The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-07-14 00:00:00

)n Aerial Vatliament. HOUSE OF LORDS—THURSDAY. lop of EXETER inquired whether the government formation regarding the passing of an ordinance by :tire of Canada respecting the monastery of San 30IIRNE answered in the negative. fict (Ireland) Continuation Bill, on the motion Nox;manby, was read the second time, his n answer to the Marquis of Westmeath, ion prevented him doing more than of the report on the Canada Government ;e to discussion ; but it was eventually bill ordered to be read a third time on ie Bill was read the third time and moving the second reading .1, 'expressed the hope that it ly of their lordships the sort of _—n exposed elsewhere. It was id time and ordered to be committed. of Nt'Auwicx moved for Mr. Dundas's report ence taken on the investigation held at firming 'hg the riots of the 15th of July, 1839 ; aad also Mr. Al 'ton (magistrate) to Lord J . Russell, with the answer -- Weaver Churches B it had t returned thereto. .rom the Marquis of Normanby, *motion,) the Duke of Wellington, he motion was agreed to. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THURSDAY. SF, in answer to the question of an hon. ed, that in the charges in the home ac. t India Company, there were items for to the amount, last year, of £50,000, and He could not give any details now, vould come when they would be SHINGTON having made inquiry on the subject, stated that the trustees for the pay ize money had delayed the payment that he expected interest would be C:Hol3Rousv n the delayed instalment ; and that the delay arose uence of doubt as to whom certain jewels belonged. inuz observed that he had a notice on the books for next, for the appointment of a select committee to ito the operation that the corn laws had upon wages ; e believed that it would be impossible for him to at committee this session, he begged to withdraw E asked the president of the board of trade whe re that, in consequence of the extravagant grown sugar from Cuba and the Brazils :o the port of London for consumption, differential duty ? The object of the elude slave-grown sugar, but that ob lefeated. I Wa3 HERE answered that he had reason to believe, 3vir days, orders had been given for the impor -11 quantity of foreign sugar ; he could not say he had alluded to slave-grown sugar; ign sugars, not slave-grown, that might )II CU ERE added that he was not able to say where me from; he had heard that there was a pros mall quantity of foreign sugar being admitted, iditional duty. re resolved into committee on the ical duties and_yevenues. which the several id amendments proposed were discussed in a desul- bate on the poor-law commission bill, the the day were disposed of, and the house ad- HOUSE OF LORDS.---FainAY. hips bill went through a committee, Lord witting the propriety of Lord CoLc HESTER ' S the custom of piling timber on the decks of on took place between Lord WEsTmEATH dANBIr on a proclamation of the Lord Lieu- Ld on the subject of " the teetotallers' pledge." )rd Lieutenant approved of the objects of the e conversation led to no result. R.DEEN, in a speech full of conciliatory expres tvv for the present his bill on the Scotch church cipal corporations (Ireland) bill was discussed in details on the bringing up of the report. The istice bill passed through Coro- hancery bill was read a second time, when OUSE OF COMMONS.—FRIDAY. r the meeting of the House of Commons, the ❑nounced that it was not intended to proceed ition against the late return for the borough of ave notice, that on Monday he should move ngers in the gallery nor the reporters be ex ions, except on special motion for that OPE gave notice, that early in the next session a a bill to relieve dissenters from payment of fain Polhill, Mr. LABOUCIIERE stated mild be shortly brought forward in the "e believe it will be introduced ou Mon- order of the day for going' into committee of PAY Ir. 'WALLACE called the attention of the house to the Lngs of the Scotch judges, the periods whereon he con ied ought to be lengthened by two calendar months in 11 year. He made a very long speech, but did not con- )tiD V 0 C ATE briefly answered him, and Mr. censured this irregular mode of detaining the se from the or of the day. r. DirNcomßE then brought on the case of William and John Collins, convicted of seditious libel, and iprisoned in Warwick gaol. Their treatment there m cruel, he said, and contrary to all precedent. He imerous instances, beginning with the year 1792, in ) ersons convicted of political offences had been treated vility and lenity, and permitted to see their friends, -:ontinue their literary and other occupations. Lovett lins, on the contrary, had been visited with all sorts ants, privations, and many annoyances during the d Collins at night had been obliged to sleep in a )ed, the second place in which was occupied succes y four other persons, all imprisoned for disgraceful . Mr. Duncombe complained also of the treatment rts, Vincent, and divers other prisonem in Ilchester, 4, Wakefield, and other prisons. Vincent, the chart .ien the nine months for which he had been sentenced .count of one offence were on the point of expiring, was secuted again for another offence, committed at an earlier te. With respect to Mr. Feargus O'Connor, the gaol :nt vere as in the cases before specified; , t as under some very unjustifiable restraints, itef An carrying on his paper, and from seeing his ,s, ..cepting in the presence of the turnkey. There itt,e to he expected from the alterations introduced by .ew law : the question would be, what sort of rules and nations would -be made under the discretionary power ' .I,at act in the magistrates. The whig dbctrine J, particularly against illegal meet -Griy what it now appeared to be : witness .est, of the whig peers against the sedition bill in He believed that the severities now inflicted would their own object. There was hardly a village in the,people dill not entertain a strong feeling about the of • these prisoners. He concluded by moving a dint), purporting that no greater restraint or degrada night to be inflicted on prisoners confined for political than their safe custody requires and long usage was not so se vented ti offence WAKLEY seconded the motion. The usage which ss of prisoners now received was in his opinion no ess than torture; particularly where the culprit was !lied to observe s;lence, which appeared to the hon. ler to be a peculiarly severe infliction. The regulation Is ought to rest, not, as now, with visiting justices, but he Secretary of State, who might be nightly questioned t house on his official responsibility. Mr. Wakley went express his regret for the absence of Sir Francis Bur rom this debate who had himself been imprisoned for tical offence. Sir Francis's address of August 22, 1819, • electors of Westminster, contained language of the highest excitement on the subject of the Manchester ng ; but he, when imprisoned, took the fresh air, and his levees. The prosecution was a harsh one, and ;ht some obloquy. on the tory government ; but there io severity in the treatment of the bird when once caged. the able atatement of M. Duncombe, the ministers warnirg, and the entire responsibility now rested on overnment, who must not attempt in future to shift it the magistrates. He hoped therefore that Mr. Dun e wonld not 'go to a division, but that ministers would some satisfactory declaration to the house on this im- 3ir G. STRICKLAND thought it hard that men should be iished for merely attending a meeting at which violent , Tuage had been used. Everybody had been in that situ anti it wasunreasonable to hold the auditors responsible he indiscretion of the speakers. But he thought it still er that the. sentence of the law should be aggravated by ides of discipline and diet. MAVLE, said, that he would not by the intimation sic. Duncombe would forbear to divide be bribed to aide from what he felt to be his duty. In almost all es of lenient usage to which Mr. Duncombe had all u d e d ad been, in addition to imprisonment, the infliction VY fine, such as would have been total ruin to any of nders on whose behalf the present complaint was There was no analogy between the animadversions Burdett on the Manchester case and those of Collins on that of Birmingham. At Manchester by the yeomanry; but at Birmingham Sown had been restored by the London personal injury to individuals, and with the .nation o f t h e c i t i zens, L ovett an d Collins were r release, several wee k s ago, f rom t h e imprison .cribed as so dreadful. on the simple condition of -gnizances for good behaviour during one easy terms th ey h a d c h osen to re f use . With ie petition of Vincent and his fellow-prisoners at aey were sent up in answer to a letter from Mr. himself, requesting them to sen d th r ee se v eral )a any subjects of the gaol regulations. The only they had wade was, that they were not allowed I forks, but were obliged to eat their food with the )oden spoon and their fingers. The proposed plan a central power of gaol regulation in the Secretary s no improvement upon the existing system under power was exercised by the magistrates: The throughout the late disturbance s h a d acted with which was a sufficient guarantee against any on their part ; and the slur which this motion upon them was wholly unmerited. What he might incur by opposing this motion, lie than alter the course of the law as pro. btr Franc wn recol )osed 1 Mr. DISRAEI ~..ud, the question was, whether the extension ........ents to political offences was not a practice bout precedent until very recent times. The . ad eve r b een , and it was the true principle, that i !finch of i the sentence as consisted of mpnsonment was A, not by way of punishment, but for the purpose of ty to the state. If the difference between the manners two periods were considered, the Whig Government usher . than that o f th e S tar Ch a mber. The Under .ary of State . had appea re d anx i ous to avoid a division, idy to repel it ; but the mover would not do hii duty if iot divide, nor the house if it did not redress these es. The offences committed might have been greater but was not the penalty law ? If the trial and the senteneewereaccording to. the than the I law, so ought to be the administration But the government would have of the punish which would be asked at every hustings to I,—how it happened that the samye trings in . the Y in Ireland under the name of agitation, b o f sedition wh , ich in obtained I was punished under the name that his own friends would not withhold thelornstUppHoret us motion because it was brought forward It of theirs. They were the natura c l la le ss a e d ,s er w s e b o lv y f thetah an the aristocracy and the labouring idy of the .nation, and he trusted to see the union of classes preserved. Mr. WARBURTON said, that from the rigour exercised, the sympathies of the public were now witl"the offenders, the effect of which might probably be to induce repetitions of the offence. He read returns from several gaols, showing a system of discipline more or less severe. In some inAances the prisoners confined for misdemeanours were kept upon the separate and silent system, and their hair and whiskers were shaved. He thought that ministers themselves were pledged to redress the grievances of political prisoners after the course which had been taken by government upon the prison bill in this session, and Lord Normanby's lett& to the visiting magistrates of one of the prisons in May last. In former days the Whigs were always forward to denounce all undue severity ; but there was a striking contrast between their past and their present conduct. Mr. WARD was of opinion that the phrase " political offences," as employed in the proposed resolution, was too large. He concurred in that resolution as far as it related to seditous words, whether spoken or written ; but he could not accede to it if this phrase were retained, which would give indulgence to acts of violence and revolution itself. He thought that, after so long a debate, the House ought not to separate without coming to some decision about the classifica tion of prisoners confined for the different descriptions of political offences. Mr. LUDLOW BRUGES corrected some gross misrepresenta tions in the petition relating to the prisoner Roberts, which appeared to have been got up by some person having no proper connexion with the case. The prisoners for whom the sympathy of the House was asked were not merely the authors of seditious libels ; some of them were the men who had endeavoured to raise armed mobs in the counties of Wilts and Somerset, striking terror into the inhabitants, suspending trade, and counselling armed insurrections and arson. • Mr. Serjeant TALFOURD said, that the question was not whether the offences were heinous or trivial, but whether for these offences men should suffer a punishment not warranted by law. No one complained that an offender sentenced to hard labour was put to hard labour accordingly. There might be exaggerations in the petitions : it was natural that the sufferer should overstate his grievance, and that it should be overrated by the sympathy of those around him. In Vincent's case, however, he was persuaded that there had been no exaggeration. The attention of government, when properly called to that case, had indeed been sympathetically applied ; but this redress of the grievance showed at least that grievances did grow up under the existingsystem. Was the proprietor of a newspaper to suffer not only the adjudged imprisonment, but also, by the prohibition of his labours, a total destruction of his property, which was no part of his sentence? If the hardships complained of were rare ac cidents, he should not have thought it needful to interfere ; but, regarding them as the regular and still increasing offspring of the existing system, he must vote for a resolution which would effectually terminate them. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, he could make no such vague and general declaration as some gentlemen seemed to expect from him. Was it meant that political offences were no longer to be treated as crimes, and that therefore no political offender was ever again to be placed on the criminal side of a prison ? The object of the present motion seemed to be to create some great sympathy for offenders of this class. It was very easy to.write to the different prisoners, and so to get up grievances. If a political prisoner was confined with other men convicted of misdemeanours, then he complained of being placed in such company. if he was removed to some separate quarter, then he complained of being placed in soli tary confinement. Before the prison regulations in general were brought to their present strictness, political offenders, like offenders of other classes, had greater freedom than thay could enjoy now ; but the comparative rigour now suffered by them was not a ,difference peculiar to offenders of a political character. The law lately passed on the subject of prisons would better meet the case than any vague resolution of the nature now proposed. Mr. HUMS supported the motion, and vindicated the Chartists, whose principles, he said, were thoie of the British constitution. These men were punished because they were poor; her Majesty's Ministers had been equally guilty a few years ago of exciting the people, and probably, if out of office, would be glad to do the same thing again. Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that at a former period of dis turbance he had advised the vigorous execution of the exist ing law, previously to any attempt at new legislation. For the deluded and ignorant multitude he had much compassion, but he felt no sympathy with those who deceived them through the press, taking care themselves to remain at a safe distance from the tumult. Some time ago the rich man was allowed to provide himself in prison with luxuries. This was thought unreasonable, inasmuch as the same comforts were beyond the reach of the poorer prisoner. For this reason the law was altered, and the rich and the poor were alike precluded from indulgences in prison ; and yet complaints were now made that men of a higher class were obliged to endure pri vations in common with their poorer neighbours. Tbis house was not the proper jurisdiction to try the regulations of prisons and the conduct of gaolers. Four whole days in every week would not suffice for the discharge of such a duty. Besides, a resolution was not the way ofdealrng with the general question ; that should be done by bill. It had been said that the resolution should confine its exemption to seditious libels. That would not reconcile him to it; for he could not forget that the class of seditious libels included publications instructing mobs in the use of the pike, and suggestions for the distribution of lucifer matches among the hayricks. He felt that punish ment ought to carry public sympathy with it ; but he was at a loss to discern that public sympathy went with such of fenders as these. On the contrary, he believed that a relaxa tion like that now proposed would only have the effect, should another disturbance break out, of rousing the general indig nation against the House of Commons. . Mr. AGLIONBY supported the motion. This house, he said, was, and ought to be, the grand court of appeal. Mr. C. BULLER took he same side. He said that the letter for which Sir Francis Burdett was sentenced to be im prisoned was of the same character as that for which a similar sentence was passed upon Mr. Feargus O'Connor; but the practical effect of the sentence had been very , different in the one case and in the other. This was an offence into which poor men were the likeliest to be led, and the house would not do well to set itself against these classes. Captain HAMILTON said a few words in favour of the mo tion, and Mr. WILLIAMS followed to the same effect, re peating the arguments of previous speakers. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that the prosecutions of what were now called political offences were not prosecutions of mere libels, but of direct incitements to rebellion. He himself, in addressiag the jury at York, on Feargus O'Con nor's case, had put the question upon this one issue—did he publish with the intent of inciting the people to insurrection ? and the jury found at once that he did. Mr. MUNTZ said a few words, and Mr. DUNCOMBE, in a short reply, vindicated himself from the charge of having got up any petition by undue means ;, after which the house, on a division, rejected the resolution by a very large majority. a remarkir church Disci! Lyndh timber RAILWAY COMMUNICATION. the bar, The fourth report of the select committee on railway com munication has been printed by order of the House of Com mons. They had taken under consideration a number of petitions suggesting the expediency of altering the present system of taxing railway passengers, paying particular atten tion to see whether it at all compromised the accommodation, which such a mode of conveyance ought to afford to the la bouring classes. Referring to the revenue derived from the duty on railway passengers in 1840, which was £72,716, they found that of this sum £53,000 was received from the Grand Junction, the Great Western, the Liverpool and Manches ter, the London and Birmingham, and the London and Southampton ; so that the railways in the north of England and in Scotland, which derive their income from the poorer classes, who consequently suffer most from the present taxa tion, contribute to the revenue in a very small degree. The act 2 and 3 William IV., c. 120, which fixes the present rate of duty, states that " the proprietor, or company of proprie tors, of every railway along which any passenger shall be conveyed for hire, shall pay for all such passengers at the rate of one-halfpenny per mile for every four passengers so conveyed ;" that is to say, every passenger is taxed one eighth of a penny per mile, whatever be h►s fare ; and the committee, taking into consideration the difference of the fares paid by different classes of passengers, find they are taxed by this system most unequally. In some instances it is found that a first-class passenger is taxed only 3iper cent. ou his fare, while a third-class passenger is taxed 12, and even 15 per cent. This inequality operating as a discourage ment to the labouring and poorer classes, who would natu rally compose the greater part of the third .class passengers, is the more hard, as the railroads have, in many instances, destroyed the communication by means of waggons, which, although very slow, had the advantage of being a cheap ac commodation to the poor man. On many lines of railway the pressure of the tax is now felt for the first time, as in former years the lords of the treasury exercised a power which they possessed, and allowed in some cases an annual composition instead of the tax—an indulgence which is now no longer granted. From the evidence of the chairman of the Leeds and Selby Railway, the commissioners had learned that in the year 1836 that company had raised their fares to such an extent that they diminished indeed the number of passengers, but the increase of fare was enough to augment their profits by £l3OO. The taxation per head per mile offering no security against a proceeding of this kind, but even encouraging such an act, taxation being dimi nished with decrease of passengers, notwithstanding increase of profit, another objection appeared to the present system, which according to the commissioners, tended to render the interests of the railway companies and of the public (parti cularly the poorer classes) opposed to each other. The com missioners, therefore, are decidedly of opinion that the pre sent system should be altered, and examined two suggestions by which this would be effected. One suggestion is, to sub stitute for the present tax a per centage on the gross receipts derived from passengers, it being calculated that five per cent. would produce about the same amount of revenue as is raised under the present system. The other suggestion, which the committee regard as more favourable to the public interests, is to establish a gradual scale of taxation, by which the amount of tax would be regulated by the amount of fare, and act as a check on undue increase of the latter. A scale was proposed to illustrate this plan. Many railway compa nies are limited by statute to a maximum charge of 3/d. per mile for a passenger. The proposition was to allow a duty of 10 per cent. on all fares exceeding 70 per cent. of the maximum allowed by the act, a duty of five per cent. on all fares be tween 40 and 70 per cent., and a duty of 2/ on all fares below 40 per cent. This scale the committee consider too high, but they approve of the principle; and recommend, that when no maximum has been fixed by parliament, 3d. per mile should be considered as such for the purposes of taxation, while for fares exceeding 70 per cent. of the maximum, they fix 71 per cent. as the duty. The rates of 4to 21 per cent. they leave the same as in the scale proposed. They recommend that facilities be afforded for the rapid conveyance of troops from one part of the country to another, in cases of emergency, on payment of a " reasonable sum" for railway conveyance. The new method of conveying intelligence by means of elec tricity is incidentally mentioned, from the circumstance that experiments have been made on the Great Western. From the readiness of communication which this method affords, the committee conceive it may be inconvenient to leave the exclusive possession of it in private hands, suggesting that government should be furnished with similar means, and ex pressing a belief that no railway company will object, on fair terms, to giving facilities to government for electrical com munication. • WINDOW TAX.—The most intense dissatisfaction prevails every where in consequence of this tax, as it is levied by various re-surveys, and the litigious manner in which the charges are made ; even the glass doors which open in the middle are counted as two windows. SHARP PR ACTICE.—A grazier came lately to Nottingham by the railway from Derby, for the purpose of attending Len ton fair. Whilst he was in the carriage a stranger accosted stranger, whothe veexrpyrepsl expressed histo which desire t I o hini with great civility, and after chatting about a variety of topics, “ elicited from him that he was going to Leuton fair. hriespli newed tall:- quaintance there. Ananimated conversation ensued, which . was kept up with greataaraccogmoinpagn; vivacity by the stranger visitor to Lenton, until the at the Nottingham sta tion. The parties having alighted,the mysterious but plea sant stranger suddenly exc l a i med , " In tention ; I shall not visit th e fair;" I have altered my and very politely bid the grazier good morning. The latter Lenton, but having occasion to feel pinrtreded on his way to had put away his money, he discovered pocketulat he in which he three £lO notes; and immediately suspecti ng th. a was minus polite and insinuating fellow-traveller had picked his his very ocket he hurried back to the station - house, where he learned ' hi s companion had returned by the following train to that Derby. After a short consultation he consented to be strapped to an • which was to be despatched to Derby instantly, engine, and in the incredibly short space of SEVEN MINUTES AND A . H ALF, overtook the train just before it reached the station house at the above place ; the grazier pointed out his friend, who was seized, and the stolen money found upon him.— null Times. TRIAL OF EDWARD OXFORD FOR HIGH TREASON. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT—THURSDAY. This morning having been fixed by the judges at the last session of the Central Criminal Court for the trial of Edward Oxford, charged with the offence of high treason, the Old Court at nine o'clock was open for the admission of such of the public as had procured tickets from the Sheriffs. The arrangements made by the Under Sheriffs were precisely !.he sainels on the occasion of the recent trial of - Courvoisier, and were excellent. Not the slightest confusion prevailed, and the Court was soon filled in ;very part by a highly re- spectable auditory. . . _ The Court then directed Edward Oxford to be placed at The prisoner came forward with a light step, and with the same smile on his countenance which he exhibited when ar raigned last sessions. He looked carelessly round the court and up to the galleries, and having made a survey of the assembly leaned upon the front of the dock on his elbow, and commenced playing with the flowers strewed before him. All eyes were naturally directed towards him, but he did not shrink from the gaze, but retained his position with the greatest possible composure. The jury having taken their pieces precisely at ten o'clock, the Sheriffs, Under Sheriffs, and other civic officers ushered into court Lord Denman, Mr. Baron Alderson, Mr. Justice Patteson, and the Re corder. The counsel for the prosecution were the Attorney Gene ral, the Solicitor General, Mr. Frederick Pollock, Mr Adolphus, Mr. Gurney, and Mr. Wightman; for the pri , saner, Mr. Sydney Tailor arid Mr. Bodkin. The prisoner having pleaded not guilty, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL opened the case. After ex plaining the general nature of the law, he said he was inform ed that two questions would be submitted for the considera tion of thejury. The first, he continued, is whether supposing the prisoner to be accountable for his actions, he is guilty of the offence laid to his charge ? and the second question will be, whether at the same time he committed the act he was accountable for his actions? The burden of the proof on the first issue rests entirely on the prosecution. The pri soner is still to be presumed to be innocent, and unless I shall be able to lay before you clear and satisfactory evidence to establish his guilt, it will be your duty to acquit him. But upon the first question the evidence I am instructed to lay before you (and I see no reason to disbelieve the witnesses) deprives me of the power to suggest any doubt that possibly can arise in your minds. It is, however, for you to hear that evidence, and to determine upon its weight. The pri soner at the bar is, you perceive, a young man, about 18 or 19 years of age, although, from his appearance, you would hardly suppose he had reached that age. He was born in Birmingham ; he came when young to London ; and went to school somewhere in Lambeth, and had since been •in the service.of various publicans in the capacity of barman. He was not, as has been suggested and stated, a potboy, but a barman, a person engaged in superintending the business of the different publicans who employed him. And when I talk of what has been stated out of court, I must NTry re- spectfully beg of you to discard from your recollections all that you have heard or read, and be guided entirely by all the evidence which will be laid before you. He first served in the capacity of barman to his aunt, who kept a public-house at Hounslow ; he then served somewhere in the city. Another place he had held was at a public-house in Oxford-street. He had left that service about ten days before this transaction, and went into lodgings, at No. 6, West-place, West-square, Lambeth, where he resided up to the time this ofience was committed. It would appear that he had deliberately formed a plan to make a direct attempt on the life of the Sovereign. On the 4th of May, in the present year, it will be proved, while he was living at the lodgings I have mentioned, he bought a pair of pistols from a person of the name of Hayes, residing in Blackfriars road, for £2. He bought at the same time a powder-flask. It will also appear that he practised shooting at a shooting gallery in Leicester-square—at a shooting-gallery in the Strand—and at a shooting-gallery at the west end of the town. On Wednesday, the 3d of June, the week before the day named in the indictment, he went to the shop of a per son of the name of Grey, with whom he had been at school, and who lives in. Bridge-road, Lambeth, and bought from him half a hundred copper caps to use in firing pistols. He asked Grey at the same time where he could buy some bul lets. He was told where bullets were to be had, and he said that he had himself some gunpowder. On the evening of Tuesday, the 9th of June, he had a pistol with him, which he said was loaded, and when asked what he meant to do with it, he refused to tell, but said he had been firing at a target. We now come to Wednesday, the 10th of June. Gentlemen, you are probably aware of the custom of her Majesty Queen Vic toria, since her union with Prince Albert, frequently to take an airing in the afternoon or evening in the parks, without a military escort, and strictly in the manner of private life. It will appear that on this Wednesday, about four o'clock, the prisoner went into the park, and saw Prince Albert returning from Woolwich, and going into Buckingham Palace. The prisoner went up Constitution Hill, and there remained, awaiting the approach of the Queen. At about six o'clock the Queen, accompanied by Prince Albert, left the Palace in a low open carriage with four horses and two outriders, who went before, with no other attendants. Her Majesty was seated on the left side of the carriage, and Prince Albert on the right. The carriage drove up Constitution Hill, and about 120 yards up the hill was the prisoner, Edward Oxford, walking back wards and forwards, whith his hands under the lapells of his coat. He was on the right hand side of the road. When the carriage approached he turned round, nodded. then drew a pistol from his breast, and when the carriage was nearly opposite he discharged the pistol. The ball whizzed past to the opposite side of the road, and in all probability her Majesty was unconscious at that moment of any at tempt having been made upon her life. He then looked back to see if anybody was standing near him, and drew another pistol and aimed it at her Majesty. It would seem that the Queen saw him aiming at her, for she stooped down, and again the providence of God preserved her. The Queen im mediately drove on to the residence of her august parent. There were a considerable number of persons on the left side of the road, and among them a man of the name of Lowe, who rushed across and im mediately seized Oxford and took the pistols from him. Lowe was for the moment believed to be the offender, but the prisoner said, "It was I that shot at her." He was accord , ingly taken into custody, and conveyed to the station-house. There he voluntarily put the question, " Is the Queen hurt ? " and on being told she was not, he was asked if there were not bullets in the pistols, and lie admitted that there were. His lodgings were then searched, and in his room was found a box he had admitted to be his, containing a sword scab bard, two pistol bags, a bullet mould, a black crape, a razor, a powder flask, three ounces of gunpowder, five bullets, and fourteen percussion caps. There were also found a pocket book containing papers which I must read to you. (The learned gentleman then read the documents purporting tc relate to a society called Young England, but as these docu ments have been all'eady before the public, it is unnecessary to repeat them.) Under these circumstances, and still sup posing the prisoner to be accountable for his actions, it will be for you to say whether you have any doubt of his guilt. Though the balls have not been found, I do not think there can be on the evidence any doubt that the pistols were loaded with ball. I now come to the second question— nameW, whether the prisoner was in such a state of mind at the time he discharged the pistols as to be account able for his actions? I will at once admit that if it can be shown that at any time he could not distinguish be tween right and wrong, that he laboured under some de lusion, that he was insensible to the consequences of the act he was committing, he was not, according to the law of England, an accountable agent, and therefore it will be your duty to acquit on that ground. In former times, under a statute of Henry VIII., the plea of insanity could not avail against a charge of high treason ; but the law has been altered, and it lies on the party making that plea to make it out clearly and satisfactorily. He must show that not only on former occasions there had, been strangeness and eccen tricity of manners, but that at the time the offence was com mitted the individual charged was not in such a state of mind as to be an accountable agent. To establish exemption from a criminal charge there must be a greater, degree of aberration of mind proved than would be necessary in a civil proceeding to set aside a contract. The learned gen tleman here quoted the dicta of Lord Coke and Sir Matthew Hale, and also a principle laid down in " Harrison's Prin ciples of the Criminal Law of Scotland," in support of his proposition. He cited also the cases of Arnold, tried for shooting Lord Onslow, of Lord Ferrers, for shooting his steward, and of Bowler, tried before Mr. Justice Le Blanc (in all of which cases insanity had been the plea), to show the strict proof required of insanity at the moment the act charged was committed. He also went at length through Mr. (afterwards Lord) Erskine's defence of Hatfield in 1800, and Lord Kenyon's judgment in that case. He next pro ceeded to contend that there was no grounds for contending that the prisoner was at the time of perpetrating the deed in a state of mind to exempt him from the force and punish ment of the law. The following witnesses were then called : Samuel Perks examined by the Solicitor-General.—On the 10th of June I was in the park on Constitution Hill. I saw her Majesty leave the Palace • she was in an open car riage, and was accompanied by Prince Albert. After the carriage drew near to me I saw the prisoner Oxford. He was on the right side of the road ; I was exactly opposite to him, a few yards off; he was walking with his arms folded, in ad vance of the carriage. The prisoner gave a nod towards the carriage when it had advanced within 10 or 12 yards towards him. I then saw him pull a pistol from under his coat with his right hand. When the prisoner discharged the pistol he was only five or six yards from the carriage. I was within a foot of it. After the pistol was fired I heard a whizzing noise in the air. I was then at the back of the carriage. As soon as Oxford fired his pistol he turned his head round as if to see whether any one was near him. He then drew another pistol from his breast, I think with his right hand, and fired a second time. He took a deliberate aim at her Majesty. When he fired the second shot the carriage was three or four yards in advance of the prisoner. Dord Denman.—ln which hand did the prisoner hold the pistol the second time he fired ? Witness.—ln the left hand, my lord. When the secone pistol was fired three or four persons ran towards the pri soner, and a man named Andrew Lowe was seized by mis take. Lowe had got hold of the prisoner, and took the pis tols from him. Lowe was the person who it was first sup posed had fired the pistols. A person named Clayton said to i. Lowe, " You confounded rascal, what have you been doing ?" On whiCh the prisoner said, "It was not him ;it was me who fired the pistol." Clayton and I then gave the prisoner into the hands of the police. Cross-examined by Mr. Sydney Taylor.—The pathway on Constitution-hill is about level with the road. It may be a few inches higher. By Lord Denman.—Her Majesty sat on the left hand side of the carriage, Prince Albert on the right. The Prince was consequently the nearest to Oxford. The back part of the carriage was about half-way up her Majesty's back. Joshua Lowe and Albert Lowe corroborated this witness. Elizabeth Stokeley exanained by Mr. Wightman.—l am housekeeper to Lord Bexle. I was on Constitution-hill on Wednesday, the 10th of June. I was next the wall. I saw the prisoner present the pistol and fire at her Majesty. I was nearer the prisoner when he fired the second time. I saw him change his hand, and immediately present a second pistol, and fire towards her Majesty. . The Queen and Prince Albert rather crouched, or stooped down. The Prince ap peared to me to press her Majesty down after the first pistol was fired. I heard a whizzing noise in the air after the dis charge of the pistols. When the second pistol was fired I was close to the carriage. The prisoner then dropped his arms by his side and stood upright ; he was soon surrounded by several persons. soquaßruee.kinlgwhaasmonr,alace.lwosWilliam Clayton, examined by the Attoeney-General.—l am a cabinet-maker, residing in Princes-street, Leicester drndeensdasyid,ethoeflOothe f June. I was about 200 yards from the marble entrance road. I Constitution-hillon otnheWgea heard. a pistol fired ; at that time I was about 25 yards from the carriage. I saw two young men near the railings, when a female said, " The is the who did • " lat first thought it was Alb re man it. ert Lowe whom I seized and said, " You confounded rascal, how dare you shoot at our Queen." The prisoner heard what I " I did it ; I will give myself said, and he replied, up, and lgo quietly."then seized the prisoner ;he was given • into custody. I was very roughly handled myself, and taken into custody. I was taken to the station-house and searched. I afterwards saw the prisoner there. I asked fora draught of cold water then asked me if the Queen was hurt. I said, " What did you put in the barrels ?" He replied, "To that I have an swered a dozen questions that have been asked me by a dozen persons, and I shall answer no more. I examined the pistols at the station-house and marked them. The pistols were never out of my sight from the time I took them from the prisoner until after I had marked them. Albert Lowe and his uncle had both hold of the pistol when I first seized it. It was the prisoner said, "I am the man who did it!' The pistol now produced is the same. By Mr, Baron Alderson.—lt was about 15 or 16 yards from the carriage when I seized the prisoner and Lowe. The carriage immediately drew up after the second pistol was fired. I should say the second pistol was fired full Bor 10 yards from the carriage. Charles Brown, examined by Mr. Gurney.—l am a police man. On the 10th of June I was on duty at Buckingham Palace. I took hold of the prisoner's collar, when he said, " I did it ; don't use violence ; I will go quietly." The pri soner was then taken to the station-house. On arriving op posite Wellington Barracks some one said, " Was there any ball in the pistols ?" Prisoner replied, "If it had come into contact with your. - head you would have known it." On searching the prisoner a piece of wadding was found, which he said he put over the cap of the lock, as he did not want the pistol to go off so as to hurt himself. I remember some persons coming to the station-house ; they asked the prisoner if there were any balls in the pistols ; he replied that there was. Cross-examined by Mr. S. Taylor.—l will swear positively that the prisoner said the pistols were loaded with balls. I assisted a serjeant of police and three or four men in search ing the spot where the pistols had been fired, in order, if pos sible, to find the balls. No ball was found. Charles Smith examined by the Solicitor-General.—l am a policeman, and assisted in taking the prisoner Oxford to the station-house. On the way, some one asked if the pis tols were loaded with balls. The prisoner replied, " If you had come in contact with them, you would have known there were balls in them." Cross-examined.-1 am sure these were the words used by the prisoner. William Smith, another policeman, gave similar testimony. Frederick Barry, examined by Mr. Adolphus.—l am in the employ of Mr. Hayes. He has two shops, one in Blackfriars road, and one in Farringdon-street. I remember the rumour of the Queen being fired at, I remember seeing the prisoner as my master's shop in Blackfriars-road about three weeks or a month since. He bargained for a pair of pistols and a powder-flask. The pistols now producedare the same as my master generally sells, and they have his private mark upon them. I asked the prisoner two guineas for the pistols. He asked me how far they would carry. I told him about 20 or• 30 yards. He then said if I would taked two sovereigns for them he would have them. I said if you won't give more I must take it. He then bought them, and also a powder - flask, for which he gave 2s. The prisoner had two bags with the pistols. I had not seen the prisoner before the time he purchased the pistols. I then talked to him for about ten . minutes. lam confident he is the same person. I saw him again three days after the Queen was shot at. By Mr. Bodkin.—lt was about one o'clock in the day when the prisoner bought the pistols. No one besides him and myself was in the shop at the time. John Gray said, his father kept a shop in Bridge-road, South Lambeth. The Monday or Tuesday before the Queen was shot at the prisoner bought half a hundred percussion caps at his shop. Sir H. Wheatley said, the prisoner, when in custody, asked him if the Queen was hurt. The Earl of Uxbridge' said, the prisoner put a similar question to him, and added, ; that he had been practising shooting lately. Samuel Taylor proved, that about a week before the Queen was fired at the prisoner showed him a loaded pistol. The. Hon. John Augustus Murray, and the Hon. William Owen Stanley, said they had seen the mark on the wall in the park. and that it appeared to have been produced by a pistol bullet. At this period of the trial - the jury retired for refreshment. After an absence of half an hour the trial was resumed. John Win. Leaton, a butcher's son, proved that the week before the attempt on the Queen's life he had been with the prisoner to a shooting gallery, where he showed him a pair of pistols. Witness thought those now produced were the same. Mrs. Stammers said, the prisoner lodged with her six or ' seven weeks before the Queen was fired at. She recollected the police taking his box away. Inspector Hughes proved the contents of the box to be a sword, a black crape cap, a bullet-mould, and four papers, also some percussion caps. The bullet that was cast in that mould fitted the pistols. There were some loose bullets in the box ; they would roll easily into the pistol, for they were smaller than the barrel of the pistol. I took the box and con tents to the station-house, and showed them to the prisoner; he said they were his, and that he had attempted to destroy the papers in the morning; the papers were folded up in a sheet of foolscap► paper. (The prisoner here laughed, and took a few notes.) The Clerk of the Court read the rules and regulations found in the prisoner's box, which have already appeared. The paper was headed " Young England," and signed " A W. Smith, Secretary." During the reading the document the prisoner laughed re peatedly. The other documents were read, which occasioned nearly all present to laugh, including the Bench. The Hon. Fox Maule, examined by the Attorney-General. —I am the Under Secretary of State, and was present when the prisoner was examined before the Privy Council. After he had been examined, the Secretary of State informed the priSoner that he was at liberty to state what he thought pro per, but that it would be taken down and made use of against him. The prisoner then made a voluntary confession, which he signed. (The confession was here read.) Cross-examined by Mr. Bodkin.—There were other per sons examined by the Secretary of State besides those who have been called by the government. I have seen the pri soner twice in Newgate. Ido not recollect asking him any questions. Mr. Bodkin.—l don't know whether it will be improper to ask you, Mr. Maule, whether the government has made any inquiries as to the existence of the society called " Young England ? " Lord Denman.—That can have nothing to do with the case. The Attorney-General.—This is the case for the prosecu tion. Mr. Sydney Taylor then addressed the court for the prisoner, and said he should be able to establish his in sanity beyond all doubt. The learned gentleman made some remarks upon the nature of hereditary insanity, which very often developed itself between the ages of 14 and 18 ; insanity in those cases generally developed itself on a sudden, and there could be no doubt that this dreadful development took place in the case of the prisoner at the very time he fired. He should be able to show that the prisoner's family, were mad : his grandfather died in a lunatic asylum—his father generally laboured under the same dreadful calamity ; and be was of opinion that the disease had descended to the prisoner at the bar, who had committed the act for which he was arraigned in a paroxysm of insanity ; and if they held him responsible for that act they would realise the words of a celebrated physi cian, " That man's vengeance followed God's visitations." He (Mr. Taylor) was satisfied that her Majesty entertained the same opinion, for on the following day she entertained a dinner party • indeed he felt satisfied that her Majesty enter tained a similar opinion to that which actuated one of her il lustrious predecessors—Queen Elizabeth, who, on being told that a plot had been formed against her life, said she would not believe it, for she would not entertain an opinion of her subjects which was degrading to the feelings of a mo ther towards her children. He trusted that what he had so inadequately advanced on behalf of the prisoner would be taken into their consideration , and that they would show that the prisoner deserved more of their pity, as well as that of the court and her Majesty, than of punishment. Mr. Taylor then sat down, having addressed the jury for two hours and three-quarters. The learned counsel then, at six o'clock, proceeded to call witnesses for the defence. Sandiman Kent examined by Mr. Bodkin.—l reside at Kentish -town, and am a carpenter. I was acquainted with the prisoner's grandfather, who was a sailor. I knew him for several years, and had him under my observation until he died, about eight or nine years ago. His mind I considered was unsound during the early part of his life, but he grew better towards its close. In the year 1799 he was raving mad, and I assisted to confine him with cords. It required the united strength of three persons to keep him down. He was subsequently taken before a magistrate, who sent him to Petworth Bridewell, where he remained for about a fort night, when he was discharged under a promise that he would go to London. On another occasion he ran after me with a spit, and I have known him to smash almost everything in the house. He knocked down two clocks one day, and was subject to strange and sudden fits of insanity. He would jump and dance about, and appear like a man quite beside himself. He was admitted into Greenwich Hospital, and was placed in the Queen's ward. Cross-examined by the Attorney-General.—He was mar ried to my sister, but did not live very happily with his wife. He was generally very bad after drinking. He was sent to Petworth Bridewell for breaking some things. At Green wich Hospital he walked about like the rest of the pen sioners. By Lord Denman.—He was five years in the hospital. Sophia Oxford.—l am widow of the prisoner's grandfather, who died at Greenwich Hospital eleven years ago. We lived together 35 years. He was always very unsettled in his mind, particularly when he took liquor. I noticed a strange ness about him soon after we were married. The prisoner's father was only 12 months old when the grandfather came to the house and caused a great disturbance. He was taken to the magistrates in consequence, and, with the assistance of a waterman, the beadle of the parish, and some other men, a strait-waistcoat was put upon him, and he was considered so bad that it remained on him for a fortnight, and two men were obliged to sit up with him. He got better in a couple of months, and then . came to see me. When he was at Greenwich he was attended by Sir Richard Dobson for an attack in his head, which I firmly believe affected his mind. For a year previous to his death he behaved very steadily. Cross-examined by the Solicitor-General.—My husband was not tipsy when he broke the things, but he was dis pleased with my relations because they would not give him a treat, as he considered that they ought to have paid him that mark of respect. Sophia Bartlett, examined by Mr. Bodkin.—l am daughter of the last witness, and live in Gray's Inn-lane. I remember a strait-waistcoat having been placed on my father when I was twelve years old. Four men assisted, and they went up stairs to the room where he was, and shut the door. After that my father went to sea, and was then admitted to Green wich Hospital, where I saw him several times, and had con versations with him. He was not altogether insane, but very strange and eccentric in his mind. He used to say, while keeping guard at the gate, that he was the Pope of Rome and St. Paul, and then he would tell me that the Pope had escaped from prison. I had a brother younger than myself named Peter, who had a complaint in his head, which caused it to be light at times, and on one occasion he was placed in the Naval Asylum. My father, to the best of my belief, never was of sound mind. Cross-examined by Sir F. Pollock.—l am 26 years of age. My father was at sea nearly all his life, but used to come home at intervals. He was employed at Greenwich to keep one of the gates. He represented himself as St. Paul, not St. Peter. Sarah Kitchen, examined by Mr. S. Taylor.—l am 74 years old, and used to keep the Black Prince public-house at Kennington-common. I am the widow of the prisoner's maternal grandfather. I knew the father of the prisoner when a little boy at school, but never saw him after. I never saw his grandfather but four times in my life. Mrs. Hannah Oxford—l am the mother of the prisoner, and married his father when we were each twenty years of age. I was acquainted with him for about six weeks before our marriage. He became acquainted with me at the Hope and Anchor public-house at Birmingham, and I married him against the consent of my friends. Both before and after I was married to him he acted very strangely ; and previous to our marriage he attempted to draw a razor across his throat, and threatened to shoot himself with a double-barrelled pis tol, which he said was loaded with slugs. I promised to marry him at the very time the Princess Charlotte was lying dead ; but before the day appointed for the marriage I said I would not be his wife in consequence of some inquiries made respecting him, and he then pulled out a bundle of bank notes, threw them into the fire, and watched them until they were consumed. He was in a great rage before he did it, because I would not take the money to purchase some furni ture. Before we were married be was found in the street with an open razor in his hand. He was crying, and seemed in a very desponding state, and in that state he was taken home by a watchman. After we were married he did not mend in the least, and during my pregnancy of my second child he used to make all sorts of faces and grimaces at me, and when the child was born it used to distort its face in the same way, and never showed any indication of sense or rea son. That child died when it was two years and nine months old ; and while I was pregnant with the prisoner my husband used to make the same grimaces. He was always tormenting and annoying me. I never did anything to vex him, but, on the contrary, was too kind and attentive to him. He was a gold chaser by trade, and could earn twenty guineas a week. He bought a horse on one occasion, and used to lead it about the parlour. When I was pregnant with the prisoner my husband threw a quart pot at me, and hit me on the head. I fell down from the effects of the blow, and was insensible some time. When we were living at Birmingham he stripped the house of every article of furniture without any quarrel or provocation between us, and then went directly to Dublin, where he spent a sum of money which he took with him. When he returned he pushed me from him, and refused to take my hand. He always acted contrary to what he was told to do. When I was in distress for money he used to laugh, and had a sort of supernatural look. with him. I knew him to take laudanum twice, and on one of the occa sions lie was very ill. He died on the 10th of June, 1822. I saw his father on that occasion, and he scolded me for hav ing the body opened without getting anything for it. The prisoner was born on the 9th of April, 1822. When he was seven years of age he used to burst out crying for no cause. He continued this habit from three or four years of age up to the present time. He would sometimes get into a violent rage without any cause, and he would knock and destroy anything he might have in his hand. The first day he brought pistols home he pointed one of them at me, and on another occasion he levelled a loaded gun at me. When a child he burnt his face with gunpowder, and lie was very fond of firing off little cannons. After his fits of passion he would burst out into fits of laughter, which appeared to be quite involun tary. My customers complained of his conduct, and I lost my business entirely. At other times he was penitent. When he was not under such excitement he was very re served, and would riot speak, and used to be very angry with me if I spoke to him. I went into the service of Mr. Prescott, the banker, as confidential housekeeper, when I lost sight of the prisoner for some time. After that I placed him under the care of a person of the name of Salmon. I remained with Mr. Prescott for a year and a half, and after that time the prisoner appeared more calm and collected. Mr. Baron Alderson—How long is that ago ? Witness—About eight years ago. Examination continued—The prisoner was in the habit of going on to the roof of the house, and throwing things at persons passing. He was once taken to the station-house for getting up behind a carriage and alarming a lady. Lord Denman—How long is that ago ? Witness—About six years ago. The prisoner never, to my knowledge, belonged to any club or society. I left London for Birmingham about four weeks before this affair occurred. He had left his situation about a week before that time. He received £2O per annum wages. He also received a suit of mourning when his mistress died, which enabled him to obtain the clothes he now wears. Upon one occasion he presented a pistol at me : I then asked him why he spent his money so foolishly ? When he replied that the pistol did not belong to him, it belonged to a young man for whom he was taking care of it. A day or two before I went to Birmingham the prisoner struck me a blow across the face ; I called upon my landlady, who said that if she struck her mother she should expect her hand to drop off. Upon which the prisoner appeared ashamed, and became very sullen. I know his handwriting ; the letter produced is his writing. Cross-examined by the Solicitor-General—Told Mrs. Paxman that the blow on my face was an accident. The prisoner first went to school when he was quite a boy. He continued under my care till his father died ; he was then 7 years old. He had been to school before, that time. The first school he went to was a Mr. Water's ; he then went to a Mr. Robinson's, where he remained some months. He then went to a third, where he also remained some months. After I left Mr. Prescot's, the prisoner went to Mr. Salmon's at Birmingham, where he remained twelve months. He after ' wards went to live with his aunt, where he acted as barman ; his duty was to serve customers and receive money. He re ceived wages from his aunt. The witness then described the several situations the prisoner lived in, but the low tone in which she spoke prevented her being heard in the reporters' box. When he lived at Mr. Salmon's, complaints were made of the prisoner giving wrong change, breaking glasses, &c. It is four years this summer since the prisoner first went to his aunt's, and since that period he has always supported himself by his situations. When I kept the coffee-shop the prisoner annoyed the customers by crying out and bawling aloud. I forget the name of the lady whose carriage he got up behind, but she resided in the Walworth-road. Ido notknow a per son of the name of Roades. The prisoner had been at home about a week when I went to Birmingham. When I left Lon don, I intended to return to West-place again. The prisoner was then looking out for another situation. I told him to look out for another place, but he said there was nothing stir ring, and he would wait till a good place offered itself rather than answer advertisements. Mary Sumner was then called by Mr. S. Taylor, when Lord Denman said, he thought as there were several other witnesses to be examined, it would be better to adjourn at once till to-morrow morning. It was impossible to conclude that night. Mr. Taylor replied that the examination of his witnesses would certainly occupy some time further. Lord Denman said that as he was unwilling to interfere with the examination of the prisoner's mother, but he thought it would he better in the examination of the other witnesses, rather to ask whether they had formed any opinion as to the state of the prisoner's mind, and the grounds on which they formed that opinion, than to lead them into the whole his tory of his life in order to elicit some circumstance which might bear upon the case. He did not wish to interfere with the defence, but he threw it out as a hint for the consideration of counsel. The court then adjourned at a few minutes past eight, until nine o'clock the next morning. SECOND DAY Soon after nine o'clock this day the proceedings of the trial were resumed. The jury, who had been taken to the London Coffee-house during the night, being called over, the prisoner was placed at the bar. _ . ,-FRIDAY Mary Sumner examined by Mr. Taylor.—l reside in Church-row, Houndsditch, and am a widow. I have lived in Birmingham, and knew the father of the prisoner, and have had opportunities of observing his conduct. I always thought he was not right in his mind. Once, at dinner-time, he threw the meat and vegetables out of the window, and my family all used to say to one anothur, that he must be out of his mind. His acts were more like those of a madman than any thing else. Charles Marklaw.—l live at Birmingham, and Mrs. Ox ford is my sister. I knew her late husband. On one occa sion he kissed both his children, and then went out of doors and drank the contents of a bottle, which, by the smell, I knew to be laudanuin. I told him he was a fool for acting in such a way. He was taken to his own house, and Dr. Birt Davies was sent for. I always considered him in a mad state. Dr. Birt Davies examined by Mr. Bodkin.—l am a phy sician and a coroner for the county in which I reside. I at tended the husband of Mrs. Oxford at Birmingham on one occasion when he had poisoned himself by taking laudanum. I believe I saw him twice or thrice in 1824. I directed the usual remedies to be administered to him, and he recovered. I cannot say whether he was in any danger when I first saw him. I never saw him after that time. I had no opportunity on the occasions I saw him of judging of his state of mind, but I had heard of his strange conduct from others. Mr. Bodkin.—Assuming the facts that have been deposed to, do you think the prisoner sane or insane? The court stated that the question was inadmissible. That was a question the jury would have to answer. Mr. Bodkin.—Do you think that a man firing two pistols at her Majesty, and then admitting that he had done so, and entering freely into conversation on the subject, could be in his same mind ? Witness.—•l think he must be mad. Baron Alderson.—Without making any other inquiry ? Witness.—A man knowing the danger he would be in, and making such an admission. I think that it would be a proof of madness. If I found that a man had written such papers as are now produced, just before he committed the act, it would strengthen my opinion. (The papers referred to were those found at the prisoner's lodgings.) Cross-examined.—l don't recollect what remedies I pre scribed to the prisoner's father when he took the poison. The circumstance is impressed on my mind from the fact that he was a man of colour. I don't recollect how far he was over powered by the laudanum. I answered the questions put to me by the prisoner's counsel as a medical man, and not as a magistrate or a coroner. The circumstances that were re ferred to showed a tendency to insanity. By the court.—l derive that opinion from the circumstances under which the crime was committed. It was done openly —no attempt at escape or concealment—no caution—the party delivered himself up immediately—the admission that there were balls in the pistols— _ _ _ Baron Alderson—l don't think that is admitted. That is a question to be discussed. Witness.—Also the absence of motive. Lord Denman.—Really I don't think we ought to go into this. It is a matter solely for the jury. Baron Alderson.—A medical man's province is merely to speak to medical facts, upon which he grounds his opinion. Lord Denman.—As to the fact of the papers, there may be a question whether they are genuine or not. They may be merely papers made up for the purposes of a defence. Mr. John Wright.-1 am at present a serjeant of police, of Brighton. I knew the prisoner's father. He was very violent, and continually ill-used his wife. I don't think he was right in his head half his time. I was articled to him, and learnt the trade of gold-chasing. Robert Snedd.—l formerly resided at Birmingham, and I also knew the father of the prisoner, both before and after his marriage. I considered him to be in a very unsound state of mind.. Clarina Powell.—l formerly kept the King's Head at Hounslow, and the prisoner was in my service for two years, about two years ago. During that period he was under my observation, and I considered he was not in a sound state of mind. Joseph Day.—l am a green-grocer, and in the year 18 7 _ _ I was a corpo - ral in the second battalion of grenadier guards, and was quartered at Hounslow, and frequently went to the house of the last witness. I had opportunities of seeing the prisoner, and, in my o pinion, he was of unsound mind. Mary Ann Formn.—l was a fellow-servant with tht pri soner at the Shepherd and Flock public-house. I consider the prisoner of unsound mind. William Hazlewood.—l was barman at the Shepherd and Flock with the prisoner, and I observed him frequently laughing and crying. In my opinion he was of unsound mind. Mr. Thomas Parr.—The prisoner was in my service; had come from the place mentioned by the last witnesses. I consider the prisoner of sound mind, but subject to fits of laughter, which at times appeared to be quite uncontrollable. I never saw him Cry. Mr. Newman. Robinson.-1 am landlord of the Hog in the Pound, and the prisoner lived with me from the Ist of April. He was always laughing, and when I approached him he still kept laughing. Some of my customers were offended by his proceeding in this way. [At this stage of the prcceeding the prisoner began to cry.] John Tedman.—l am an inspector of police, and knew the prisoner when he was at the Shepherd and Flock, and he was under my observation for 18 months, during which period I frequented that house. I consider the prisoner to be of un sound mind. Cross-examined.—He was trusted to draw the beer and liquors, and receive the money, and wait upon the cus tomers. By the Court.—l have frequently found him crying, and when I asked him what was the matter, he said " Nothing, it is all over now." He told me that no one had ill-u,sed him. I have found him laughing, and whenfasiced him the reason, he said the old women drank so much gin it would make any body laugh. I heard his master once tell him to bottle some stout, and he put the funnel the wrong side up wards, and he said, when I questioned him, that it was a jolly good cork. The beer ran all about the basket. I told Mr. Minton, the master, that he was acting like an idiot, and he had better send him away. He was occasionally very violent, and at other times he was very quiet. About 18 months ago the prisoner wished to go to the House of Lords to see the Queen, and he said he was determined to see her, and he.would see'her one dayoroiher . . ---- Susannah Phelps.—l am a married sister of the prisoner, and he lived in the same house with me when this occur rence took place. I have observed something strange and extraordinary in his conduct all along. I recollect his bring ing the pistols home, and he was continually pointing them at me, and firing them off out of the window, and in the yard. I never knew of anybody being hurt by these pistols. He began firing the pistols a day or two after he bought them. When he came home, in the beginning of May, from the last place, he had £5 for a quarter's salary. I did not ever see the prisoner in company with any one except the lad Lenton, and he never received any letters. It was my opinion, and every one else's, that he was not of sound mind. He once held the pistol to my head as I lay in bed. Emily Chittenden.—l was housemaid when the prisoner was at the Hog in the Pound. I observed that at times his conduct was very strange and very eccentric. I recollect that Mrs. Robinson, my mistress, fell down stars once, and was very much frightened, and the prisoner laughed at her. I have noticed him laugh at other times when there was nothing to be laughed at. I never saw him cry. I have not heard him talk of himself in a strange manner, or say that he was a king. I received a letter from the prisoner, ad - dressed as follows " To a public-house, the Hog and Pound, To Miss Chittenden, there to be found, Please to convey with speedility ; Remember, my blade, the postage is paid." —(a laugh). Christopher Day and Richard Mc Donald gave similar evidence as to the state of the prisoner's mind. Dr. Hotchkin, a member of the Society of Friends, gave evidence upon his affirmation—l have been a physician for 14 years, and have lectured upon morbid anatomy, aad have written works upon the subject. Mr. Sydney Taylor—Suppose a person committing a crime, for which his life would be forfeited, without any motive, and he giving himself up and avowing himself the author of the crime, do you think such a man would be sane or insane ? _ _ _ Witness-1 think it would leave a very strong impression that the party was insane, and my opinion would be streng thened if I was aware that other members of the family had been insane. Upon all the facts as stated I should say the prisoner was insane, and such a form of insanity has been recognised by medical authorities. Cross-examined—l should say it was under the form known as lesion de la volonte, lesion of the will. This means more than a person having the control over his own actions. It would suppose a morbid propensity—a disease of the will. I should say it was connected with moral irregularity as the result of disease I don't think that I have ever had such a case under my own observation. I think that committing a crime without a motive is an apparent indication of insanity. Re-examined—The form of insanity I have referred to is a well-recognised form. Lord Denman, to the witness—Do you not think that any person can form an opinion as to the conclusion to be drawn from a person's actions, and the want of motive for commit ting a crime, as well as a medical man? Witness—l think not. A medical man would make more careful examination. Lord Denman—But supposing an equally careful examina tion, the result would have been the same? _ .. By Baron Alderson—lt is very difficult to draw the line between eccentricity and the commencement of insanity. _ Dr. John Connolly—I am physician to the lunatic asylum at Hanwell, and have had considerable experience in dis orders of the mind. I have seen and conversed with the prisoner, and I am of opinion that he is not of sound mind. Dr. Chowne.—l am physician to Charing-cross Hospital. 1 think that the commission of a crime without motive, under the circumstances detailed, is an indication of insanity. It is a well-recognised form of insanity under the name that has been mentioned—lesion of the will. It is also called moral insanity. I hive seen the prisoner in Newgate, and conversed with him, and from that conversation, and the opportunity I had of observing him, I should say his mind was essentially unsound, and combined a mixture of insanity and imbecility. I think that involuntary laughing and cry ing is a proof of imbecility. Dr. James Fernandez Clarke.—l tun a surgeon to several institutions, and have been in the habit of attending insane persons. I have attended the prisoner's family, and have known the prisoner for several years. I was present with the other medical gentlemen, and my opinion is that the pri soner is imbecile and of unsound mind. This was the case for the defence. The Solicitor-General said the jury would shortly have to perform the most important part of their duty—to con sider the fair weight to which the evidence offered to them was entitled. In common with his learned friend, all who were associated with him would be rejoiced if, at any period of the trial, they could have seen that, in the performance of their dvty, they could have consented to a verdict of insanity. But in this case they were called on to decide upon a ques tion involving the most important interests. He considered the duty he had to perform was of such a public nature that he should not observe upon the general observations of his learned friend. If they could, consistently with their duty to themselves and the country, they would find the charge was not proved—but that verdict of acquittal, to be satisfactory to the public, must be founded upon evidence. The public would be best served by juries on all occasions occupying themselve with their proper business, without looking to other considerations—their duty only was to consider whether the crime had been committed by the prisoner, and whether he was answerable for his actions when he committed it. Violence, irregularity of conduct—nay, insanity itself, might exist without doing away with the responsibility of his con duct. The defence rested upon three points :-Ist, Whether the Queen was the object of attack ; 2d, whether the pistols were loaded with ball; 3d, the state of mind of the prisoner. In considering the two first questions, the consideration of insanity would not materially occur. The commission of the fact was totally distinct from the responsibility which might result. It was admitted that premeditation and con trivance were not always symptoms of sanity. Was it made out by the evidence that the object of the prisoner was to shoot the Queen ? No other individual filled that station in society which could present ,such an object of attack as the Queen, whether to a sane or an insane person. They would remember that he had expressed his determination to see the Queen, and that on another occasion he had known she was at Windsor. If Prince Albert had been the object of attack, the prisoner had an opportunity of shooting him on his return from Woolwich ; the pistol was levelled at the carriage. He inquired, as soon as his cell-door was open, it' the Queen was hurt. His learned friends answer, that perhaps he thought she might be hurt by the wadding—perhaps by the ball — which was the most likely. Would not those facts prove that the Queen was the object of attack? Had he aimed at any one else, would his inquiry have ended with asking as to the Queen ? She was the sole object of his attention ; no other individual occurred to his mind. There could be no reasonable doubt as to the Queen being the sole object of attack. In a subsequent part of the case matter would arise calculated to lead to the same conclusion. If the prisoner should be influenced by vanity, and a desire of making him self the general object of attention throughout the country, estimable and important as the life of Prince Albert must be, it could not be compared in importance with that of her Majesty ; and if influenced by desires of destruction, the prisoner had done this deed, this would point at the Queen. There was no other individual to whom the evidence would apply except to the Queen. It was the duty of his learned friends, and they had discharged that duty with great ability and diligence. to present to the jury every object, and they would have produced facts calculated to show that the pri soner had aimed at some other individual had such been in their possession. With regard to the question of the pistols being loaded with ball, he considered that the consideration of insanity would rather lead to the conclusion that such was the case than otherwise ; but there were other circum stances. The prisoner applied to Gray to purchase caps and balls, who recommended him to the place to purchase balls. He is fond of practising with balls at a shooting-gallery. He had a bullet-Mould adapted to the pistol, and loose balls were found in his box. If an individual levelled a pistol and discharged it in such a manner as to indicate an intention of murder it would a very dangerous doctrine to assume that there were no balls in the pistol, unless such balls were found. In the case alluded to by his learned friend, the pistol was not discharged . but when the pistols were discharged, and powder and ball were found in the person's possession, the case was different. What was the object of firing ? Destruc tion. Could any other be suggested ? One pistol was fired ; and if his object had been to create alarm merely, why dis charge the second ? But if his object were destruction, hav ing fired the first without effect he would fire the second ; and that wss a circumstance for them to consider when they came to consider whether the object was to produce death. Would those circumstances leave any doubt that there were balls ? The question asked by the prisoner distinctly proved that an act had been done by which the Queen might have been hurt. The prisoner's expression, too, to one of the witnesses, telling him if his head were at the muzzle of the pistol, and the ball had struck it, he would have known. Again, when the question was distinctly put, he said they were loaded with ball. If incidental and direct admission left it uncertain in the execution of criminal justice, whether a man who levelled a pistol at another in the open air had loaded that pistol with ball or not—no one would be safe. If the pistols were loaded with out ball, the prisoner should show it. His expressions were confirmatory of the conclusion fairly deducible from the facts of the case, that the pistols were loaded with ball. Sup posing him to have been labouring under delusion, unless he were so mad as not to know the consequences of pulling the trigger, what was there to lead to the conclusion that the pistols were not loaded with ball ? Considering the evidence of the witnesses, who stated that they heard the whizzing, what was there to lead to the conclusion that the pistols were loaded with powder only? There were two gentlemen who stated their opinion that the marks upon the nail were the marks of balls. Suppose they are mistaken, what then ? If the jury had ever discharged guns or pistols, and attempted to look for the balls, they would know the difficulty, even in a limited space, of finding a ball. Considering the height of the wall, a very slight. elevation of the muzzle of the pistol would be sufficient to carry the ball over the wall. The second pistol was fired up the road, and it was extremely difficult, of course, to see what direction it took. Their duty would be to weigh well the probabilities which would arise from the conduct of the prisoner on other occasions, and the extreme improbability that either from design or accident he should omit to• load his pistols with ball on this occasion. With regard to the third point, he was traced from school into three distinct services. They had had his employers' evidence ; they had heard a great many witnesses. Suppose the prisoner's will was now in litigation, and this evidence of insanity should be attempted to be inferred against its validity, what would be the effect of it? They had heard quotations from text-writers—they would hear from the court the rule of law they were to apply to the case ; but in a civil case a very different rule of decision was required from a criminal case. If he apprehended aright, the rule itself in this case was not difficult ; its application was more so. Lord Erskine had entered more at large into the question of criminal responsibility than any other writer, and public justice did not require that they should measure the prison er's responsibility by any other rule than that laid down by Mr. Erskine in defending Hatfield. It was a safe and just rule. Before he reverted to the evidence, he would once more call their attention to it. Thg principles were laid d own very shortly by Lord Lyndhurst i the case of the Kin g v . Of fard. It was an indictment or murder, and Lord Lyndhurst said that to acquit the prisoner it was necessary that the jury should be of opinion that he did not know the consequence of what he was doing ; that he was not aware that he was acting against the laws of God and of man. Sir J. Jekyll had said rightly in the DuChess of Kingston's case, the raw would not measure the capacity of a man's understanding provided he be compos mendis. Lord Hale said that partial insanity would not excuse a person from responsibility for his criminal actions.—[The'learned gentleman then read the opinion of Lord Erskine, and quoted many other authorities on the subject.] The question for them to decide would be, whether the prisoner was in a situation to know right from wrong—to know that the consequence of this act would be the infliction of death, and that he would thereby subject him self to punishment. The Solicitor-General concluded by ex pressing his opinion that the verdict which the jury would deliver would be satisfactory to their consciences and the country. Lord Penman then commenced summing up, and stated that the prisoner was charged with high treason ; and the other acts charged were, that he fired two pistols at her Ma jesty, loaded with bullets. The jury were to determine whether he fired the pistols, and whether they were loaded with bullets, and then to consider whether the prisoner was insane. These questions were perfectly distinct. As to the fact of the firing, that was too notorious to stand in need of much comment; but they were to dismiss from their minds all they had heard on the subject out of court, and attend solely to the evidence. There could be no doubt but that the prisoner was the person who fired the pistols; but as the case was most important he should go through the whole of the evidence, and call their attention to the facts as he went along. His lordship then commenced reading the evidence, commenting upon it as he proceeded. lie concluded by stating that he left the case to the jury, satisfied that they would take all possible pains to ascertain the truth ; and, hav ing ascertained it, that they would pronounce such a verdict as would give satisfaction to their own minds, and be an ex ample to future juries. The jury retired at a quarter past five o'clock, and re turned into court at a quarter past six o'clock ; their names were called over, and the prisoner was placed at the bar. He did not appear at all disturbed. Mr. Clarke then asked whether the jury had agreed upon their verdict? .; Foreman—We find the prisoner, Edward Oxford, Guilty of discharging two pistols at her Majesty, but whether they were loaded with ball is not satisfactorily or sufficiently proved, he being at the time in an unsound state of mind. The verdict appeared to create a good deal of surprise in the court. Mr. Sydney Taylor submitted that the prisoner, upon this verdict, was entitled to his acquittal. The Attorney-General contended that the court ought to ask the jury whether they intended by the verdict to say, that they acquitted the prisoner on the ground of his being insane? After some lengthened discussion, Lord Denman said it would be better that the jury should retire and reconsider their verdict. They accordingly again retired, and were absent about an hour, when they again entered the court, finding a verdict that the prisoner was GUILTY, BEING AT THE TIME INSANI. Baron ALDERSON.—That is, you say that he is not guilty, on account of his being insane at the time the offence was committed ? Foreman.—That is what we mean, my lord The :iltiorney-General then moved the court to order that Edward Oxford should be put in some place of safe custody until her Majesty's pleasure was known respecting him. Lord Denman.—The order wiil be made as a matter of course. The prisoner was then removed from the bar, and the court adjourned. THEATRE-ROYAL, LIVERPOOL On the Nights of the RACES, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, the Performances will not commence until EIGHT o'clock. The Doors to be opened at a Quarter past Seven. Seventh Appearance of Madame VESTRIS and Mr. CHAS. MATIIEWS, of the Theatre-Royal, Covent-Garden, who are engaged for a LIMITED NUMBER OF . NIGHTS, and of Mr. JAMES VINING, of the same • "Theatre, who is likewise engaged for a limited period. Fourth Week of Mr. GILBERT and Miss BALLIN, Prin cipal Dancers of the Theatre-Royal, Drury-Lane, and their Pupils, Master and Miss MARSHALL, and Miss TAYLOR. _ _ THIS present TUESDAY, July 14, 1840, the Perform ances will commence with the Drama called FAINT HEART NEVER WON FAIR LADY. Ruy Gomez Mr. Charles Mathews, Duchess de Torrenueva Madame Vestris, As originally performed by them in London. After which, the Farce of CHAOS IS COME AGAIN. Jack Bunce. To which will be added the Operetta of the LOAN OF A LOVER. Peter Spyk Mr. Charles Mathews. Captain Amersfort.. Mr. James Vining. Gertrude (her original character).. Madame Vestris. To conclude with, for the eleventh time here, a new Grand Ballet, called the DAUGHTER OF THE DANUBE. The Fire Fiend.. Master Marshall. Rudolph.. Mr. Gilbert. Fleur des Champs (the Daughter of the Danube) Miss Ballin. Bertha and Gertrude .. Miss Taylor and Miss Marshall. TO—MORROW (Wednesday), the Comedy of KNOW YOUR OWN MIND. Dashwould, Mr. Chas. Mathews; Millamour, Mr. Jas. Vining; Lady Bell, Madame Vestris. After which, the Farce of PATTER VERSUS CLATTER. Captain Patter, Mr. Charles Mathews.—To conclude with THE DAUGHTER OF THE DANUBE. On THURSDAY, FAINT HEART NEVER WON FAIR LADY, with the SENTINEL and the DAUGHTER of the DANUBE. _ _ __ On FRIDAY, THE DUENNA. Don Carlos, Madame Vestris. With a New Ballet, called VENUS AND MARS. —To conclude with A HANDSOME HUSBAND, being for the BENEFIT of Madame VESTRIS, and the last night but Five of Madame Vestris, Mr. Charles Mathews and Mr. James Vining. MECHANICS' INSTITUTION, MOUNT-STREET. MUSICAL TREAT. ON WEDNESDAY next, the 15th July instant, at Half past Seven, p.m., Mr. VINCENT NOVELLO will deliver the Second of a Course of Four Lectures on CHURCH MUSIC, to be continued, at the same hour, on the succeeding SATURDAY, the 18th, and WEDNESDAY, the 22d instant. _ _ The Lectures will be illustrated witry numerous and varied selections from the works of the greatest Musical Composers ; and, for this purpose, the services of the Misses FLOWER, of the London Concerts, Mr. ALFRED NOVELLO, Mr. WALTON, of Manchester, and an extensive Chorus have been obtained, at very great expense. Mr. VINCENT NOVELL() will preside at the Pinao•forte. The Lectures will be read by Mr. A. DUNCAN, Teacher of Elocution and Assistant Master in the English Department of the High School of the Institution. At a Quarter before Seven on each Evening, the doors of the Lecture-room will be opened. Admission to each Lecture, ONE SHILLING The Exhibition is open without further charge to those who attend the Lectures. W. B. HODGSON, Secretary EXHIBITION AT THE MECHANICS' INSTITUTION, MOUNT-STREET. THOSE who have not seen this most extensive and magni ficent Exhibition, ought to lose no time in visiting it, as, on account of the opening of the Schools on Monday, the 3d August, it cannot possibly remain open longer than Satur day, the Ist August. The Exhibition consists of a most splendid Collection of Paintings, Statues, Mechanical and Architectural Models, Philosophical Apparatus, Machinery, Manufactured Goods, in their various stages, Specimens of Natural History, Antiquities, Curiosities, and interesting Articles of every description. Sixteen Rooms, five of them about ninety feet each in length, are occupied with the collec tion ; nothing similar to which has ever been seen in Liver pool. At One and Eight p.m. Philosophical Experiments, &c, &c, are exhibited in the Lecture Room, and illustrated by short Lectures. The Exhibition will remain open precisely there weeks from this date. Admission, from Nine to Four, One Shilling ; children Sixpence ; from Four to Ten, Sixpence for persons of all ages. Season Tickets, (of which above 5000 have been sold) Two Shillings and Sixpence. 6th July, 1840. W. B. HODGSON, Secretary. EXHIBITION APTAIN SIBORN' S MODEL OF THE BATTLE OF WATERLOO THE celebrated MODEL OF THE BATTLE OF WA TERLOG is NOW OPEN for EXHIBITION at' the GALLERY OF THE UNION -^ROOMS, Slater; street, Bold-street. Open from Ten in the Morning till Ten at Night. Ad. mission, One Shilling each. SPLENDID PICTURE OF THE "PRESIDENT" STEAM SHIP, The readers of the STANDARD, and the public generally, are respectfully informed, that on Friday, the 31st of . July instant, will be presented gratuitously to subscri bers and purchasers of the paper of that day a beau tiful Picture of the PRESIDENT, the largest Steam ship in the world, to be lithographed by a first-rate Artist, from a splendid painting by Mr. S. Walters, a gentleman of the highest celebrity as a Marine Painter. This Picture will be accompanied by a full and authentic description of the vessel, her construc tion, engines, and equipments. The production of this work of art will be attended with very considerable cost ; but the liberal patronage' with which the STANDARD has been honoured, in duces us to make this sacrifice, in testimony of our ' gratitude, and in the hope that to a commercial and nautical community such a present may be found' acceptable. As we anticipate a large sale on the day in question, ft more favourable opportunity could not be presented for the wide circulation of advertisements, which we respectfully solicit. To parties desirous of obtaining Pictures, we suggest an early application at the office, where a book will be kept for the insertion of names, in order Oa' the earliest and best impressions may be secured. Standard-office, July 13th, 1840. ebt Etintimot &tanbarb. TUESDAY MORNING, JULY 14, 1840 A copy of the Northampton Mercury has been for warded to us, contain a most gratifying announcement. We neither know nor care whether the Town Council of that town is composed of Whigs, Radicals, or Con servatives : but we feel happy in congratulating its members upon an act which reflects equal credit on their good sense and their humanity. We allude to the petition which was introduced at the meeting of the. Northampton Town Council, last week, praying the House of Commons to take measures for encouraging the importation of free labourers into the West Indies• and British Guiana, which petition was adopted with— out a division. The following is a report of the pro— ceedings as it appears in the Northampton Mercury : FREE LABOURERS IN THE WEST INDIES.-Mr. Gr(101122 moved that the council petition the House of Commons to take measures for encouraging the importation of free. lib bourers into the West India colonies and British Guinn/at. Mr. Groom stated that the present high price of sugar, an article which had become one of the actual necessaries of life, and the depressed state of the export trade, in which this town was greatly interested, called, in his opinion, for some such step. During the last year the want of labourers in our sugar colonies had occasioned a falling off in the im ports of sugar, as compared with the six years previous to 1835, to the extent of 75,200 Mids., in value nearly two millions. In the West Indies there were some millions of acres of land lying uncultivated, while in British Guiana at least 300 labourers could be profitably employed, for every one now located upon that rich soil. Nobody could doubt that it was far more desirable that England should obtain colonial produce from her own colonies than from those of foreigners. We had paid twenty millions for the emancipa tion of the negroes, and we should be encouraging slavery still if we purchased our sugar from foreign colonies, where' its cultivation is wholly carried on by slaves. It should also • be remembered that the West Indies take in exchange for their produce all kinds of manufactured goods from this country, having no manufactures themselves, and the late deficiency in the imports had consequently affected the staple manufactures of this town and county seriously, the export trade in shoes having greatly fallen off. Indeed it would be found invariably, that in proportion as the imports fall off, • so would the exports. Free labourers, it appeared, might be ' obtained from among the free blacks of America and from ' the East Indies, and there were also some thousands of slaves captured every year by British cruisers, who are noW sent to the Brazils or to Havannah, and who might be mit- ' ployed to great advantage in our own colonies as free labour- - ers. Again, in the Bahamas several thousands of liberated- Africans were living at a great expense to this country in idleness, and without a chance of bettering their condition. - These too, he conceived, might be beneficially employed jut