The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-08-20 00:00:00

ening him with death. There were 36 sovereigns in the purse. A short man said, "We will not leave the house in this way—we'll do some murder before we go." They pro ceeded to break open all the drawers, a cupboard, and a box, turning out every thing in them, including some title-deeds in a tin box, and took away some silver spoons, a watch, a bottle of rum, &c. The main body then went away, leaving one of their number in the room, who held a pistol close to his head. When the otherq. had gone some time, this man went away, pointing his pistol at Mr. Shaw all the way. lie shut the doors behind him, and they were found nailed up afterwards. Mr. Shaw identified his key. William Care, Mr. Shaw's man, corroborated the testi mony of the latter. Thomas Sutton (the approver) stated that he lodged for some time in the house of Parkinson, with whom Pennington also lodged. The house was in Stafford-street, Choriton-on- Medlock. On the 25th March last, he and the prisoners all met at Parkinson's house before dinner, and planned the robbery of Mr. Shaw's house, which was about 16 miles from thence. Next day they set out between two and three o'clock. Soon after leaving Parkinson's they separated, Ellis, Parkin son, and Pe nn in g ton going one way, and Barber, Goodier, and witness the other. They reached the neighbourhood of Shaw's house about ten o'clock, and met the other three in the stile road leading td the house, at the distance of about a quarter of a mile. They went to the house, and after remaining near it a short time, witness and the others left Pennington and Goodier, and went away for the purpose of endeavouring to get a drink of buttermilk at the house of Mr. Bibby, a relative of Sutton's, who resided at a short distance. They went to Bibby's house, and at first mistook the door. They knocked at the door of a Mr. John Shaw, who directed them to the next door. • They went next door, knocked up Bibby, who was in bed, procured a can of buttermilk, drank it, had the can re-filled, and took it to their comrades who were waiting for them near a heap of manure. They pro ceeded to the barn, where they waited about an hour. Bar ton, Pennington, and Ellis went to the door, when the dog began to bark furiously, upon which Parkinson observed " we must go in." Ellis went to the back door, and the other two got a stump, or billet of wood, and dashed in the front door. Pennington immediately fired off a pistol; a window was heard to open, and witness threw three stones at it, but he did not see any body. Goodier, Parkinson, Barber, and Pennington went in, and witness remained outside. He (witness) stood till he heard some glass broke, when he went round to the back. Ile had Ellis's umbrella in his hand. He found Ellis with the young woman, and threatened her not to break through the window. He went back to the front of the house, and presently the others came out and locked the door: Parkinson had previously stolen some spoons, and produced some rum which they drank amongst them. Barber produced ..£7 103. in gold, and gave them a sovereign each. Having left their companions they overtook a cart, in which. they rode to Stretford-road-end. On cross-examination, it appeared that the prisoner had been convicted of felony, and imprisoned for poaching. Mr. Jones, the constable of Warrington stated, that hav ing heard of the robbery, he proceeded on the 28th to Mr. Shaw's residence, where he found impressions of crow-bars on the doors and drawers, and footmarks near the manure and about the premises. In consequence of information which he had received , he went to Parkinson's house, where he apprehended Barber. The others were apprehended with Sutton at the railway station in Manchester. A pair of pis tols and two black frocks, two black crape masks, two bullet moulds, &c., were found in the house, with a quantity of ske leton keys, crow-bars, &c. The key which was identified as the key of Mr. Shaw's house, was also found at Parkinson's house, with two dark lanterns, one of which was without a slide. A slide which fitted it was found on the floor of Mr. Shaw's kitchen. At Barber's house a number of keys were found, a crow-bar, a black calico frock, and some lucifer matches. He went to Goodier's house, and found him crouched behind the door, naked, with his clothes under his The jury found the prisoner guilty. Parkinson and Goodies, were placed at the bar with William Dixon, 35, and Jamis Unsworth, 25. They were charged with having, at Warrington, feloniously broken and entered the silk manufactory of Messrs. Spencer, Birkham and James Pownall, and stolen therefrom 41 silk warps, value £2OO, and 21s. 4d. in copper. James Unsworth was charged as an accessory after the fact. The chief proof again rested on the testimony of Sutton. On the night of the 15th of February they went to the factory, Parkinson, Dixon, and Goodier carrying with them crowbars and long skewers, for the purpose, as they said, of picking out the mortar and taking away the bricks. They had also large bags made of window curtains, which were for the purpose of carrying away the silk. They arrived at the factory shortly after two o'clock, and set Sutton to watch. They commenced opera tions on the bricks, Sutton giving them notice whenever a boat appeared on the canal, when they desisted work for a short time till it had passed. They were some time before they had removed all. the bricks which they found necessary, as they were very thick. Having made a sufficient aperture they went in, Sutton still watching. When it began to be light they came forth with the bags filled. with silk. It was proved that Unsworth purchased a portion of the silk. Se ♦eral witnesses were called who corroborated points in Sut ton's testimony. The jury acquitted Unsworth, and found the other three prisoners guilty. William Dixon, James Unsworth, and William Parkinson were again placed at the bar, charged with having in Decem ber last, burglarionSly broken into the dwelling-house of Abraham Ackers, of Bickershaw-hall, and stolen a pair of duelling pistols, three keys, a canvas hag, containing a bullet mould, silver and copper, 170 old copper and silver coins, a box of cigars, a cash box, &c. The jury acquitted Dixon, and found the other two pri soners guilty. Mr. WILKINS said there was another indictment against the prisoners ; perhaps his lordship would not think it ne cessary to proceed with it. The Loan Cutup- JusTicE.—l shall not proceed further to-night, you can use your own discretion to-morrow, Mr. Wilkins. The court adjourned at a quarter past six o'clock. NISI PRIUS COURT SHUTE AND OTHERS V. CROFT This was an undefended action, brought by Stephen Shute and others, assignees of Messrs. Allanson and Frankland, bankrupts, against John Dealy Croft, to recover the sum of £546 12s. Gd., the balance of a promissory note for Xl2lB 2s. 2d. Verdict for the plaintiffs for the amount claimed. ,-WEDNESD AN FALCON AND ANOTHER V. DENN. This was an action brought by Messrs. Falcon and Alex- 4 ander, ship-builders, of Workington, against Mr. Thomas Benn, of Greenbank, near Whitehaven, to recover a sum of £250, the balance of an account for building a ship, called the Athena. Mr. Dundas and Mr. Cowling conducted the case for the plaintiffs; Mr. Cfesswell and Mr. Robinson for the de fendant. It appeared from the statement of the plaintiffs' counsel, that in 1838, the defendant contracted wi th the plaintiffs for them to build him a vessel of the following dimensions, 100 feet long, 26 feet wide, 17 feet 6 inch es deep in s t e barquethehold,samemanner intiffs Thomas .Lee, a vessel previously built by the pla some other parties. The pri ce to be p aid was £l3 10s. per ton. It was also contracted that there should be no extras charged for in wood or iron work, except for patents if fitted keel as in the Thomas Le e. In June, 1839, the Athena was laid down, and Mr. Asbri d g e, the gentleman who was after wards appointed to the command,of her, superintended the building, as the defendant's agent. Captain Asbridge, when the keel was laid down, as the. plaintiffs alleged, on the de fendant's authority, had the keel made 10-1 feet, and her width extended four or five inches, in order that her appear ance might not be too flat. In the middle of the ship there was no variation from the contract, but in the depth same 18 inches were given in pursuance of Captain Asbridge's instruc tions. The vessel was launched in January, 1810, and in February an account of the extras, rendered necessary by the alterations was sent in to the defendant, to which he then made no objection, except as to some smiths' work. The builder's certificate was sent to him, and he had the ship duly registered. If the c on t rac t had been adhered to the vessel would have been of 303 tons burdens. She was however, now, in consequence of the variations, 330 tons. The de fendant said he was willing to pay for 318 tons and no more, although the contract was for only 303, and next, that there was a special contract that no extras should be charged, yet the plaintiffs claimed on that account £219 12s. 6d. Several witnesses were examined in corroboration-of the facts, and the items charged in the extra account were mi nutely compared by the learned counsel for the defence, with those found for the barque Thomas Lee ; an argument of considerable length ensued on the pleas in the declaration. The learned JUDGE intimated pretty clearly that they were in a great measure wrongly laid, and that the only question he should leave to the jury would be the amnunt of the extra charges. Mr. CRESSWELL then addressed the court on the part o the defendant, enlarging on the great importance in building, vessels by contract, and paying for them according to the registered tonnage, of the prescribed proportions being duly observed. It was of the utmost importance to the shipowner that for the purpose of capacity, the depth of the vessel should be in exact proportion to her length and breadth, otherwise he would be paying the builder for a larger tonnage than he would have an equivalent for, in the capacity of the vessel for carrying cargo. On the other hand it was the build er's interest to make the vessel as long and as broad as he could, but to make it as shallow as possible ; but the defen dant gained nothing by the little more depth which the plain tiffs had put into the vessel, because it was not made 'mid ships. He sanctioned the alterations from 303 tons to 318 tons, and be was willing to pay for that ; but the plaintiffs made the ship 330 tons, and for the difference the defendant refused to pay, inasmuch as he had not authorised it. The fact he (Mr. Cresswell) could prove by Capt. Asbridge, but unfortunately he was abroad in the vessel, and it was the knowledge of this fact which had induced the plaintiff's to bring the cause to trial. The learned counsel then directed the judge's attention to the several pleas in the declaration, particularly the fourth and fifth, contending that the plain tiffs had been paid more than the amount which they claimed for 303 tons, beyond which they did not go in their plea, in. asmuch as they had been paid for 318 tons, and that the diffe rence would overtop the bill of extras, which they ought not to have sent in. After a very long discussion, it was arranged that the exac amount of the extras supplied should be settled out of court. Under the direction of the learned JUGDE, thejury returned a verdict for the defendant on the fourth plea, that the plaintiffs had built the ship acco r di ng to the contract, and on the fifth plea that the defendant had paid all that he was bound to pay. On the other counts, which were merely for mal, the jury found for the plaintiffs. The result, substan tially, is in favour of the defendant. FOULDS V. wietcuennv. This was an action brought by the plaintiff, Abraham Foulds, against the defendant, Seymour Willou g hb y , for the recovery of the valu e of a mare and filly, which the defend ant found and converted to his use. Mr. WATSON stated the case. The plaintiff sought to recover a sum of about £lO, , being the value of a grey mare, a bay filly, and a saddle. he facts of the case were short and simple. The defendant, who resided with his b rot h er at the inn at Birkenhead , was the owner of the .Birkenhead Ferry. In the summer of last year the plaintiff had the horse in question at the fair of Birkenhead for sale, b ut , being unable to dispose of them , he was bringing them bads to his place in Liverpool, at about two o'clock in the day, He paid the ordinary ferryage for them (one defendant was oneinshailclionngfiannec( sixpence) at the pay-gate, and had them placed situation on the deck of the steam er. 1 on board at the time. Shortly afterwards some furniture was brought on board, and the plaintiff w as then directed to Place his horses in another position in the boat. They had not remained there very long when the defendant, for some cause or other, insisted on their being taken on shore. The plaintiff refused to comply with the request, whereupon the defendant led them ashore, and took them out o f si g ht of the plaintiff altogether. The plaintiff was then offered the IS. 6d. he had paid for their ferryage, but he refused to take_ it. He also refused to follow the horses, which, it app eared, were taken up to the Birkenhead Motel, and he came back in the boat to Liverpool. The following day he went over, in company with a friend, and demanded the horses from the ostler who had them in charge. At the time the defend ant and his brother had gone out shooting, but the horse: were standing in the stables. Th e os tl er having refused tc give them up, the plaintiff returned to town. The animal were then turned out to grass upon a place where little gran: was to be found they fell off very much in condition ; and on the 12th of December following, the defendant brough them over to Liverpool and had them sold by auction. horses being of little or no value at the time, they were sold for little or nothing at the sale. The plaintiff, therefore, sought the value of them at the time they had been taken from him, which was about £4O. The saddle and bridle were worth about £4 extra. The defendant pleaded that he was not guilty. After several witnesses had been exatnined to prove the Mr. CRESSWELL addressed the jury on the part of the de fendant. He contended that all that was done, admitting that it was wrong, did not amount to a conversion of the property. He stated that the horses had been an annoyance to the ladies on board the steamer, and that it was merely to prevent that annoyance that the defendant proceeded to take them on shore. Mr. Cresswell admitted that there might be grounds for an action of trespass, but not for one in trover. _ _ His LORDSHIP, in charging the jury, gave it as his opinion that there was nothing in the first part of the case, in turn ing the horses out of the boat, or in the subsequent facts as proved, to show a conversion. The jury, without leaving the box, returned a verdict for the plaintiff for £3O damages. KENT D. LEA 'AND -LAWTON In this case Frederick Kent was plaintiff, and Fabius Lea and William Lawton were the defendants. The action was brought for the recovery of the value of certain fixtures and property which were detained and sold at a sacrifice to setisfy a landlord's demand for rent. _ . . _ _ _ It appeared from the statement of the case that the plaintiff was a licensed victualler in Crosshall-street. The defendant, Lea, was the owner of a certain house in that street, which he let to a person of the name of Wm. Brown. Brown se-let it to the plaintiff. It was held on an old lease. The plaintiff became the tenant of the place in July last year, when he purchased fixtures, fitted up the interior, and continued in possession until the March following. An execution was then laid on for six months' rent which was owing by Browne, and in consequence of that execution, the plaintiff was at present in great distress. The plaintiff had nothing whatever to do with Lea, and only owed a quarter's rent to Browne, at the time of " the execution. On the 18th of March the other defendant, Lawton, who was a sergeant of mace, made the distress for half a year's rent, and it was for what then took place that the present action had been brought. Ac cording to the statute, it appeared that although a landlord was authorised to sell whatever goods might be found on the premises to satisfy himself for the rent due, yet that, if he seized more than the rent amounted to, he was liable to an action. A considerable portion of what had been seized con sisted of the fixtures. and as to fixtures, the law laid it down that the party had no right to make distress at all. The property detained amounted in value altogether to about £lOO, while the half year's rent did not exceed £2B. After a number of witnesses had been examined on both sides to prove value, &c., the jury decided as follows :—We do not consider that there was any misconduct at the sale, or that any damages should be allowed for the irregularity of the appraisement • but we find a verdict for the plaintiff for £2O, loss sustained by the sale of the fixtures. The court adjournd at a quarter past six o'clock CROWN COURT.-YESTERDAY FORGING AN INDORSEMENT TO A BILL OF EXCHANGE, AND UTTERING THE SAME WITH INTENT TO DEFRAUD Thomas Brown, 30, and Christopher Robinson Bell, 35. were inicted for having, at Manchester, feloniously forged and uttered a bill of exchange in writing, for the payment of £194 155., and with having uttered the same to one Samuel Appleyard, with intent to defraud him, they well knowing the same to be forged. The prisonerS were both fine-looking men, and were repre sented (more particularly Brown) as having, until recently, each borne good characters, and having carried on busineSs, though not conjointly, in a manner that was considered highly creditable to themselves, for a succession of years. Brown is stout, inclining to corpulency : Bell of slender and smaller build, and both bearing an undoubted air of gentility. The case, as affecting the commercial community, excited very general interest in the court ; but as the evidence was volu minous—occupied the greater part of the day—;and moreover from the requirements of the law, somewhat tedious and in volving much of the tortology of corroboration, we deem it advisable, in the previously crowded state of our columns, to condense (though necessarily imperfectly) the whole into a narrative of the leading points. Mr. Armstrong and Mr. Green conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Baines appeared for the prisoner Brown, and Mr. Adolphus for Bell. It appeared from the evidence that the prisoners, though not ostensibly connected in business, had for some months past aided and abetted each other in the preparation and ut tering of two bills, one of which,—the last that was uttered — formed the subject of the present indictment. Two bills had been uttered by the prisoners, both purporting to bear the indorsement amongst others, of Messrs. York and Sheep shanks, of Leeds. The first bill, purporting to be drawn in April last, in York, was for the sum of £156, and apparently by one Atkinson and one Hall. Amongst the indorsers were the names of York and Sheepshanks. The prisoner Brown took this bill to the Manchester Alliance Bank, and presented it to Mr. Farrar, the manager, who enquired of him who Mr. Hall was. The reply was that he wa a respectable manufac turer of Leeds. The jury was not however, called upon to decide on that fact, but whether York and Sheepshanks's signature was genuine, as attached to the subsequent bill, and whether the prisoners had uttered it with intent to defraud. The first bill was dishonoured and advice was given of the same. It further appeared that the parties finding themselves involved, drew out the bill noticed in the indictment ; also containing the assumed signatures of York and Sheepshanks, as endorsed. With this , a purchas of goods was made from the prosecutor Appleyard, which were sold at a sacrifice, and the dishonoured bill for the £156 was taken up by Brown, with the proceeds. Brown appeared to be surprised when he learned that there was a forgery on the face of the bill. An application was made for the bill to be returned by the bank, but this was re fused, until the bank wes satisfied that the transaction was a fair one. The goods selected by Brown from Appleyard, amounted to £259, and the former told the latter to make out the invoice to Brown, Bray, and Co. Bray, as 't afterwards appeared, being a person with whom Brown had entered into some sort of partnership through the negocia ;ion of Bell, in the interim between the drawing of the two Sills. Brown stated that the bill was got from a person lamed Greenwood—naming his residence. It appeared, how wer, that Bray was a person lodging in a small cottage in the )utskirts of Leeds, and that the Greenwood alluded to had re sided where it was stated, but had been dead two years. Brown himself indorsed the second bill, and it was proved that the fill ing up of it was Bell's writing, and the signature of York and Sheepshanks (his former employers) also in his writing, somewhat disguised. The prisoners were apprehended in Leeds, and on their persons were found two copies or drafts, of attempts to draw the bill, one of which was on a stamp ; but, as it contained a mistake, it had evidently been aban doned. The evidence on the whole did not appear so strong against Browne as against Bell, as related to a general know ledge of the fraud. • The prisoners were ably defended, but no witnesses were called. The judge summed up very perspicuously. and left it to the jury to consider first, whether the bill was forged, of which he thought no doubt could be entertained ; and second ly, whether the prisoners uttered it, knowing it to be forged, which was sufficient to sustain the indictment, whether they themselves forged it or not. There were some collateral points in the evidence, but they were of minor Importance, with the exception of the fact that it did not appear distinctly that Brown had received the written notice from the bank of the first bill being dishonoured, before lie aided in the uttering of the other. The jury retired, and after being absent for 35 minutes, .eturned, on re-entering the box, a verdict of Guilty against )oth prisoners. Sentence was deferred, with a view to the hearing, previ of witnesses, as to the former character of the ,soners MANSLAUGHTER CASES. Edward Stanton, aged 74, stood charged with having, at Bolton, killed and slain Betty Stanton, his wife. Ann Thompson knew the deceased. She was in the habit of getting drunk, and she and the prisoner then quarrelled. On the 14th of July witness saw her on the floor, and the prisoner was leaving her. She assisted to put her on a chair. He then kicked her, and struck her over the eye. She groaned, and made a deal of noise. She was assisted up stairs, and complained of pain in her side. She could not draw her breath. A doctor was sent for, and bled her. It happened on a Wednesday. On Saturday she appeared bet ter, but died on Sunday. Cross-examined by Mr. WlLKlNs.—Deceased had not been out on the Wednesday. She got drunk in witness's presence, at home. Her husband said, in her presence, that she was subject to fits. Leeches were also applied to her side Alridget Stothart saw them quarrelling, and saw the pri soner draw his hand at her, on the day in question. Saw her assisted up stairs. She had difficulty in drawing her breath. Saw her on Sunday morning. She still complained. The prisoner seemed much distressed. Cross-examined.—l have seen her in fits. They_ generally came on after drinking. They were " s tir-u p fits." Deceased's sister saw her before her death, and she wat very ill. Mr. Heap, surgeon, opened the body on the Monday after her death. There were internal injuries that caused mortifi cation, and corresponding marks exteriorly, as of blows. Cross-examined.—The marks might have been caused by falling in a fit. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. The prisoner was discharged. Frederick Wainwright was charged with having, at Li verpool, killed and slain Thomas Ball the younger, in a fair stand-up fight. He withdrew his first plea of nut guilty, and pleaded guilty. Sentence deferred, in order to hear witnesses as to character. Daniel Shields was indicted for killing and slaying George Myers, at Liverpool. The deceased, it was stated, came to his death by a blow from a brick, thrown from a house on the day of the last election. George Chesworth, a shipwright, of this town, said, I knew the deceased who was enzaged as a flag bearer. At about eight o'clock on the night of the election, I received a blow from a stone on the arm, in Fisher-street. I saw the prisoner go on the roof of his mother's house. He and others commenced throwing stones from the roof. I saw a stone pass by me, and deceased immediately fell. He was carried away. Stones were thrown at us from the roof till we got wit of the street. The blood was running down the deceased's face. 1 saw him afterwards with his head on the table, and afterwards saw him when he was dead. I did not see the stone strike the deceased. Wood, a ropemaker, saw the deceased after he bad re ceived the wound. He died some days after. Edwards, a shipwright. said, I saw the prisoner on the )p of the house with a brick in his hand. (Mr. Murphy here voluntarily defended the prisoner.) Cross-examined.—Stones might have fallen easily from the Louses further off, from which other parties were throwing. Ann Myers, widow of the deceased, said he was brought come much wounded. He died on the Sunday but one afterwards. Mr. Pennington, surgeon, said, I was called in to see the deceased on the 4th of July. I attended him until he died. His death was caused by the violence of the injury. He was trepanned and died soon afterwards. James Patterson, police-officer, apprehended the prisoner. He said Myers and his gang threw stones into his mother's house first, and they were obliged to throw for self-pro tection. His brother, who had gone to sea, was, he said, present at the time. Cross-examined.—There were violent assaults made upon houses, and many parties were injured. Several cases showing this were tried at the last sessions. Mr. MURPHY ably addressed the jury in behalf of the prisoner. He contended that there was no proof that the prisoner committed the violence that caused the death of the - deceased: The jury found the prisoner Not Guilty. Edward Nickson was indicted for killing and slaying Mar garet Robinson. The case was pretty fully reported in our police intelligence shortly after the occurrence. John Nickson a boy, said, he lived at the time in Norris street. The prisoner was his father. On the 31st of Ma} last his father came home tipsy, and lay down on the bed. His mo ther came home with some muscles. She asked him to get up and have some. A quarrel ensued, and he got up and kicked her. She tried to get out of the cellar. He pulled her down, and struck her in the side with a knife. She called witness to go for the police, and prisoner said, if he did he would serve him the same way. She got up the steps, and he pull e d h er back and she fell o nside. She got up, and he caught her by the breast and threw her on the floor on her back. She cried, " Don't lick me !" She sat down on one of the steps. She then endeavoured to get out again, and he pulled her back and she fell with her head on the lower step. She was afterwards put on the bed. She never spoke afterwards. Cross-examined.—She was not tipsy when she came home that he knew of. His father kicked her about four times. The knife bent when he struck her on the waist. There was a procession that day. His father carried a colour, and his mother went to see it ; she'was not drunk that he knew of. A female, named Musker, said she saw the deceased lying on the floor of the cellar. Shedid not appear to be sensible. Witness assisted to put her in the bed. She afterwards saw the prisoner, who said he thought she had been - drinking poison or something. When she first saw her, prisoner said nothing about her having been drinking. On the second oc asion the prisoner was crying. Another female saw the prisoner push the deceased, and afterwards saw her fall. Inspector Oottam apprehended the prisoner. He told him he was apprehending him for killing his wile. He replied she was not his wife. . . Mr. Eckerly, surgeon, made a post 7nortenz examination of the body. There was a fracture of the skull, which was the cause of death. There was no mark on the side as of a blow. She had stays on when he first saw her. The sister of the deceased said she (deceased) was not mar ried. The prisoner and she bad lived fourteen years together. Mr. MURPHY spoke at some length in behalf of the pri soner. _ . . His LORDSHIP summed up perspicuously, and the jury returned a verdict of guilty. His LORDSHIP, after seriously admonishing the prisoner on the violence of his conduct to the deceased, who was under his protection, sentenced him to be imprisoned four months,—the first and last week in solitary confinement. Luke Mills, was indicted for causing the death of Stephen Settle, at Ratcliffe, near Bury. _ Richard Settle, brother to the deceased, said that on the night of the 24th April, he was going home with him, reckoning their wages, when the prisoner came up and said something, to which his brother replied. They called each other nicknames, They afterwards struggled together. Both pulled off their jackets, and they fell several times. Luke had iron clogs on. He threw deceased over his head, and ran two or three yards to him and kicked. Deceased afterwards walked home with witness. He held his hands to his belly and said he was ruined. He died on the Sunday night after wards, (next day.) He was well before. Cross examined.—His brother had been labouring under a looseness of the bowels for three days. James Blakely saw the affray. They rolled a little on the ground. Stephen said he would pull of his jacket, which witness took to be a challa nge to fight. They both took their jackuts off and began again. Stephen struck first. Mills then threw him over his head, and afterwards gave him a kick. He was close to him at the time, and the kick was not a heavy one. They wrestled again and rolled a little. Stephen afterwards walked away by his brother's side, without any assistance. Another witness corroborated the last, in essential par- ticulars 11Ir. Holmes, Surgeon, made a post mortem examination, and found inflamation and rupture of the bowels, also slight mortification. A kick or a severe fall would produce it. There were no outward marks of violence. Cross-examined by Mr. WHAtiss.—l cannot say what time inflammation had been going on. Mortification is the death of the parts. If I had not heard of the wrestling, I should have attributed the rupture to external violence._ 1 do not think that the inflammation would cause the rupture. The bowels might be ruptured, by their being elastic, without having an external mark. Mr. MURPHY addressed the jury fir the prisoner, con tending that the diarrhoea under which the deceased laboured might have produced inflammation, which would reach to mortification ; and that the parts having lost their power, a rupture might arise from the abruption of the contents, without a blow. _ _ _ _ HIS LORDSHIP summed up, noticing the kick with a clog tipped with iron, which was not denied ; and he knew of no sort of fair lighting in which such an instrument could be used. His lordship inclined to take the evidence of the me dical witness in preference to the suggestion thrown out by the learned counsel. The jury found the prisoner Guilty. The learned JUDGE in passing sentence adverted in a for cible manner to the horrid practice of kicking, of which he was glad to find only this case in the present calendar. '1 he sentence was, that he be imprisoned for three calendar months and kept to hard labour, and that the concluding week in each month be in solitary confinement. Alexander M'Cauley was indicted for the killing and slay ing, at Liverpool, of John Williams. Some difference had arisen between the prisoner and deceased at the corner of a street, and a few blows were exchanged, when the deceased fell, and almost imrnediaiely expired. It.appeared, however, from the evidence of the surgeon who had examined the body, that the immediate cause of death was a disease of the heart, which the slightest encounter might render fatal. The jury acquitted the prisoner, and he was discharged. POST-OFFICE CASE In behalf of Thomas Miller, who had pleaded guilty to a charge of having embezzled and secreted three letters from the post-office establishment, given to him for delivery, six witnesses of respectability spoke as to character. They had all known him for many years as a well-conducted and re spectable man. His Lordship said he should look at the de positions before he passed sentence. SENTENCE ON WAINWRIGHT Several witnesses gave the prisoner an excellent character as a fellow-workman at Mr. Berry's foundry, (where he had killed a man in a .provoked encounter,) as a quiet, inoffensive, and well-disposed youth. His Lordship fined him is. and discharged him. -----~-. NISI PRIUS COURT.—THURSDAY EDWARDS V. BAIRD. This was an action brought by the plaintiff, John Edwards, against the defendant, James Baird, the amount of certain goods sold and delivered, and work and labour done on an account stated. The defendant pleaded that he was never indebted to him and has a set off to a greater amount than that claimed. Mr. MARTIN stated the case. The plaintiff had formerly been a surveyor for a gas-light company in Liverpool, and since then, he acted as excavator of different works about the town. The defendant had retired from business, and was the owner of a good many houses. The plaintiff's demand for excavating houses belonging to the defendant, and super intending their erection, amounted to £7O. The parties were connected, and had been on good terms with each other until lately. The facts of the case were few and simple. It appeared that in the beginning of the present year, the de fendant proposed to build eight houses near Dean-street, in a court, and to convert a large house, situated at the corner of the street, into live tenements. Afterwards, however, he altered his determination, and the large house was pulled down and live small houses built on the site of it. The plaintiff had excavated the ground. At first it was determined that a Mr.' Wood should be the architect, but subsequently that determination was altered also, and the plaintiff actei in the capacity of architect and surveyor until the ereetioi had been nearly completed. The first item of his demand was for excavating the foundation, and that amounted to £l7 10s. The next was for superintending the erection of the houses. He attended regularly from six o'clock in the morning until the same hour in the evening; and for this be charged 10s. a day. The next item was for the cartage of the rubbish from the houses, for which he claimed a sum of £26. The defence was that the plaintiff was indebted to the defendant for the value of a team of horses and a cart, which had been sold by the latter to the former. After the examination of the first witness, Mr. Ca.ussweLL, on the part of the defendant, agreed to have the case referred for settlement to parties out of court. A verdict was accordingly taken for the plaiutifl, subject to a reference. RRETHERTON V. PALMER. In this case Joseph Bretherton was plaintiff, and John Palmer defendant. The action was brought for the recovery of money lent, advanced, and paid, and for .stabling and medicine supplied to the defendant's horses. Mr. CROMPTON stated the case. The plaintiff is a veterinary surgeon, in Liverpool, and is in the habit of re ceiving and stabling horses which arrive from different parts of the country. He is also in the habit of advancing money to his customers to enable them to make purchases of horses, and on the sale of them afterwards he charges a guinea a week and 5 per cent. commission. Having had dealings with the defendant, who was a horse dealer at Northampton, and who had horses at his establishment in the year 1839, ac counts were settled between them on the footing of the charges mentioned. From the month of April to that of June of the present year they had had considerable dealings together, and at one period the sum of £350 was owing by the defendant to the plaintiff, of which he had subsequently paid about 1:250. A balance of £97 4s remained due, and for the recovery of that sum the present action was brought, he having disputed the payment of the five per cent. commission, upon the ground that it should not have exceeded two and a half. Lawrence 'Walsh having proved that 5 per cent. was the usual commission charged at the plaintiff's concern, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for the sum claimed. FLETCHER V. GREY. Verdict, by consent, for the plaintiff, for £l4 13s. sd. HEATON V. YATES AND ANOTHER. This was an action in replevin, brought by the plaintiff, John Heaton, against the defendants, Henry Yates and John Rye, for the recovery of the value of certain articles of fur niture, sold by the defendants for a quarter of a year's rent, amounting to £22. Mr. JAMES appeared for the defendants. No counsel ap peared on behalt of the plaintiff, and the witnesses on both sides having been absent from court, a nonsuit was entered. DOE DEM FARNWORTH AND OTHERS V. JOHNSON. This was an action of ejectment. Verdict for the plaintiff DEO DEM HUGHES V. JONES TODD V. WELLS AND ANOTHER BATEMAN AND OTHERS V. PINDER. This was an action brought by the executors of James Bateman, against the defendant, Robert Pinder, for the re covery of the amount of a promissory note for £75 ls. Bd. The note was drawn in the year 1830, and had been signed by several persons of the name of Pinder and Pinn, who were severally related to each other. Various small sums had been given in part payment of it, which went in discharge of the interest and a portion of the principal, but a balance of £55 remained due, for the recovery of which the action had been brought. Tile defendant pleaded that the note had been made upwards of six years since, but as as a payment of £1 had been made subsequent to the bringing of the present ac tion, it was contended by counsel that such payment amounted to an acknowlegment of the debt, and took the case out of the statute. His LORDSHIP ruled that the payment in question amounted to an acknowledgment of the debt ; and a verdict was returned for the plaintiffs for the full amount of the sum claimed. ELLISON V. BLINKAItN. This was an action brought by the plaintiff, Richard Elli son, against the defendant, William Blinkarn, for the recovery of the amount of a bill of Exchange for £4O. Verdict for the plaintifffor the sum claimed This was an action of ejectment brought by the plaintiff, Thomas Hughes, against John Jones, to recover possession of a certain lease, which had been seized under a fieri facial, and sold by the sheriff at a low price. The execution credi tor was the purchaser, and after satisfying the debt and costs for which the execution had been issued, a small surplus was handed over to the lessor of the plaintiff. The defendant obtained possession of the premises under this proceeding. The question for the jury to decide was, whether the defend ant was entitled to retain it, the sheriff not having executed any assignment of the lease. Verdict for the plaintiff, subject to a motion for a non suit. This was an action brought by the plaintiff, James Todd, against the defendants, John Wells and Margaret Fitch, for the recovery of the amount of a promissory note for £lOO. The plaintiff was a farmer residing at Huntingdon, near York, and in the year 1827 had lent the defend an t s the sum in question upon their promissory note. They continued to pay the interest on tye money regularly until October last, when the plaintiff said he would require £5O of the principal in the present, and the remaining po in the next year. The first £5O not having been duly paid, the action was brought for the recovery of the full amount. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for the sum claimed. HORNBY AND OTHERS V. BROWNE. This was an action brought b y the plaintiffs, Joseph Hornby and others, assignees, against the defend an t, Ell en Browne, for the recovery of the amount of a bill of exchange for £5OO. Verdict for the plaintiffs for the sum claimed. KELLETT V. HEAP AND OTHERS. In this case William Kellett was plaintiff, and John and William Walker Heap were defendants. The action was brought for the recovery of money lent on account stated. Mr. MARTIN stated the case. The plaintiff was an inn keeper at Leyland, and the defendants were cotton manufac turers, but had subsequently resigned business. The ques tion the jury had to decide was one of considerable import ance, as a great number of other cases would depend upon the fate of the present one. It was whether the defendants were liable to pay money which had been l'orrowed by a person in their employment, named Joseph Edge, and for their use and benefit. In Lancashire it was the practice for manufac turers to put out work to be woven by weavers, and to send a person, who was called the " putter out," to the different towns to collect the work done, and to deliver out materials, and there was generally some appointed place where the weavers met the " putter out" on certain stated days. The loom, which was the subject of the present action, had been made during the time the defendants had been manufactu rers. They had a warehouse at Leyland, where the weavers in the neighbourhood were in the habit of assembling to pro cure work, and to be paid for what they had executed; and the defendants were in the constant habit, when they fell short of money, to go to the plaintiff, and to borrow money to pay their weavers. The que s ti on for the jury to decide would be in respect of a loan made by the plaintiff on the 26th April, 1829, upon a note received in this form : " Please to lend us £5 until next Friday. " JOHN HEAP and Co. "JOSEPH EDGE." " Mr. Kellett. It would be proved by the person who took the note and brought back the money from the plaintiff, that the sum so borrowed bad been paid for work (lone on account of the defendants; and it would be further proved that the defen dants were cognizant of this mode of conducting their busi ness, that various persons who had held the same situation as Mr. Edge had pursued the same course, and that the money they had borrowed had been subsequently repaid by the defendants. Evidence so irresistible would entitle the plaintiff to a verdict. There was one difficulty in the case, namely, that Mr. Edge had been subsequently guilty of misconduct in the defendants' employment ; but as the plaintiff had nothing to do with the acts of that gentleman, and as the money had been unquestionably advanced by him, there could be no doubt of the fact that he ought to be re paid. Several witnesses were then examined to prove the case ; after which, Mr. CRESSWELL contended that the authority given to Edge to borrow money was conditional, and that the plain tiff was bound to show that the defendants had failed to sup ply him with sufficient money to pay the weavers, before he borrowed any from the plaintiff. The point was argued at some length, and eventually the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for £5, subject to a motion for a nonsuit, if the court above should be of opinion that there had not been sufficient evidence to sustain the action. GASKELL V. PATES. In this case, Henry Gaskell was plaintiff, and Elizabeth Yates defendant, and the action was brought for the recovery of the amount of a promissory note for £B4 19s, payable by instalments. The defendant pleaded that she had been in duced to make the note by fraud upon the part of the plain tiff. Mr. CRESSWELL stated the case. He said the plaintiff felt himself aggrieved at the form the proceedings had taken, and was extremely glad at having an opportunity to refute an imputation on his conduct in the matter. The defendant bad thought fit to plead fraud and cunning, but the circum stances would amply prove that no such means had been used. It appeared that the defendant's late husband had been indebted to the plaintiff, who treated him with the greatest possible indulgence, but at last brought an action, and got a judgment, which he allowed to remain over. The defendant's husband died worth money, and the defendant possessed herself of his stock in trade. The plaintiff, con ceiving that she ought to pay him the amount due, proceeded to her residence at Waterloo, in company with Mr. Cross, an attorney, where she gave the promissory note, and subse quently refused to pay the first instalment, which made her liable to the full amount. Verdict for the plaintiff for the sum claimed. HALL V. PROCTOR In this case Thomas Hall was plaintiff, and James Proctor defendant. The declaration was on the case. It stated that the plaintiff was a colour-manufacturer, and that the defen dant had spoken certain slanderous words, which imputed insolvency to him in the way of his trade. Mr. CD.ESSWELL stated the case. The plaintiff in the ac tion was a person carrying on the business of a colour-mer chant, of respectability and good credit. The defendant had formerly been in business in Liverpool, but was at present living on his own means. The plaintiff was under the neces sity of seeking the reparation of his character at the hands of the jury, it having been affected by a very gross and injurious imputation cast upon it by the defendant, under circum stances which showed that the latter had not been labouring under the effects of passion at the time. When a person said to a trader that he was an insolvent man, unable to pay for purchases made, it chewed a deliberate intent to do an injury. Such had been the course of conduct pursued by the defen dant in this instance : but what added to the enormity of his offence was this, namely, that after saying he was sorry for what he bad previously said, he afterwards retracted, and repeated the offence, without the slightest provocation on the part of the plaintiff. The first occasion upon which the offensive language had been used was in the month of April last. The parties met by accident at a public-house called the Robert Burns, situated in Brownlow-hill. The plaintiff happened to be there with his friends, when the defendant entered. They had previously dealt together, but had ceased to do so for some time. The defendant came up to the plain tiff and said he wanted to sell him a quantity of ochre, upon which the plaintiff said he had no great objection to deal with him. The conversation immediately after dropped. The defendant then proposed that some of the company should play at drafts with him. None of the plaintiff's friends agreed to play ; the defendant got displeased at their refusal; and in his passion he struck the table with his hand. The - force of the blow broke one of the glasses„ . The defendant ex- pressed a hope that the company would subscribe a penny a piece to pay for it. The plaintiff refused to subscribe, where upon the defendant, addressed the plaintiff, said he was not like him, a poor scrawl ; that he could pay his way, a thing the plaintiff could never do ; that he had been watching the plaintiff of late; that the plaintiff was one of the biggest scoundrels and wastrels in Liverpool ; that be had heard the fact from a thousand ; that he was acquainted with a party who would do the plaintiff up before long; and that he should have rapped at the plaintiff himself, but that he was not worth powder and shot. This language was calculated to injure the feelings and circumstances of the plaintiff. The defendant, however, never retracted it, but, upon the con trary, boasted afterwards that lie had succeeded in driving the plaintiff out of the public-house. The plaintiff said at once that the language was insufferable, and requested his companions to take notes of what had been said, whereupon the defendant observed that it was all true, and that he was ready to prove it. Subsequently the defendant had notice served upon him, that an action of defamation of character would be commenced. A. friend then interfered, and after some negotiation, it was arranged that the defendant should give a dinner to a party of twenty persons. and make an ac knowledgment in their presence, of having done a wrong to the plaintiff; but, when the day for sending rc,t,nd the invi tations arrived, the defendant refused to comply with the terms of the arrangement. Accordingly the action pro ceeded, and since it had been brought, the defendant not only refused to make any reparation, but he actually said over and over again, that the plaintiff was a swindling scoundrel, and that he was ready to prove the fact. After the examination of several witnesses, to prove the facts, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—damages NEWHAM, JUN., V. GEIGER. Verdict, by consent. for the plaintiff for .£295 Gs ht‘GLEN V. BROWNE• This was an undefended case. It was brought by the plain tiff, Robert M`Glen, against William Browne, for the reco very of a bill of exchange for £392 7s. 2d. Verdict for the plaintiff for the sum claimed. PROCTOR V. Nl' ANDREW AND OTHERS. This was an action brought by the plaintiff, James Proctor, against the defendants, Robert M'Andrew, Joseph Roscoe, and Ebenezer Roe, for the recovery of a puncheon of gin, which had been lost through the negligence of the defendants. Mr. KNowLEs stated the case. The plaintiff is a spirit mer chant in Liverpool, and the defendants are known by the name of the London and Liverpool Shipping Co., and the action had been brought to recover the sum of £4B, being the value of a puncheon of gin, which bad been lost. The facts were simply these :—the plaintiff sent an order to Messrs. Segar and Evans, of Mil'bank, for twenty-five puncheons of gin, the whole of which were shipped on board one of the defen dant's vessels, called the Fabius, in the Thames, to be brought to Liverpool on payment of th e freight. The puncheons were placed under a quantity of oil. The ship arrived safely, and on the 6th of March, the plaintiff received notice that the gin was ready to be delivered to him. The warehouseman of the plaintiff accordingly went to the dock where the ship had been lying, to superintend the delivery. The mate of the vessel then informed him that one of the puncheons had leaked out ; and it was then ascertained that by some means or other nearly the whole of the puncheon of gin had either leaked or been taken out of the puncheon. The other puncheons were got out comparatively safe, but the oil had done some damage to them ; but the present action had not been brought for the recovery of the damage sustained by any of the puncheons except the one which had leaked out. The question for the jury to decide would be, whether the puncheon in question had leaked, or whether its contents had been taken out designedly. Several of the witnesses were then examined to prove the case. Mr. CitEsswELL addressed the jury on the part of the de fendants. He contended that it was impossible, from the situation in which the puncheons had been placed under the main -hatchway of the vessel, that pilferage could have - taken place, and that the loss had been caused by leakage. A number of witnesses were examined for the defence ; after which His LORDSHIP charged the jury, who, after an absence from court for half an hour, returned a verdict for the plain tiff —damages £3O Bs. The court adjourned at half-past five o'clock to nine this morning. MEETING OF THE DOCK COMMITTEE At the weekly meeting, yesterday, the following members were present:—Messrs. Berm, (chairman,) Horsfall T. Holt, Middleton, Smith, Mellor, Bu:ley, G. Holt, Tobin, Ch a pman, Martin, Evans, and Aikin. The Sub-committee of Works reported that several con tracts had been made for excavations, and scuttling the end of No. 1 pierhead. Gas, from the new company, was ordered to be supplied to the offices of the South Dock-yard. The Sub-committee, to whom the matter of the head keeper of the Rock Lighthouse was referred, reported that they had investigated all the circumstances, and having found him guilty of neglect, of misrepresentation, and of fal sifying the log, besides haying the assurance of the marine surveyor that no c onfidence could be placed in him, they were unable to recommend the general committee to retain him in the service. Curwen was accordingly discharged, but the fine of £5 imposed upon him some time ago was re mitted. The Sub-committee were authorised to select a fit person to fill the vacancy thus occasioned. The situation of clerk to the marine surveyor, salary £BO per annum, was declared vacant, in consequence of the re signation of Mr. Thomas Davis. Referred to the Sub committee to recommend a successor. The same Sub-committee was also emp ow ered to make arrangeme nts for the working of Clarence, Canning, and Salthouse docks, the masters of which are in bad health. The committee then proceeded to th e t ransac ti on of some financial business and then adjourned. CHALLENQE TO THE MEMBERS OF THE MANCHESTER CONFERENCI G E NTLE MEN 9 —What I anticipated has come to pass, you have joined with the servants of " Belial," and with delusion the most infatuated, and most arrogant, you have presumed s peech of Tuesday last) that you are (see your chairman's able to work out the, regeneration of your country ; even , ncu are your materials, you though as a body, so dare not seek for God's blessing or your efforts, through the only channel of which it is to be obtained —namely, our Lord Jesus Christ. How the Papist and Socinian must have weakness and wi c k e d ness ? and o f your politenes s ? I h ave addressed re oiced in yo ur what am I to think your secretary by private letter, and yourselves, as a body, iiriply because rny arguments are through the public press, and , yet you have not deigned to notice either. And why ? in order that you may have no hole to unanswerable. But, creep out of, so that the Papists and Socinians may have no reason to say there is none o stand up for the honour of the your body, you may de living God, I engage to meFt any o f pate, and prove the following from the authorised version of the Bible :- Ist, That it is il,ue to the honour of God that there should upholding his word, and honouring his be a national churcb, name. 2dlv, That the Clinrch of England does so. idly, That you are I )olitical schismatics. If you refuse to me et me, pray have a little modesty, a t arrogate not to yourselves the . title of Chri s ti a n ministers.- I am, gentlemen, your ol*dient T servant, W. RACEY, Lieut. R. N. The increase in the average for the last ten years bas be nearly equal to that of the preceding twenty years! PROPOSED UNION FOR PRAYER THROUGHOUT THE WORLD BETWEEN THE 2n AND 11Ta OCTOBER OF THIS YEAR. It gives us great pleasure to inform our readers that the above noble scheme for directing, concentrating, and adding fervency to the prayers of the " children of God scattered abroad throughout the world," in behalf of those common interests which every disciple of our absent Lord holds dearer than life itself, is becoming very widely known, and the invitations to join in it are cordially responded to by Christians of various denominations in all quarters of the globe. The originators, who we find are resident in the great and, it may almost be said, religious, city of Glasgow, have taken care to circulate the necessary information over the length and breadth of our own country, and throughout the various dependencies of the empire, as well as in the United States, &c. • copies of the address have been in duo time forwarded to the several mission stations of all the Pro testant churches and societies. An early opportunity was embraced t o bring the subject under the notice of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, which venerable court unanimously issued a hearty recommendation of the plan to the ministers and people within her pale both at home arid in the colonies. As one of the effects of this sanction, we find the Synod of Canada preparing to unite with energy in the duty and privilege to which their distant brethren affec tionately call them. No doubt (though unknown to us) the heads and representation bodies of other churches are tak ing similar steps to prosper and join the hallowed enterprise. 'We have not heard whether the archbishops of the Church of England have been applied to a view to procuring an ex ercise of their authority in stimulating the work among the bishops, clergy, and laity of our beloved and ancient branch of the catholic church. Surely such an obviously plain course has not been neglected. There is a want somewhere, however. The success which has been vouchsafed the ex cellent Mr. Haldane Ste Wart in his annual appeal for a con cert of a similar kind on the first day of the year, points him out as the fitting advocate of this extension of his own ho noured proposal. Singularly blessed as we believe that scheme to have been, we anticipate more from this. The present takes a wider range—it is the call not of an indivi dual but of a society—and is now issued and enforced, not merely in their own name, but under the formal sanction of ecclesiastical authority. Let us hope that the united church of England and Ireland will manifest its zeal in the cause of Christ, by being ready in this great work, and thus availing itself of the means opened up in God's providence, for pro moting its purity and influence, and advancing the kingdom of the Messiah. The address that has been published is a document worthy of diligent study. We content ourselves here with a short recapitulation of its purport. After stating the fundamental truth that believers are one with Christ, the head of the church, and one with each other as the members of the church, it deduces the conclusion, " that as there is thus a a coininunity,„of privilege established among Christians, so there ought to - be a community of feeling and of aim in the exercise of that privilege." The design of God in constitu ting the church and calling a people to himself is next . brought forward—their glorifying of his name, first as subjects and specimens of his grace, and, secondly, as channels or instru ments whereby grace is communicated to their fellow-men. " In respect of their active agency, they are appointed in and under Christ to deal with men on behalf of God, and to deal with God on behalf of men." It is to the latter of these high functions the proposal is directed—that of being " the Lord's retnembrancers." And the humiliating confession is made that professing Christians have too generally lost sight of this duty, and even given occasion to our Lord to say, in a re proachful sense, " Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name." The leading subjects of petition are then narrated : 1. Each believer should pray earnestly for himself. 2. He should pray for all other believers, that they, in like manner, should be living Apostles of Christ. 3. Christians should pray for all connected with them by relationship, neighbourhood, dependency, or otherwise. 4. They ought to pray for the Sovereign, magistrates, and commonwealth under which they live, that Christian princi ple may regulate all the national proceedings ; and for their fellow-subjects, that they may be joint heirs of the kingdom of heaven. 5. The purity, unity, and increase of the visible church should be prayed for. Connected with this subject is prayer, fot the raising up of highly qualified men for the ministry, and for the strengthening, prospering, and multiplying of missionaries. 6. Special prayer should be made for the conversion of Israel, as the most remarkable event which is to take place previous to the coming of our Lord. It is to be life from the dead to the world and the chureh. 7. Along with prayer for Israel, supplications should be made for the outpouring of the spirit on all flesh, the destruc tion of Antichrist, the abolition of idolatry, the universal overthrow of Christ's kingdom, and the universal diffusion of the gospel and its blessings. 8. Believers should, in their prayers. look forward to the kingdom of glory itself. It may be found best to follow the model left us in the Lord's prayer, and begin with the high est subject—the coming of Christ, and descend in the scale of general importance, following the inverse order of the fore going heads, till each individua terminate in his own per sonal case. Confession of sin and giving of thanks will, of course, be intermixed with his supplications by the devout and humble Chrsitian. It is satisfactory to find, notwithstanding their deplorable dissensions on the important question of ecclesiastical polity, there is still such a prevalence of right feeling between chuich men and dissenters that they can unite as they do in the present instance in any judicious scheme that is brought forward to advance the cause of truth. The deficiency of brotherly love and the want of unanimity is aggravated by want of sufficient zeal in the prosecution of those objects in which all Christians are alike interested. The present is pre-eminently a time for throwing aside dis cord and uniting in prayer and effect. The past and recent history of missions is beyond measure encouraging. The state of the Jews presents the promise of their speedy return from their dire apostacy. The walls of China are tottering to their foundation that the heralds of the gospel may be wel comed. Heathen superstition in India, and wherever it has been assailed however feebly, ceases to offer effectual resist ance. The church is decidedly in an expectant attitude, yet, alas, averse to move forward ;—and the world, the careless world, is impressed with a dread of coming wants speaking terror to the gospel, peace to the saints of God. Our readers will observe that the period of ten days, com mencing on the 2d and ending on the 11th of next October, is the time appointed for this prayer union. What a blessed thought that then thousands and tens of thousands of God's people, widely dissevered as the - places - of - their habitation may be—some in the regions of hyperborean cold, others on the burning plains of India—some in the vast regions of Australia, others in the recesses of the Canadian forests — some in the densely-peopled cities of Europe and America, others in the isles of the South Sea and on the trackless ocean—will bend their knees at one and the same time at the same throne of grace, to present the same petition in the same all-prevailing name. And they will not ask in vain, for they only seek the fulfilment of what God has promised to do in answer to earnest, united, believing prayer. " If, when the primitive church assembled with one accord in one place at Jerusalem, the Holy Spirit was remarkably poured out in answer to their united prayers, what might we not expect if all Christians throughout the world were to agree together as concerning what they should ask ! If, in answer to the prayers of the 120 disciples, the Pentecostal first-fruits were given, might we not hope that a full harvest would be reaped when thousands or tens of thousands came in one body to the throne of grace—all guided by the same spirit of adoption—all pleading the finished work of Immanuel—and praying that the adorable Redeemer might see of the travail of his soul, and be fully satisfied?" We extract the following "Plan of the Proposed Union for Prayer" :- 1. During the time specified in the accompanying address, that is, for ten days from Saturday the 2d, to Monday the 11th October, 1841, inclusive, it is understood and agreed that the hour betwixt eight and nine in the morning and eight and nine in the evening, or as near that as possible, shall each day be given to prayer for the objects mentioned in the address. On Saturday, the 2d October, it is strongly recommended that fasting should be conjoined with prayer, and as much of the day as circumstances will admit given to religious exercises ; and that Monday, the 11th, being the last of the ten days, should be observed, as far as may be, as a day of thanksgiving. In reference to duties of this kind, let the gracious encouragement, applicable to them as well as to deeds of charity, be remembered—that a iaan is accepted ac cording to what he hath, and not according to what he hath not. 2d Cor. viii. 12. 2. It is very earnestly desired that where ministers approve of the proposed concert, they would, some time previously, direct the minds of their people to the subject, and that they would meet at least once on a weekday during the proposed period, along with their congregations, for the purpose of praying together for the various objects mentioned. 3. Heads of families should also bring these objects before their households, and make them in an especial manner matter of prayer in their family exercises during the specified time. _ _ _ ••••••••+• 4. Thereafter, Christians everywhere are requested to re member, that the hour betwixt eight and nine every Sabbath morning is already observed by many in Scotland and Eng land, as a season of united prayer for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and arc respectfully invited to join therein. ILLUMINATED CLOCKS TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD. Sln,—l beg to draw the attention of the authorities to the clock of St. George's Church. It is called " illuminated ;" but it is suffering under an eclipse at present " as the hours wax great." It would be a great convenience if a little more light were thrown into it. By half-past eleven and twelve the figures are scarcely distinguishable. Apropos of clocks : —lt has been stated that the Town-hall clock cannot, in con sequence of the construction of the dome, be lighted from within. Could not it be so contrived as to be lighted from the outside—the light being thrown upon the face of the dial ? P. S.—St. George's cloc all this evening has been scarcely visible. 19th August, 1841. PEDESTRIAN. Lord Mostyn and Sir Stephen Glynne,Bart.,liave recently made considerable additions to their estates in Flintshire. A tradesman in London recently employed a professional gentleman to recover a debt of thirty shillings; he suc ceeded, and the costs were seventy pounds ! A woman (lied in Guernsey on Tuesday week of the extra ordinary stature of seven feet two. She had been exhibited as a giantess by her brother, who is seven feet seven inches. There is not a solitary pawnbroker in the town of Carmar then ; " a fact," says the IVelshman, " which illustrates the virtue and prudence of her inhabitants." For a very simple reason—the Welsh pawnbrokers are particularly fond of so ciety. At the late Wesleyan conference a document was read from :he committee on education, sliewing that they have under :heir care in Great Britain 3,444 Sunday schools, and 131 lay and infant schools,—including a total of 390,627 ; with about 64,250 teachers, and nearly 1,000 school libraries. It is reported that Sir Michael O'Loghlen and Mr. George Evans, late member for the county of Dublin, are to be raised to the peerage. Lord Congleton (Sir Henry Parnell) is about to be ap pointed a commissioner of the Irish poor laws. SIGNIFICANT.-At a meeting of the Dublin Repeal Asso tion on Tuesday, an attempt was made by Mr. John O'Con nell to bring forward a resolution repudiating any. intention of Catholic ascendancy in the event of their o btaining a re peal of the Union. The proposition was opp osed by Mr. O'Connell as unnecessary, and of course was not persevered In. The next Wesleyan Conference is appointed to be held in London, on the last Wednesday of July, 1842. On Sunday last the lion. and Rev. Edward H. Grimston, late M.P. for the borough of St. Albans, officiated for the first time as minister of St. Michael's Church. The hon. and rev. gentleman has a living at Great Ibaey, near Sudbury. Essex Herald. At the Limerick assizes, Thomas Barkeley was sentenced to 15 years' transportation, for administering sulphate of copper and Spanish flies to wife (only a fortnight married) with intent to kill her, and Catherine Ryan, a paramour of his, was sentenced to the same punishment, for inciting him to the deed. MAKING TILE MOST OF A MURDERER. —The skeleton of Corder, the murderer, stands in a glass case, in the mu seum of the Suffolk Infirmary, Bury St. Edmund's, with a money-box below, to which, by an ingeniously contrived spring, the grisly anatomy points the attention of visitors, when they approach the spot. The receipts are said to average £5O per annum. CONFERENCE OF POLITICAL PREACHERS AT MANCHESTER. The first act of the comedy called " The Conference of Clergy and Ministers on the Corn Laws," was performed in the Manchester Town-hall, on Tuesday, the second on Wed nesday, the third yesterday, and the fourth is no doubt pro ceeding at this very moment. When all is over we suppose the Whig and radical journals, and those who act upon their principles, will shout as if the battle was won, and the agri cultural interest laid prostrate. To accomplish that, how ever, more will be required than has yet been accomplished. The proceedings commenced a few minutes after ten o'clock, by the Rev. Mr. WKERROW reading some commit tee arrangements. After that he said they had received 1500 replies to their invitations, and only six were decidedly op posed to them. There was about an equal number who had expressed hesitation as to the propriety of attending, but by far the greater number had expressed their entire concur rence in the important objects which they considered they had in view. The speaker then mentioned the names of se veral ministers, who, he said, had been taken ill at the ele venth hour, and could not attend. On producing a letter from the Rev. W. M. Bunting, he said he could only read a part of it, on which there were loud cries of " read all," but the rev. gentleman resolutely declined complying with the wishes of the meetiug. There was also a letter from Dr. Chalmers, in which the same method of giving favourable portions of it only was adopted. It, however, escaped in the reading that it was the doctor's opinion that the repeal of the corn laws would not be of permanent advantage to the country. Sonic other business was then about to be proceeded with when The Rev. W. GADSBY said. he had felt a little astonished that, in an assembly of that nature, seeking the benefit of starving thousands, it should not he introduced by prayer. To him it seemed a shame, as pious ministers of the gospel, not to think it worth while to call upon God to bless them. A MINISTER said, he thought, as ministers, that on all questions that were deemed of importance to bring them to gether, they should acknowledge God. The Rev. Mr. NOLAN observed that the importance of imploring the divine blessing was not overlooked; that as one of the Manchester ministers, he felt it his duty to say, that, in previous meetings of ministers, this subject had been considered ; and that when the gentlemen composing the provisional committee had returned, and the meeting was regluarly commenced, the proceedings would be introduced with prayer, or any other means they might think proper. The subject had been previously under the serious consider ation of gentlemen in Manchester, and he had no doubt the gentlemen below were considering the matter while he was speaking. The matter would be decided when the temporary committee came before the meeting. The CHAIRM AN said, in his mind the series of engagements to which they had devoted themselves should commence with prayer. He was told, however, that prayer would most likely he the course proceeded in, when the gentlemen who were appointed on the committee returned to the conference. He confessed that this appeared to him a situation so serious, and the conference, consisting of ministers of different de nominations, so important, that it would be in perfect har mony with that meeting, and that preliminary meeting too, that they should engage in prayer. If it were important that they should present themselves before the throne of divine majesty, when, as it was said, they regularly commenced their proceedings, he saw no reason, convened as they now were, and while their committee was sitting, they should in this instance, and while other business was preparing, first begin their work in prayer to God in that feeling of harmony in this object, which, he trusted, pervaded that assembly for that blessing from on high without which nothing could prosper. He then called upon the Rev. Dr. Vaughan to en gage in prayer. The Rev. Dr. VAUGHAN then engaged in prayer. The Rev. E. H. NoLAN, of Manchester, thought it right to say, that, privileged as they were in the society of mem bers of the society of friends, of Roman Catholic clergymen, snd even, he believed, of dignitaries of that church, it might be that some held views different to the rest in reference to the commencement with prayer. (Hear.) Tne Manchester ministers, feeling the responsibility resting with them, had not introduced this, lest even a slight difference of opinion should exist. They were all happy at what had taken place ; and confident that all would feel it was no want of spirituality on their part, but a mere feeling of responsibility resting upon them previously to the meeting being fully constituted. The Rev. JAMES BLAIR, of Dunfermline, thought what was just said very, excellent ; but he would suggest, that one hour be spent in prayer every morning. If it was agreed for the conference to meet at ten, let the prayer meeting be at nine, or as the conference might think proper. The CHAIRMAN said, that, as no one seconded that sug gestion, he might say that the general feeling around him appeared to be, that it was most desirable to wait the com munication of the committee already appointed, who would probably take this amongst other subjects into consideration. The Rev. Mr. PARSONS, of Stroud Water, suggested that those who wished to engage in prayer might do so previously to the meetings of conference; perhaps a chapel in the town might be obtained for the purpose, where those who agreed in sentiment might meet to pour forth prayers to the Al mighty for his blessing to rest upon these meetings. No person who felt the least objection would attend, and thus it would meet the views of all parties. The Rev. Mr. CROMPTON, of Henley-in-Arden.—l think one great means of preventing discussion would be, if, during the sitting of the committee below, some of the brethren present would engage in prayer. Dr. VAUGHAN suggested, that instead of discussing the question, it was better to wait until the temporary committee had returned, and made their report; after which it would be open to every gentlemen to express an opinion on the subject. After a lapse of a few minutes, the committee returned, and gave their report, recommending the Rev. Messrs. Atkinson, Chaplain, Cox, and Spencer to act as chairmen of the conference during its sittings. No allusion, however, was made to the subject of prayer. The Rev. Mr. ATKINSON, being the first president selected, took the chair, which was vacated by Dr. Cox. In opening the proceedings, he said, they had met together at the call of suffering humanity, and that call reached them, not across the briny deep, but through the green fields and populous streets of our own beloved country. They were met at the very outset of their procedure with the question—" What had Christian, and more than all what had Christian ministers, to do with temporal politics ?" He had yet to learn, that when they became denizens of that kingdom which was nos of this world, they were to forego all the privileges and for. get the duties of the present. He had yet to learn that when they began to be Christians they ceased to be men. Mr. Atkinson proceeded in this strain, justifying himself and others who had assembled on the occasion to oppose the corn laws : the rev. gentleman concluded by calling on his rev. brethren to avoid as much as possible anything which might commit them to a particular line of party politics ; to confine themselves entirely to the question of a repeal of the corn laws ; and, while they showed the courage of lions, to exhibit the gentleness of lambs. Several of the conference here again began to be clamorous to have the question decided, as to whether they would be allowed to pray or not, in the midst of which Dr. PYE SMITH rose. Dr. Vaughan was anxious to know upon what subject the doctor was about to speak ? but the doctor being afflicted with deafness did not hear him, but took from his pocket a memorandum book, from which he read a long speech prepared for the occasion, and with which we have been furnished in print. It condemned the corn laws as unjust, and as being contrary to the laws of God, and ini mical to the interests of tae country at large ; and that as Christian ministers they were justified in using all their efforts to procure their repeal. The Rev. Mr. MASSIE, of Manchester, then moved " That the conference in all its deliberations should confine itself exclusively to the laws restricting the importation of food." This, however, he withdrew, on its being announced to him that that was the subject for which the conference had been brought together. The Rev. Mr. FLETCHER then announced that the con ference would meet every morning at nine o'clock, and it be ing the custom of Manchester families to dine at one, they would adjourn at the latter hour until four, and the conference would be continued from four till eight. Mr. FLETCHER in continuation observed, that it depended upon the result of the conference whether there wasto be "a rebellion" or " a glorious revolution," and concluded by announcing that the committee had left the question of devo tional exercise to the whole bedy of the conference. Dr. VAUGHAN thought he could see a mode by which any difficulty might be obviated, and which made no invasion on the feelings or opinions of any party. The chair might be taken at nine o'clock, and the first half-hour appropriated tc devotional exercises. It would then be optional with those who could not conscientiously join in those exercises to stay away until half-past nine. The reverend gentlemen then moved a resolution to that effect. The Rev. Mr. FLETCHER suggested, that the matter might be left to the decision of the committee. The Rev. Dr. Cox considered the subject of such para mount importance, that he was unwilling to have it thrown back on the consideration of the committee. He felt as much respect as any man in the room for the gentlemen composing the committee; but to no committee on earth should the meeting delegate the power of determining whe ther they should present their united supplications to the throne of Heaven. He would warmly second the motion of Dr. Vaughan, for he thought prayer to God should precede every other consideration. The Rev. TIMOTHY EAST supported the motion. He thought that those Christian friends who could not unite in those exercises of prayer, might not come at the commence ment of the proceedings. If they met as a body , without prayer, he was of opinion that they would be held up to public disgrace. The Rev. R. W. HAMILTON, of Leeds, said their was a simple method of reconciling the opinions of all—namely, by opening their proceedings with the Lord's praper ; in which a petition would arise very much in congruity with the object and feelings of the meetings." give us this day " (or " day by day," if you please) " our daily bread." (Ap plause.) Nobody could see any invasion of religious or political feeling in that prayer. He would, therefore, suggest that they would open their meetings with that form of prayer which our Lord had taught his disciples. The Rev. Dr. RlTcute, of Edinburgh, thought the question should not have been mooted at all. He wished it to be understood, that the first exercise in which they should engage when they met was prayer ; and that if, from any cause, any gentleman could not join with them, no distinction should be drawn,—" To his own master lie standeth or falleth." (Approbation.) The CHAIRMAN then rose to put the question, but was interrupted by— Dr. HALLEY, who objected on the ground that the meeting was composed of persons of different religious denominations, some of whom could not conscientiously join with others in such a sacred exercise. He was surrounded by several Roman Catholic priests ; and he thought that, in fairness to them, if gentlemen of other denominations were allowed to offer up extemporaneous prayers, they (the priests) should be al lowed to commence by the celebration of the mass. Before he would join in such a prayer-meeting himself, he would like to know who were the parties uniting with him. If, for instance, Mr. Beard, who was a unitarian minister, should be called on to pray, he (Dr. Halley) would not think it right to unite with him. But why should he be excluded more than him (Dr. Halley)? Why should those who agreed with him arrogate to themselves any right to conduct the re ligious services ? Was it because they constituted a majority ? He trusted the meeting would not be influenced by any such reason. They had met to consider the wants of the poor; and he hoped the apple of religious discord would not be thrown in to mar their efforts at removing them. Those who desired to pray might do so at their homes and respective chapels ; and by this means ministers of different denomina tions might for once come together on common grounds, without having their harmony interrupted by the introduction of topics on which they could not agree. (Hear, hear.) The Rev. F. J. ARCHER, P.P. of Hillsborough Hall, Blessingtop, begged to put his decided negative oil a resolu tion which had a tendency to turn the attention of that great meeting from the question they had met to consider, by in volving them in a religious warfare. As a catholic clergy man, lie acknowledged that prayer was good ; but, as the meeting was neither of a political nor religious nature, he thought it better to confine their attention to the question which they had met to discuss—a question on which the hap piness of so many thousands of their fellow-creatures de pended. (The rev. gentleman made some further observa tions, but the noise which prevailed prevented his being heard. The authority of the chairman was exercised to pro cure his being heard, but in vain, until, at length, he was forced to his seat by som e friends near him, and shortly after (skier was in some measure restored.) The CHAIM AN said, with all respect for the feelings of those who had proposed the resolution—if that were the on l y place where they could meet for religious worship the cafe would be different, but it was not—he therefore fervently desired that those who had proposed the motion should re call it. They could meet in their own classes—in their own coteries—for social worship. (Hear, hear.) He asked it not only on behalf of the consciences of their Roman Catho lic brethren, but also on behalf of their suffering fellow creatures. (Cheere.) He had every respect for the motives of those who introduced the subject, but he trusted they would leave that as an arena in which they could join as brethren linked together in the cause of suffering humanity. (Hear.) Dr. VAUGHAN said, he should not have proposed the re solution had he supposed there were any present who could not conscientiously join with them in prayer. However, as there appeared such a strong feeling on the subject, he would withdraw the resolution. (Cheers.) Dr. RITCHIE attempted to address the meeting, but was put down by loud cries of " Chair," " Order," and " No, no." „ The Rev. G. ARMSTRONG thanked the meeting for not having adopted the resolution, and he trusted they would now become a perfectly anti-denominational meeting. The CHAIRMAN then adjourned the meeting until four o'clock. . At four o'clock the conclave again assembled. The chair was taken by the Rev. Mr. ATKINS. The auditory did not much exceed the number collected in the morning, and very little interest was excited either within the walls of the Town hall or outside. The Rev. Mr. SPENCER, the chairman of the executive committee, briefly addressed the meeting, observing that they were assembled as a jury to try a particular question. They had heard that trade in Manchester was dead, and they hal come to hold an inquest on it. As men loving fair ness, they should call a counsel to their bar, who should be heard on the subject of the corn laws, and, if it were neces sary, lie should have the privilege of producing a witness from America or elsewhere. He concluded by moving, " That Mr. Cobden, M.P., be permitted to address them on the subject of the repeal of the corn laws," (Cheers.) Mr. COBDEN then delivered a long speech on the evils of the corn laws, and argued that the removal of all protective duties would benefit the country generally. After this several ministers, from various parts of the country, addressed the meeting ; every evil that presented itself to their imaginations being attributed to the operation of the corn laws. The Earl of DUCIE, who was present, then delivered him self of a heavy speech against the agricultural interest, and the proceedings terminated at half-past nine. On Wednesday and yesterday the " conference" carried on its work ; but we really do not think the proceedings worth reporting. The discussions on prayer was by far the best part of the whole. As a specimen of the fairness of the " jury" as the confer ence denominate themselves, it ought to be known, that Dr. Sleigh, an agentbf the Society for the Protection of Agricul ture, applied to be heard in defence of the corn laws, but no reply was vouchsafed by this body of soi disant lovers of fair play. MEDICAL HINTS FOR THE PEDESTRIAN. MUSCULAR EXERCISE IS CONDUCIVE TO LONGEVITY (No. III.) A word or two on points not quite indifferent to the person who wishes to do all things well, and after a salutary fashion. We should recommend Col. Shaw's early start and pre vious breakfast ; and cocoa or coffee, with meat or eggs, is better than tea to walk upon. Tea comes in with better grace for the fag end of the day—after dinner. It is not well to drive dinner too late. Though circum stances must often have the principal meal under their sway, yet, where practicable, a dinner of plain animal food, about three or tour o'clock, is best. This will be generally before all the day's work is done, and such is not amiss ; for after the first process of digestion is pretty well over (usually occupying about an hour after the repast), the body is not indisposed to some reasonable further exercise, if the party be in health; and half-a-dozen miles will he done cheerily, though not at quite the same quick pace as the morning part. This is a pleasant division of the day's task, and by no means hurtful. Perhaps the hungry traveller, about this period, will feel most interest in those excellent lines in Croker's " Legends of Killarney" : " Quam pulchra sunt ova Cum alba et nova In stabulo scite legunter, Et a Margery bella, Quoe festica puella! Pinguis lardicum frustis cognuntur. " Ut belles in prato Aprico et tato Sub sole tam liete renident, Ova tosta in mensa Mappa bene extensa Nitidissima lance consident." The translation of which hath been most elegantly and fairly rendered in the same celebrated authority : " 0 'tis eggs are a treat, When, so white and so sweet, Prom under the manger they 're taken, And by fair Margery, Och ! 'tis she 's full of glee, They are fried with fat rashers of bacon. " Just like daisies all spread O'er a broad sunny mead, • In the sunbeams so beauteously shining, Are fried eggs well displayed On a dish, when we 've laid The cloth, and are thinking of dining." A glass of beer, ale, or porter during dinner, with a couple glasses of wine, or a tumbler of spirits and cold water, is best in our opinion, where the party takes anything stronger than Adam's ale. Hot water, with wine or spirits, if you have to turn out into the air again is bad, as it renders you more obnoxious to catching cold, but with cold water, and in moderation, we believe even a glass of brandy is innocent of many counts of the in dictment foraged up by teetotalism ! Those who relish a cigar will putin this supererogation, of course, now and again, perhaps, before bed-time, after tea. There is a medical ob jection to cigar smoking in the morning, whilst doing the main stroke of your day, because, as a narcotic (though so mild a one that we have on such excursions indulged at times ourself), it depresses the system when you want all the steam you can muster. It may be conceded, perhaps, as an accom plishment ornamental to the day's labour ; but it is not good when at hard work. As to dining, don't set to and eat the moment you arrive : wait a quarter of an hour. Tea is ex cellent to refresh you at the close of matters, and provided it be not driven too close upon retiring to rest ; for if this be -the case, and it be brewed strong, its most usual effect is to banish for hours after that crown of the pedestrian's labours —" balmy sleep." Finally, whether our pedestrian choose or not to wind-up with a night-cap of negus, need we add that early rising (and hard walking) deserves early rest ; and so we will attend him to his charming little bedroom, with a modest window, through whose crystal panes, perhaps, come streaming in the bonnie smiling beams of the bright harvest moon, and, as they struggle across the neatly carpeted floor, and just reach ing the snug little white dimity bed, in the centre of the room, they tall upon the dazzling snow-white counterpane with a spell only felt in the country's " stilly night." If one pencil ray of that lovely moonbeam stray onwards to the bed's head, and enable him to spell the grateful invitation of the downy pillow, we will read aloud, for the reader's benefit and parting sympathy, the lines over which he has already fallen asleep " To all and each a fair goodnight, And rosy dreams, and slumbers light !" am, Mr. Editor, your obedient humble servant, Liverpool, August 3, 1841. A WALKER RRIA EVIN (7, TIIIRST.—A correspondent, signing himself " A Pedestrian," has, in doing me the honour to notice ap provingly these letters, expressed his fears lest the plan . recommended by Colonel Shaw for remedying the evils of thirst, viz., by plunging the legs into water or wetting them should be fraught with danger; and he states that Ins expe rience has taught him that rinsing the mouth with cold spring water, and the use of a soft tooth brush, is refreshing and quenching to the thirst, without the danger or other evils attendant on the swallowing part of the business. I can only say that this rinsing is very good and unexceptionable where practicable—only that where the rinsing can be put in prac tice the temptation to the swallowing presents itself; and I think there are few minds strong enough to resist a moderate pull at a sparkling glass of cold spring water under pressure of thirst. Now with Colonel Shaw's plan, undrinkable, ten usable, stagnant muddy pools will afford a relief, free from any great amount of risk, providing the immersion of the legs and feet be not too suddenly done or too much pro longed. The rule may be safely laid down that this experi ment is free from harm, if practised for a moment or two only, or as 1 would prefer by the plunging of the legs in and out of the water two or three times, and no more, so as to anticipate that general refrigeration of the body which is re cognised by a feeling of chill, and which is, I admit, the point where danger could and would set in, whereby the balance of the circulation is destroyed, and congestion of the vascular (circulating) system is on the eve of taking place in some important organ of the body—determined by the com parative weakness of the various organs towards the one with the least vital tone—in other words, the weakest. `Whilst I have thus acknowledged the possible danger, and even attended to its mode of sitting in, so as to place the pe destrian on his guard, I do maintain that if he will take the rule just broached, viz., to beware of the chill (not here only, but under all cooling indulgencies) for a guide, he will be ordinarily safe in the practice of this, when the nature of the waters resorted to may be such as to put a stop to the rinsing altogether, unless he have the limited taste of the esquinicaux. If any other point in my letters strikes Pedestrian' as worthy of, or calling for, his animadversions, 1 shall esteem it a favour if he or any other person will take the trouble to remark upon such. The total number of deaths in the metropolis, during the week ending Saturday, the 7th of August, was 759, (males 377, females 382,) while the weekly average during the three preceding years amounted to 92G. Oysters are such a favourite dish in France, that a native of that country often begins his dinner by swallowing half a hundred of them in a raw state. ®The address in the commons on the royal speech will, it is reported, be moved, or seconded, by Mr. M. Phillips, one of the members for Manchester.—Globe. THE OLDEN TIMES.—BiII of fare of the entertainment given by Sir Watkins Williams Wynn, at Wynnstay, April 19, 1770.—" Thirty bullocks, 1 do. roasted whole, 50 hop, 50 calves, 80 sheep, 11 lambs, 70 pigs, 51 guinea fowls, 37 turkeys,l2 turkey poults, 8 capons, 25 pea fowls, 300 chickens, 360 fowls, 96 ducklings, 48 rabbits, 15 snipes, 1 leveret, 5 bucks, 4211b5. of salmon, 30 brace of tench, 40 brace of carp, 36 pike, 60 doz. trout, 108 flounders, 109 lobsters, 96 crabs, 10 quarts of shrimps, 200 craw fish, GO barrels of pickled oysters, 1 hogshead of rock oysters, 20 quarts of oysters for sauce, 166 hams, 100 tongues, 125 plum-puddings, 101 apple pies, 104 pork pies, 30 beef pies, 34 rice-puddings, 7 venison pies, 60 raised pies. 80 tarts, 30 pieces of cut pastry, 24 pound cakes, GO savoy cakes, 30 sweetmeat cakes, 144 ice creams, 18,000 eggs, 150 gallons of milk, GO quarts of cream, 30 bushels potatoes, 6,000 bundles asparagus, 200 potties of French beans, 39 dishes of green peas, 12 cucumbers, 70 hogsheads of ale, 120 dozen of ale. There was a very great quantity of brandy, rum, and shrub. Salt butter cost besides fresh ditto, rock-work shapes, landscapes in jelly, blanchmange, an immense quantity of pastry, and one large cask of ale which held 26 hogsheads. Three coaches full of cooks were sent from London on the above occ asion. It is thought that there were at the least 15,000 people at dinner in Sir Vl , atktn's Park at the same time. ABSUILDITIES.—To attempt to borrow money on the plea of extreme poverty.—To make yourself generally (Ti able, and wonder no one will visit you, unless they gain some palpable advantage by it.—To sit shivering in the cold be cause you won't have a fire till November. —To suppose the reviewers generally read more than the title-page of the works they praise or condemn . — TO keep your cler nks o miserable salaries, and wonder at them robbing you.— Not to go to bed when yo u are tired and sleepy, because " it is not bed-time." —To make your servants tell lies for you, and afterwards to be angry because they tell lies for themselves. —To tell your own secrets and believe other e ,To render a man a servi . a ce l v id ol a u f i t i e ta r - .. pop le will keep th em rily, and expect him to b e g rateful for it.—To egiect to ma k e people hones t by hardening them in gaol w ards send them a drift without the means of getting work. To fancy a thing is cheap because a price is asked for it. —To say a man is charitable because lie subscribes i c e c i e ti a o t l u i s because surprised at hospital.—To arrive at the age of fifty, and b to a" ulay be any vice, folly, or absurdity, your fellow gu ilty of.—To vote for a candidate at an e shakes hands with your wife and child and admires the baby.