took place, that his name was Smith—that he belonged to the Admiralty .-and that he would make application on her behalf to the First Lord. She was to meet him that day week, and did so ; but he put her off from time to time, and she procured a letter to be written to Lord Melville, who issued orders that the pri soner should be apprehended and prosecuted. Mrs. Bray, the landlady of the prosecutrix, deposed to lend ing her a gown to pledge, and having gone with her and seen her in conversation with the prisoner. Mr. John Nutland, chief messenger to the Admiralty, swore that prisoner did not belong to the Admiralty, and that he had no power to procure money from that establis,hment for the widow or other relations of a seaman. There *as a person of the name of Smith holding an inferior situation in the Adini ralty, but he had been ill since January. The prisoner, in a written defence, endeavoured to convince the Jury that he had merely acted the part of an honest agent in the affair, and declared that he had received the money, not to procure Mrs. Burke pecuniary aid, but to obtain admission for a child of hers into Greenwich Hospital. Mrs. Burke said this_was utterly untrue. She had only a little girl with her, who was insane. The prisoner was found guilty, and sentenced to six months imprisonment, the Chairman telling him that nothing but his extreme age (78) sated hiin from transportation. SOUTHWARK SESSIONS. Yesterday the Sessions for the town and borough of South wark commenced before the Lord Mayor and Alderman J. J. Smith. Mr. Knowlys presided as Recorder. &Now-au CASE.—A young man named John Welsh was', charged with having stolen 11 sovereigns, the property of Mr. Henry Robertson, of No. 15, Fitzosborne-street, Golden square. It appeared from, the evidence, that the prosecutor had an ac ceptance for 11 pounds, which became due on the 14th of March last, on which day a notice was left at his house, that the bill lay at Mr. John Welsh's, No. 37, Long-lane. boy was sent with money to take up the bill, but instead of calling at No. 37, Long-lane,' he called at No. 37 White-street, which is in a line with Long-lane, and may easily be mistaken for it.— The boy knocked at the door, and asked for John Welsh, when the prisoner, whose name is John ti elsh, was called down, and the boy told him he came to pay a bill of ill. Prisoner said he did not recollect what the money was for, but his fore man had been out that morning collecting bills, and he sup. posed that bill must be one of them. The boy gave him the money, and also the notice which had been left with the prose cutor, stating that the bill lay due atNo. 37, Long-lane.. The prisoner read the paper, counted the money, and said that all was right. The boy, on his return, 'was asked by the prosecu. tor for the bill, and on his saying that he had received none, was sent back to get it, when he found that the prisoner had decamped. An officer, however, apprehended. him a day or two afterwards, to whom he confessed that he had spent the money ; but at the same time said that he repented as soon as it was all gone, and had' sought the prosecutor to beg his pardon. The Mr. Welsh who was entitled to the money came forward, and stated, that the notice containing his address and the place where the note lay was so legibly written as not to be mistaken. Witness knew nothing of the prisoner. PrOsecutor paid the amount of the bill to witness. _ _ _ . . The prisoner, in his defence, said that a friend, who had often been bountiful to him, had -lately promised to remember him, and that when the money arrived, at looked so like the delicate way of that friend all through, that he supposed it must have been a gift, and took it as such. He was the more inclined to believe this was the case, from seeing that the paper was com pletely blotted. A shoemaker, who resides at No. 37, White-street, stated that the prisoner lodged and worked with him as a journeyman. Winless had known him as an honest , man eight years. The Jury found the prisoner Guilty, but recommended him to. mercy on account of the greatness of the temptation, and his previous good character. The RECORDER strongly acted upon this recommendation, and sentenced the prisonerto impriionthent for one month. TVlllitim Becket was convicted of having stolen 71b. of rags, and sentenced to be transported for 7 years. The Recorder said he was not fit to live in a civilized country. • FinE.—Yesterday morning, between four and five o'clock, the inhabitants of Lower `Vest street, Smithfield, were dread fully alarmed in consequence of the melting-house of Mi. Leach, tallow-melter, at the back part of his premises, baiting, i by some accident, caught fire. Through the praiseworthy exertions of Mr. Barnley, the beadle,, who lost no time in pro curing the parish engine, the flames were in some degree arrested; and by means of the quick arrival of the various fire engines, the flames were completely extinguished by six o'clock. The melting-house was neatly consumed, and a great quantity of tallow was destroyed. Ac CIDENT.-- Yesterday ,morning, about nine o'clock, a young man (apprentice) belonging to Messrs. Everett and Tucker, rice-dressers, Bread-street-hill, Upper Thames-street, having by some means laid hold of a rope, which, by . drawing in a certain direction, connects itself to the steam-engme, was drawn up between two beams and killed on the spot. Yesterday morning, some labourers digging near Carmarthen street, Tottenhamteourt-road, discovered a box containing the body of a child about seven months old; having several marks of violence upon it. An Inquest was held on the body ye.ster.. day evening, and a verdict returned of." Wilful Murder against some person or persons unknown." Tilt MANCHHESTER TRANSACTIONS. LANCASTER. CONCLUSION PP JUDGE HOLROYD'S' CHARGE. As to the nature of the meetings for the purpose of drilling, it was proved by different witnesses, those meetings were secret; and if they were held for a proper purpose, why should there be any concealment about them? John Haywood stated that he tsas at the 'White Moss; that he saw the people drilling, and that on his being observed, he was knocled down and severely treated. Shawcross also stated that he was knocked down at the White Moss,, and tumbled into a ditch. He, it appeared, was beaten until he was insensible. He heard some of the people say, that Hunt was to be at Manchester on the next day, and they must all be there. James Heath spoke as to persons' going by his house at Cheetham hill, on the I,6th August; one of them said, " You shall not sleep in that house to-night." Many declarations had been made, with respect to persons drilling, in different divisions. Lieute nant-Colonel Kepner deposed, that he had seen persons dril ling, one of whom said, If we march, we will teach you a new tune ;" and on the 16th of August, the very next day, he saw some of those persons going into Manchester. Mr. Roger Entwisle stated that he saw the Stockport division march to. wards Manchester in military step, . and with music and ban ners. One of the persons said to "Thou hest got a good coat on thy back, but before the day is over, I will have as good a coat as thee." Another witness said that was standing on the steps .of the portico at Manchester when the people were passing ; one of the people observed that he should like to go and see the inside of the portiCo. Another replied, "that if he had a little patience he might see the inside of the portico, and of many other places, before night." The Jury would con sider how far this evidence was important, as proving that this meeting was unlawful, as well as showing the necessity for the Magistrates being on the alert, in consequence of the notification that such a meeting would be held. It had been asked, why did not the Magistrates prevent this meeting from taking place originally ? But the question was, not whether a more effectual method might have been taken, but whether that which had been adopied was not legal, particularly as tar as the military were concerned. The military were not responsible for what the Magistrates ordered. They re ceived particular directions, and it was not for them to con sider whether the course pursued was or was not the most ju dicious. Besides, before any step could be taken to prevent the meeting, it was necessary that some proof should be given of the intention of those who meant to assemble together. —Those who assembled on such an occasion might meet under a mask,- and it was for the Jury to consider whether in this case the parties did not meet .under a pretence— whether they did not assemble apparently - for the purpose of doing a legal act, but really with a view to do that.which was illegal. Evidence - was given as to the alarm which the meeting excited; that evidence was given not only by the Magistrates, but by several respectable individuals unconnected with them, and who were inhabitant. of Manchester. Many of those per sons acted as special constables, and were induced to do so be cause they were • seriously apprehensive of the consequences which were likely to result from the meeting. Mr. Sharp spoke very strongly on this point. He stated, that if it had not been for the wisdom of the Magistrates, a very great commotion would, in fiis opinion, have taken place. Some evidence had been given as to the interruption which the Yeomanry experi enced in approaching the hustings ; and, on the other hand, witnesses were called to deny that any interruption took place. It was the province of the Jury to decide on the conflicting testi many. Evidence had also been given relative to circumstances which occurred previous to the 16th of August. Certain resolu tions, agreed to at a meeting held in Manchester, were put in, and proved to have been received from Hunt. Those resolutions pledged the parties to an alteration of the government. To at tempt by force to alter the government would be high treason; and to endeavour to effectthat object by menace, though not amount ing to high treason, was, at least, misprision of treason—an of fence of a very high character. One of the resolutions called on the people to disobey the measures of Parliament ; it called on them not to pay taxes levied according to the law of the land. That resolution was clearly illegal. Another resolution declared, that all men had a right to freedom. The proposition was a very just one. All men were free in this country,-_ and he hoped that freedom would always continue to be the birth-right of Englishmen. So far was the principle carried, that the moment a slave put his foot on our shore, he became free. No person, then, had power over him, except under some special contract. Another resolution stated that life, liberty, and pro perty, were especially dear to every man ; and that all men were equally entitled to a voice in the enactment of those laws by which they were to be governed. Now, if a government were about to be established, these would be very proper subjects for consideration ; but the case was entirely different when a government was established. Under our free govern ment, changes were made from thne to time by the proper authorities, with respect to matters that appeared to be inconvenient or . troublesome. When regular representations were made to the proper quarter, as to any alteration which seemed to be necessary in the existing law, they were, it 'was to be presumed, fairly attended to. If this were so, then the resolu tion which he had read was unnecessary and improper. The next resolution declared, that " any law hereafter enacted, or any taxes hereafter imposed by the House of Commons, ought not in equity to be attended to, because the great body, of the peo ple were unjustly excluded from electing their representatives." The 9th resolution set forth, that " after the Ist day of Janu ary 1820, the persons assembled could not conscientiously con sider themselves as bound in equity to obey any future enact ment made by persons styling themselves their representatives, other than those who are freely and fairly elected by the major rity of the people." The 10th resolution advised an address to the Prince Regent, calling on him " to issue his writs to his sheriffs and other officers, directing them to order representa tives to be chosen, agreeably to the principles laid down in a former resolution." The 12th resolution adverted to the state of " our fellow-countrymen in Ireland, professing the Catholic faith ;" and it went on to state; that " the resolutions should be signed by the secretary, and transmitted •to the Catholic body in Ireland." The 16th resolution was addressed' to the British soldier ; and the 17th resolution attacked the na tional debt; and called on the people to leave the borough mongers who contracted it without the consent of the people, to pay it. Such were the resolutions, which were proved to have been proposed by Hunt at a meeting held in Smithfield in July, 1819. This meeting, it would be observed, took place shortly previous to the intended meeting at Manchester, which was held on the 16th August. A placard was published prior to the meeting, which bore, in a very considerable degree, on the resolutions which he had read. That placard was couched in these words Manchester public meeting. The public are respectfully informed, that a meeting will be held in the area opposite fo Si. Peter's Church, on the 9th of August, for the purpose of considering the bestoneans of effecting a Radical Reform in the Commons House of Parliament, and also to consider the propriety of electing a person to represent the now unrepresented people of Manchester." This was an illegal proposition. Members of Parliament must be elected in ;en sequence of the King's writ being issued for that purpose. Therefore, such a proceeding as that mentioned in the placard was against the law. A proceeding of this kind was adopted in another town ; but punishment was inflicted on those who adopted a, course so illegal. Next came the placard of the 16th of August. Mr. -- BeeexeUßN.—Nothing was proved, my Lord, relative to the placard of the 16th. • - Mr. Justice HOLROYD admitted that the placard of the 16th was not in evidence. It was, however, proved, that a very great number of people assembled together on that day. It was for the Jury to consider, whether they really met for the purpose of furthering the object which, it was said, they had in view, or whether they did not contemplate some other object. Of this the Jury would judge, from the circumstances which had been proved. The crowd as they passed the Star Inn shouted and bellowed. They did the same at the police-office and Hunt was sworn to have cheered when he saw Col. L'Estirange advance. Now, supposing the meeting to have he'll called for a legal ob ject, the Jury lutist pay some attention to the fact, that persons were placed at the head of it, such as Hunt and Carlile, who were brought from a distance, and who had no connexion what soever with the town of Manchester. The declarations and expressions of those who were present at the meeting demand. ed peculiar attention', as evidence of the feeling - which existed. Mr. Garnett, a reporter for the Manchester Chronicle, depoSed to the words made use of by Hunt. This witness said, that when Hunt saw the cavalry advance, he cheered, and desired the people to cheer also. He (Hunt) called the meeting a tre mendous meeting. If the meeting was of such a nature as was calculated to create terror and alarm, and if some necessity were not shown fee the assembling of such a meeting, then it was clearly illegal. The witness, whose evidence he was ade verting to, described Hunt as saying " that he was obliged to the - Magistrates for putting off the former meeting. It had produced a two-fold effect—it created confidence and increased their numbers ; He believed their enemies, who had flattered themselves that they had pined a victory, had, in fact, sustained a great defeat." George 'Brown, George Read, Roger En twistle,' and others; gave evidence as to the apparent object of the meeting. Their evidence was worthy of observation, because it would enable them to judge whether the meeting was of such a nature as was calculated to alarm the country. It would he ne cessary for them to consider that, in this case it was proved that the people came from all,quarters, to the amount of 50,000 per sons. 'Weed some of the witnesses swore that the meeting consisted' of a much larger body. On the part of the plaintiff it had' been stated that et great number of women and child ren attended the meeting. This circumstance the Gentlemen of the Jury would Also - tat into their conSideration. It was en deavoured to be 'hewn that the object of the meeting was We. They because many of those who attended it had been drilled. They were said to have marched into the town in a sort of regu. lar order. On the other hand, it was deposed that the per sons only marched in the manner which was customarily adop. solemn at solen processions, for the purpose of keeping order.— Various witnesses, however, gave a very different account of the proceeding. It appeared that those who marched to the meeting *ere accompanied by flags and music. The nature of the meeting might be inferred by a reference to the emblems which those who attended it carried with theM. It was proved that there was a black flag, bearing the inscription " Equal Representation or Death ;" it was also proved that there was a bloody dagger on another flag ; and it would be for the Jury to decide whether such insignia were or were not consistent with a peaceable feeling. The Learned Judge next adverted to the evidence of Mr. Stanley, who, he observed; had stated, that such a mob as he saw assembled in St. Peter's-field, im pressed on his mind an apprehension of danger, when headed by such men as Hunt and Carlile. That gentleman, hoiveVer, thought that there was no occasion• for employing the cavalry, because the conduct of the people appeared to be peaceable. Still, it should be recollected, that Mr. Stanley spoke of a " tremendous shout," and also of the danger to be apprehended from a mob, headed , by such persons. Evidence .was given of the alarm which the meeting had created, both in the minds of the inha bitants of the town and of stringers ; and the reporters had spoken as to what Hunt had said to the multitude. Their at tendon was drawn particularly to the expressions used by Hunt ; and therefore their observation was likely to be correct. All of them had spoken to the peaceable conduct of the peo ple. On the other side, a great deal of evidence-was adduced, to-shew that the people used violence, and had driven the con stables away from the hustings. If the Gentlemen of the jury wished him to go through the evidence on this point, he would. willingly - read it. The Foreman—We do not wish it, my Lord. Mr. Justice HOLROYD.—The lawfulness or unlawfulness of the meeting, under all the Circumstances, would be the first point for the consideration of the Jury. The next point would be,- whether the employment of the military' was or was not necessary. Much evidence had been given by the officers and by other witnesses, to show that a reasonable necessity-existed for calling them in, for the purpose of assisting in the execuo' tion of the warrant. The question here was, whether then:lli., tary were assisting the constables in furtherance of the orders , of the Magistrates ; and next, whether that which they did Was' done in self-defence. If they were attacked' by the mob ; in the legal dis Charge of their duty, they had a right to resist them. It was, however, alleged, that no stones were thrown, and no attack was made on the military, until after they ha assailed the people on 'the hustings, by wantonly cutting and wounding them. This allegation had been, met by contrary evidence. The Jury had heard the evidence on,this point ; but if the Jury wished it to be read, he would lay it laefore them. The Foreman.—For my part, I do hot wish it. Mr. Justice lioLnox-p next proceeded to advert to the evi dence which had been given, relative to the dangerous situation of the Manchester yeomanry, when they got near the hustings ; as to the dispersion of the people arid the resistance which was offered by them to the military.lt appeared that two pistols were fired at them, one from the top of a house, and another from the yard of the - Quakers' Meeting-house. ' It was also proved, that the area opposite to St. Peter's Church was, previously to the meeting, cleared of stones and brickbats ; but that, after the meeting, a considerable quantity (a cart load} of stones and brickbats were collected on the ground. If the people brought those missiles to the place, it would be for the Jury to con sider what object they had in view, and whether a meeting was, or was not legal, the members of - which had armed themselves in this manner ? The trespass on the plaintiff, without proof of which he would have had no right of action at all, was sworn to by a person of the name of Prestwick. That individual stated, that Redford was wounded by the defendant, Mt. Oliver, near the Quakers' Meeting-house. At this place it was stated by Lieut. Buckley and others, that a greatnumber of brickbats were thrown, and much resistance offered to the military. If the Jury believed that the plaintiff was wounded by the defendant, they would then have to consider whether the wound was not in flicted by Mr. Oliver in his own defence, and in opposition to the attack that had been made on the military. It was said that the military had no right to interfere with the flags,--that they ought to have confined themselves to the execution of the warrant. But, if they saw sentiments which appeared to be illegal, inscribed on . those flags, they had a right to seiie them with a view to ulterior proceedings. Here, however, this point was not in issue. No 3 charge was made respect ing the seizure of the banners. The action was simply for an assault, alleged to have been made on the plaintiff by the defendants. No evidence was given that Captain Burley Or the trumpeter had inflicted any . wound on this.man ; and they could not be rendered liable, in a case of this kind, for the conduct of others. The Learned Judge ,then adverted to the evidence which had been giveit, that, about the time Red ford was said to have been wounded, an attack was made on the Yeomanry, - one of whom was ca rr i e d f rom th e fi e ld for dead. He called the attention of the jury to the- fact, that two of the witnesses had seen Redford drilling, and expres sed his surprise, that in a case where no expense appeared to have been spared on either side to procure witnesses,- no proof had been adduced as to the wound which the plaintiff was said to have received. It came out in the evidence, that certain per sons had formed themselves into a Committee to afford relie.f to the persons who suffered on this occasion ; but it did not appear that Redford was one of those who applied for relief. The Jury would consider whether proof had been given that Mr. Oliver had or had not wounded the plaintiff. If they were sa tisfied that he did wound Redford, that would Fo to decide one issue, with respect to Mr, Oliver, but not with reference to others. The next question would he, whether the wound was inflicted on the plaintiff in self-defence ? if they were satisfied that the cavalry made no attack except for the preservation of the public peace—if they were convinced that no violence was used, except what was necessary for the execution of the warrant—if they believed what had been stated by several persons, (parti cularly by the officers and soldiers of the 15th Hussars) that stones and brickbats were flung at the military, and if, under these circumstances, Mr. Oliver had acted in self-defente, that would be a justification for him, supposing they believed him to have committed the assault. To enable the Jury to decide whether the meeting was legal or illegal, he had read particular parts of the evidence. He had so acted, because he 'did not wish to trust to his memory, and he was anxiolls that the ex pressions of the witnesses should not be mistaken. If the Jury thought it necessary for their satisfaction that he should read any-part, or even the whole of the evidence, he would be most glad - and happy to do so. DISCOVERY OF A NEST OF SWINDLERS.--A most im— portant discovery of a notorious gang of swindlers has lately been made by the Police, who have succeeded to a great extent in their impositions upon various eminent tradespeople at the west end of the town. It appears that several fellows are con nected together, one of whom is a housekeeper at the west end of the town. The men with whom he is connected endeavour to make themselves look like gentlemen, and then they call at the houses of upholsterers, cabinet-makers, china-merchants, and jewellers, to whom they give large orders, and refer to the above housekeeper, with whom they are concerned. This is , generally . done before the goods are forwarded, and of course the purchasers receive a most excellent character for honesty, regularity, and responsibility, being . represented as men of pro— perty, and living in temporary lodgings while in London. To deceive the applicants for characters, the housekeeper to whom they are referred introduces the tradespeople into a back office he represents himself as a Banker's clerk, and to convince them of his respectability, he bestrews his desk and table with false checks, &c. and a large book, with " Drummond and Co." written in legible letters. The goods are sent home ;as soon as they are received they are sent away to a safer repository. The. tradespeople naturally apply for payment in a short time after, but the landlord of the house states, that his lodgers, whom he considered to be responsible men of property, have absconded and cheated him. This, however, was contradicted by one of the party, who was foremost in the Plan,- but what had been insulted ; and he laid information at Mary-le-bone: Police Office, and several of the parties were taken into cus tody,-and brought to the office yesterday. Several of the trades.- people imposed upon attended, and gave evidence ; after which • the prisoners were remanded for ifurther examination, when there is no doubt that the whole of the villains will lie in custody. BIRTH. At Killarney, Ireland, on the 2d of April, the Lady of Major Cariniehael; Sth Drakoon Guards, of a son, MARRIED. On Wednesday, the 10th instant, at St. Pancras, Mr. Chas. Regnart, jun., late of the Victualling-office, Somerset-place, to Cornelia, second daughter of John William Grece, Esq., of Chart-lodge, County of Surrey, and Chatham, Lower Canada. Yesterday, at St. George's Hanover-square, Williamßeattie, Esq., M.D., Edinburgh, to Elizabeth, second daughter of the late Stephen Linimer, Esq. DIEp. On Wednesday, the 10th inst., in Clarges-street, Caroline, wife of Dr. Cloves. On the 7th instant, at Buckden, after a short illness, John Hodgson, Esq.,. M.A., Commissary of the Archdeaconry of Huntingdon, aged 82. On Thursday, the 4th instant, at Hamelli, Hertfordshire, Matthew Woddelow, Esq., late of Undley Hall; Suffblk. On the 3d instant, at the advanced age of 89,years, the.itev Anthony Barwick, vicar of Neatished and Horning, Nolfolk, which livings' were 'presented to him by Bishop Yonge; in 1767.: Printed and Published for the PROPRIETORS, at the SUN- Office, No. 112, Strand, by J. B. CARSTLM.