The Express.
London, England, 1849-12-12 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 12, 1849.

JAW ilntelltgence.
JUDICIAL MITCOMITEE OF THE PRIVY
W.—YrwraiussT.
soma mit Aroinsmoor or Unmoor, uts AscasmttVor or
INS/1, lIIR BUMP or Lome, Loom L.4st.IMLL, C.sb.l L,
LinIIDOWI,II, Tag Vres•Cmoraulo Rinse? Saves, Ma. lhaisco-
ow Lwow, Ms. Lam raaaa, ass Da. Lvaati.oTox.
0011 MAN V. TNT BISMOP or EIZIIIT.—IRTANT B&TTIBM,
This Wes sa Mpg from • decision of the Cart of Arches,
Ia which Odium% was given for the Bishop of Easter, the

present reepoulant.
It will be remembered that some time ago the Lord Chan
caller presented the Rev. lir. Gotham. the worst appel-
lant, to the living of Bamford Spoke, ink e diocese of
Exeter. Delon, however, the Bieber Exeter woul
parent to the reverent gentleman's induction to the
living he insisted upon his undergoing an tilMioll,
Con before his lordship on certain matt. re touch-
ing his religiose belief, conceiving that Mr. Gor-
ham, since his former examination (on being presented
to the living of St. Jest, in Cornwell), had held sad
inculcated doctrines at variance with some of the eardinal
articles of the church of England, particularly that he held
unorthodox views with regard to the effect sad efficacy of
baptismal regeneration. The cause came on for hewing be-
fore Sir Herbert Jenner Fast, in the Archie Court, in the
summer of this year, and, after an elaborate argument,
which lasted several days, the wart pronounced judgment
in favour of the Bishop of Exeter. From that judgment
the Rev. Mr. Gorham now appealed to this tribunal.
Long before the doors of the court opened a considerable
crowd, among whom we noticed several clergymen, had
assembled in the lobby adjacent to the entrann, ce ; and
en-
at
half-past 10, when the doors were thrown ope a trem
dons rush for places in the court took place. Within the bar
we noticed several noblemen and dignitaries of the chinch.
The Earl of Carlisle, Sir Edward Ryan, sof the Rev. Dr.
Wordsworth were among the another.
Mr. Turner, t2C., immediately proceeded to open the
use of the rev. appellant. He began by adverting to the
great importance which attached to the question now
before the court in its relation to the Christian
church. He then referred to the career at college of
the appellant, which reflected the highest credit upon him,
and to his subsequent presentation to the living of St.
Just, in Cornwall, on which occasion he had undergone
an examination before the bishop of the diocese, who
had given him the usual certificate of the appellant's fitness
to minister in the church of England. The learned counsel
then proceeded to state the circumstances attending upon
the appellant's presentation to the living of Bamford Spoke,
his subsequent examination before the bishop and its results,
the proceedings in the ecclesiastical court below, and their
fens, which we have detailed briefly above. He con-
tinued to say that a proceeding on a question like
this had sot been had in the ecclesiastical court for
=say centuries below, until it had been mooted in this case.
The Bishop of Exeter had charged the appellant with un-
sound doctrine in regard " to that great sad fundamental
doctrine" of the church in reference to the rite of infant
baptises, in that he hell that infants were not regenerated
thereby, and made the children of God, according to the
teaching of the Church of England. He would state to their
lordships what he conceived to be the doctrine laid down by
the ludge of the Ecclesiastical Court. It was the doctrine of
the Church of England that spiritual regeneration was given
to all, unconditioaally, in and by baptism, and that was the
position laid down by the judge in the Arches' Court. That
is a doctrine deduced by the learned judge inferentially, as be
should contend, sot from the articles, but from the services
of the Church of England. He (Mr. Turner) could not col-
lect what was the view of the learned judge as to what spi-
rime] regeneration was from his judgment. In one place he
celled it a &sage of nature; is another part he spoke of it as
&change in condition, and not a change of nature; is ano •
thee piano he described it as something almost amounting to
justification. But whatever the learned judge's judgment
might be as to the effect of baptism, he therein laid it down
that it was the doctrine of the Church of England that all
unconditionally were regenerated by the rite of infant bap-
tism. Ile would now state the views of Mr. Gorham as to
what infant baptism was. lie said spiritual regeneration
wee a change of nature, and not of the condition of man ;
that it may be given before, or in, or after baptism, as the
Almighty chooses; that if infante receive baptism rightly
they must receive the grace of Cod before or in baptism.
But if infants do not naive baptism rightly Mr. Gorham
said their baptism had no imuudiate spiritual effect. He
also maintained those doctrines to be proved by the chunk
of England, and by the reactors of the service of the
Church of England, requiring, as it does, in adults, faith
and repentance, and is infants the promise of faith and re
pastures. The first question proposed by the bishop eo Mr.
Gorham was, to prove from Scripture that baptism and the
Lord's Supper were severally necessary to ulvation.
Gorham answered, in terms, that he did not find in Scrip-
ture that baptism and salvation were so absolutely Lid down
ss in tne interrogatoey. The examination then proceeded
to the consideration of the general effect of baptism apart
from its being absolutely seuwary to salvatios, and the
appellant admitted that baptism was generally mower, to
181w/on. The questions proposed to r. Gorham were that
taken (tom the services of the thumb. The bishop asked if
the church of England held, and if Mr. Gorham hell, that
every chid to whom baptism was given by a lawful
minister we. regenerated and made a child of God and
an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven. Mother ques-
tion was whether the appellant hold, and whether the
drunk held, that children so baptised were barn of
water and the Holy Spirit. Mr. Gorham replied to there
gouda's goaerally, that those propositions undoubtedly
might be held by many members of the church with a good
soweeknoe, if taken with some just and favourable Gansu tie-
ties, that emestruetion being founded on a comparison of the
formulas with the articles of the church. The articles. Mr.
Gorham said, laid down witn great precision the absolute
awessity cf both sacraments, but that, with respect to hap
lion, no distinction was made in them between adults and'
ideate. The articles said then was no bestowment where
there was no worthy reception; bat in the formulas there'
was a distinction made between adults and infants, faith and
pepentanee being stated to be the conditions on which re-
ginergl;,-: was bestowed in the case of adults, whilst in the
case of iamb no tech contt:2ll3 were laid down. In other
words, the regeneration was stated to be tionciironal as
to adults, but absolute as to infants. The bishop then
premed Mr. Gotham as to the effect of the sponsorial
promises within the meaning of the articles of the church.
Mr. Gorham answered the questions generally in a manner
unsatisfactory to the bishop. Now, the question before the
court was, whether spiritual regeneration was a change of
nature or of condition ; and whether the doctrine of spiritual
regeneration of infests in baptism, as laid down by the judge
is the court below, was is aeoordance with the doctrines of
the church of England ? To determine this question the
first point to consider would 100, to what extent has the
church of England declared her views on the effect of lop.
Um? How were the articles et the church of England and
her formularies of equal effect to determine this question?
Ho (Mr. Turner) untended that her articles were her does
trine., and her pre er-book her code of devotion. What was
the title of the articles ? It was," Articles agreed upon by the
archbishops and bishops, and the whole clergy, in the convo-
cation, holden at London, of 1562, for the avoidance of
diversities of opinions, and for the establishment of cos-
sent touching true religion." What could be more con-
clusive to show that those articles were the whole of the
doctrines of the Church of England t The learned cossad
then read portions of the act of parliament which fakers' II
that convocation, and which provided (inter alio) that the
cause of deprivation of a living should be the clergymn%
holding doctrines contrary to the articles of the Clow& of
England. And on induction he was required to reaisr in
account of his faith, not with referees, to the forsankii Of
the church, but the articles of the Church of II
then solemnly agreed to in convocation. He (Mr. Turnerpgill
contended that the reasonable inference hem the artistes
of the Church of England agreed to in that convoca-
tion was that those artkles should be regarded as the
code of devotion of the Church of England. What was
the latest of 2nd and 3rd Edward VI., but to preserve uni-
formity in the services of the church of Esgland ? That
was stated in its very preamble. Now, let their
'
amide/ whether the Book of Common Prayer and
ministration of des snerameols kid down any dostrias of the
church of Eagles& The site and so), pewee of this else
tuts was to iatrodua ems sumo& seder St servissia
church throughout the whisk k)ngiosa. Tko 6th and 6th
Edward VI.. cap. I, was an wafer previdies for the unifor-
mity of service in the sausersete _eftEngland and
W Immediately aftot flat NS um is Queen Mary,
and with her antiag to Me theme the Praysr•book sad
all the seta rel~e It were swept away. On the as
of Queen Mwebsts, there was metered the act
for the nada:realty or CammlCM Prayer and the admini.
aeration of the aserusants. This act revived the statute
of Edward VI., with mural addition. It could
have been the lateallea of Queen Li abeth's act to
'ter the articles tithe Chunk of Issierk for it absolutely
Quin the power to add sew insularies to those
a existence. tb. 13th and lath Charles 11., c. 30,
whisk made baba provishea flar the saitorsaity of
Prays lug suedes, sad the oisielstrettea of the
star sod falesdeesd several steilisetkus late the
Cshamels Prayer. Now, be salssitted, fres a view
rziethat it was rim swingialia to
et the Chunk ef basis* ems by
KOZO time. If *sir ketildps teak
spas the Articles, apes the seam% re epos the
~book, they weld dal t Ankles iron the
M faith, sad the PrifirAelthat
the he
elide el dereglia.
Artist's were serifs isiestises Ilialpeere, waft
-.beak was litssied(ll& rearm *see Molls= Weir
d pasties. Ho Tuner) esalssisd that thelaw if
IfidsZpswardiddlim is staididftll.• battier
waroadbadlddle estilogradist
41•84 from the essidediatiededdend mew
Mr inertia is the So whaled *Abe lid
satillasterily shows tie Me demise of the *wish of
'ml mos hem the Aeeele, eat the deveried hen the
,ser-book. Now, se what West bed tie &mai of
-red doomed bar views out the ambled et hard= f The
of the shersit of Rome ea the auteset of Waist
said is the Osessil of Treat Mies the
N AMIN WL la die dust d some ins
the
ei Mil bin end is Met

church for centuries, was first and finally settled, and by
:hat doctrine it wee held tl-at the eaerement of baptism
was
ifttheous whether it was received rightly or not ; wit aaaaa
the 27th article of the church of Euglaud negatived that
prJeion. That *ride a " Bep.ism is not only a
eg poss
et of profeeskn end marking of difference, whereby
Christians are &scented Iris others, but it is 11113 a sign cf r--
generation or new birth, wk !ebb as by an instrument, they
that receive baptism rightly are engrafted iota the church."
lie had thus proved what the articles of the church of
feed had had negatived. lie would proceed to show what they
affirmed. Tee 29th article said that barisat was a sign 01
regeneration or new birth." That irticle said that ' bap-
tism is not only • sign of profession, and a marking of
difference whereby Christian men are discerned front others,
but it is alsoa sign of regeneration or new birth.' And
what were its ethos? Why, these, that baptism "L also a
sign of regeneration or new birth, whereby, as by an instru-
I mine, they that receive baptism rightly are grafted into the
church, !woollies of the forgiveoess of tins are thereby
signed and sealed, faith is confirmed, and grace is increased
by virtu of prayer." When he looked at the construction
of this article,
he could not help concluding from it that
the sign and the interest conveyed by the sign were
purposely separated for the purpose of introducing into the
conveyances the words as to the baptism being " rightly re-
ceived." Mr. Terser continued to say he had dealt with the
question as if their lordship had to consider whether
Gorham's doctrine was the doctrine of the Church of Eng-
land. Bat that was not tae question. The question was
whether the docerine of Mr. Gorham was disaffirmed by the
doctrine of the Church of En,rland. Del. se they peeved
that the doctrines of Mr Goebel" were opposed to tile At,
titles of the Church of England, their lordship could um*
affirm the sentence of the court below. Those dOtabea of
the Church of England were laid down at the dawn of the
Reformation, when it was Reposery to embalm as wry
denominations of Christians a possible. latiobi II stein,
" Holy Scripture contained all that was necessary to a sea's
salvation." Was not that a declaration that the framers el
thews Articles meant that nothing was el wailed as en
article of faith but what was contained in Scripture ? Arth
els 20 said the church had paver to order rites
sad ceremonies, yet it was not competent to de-
cree anything not contained in Go I's Word. The
frame of those articles was, that they °one& ned certain things:
as proved and as mecum to be believed, and they left other
I things as not proved as not necessary to a man's salvatioll.
They left undetermined venom quislings, and these UMW
questions the crown in its declaration bad said ism he be I
collected from Scripture by those who reed and haseprond
the Seriou and who were entrusted by the Church of
Beglaad withs, that interpretation. The learned judge is the
Part below had said the Articles of the Church of England
were opts to doubt; was that doubt to be solved by a person
in the position of a single judge of the Ecclesiastical Court ?
Rs contended if those articles were open to doubt that doubt
was to be settled in • full convocation of the clergy, and net
by the dictum of a judge in the Ecclesiastical Court. What
was the effect of the decision of the learned judge? If the
bishops might lay down rules of faith from expressions in
the devotional services of the church, where was to
be the limit to that authority ? A clergyman might Ds
=
el holding a living in one diocese, and incapable of
a living in another, owing to a diversity of opinion
between the bishops of those dioceses—nay, more, • clergy-
MA sight be deemed unworthy of holding a living in the
Sher ems bishop, and worthy in the life of another. To
ears des mass, of the court below would be giving
the elides of the Bishop of Exeter on expressions mei
in the dentinal services of the Camel of Blur
land, the kielle and effect of an act of paths-
meat. The learned counsel read from an
use
Liturgy in in 1549, and before the Articles were
certain expressions from the various offices, from whisk he
deduced that them was in them as clear and express a decla-
ration of the regeneration of baptism, and as plain a litany
for that blaming as was contained in the Book of Common
Prayer. Scripture from the beginning to the end had bees
silent with respect to infant baptism; and the Church of
England had wisely abstained from giving its opinion urn
it. He would tonsil another argument upon the mar that
had prevailed in the Church of England on the effect of in.
Mot baptism. Bishops and writers of enat eminence in the
Church of England had entertained different notions upon
infant baptism, and they had, nevertheless, still retained
their positiou in the Church of England; and now it was
said that a clergyman, who ventured to differ in some
respects from his bishop on points of doctrine, was
incapacitated from holding preferment in the church.
After the publication of the Articles in 1562,
bishop and writer of grant eminence in the Church of
Saibmi had held opinions in favour of the doctrines
et dudes and predestination, which were diametrically '
=to the articles of the church. If the &close I
Court could not determine the interpretation to
pot apes the articles, neither could the bisho Mee-
semi se as sloped lay from the bishop to the Ecclesiastical
Own.
Tholoorned gentleman had not concluded his address at
Sheridan of the court at twenty minutes to four o'clock.
The Court intimated its inability to sit either on Thurs-
day or Saturday next, so that the farther hearing of this case
will proceed to-morrow and on Friday.
Dr. &pad is counsel,with Mr. Turner,for the appellant;
and Dr. Addsau and Mr. Baddeley represent the Bishop of
Exeter.

EQUITY COURTS.—YzansmAy.
Boron rim VIC4CRANCELLOR or ENGLAND.
1.11 V. IiVITON.—MAZILIAOR or A WARD or COVRT.
Ttua cue has several times occupied the attention of the
Vies-Chancellor in his private romn. It appeared that a
young lady, a ward of court, wee about to be married, and a
referencekad been directed to_flir William Horne, the Mas-
ter, to approve of • proper settlement upon the marriage.
In consequence of Sec William Horne not Woe able to
attend to his duties at present an order weeobtained from
the court that the reference should be transferred to Mr.
Richards, another Muter, and a motion was now made to
discharge that order on the ground that no notice was given
of the intention to apply for the order, to the persons inte-
rested in the young lady's property. Sir Wm. Horne had
had the entire conduct of the proosedings, and it was de.
sirable that in so del:oate a matter the reference should be
delayed until be was able te return to his dike.
The motion was opposed on behalf of the intended hus-
band, and it was urged that the court had full jurisdio-
tics to change the Muter upon suMeisat grounds being
adduced; that delay would be very distressing to the
parties interested, and there wss no reason for saying that
one muter was not quite as capable as another of settling
the hotline,.
Mr. Teed, Mr. Rolt, end Mr. Jervis appeared for the as.
tiro; sad Hr. Bothell, Mr. Stuart, Mr. W. Cooper, end Mr.
Hislop Clarke opposed it.
The Vice Chancellor said the question we. whether lise
order changing the Meater:should be discharged. He Ai
not think that there was any ground whatever for doing
so. The persons objecting had no interest in the matter,
unless, indeed, the interest of the person entitled to the pro-
perty in remainder were to be considered, but that most be
put out of consideration ; and in a ease where the potions]
comfort of the young lady was so much concerned, he thought
it was the duty of the court to see that no unnecessary delay
took place. lie should therefore refuse the motion.

he apenhended would speak for themselvi s. Exeter-hall
had originated in the public spirit of a.m., individuals who
were sensible of the umiessity that existed for some estaslish.
most to be devoted to tue ravers or meetings
ul a charittble, benevolent, Or rcieneific character, and to
these and other respects the edifice in gues,ion had
provided the public with an accommodation they did not
before pose as. By the deed of incorp,xsti, n the proprietors
were bound to confine the building to "religions, charitable,
and scientific purposes," bat it bad been urged that the
steps that had been made in this plies to advance the
science of ma-ic, was a deviation from the principle upon
which it was originated ; but he could not see any reason-
able bass upon which sack an assertion could be founded.
Latterly the anommcdeton the balding afford, d had been
extended, it bad occasionally been let to musical associations
and foe wailful entertainments, and consequently the
release bal. been increased; but ho apprehended that be-
cause at any particular period there had b, en en increase of
revenue arising from fluctuating causes, such as a passing
excitement in the public mind when the accommodation the
place afforded wee in full demand—the parish cams could
come not in and assess the establishment upon the amount
or revenue that was derived at such a particular period.
That was a factitious value—a reel rental could not be cal-
culated therefrom ; but the course he proposed to take was
this, to take the average rental for the last Wee years, make
the necessary deductions, and then pin the net rental es the
rateable value. The receipts for the three years ending in
April last gave an ay. use of 3,392/. for each year ; but
such were the variations to which this return was liable,
that in a former year there bad been an entire leas of some
9001. or 1,0001. It depended upon the public taste, upon the
competition that wee rising up. AU upon which the
depended we uncerteintv, and therefore it wee better that
an average Income should be taken rather than the income
at :OBS !particular period. The question was, what rent
would a tenant pay for it, and he would show presimly how
much a tenant could give for it in the shape of rent ; 2111.
must be deducted from the
ca verage he had given, in re-
spect of property let to ther parties, but assessed to
the trusters, and that would leave 3,1711. as revenue.
The estimated expenditure, including salaries, wages, rates,
and taxes. Bro., was 1,0271., which sum deducted from the
revenue lelt 2,1441. After deducting interest upon the
capital expended in furniture and fittings, 10 per cent. upon
the capital for depreciation, and allowing 6001. a year for
tenant's profits, there was left a gross rental of 1,1941. From
that they deducted, as they were entitled to do, a sun suffi-
cient to keep the piece in such repair as to command that
amount of rent, and after these deductions there was a net
rental of 9641., at which sum the trustees contended they
ought to be reed. The learned gentleman entered into
these details very minutely.
Mr. Garby, the clerk of Exeter hall, was then examined.
He proved that up to this year the assessment had been
1,5001., and that the average income for three years ending
April, 1849, was 3,3821. In 1842 the revenue was 3,2841. ;
in 1843, 4,241 • in 1844, 3,0161. ; in 1846, 2,9081. ; in 1846,
2,5981.; in 1847, 3,0181.; in 1848,2,947; and to April, 1819,
4,1811.
The wiener was noes-examined at some length by Mr.
Peshley uto the arrangements of the establishment and its
capabilities, the terms upon which it was let, An, but the de-
tails were not interesting.
A long dismission then took place in reference to the items
that had been placed before the court, in the course of which
Mr. Futilely contended that the appellents were not entitled
to deduct from the revenue interest upon the capital in-
vested in fittings, and that the rental must not be calculated
upon the revenue of preceding years, but by the income of
the current year; ultimately,
His Ltrdship said he thought justice would be done to all
parties by the rate being fixed at 2,0001., and ordered it to
be reduced to that sum.
Doering the investigation his lordship inquired whether
the directors had an absolute control over the building, and
the deed of incorporation was handed to him. Having pe-
rused it, he said it appeared to him that the directors were
bound to confine Exeter Hall to " religious, charitable, and
scientific purposes." It was competent, therefore, for the
teaching the science of music to be carried on there, but he
was inclined to think that it was not competent for them to
give public concerto.
M. Jullien and other musical ceiebrites were in attendance
upon rubpecna, but they were not examined.
The court then adjourned.

017ILDHALL.
THE CHARGE OP STEALING VALUADLI Szetrarrexa.—
Mr. Ogle, the "elicitor, of On at Winchester-streee, who
was robbed by his clerk, Collie, of Friesland shares attended
the justice-room yeaterday, and oddre s-ing Mr. Ala. Carden,
said—" That from what had appeared in the newspaper
that morning respecting his non-attendance, it Feder t b con-
attn. d into a disrespect to the sitting alderman, but be could
assure the magietrate that such was not the cue, for at the
last examination before Sir James Doke, he was told by that
worthy alderman that his attendance would not be rep Led
again, and, in accordance with that intimation, he certainly
did not come. He hoped the explanation he had given
would be perfectly satisfactory, as he had not the slightest
ides of hieing in any way disrespectful to the bench."
Ald Carden said Mr. Ogle's explanation was perfectly
satisfactory, and he had no doubt the same publicity would
be given to it as were the remarks of his brother alderman
who eat on Monday.
Mr. Ogle thanked thLAMBETH.e alderman and retired.
THE LASE CASEB OP DARING HIGHWAY ROBBERT.—
James Sinclair and John Anderson, remanded on two pre-
vious collisions on a charge of bring concerned in several
daring highway robberies, and using murderous violence tn•
wards their victims, were again plued at the bar. A third
person, who gave the name of Daniel Fitzgerald, was
brought up in cus'edy as an accomplice.
Saran% Hardwick, 7 D, who apprehended the pr'sonere,
stated that titers were in ate* ndence two officers belonging
to the Millbank Penitentiary, who would prove that the
prisoner who gave the name of Anderson, but whet, real
name was Fergasson, had been convicted and sentenced to
transportation, and bad been sent from Millbok en board
the Warrior conect shin, lying off Woolwich. Some ys ars
ago he, Sergeant Hardwick, apprehended the prisoner, Fi. z-
gerald, en a charge of felony, and he was then conaicted and
sentenced to seven years' transportation. On apprehending
him on the present charge, and on their way to the station-
house, Fitzgerald told him that the prisoner, Anil( rum, had
been a fellow convict with him on board the Warrior, and
that his real name was Ferguson.
John Evans, a cabinet-maker, lodging at the same house
with the prisoners, said that on one occasion when in con-
versation with the prisoner Sinclair, that person admitted
that he was a native of Gloucester, axed that his name was
Robinson. On another occasion, when the landlord, Barry,
was giving a distressed lodger an ord. r for employment at
the Mendacity Society, the prisoner said he should knock
down the first man or women lie met in the street rather
than work for a shilling a day. The conversation was sub
sequently &Mated to the landlord of the house, we% upon its
being said that be wt, in the habit of going weekly to take
awry the rentsconected from lodging-houses in Whiteehapel,
Ueiomeourt, Holborn, and Shers's-gardens, Drury lane,
Sinclair asktd where be lived, and said he would be worth
meeting on kis wry home.
Lockyor, the gaoler to the police stati...n, said, on that
morning on locking up the prisoner Fitzgerald in a cell by
himself, be was leaving the place when he heard that pri-
soner exclaim, " Hallo, Jam, you're all right." The ori.
sonar Sinclair, from another cell repied, " Oh yes ; I was
nriled three weeks ago in Marrowbone-lane upon three
front propping (meeting persons and striking and robbing
them) cases." Fitzgerald said, "Oh yes; I saw it in the
papers." Sinclair continued and said, " Yes, but I smashed
them all ; you must say that you were with us on the night
in question, and that we had a drop of beer together, sad
that will clear you."
The prisoners, on some private communication being made
to the magiatrate, were all remanded.
ROBBERY or WEARING APPAREL.—AmeIia Hawkins,
a notorious thief, was charged with stealing a silk dress and
other property, belonging to Mrs. Emma Bellamy.
The prosecute: stated, that on the 10th of last meats
the prisoner cams to lodge at her house, representing herself
at the time to be a servant out of place ; and believing her
representation, and that she was an honest person, she left
her in cue of her house on the 13 h, while she was out at
work. On her return home she discovered that her box had
been broken open and a black silk dress, and other articles,
carried away. She gave information to the police, and on
Saturday night she was taken into custody.
Sergeant Quinnear, 1 P, deposed that he was present at
the assizes at Guildford when the prisoner was tried and
convicted and sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment,
seat added that, at that time, a former conviction had been
proved against her.
The prisoner was fully committed for trial.

Proms the LONDON GAZETTE.—Tuesday, Dee.ll.
BANKRUPT&
Wittme LATJV Selma, Marcladed, grocer, to surrender Dec. 31
and Jan. 21, at 12, at Manchester Court. Sob., Blain, Mancluster,
and Norris, Macclesfield; off. wig., Fraser, Manchester.
Worm ELLEN, Great Ruesell-street, Bloombuty, cost merchont,
Des. 20, at 2, and Jan. 22, at 11, at Basinthall.street. Sol., Long,
Lawrenee.lane ; off. wig., Edwards, Sambrook-court.
TISALtIi Grim:mow and Caritas Foams, Old-street, St. Luke's, and
Ft. John's-street, Clerkenwell, rectifiers, Jan. I and 29, at 12,
at Basinghall.street. Sots., Lawrence and Flews, Old Jewry.
chambers; off. ode., Groom. Abchurch.lane.
THOIIAS WELL lawue, llexham, Northumberland, draper, Dec. 20
and Jan. 17, at 12, at Newcastle-upon-Tyne Court. Sob., Reed and
Co., Friday-street, Cheapside; Sale and Co., Manchester ; and
Griffith and Crighton, Newcastle-upun.ryne; off. amig., Baker,
Newcastle-upon-1 pin.
Bowls LOVILItad, Porten, grocer, Dee. 20, at 1, and Jan. 15, at 12,
at Badrighall.street. sola., UMW& Dyne, Lincoln's-inn-fields, and
stening, Formes ; off. swig., FAwards, Sambrook-court.
CHASMS th:(l4/1, PLAKIIPSACS and HODCSIT STIOO3IO, Birllllool=l,
screw monutacturers, Dec. 19 and Jail. 17. at. 12, at Birmingham
Court. Nola James, Birmingham, mid Collis, eitourbridge ; off.
stair., Christie, Birmingham.
WILLIAM ALFIANDKII Ramis, Maidstone, Kent, cabinet maker, Dee.
17, at It, and Jan. 20 at 11, at Itisingnall,treet. Sots., liraiken.
Mks, Bartlett's-buildings, Holborn, and Case, Maidstone; off.
&mtg.. Graham, Colentaastreet.
Dismay Timms WATSON, Liverpool, draper, Doe. 27 and Jan 17, at
11, at Liverpool Court. Sol., Dodge, Liverpool; o(. swig., Turner,
LiverpooL

DECLARATIONS OF DIVIDENDS.
Fermate' Bzwiea, Birkenhead, tea dealer-3rd di.. of id., Dec. 13,
and any subsequent Thursday, at Turner'a, LiceooL
Date Boars, Crewe, Cheshire, draper-2nd di.. Bd.,Dec. 13, and i
any subsequent Thursday, at Turner's, Liverpool.
JOlllO.lll EVIMALL, Whitehurch, Shropshire, chemist-Ist die. of
Is. 10d., Dec. 13, and any subacqueat Thursday, at Vidprs, Bum-
inShanx
Gismos Isisrliovas RICHAILDIION. Liverpool, cutler-2nd die. of /31d.,
Dec.l3, and any subsequent Thursday, at Turner's,Livei pool.
Isitsenaa Remus, Mold, Flintahire, draper-2nd die. of id., Dec.
13, and any subsequent Thursday,
nt Turner's, Liverpool.
DIVIDENDS.—Jan. 3. F. J. Ablett, Merthyr Tydvil, Glaormgan. •
shire, draper—Jan. a. J. Jacobs, Canterbury, anetioneer—Jan. 1. W.
Plumley, Bristol, poulterer.
CERTIFICATES to be prated, unless caws be shown to the ocatrary,
on the day of :meth's.
Jan. 4. J. W. English, Poultry, City, chemist—Jan. 8. W. Ilas-
kayne, Liverpool, merchant—Jan. 4. J. F. Ileathcoat, Leicester,
chemist—Jan. 4. R. Jelley, Leicester, cabinetmaker—Jan. 10. W.
Rowett, Liverpool. broker—Jan. 2. J. Saner ' Kingston-upon-H*4l4
tailor —Jan. 2, J. Sowden, junjun.,lngoldmellis Lincolnshire, farmer
Jan. 4. T. Wood, Leicester, umber merchant.
CERTIFICATES te be granted, unites cause be shown to the contrary,
within 21 days kern date.
Dec. 7. W. J. &bell, Gloucester, shipbuilder—Dec. G. G. Brier,
Kirkbeaton, Yorkshire, stonemason—Dec. 7. J. Cary, Shepton Mullett,
Seruerstre,printer —Dec. 8. A. Webb, Waketield, Yorkshire, seed
merchant.
CERTIFICATES to be confirmed, unless cause be shown to the
contrary.
Dec. 7.3. Lloyd and G. Lloyd, Brinningtoo, Cheshire, builders—
Dee. 10. W. Pitileld, Tettington Lower End, Lancashire, bleacher—
Dec. 5. B. Sewell and W. (Jarred, Hackney, drapers.
PARTNERSHIPS HISSOLVED.—C. Andrews and N. Wyatt, Mod.
bury, Devonshire, limeburners—W. Buckley and W. Knight, Oldham,
L~ramfounders—T. W. Cross and J. Chappel, Leeds,
Aloe: lean pail manufacturs—D. Davies and W. M. Maxwell, Neath,
Glamorganakire, colliery proprietors—C. B. French and J. Bullock,
Primrcee.street, Bishopegate, City, iron fence manufacturers—S. N.
Gamble and W. Lockwood, Liversedge, Yorkshire, worsted osmotic.
tares—T. MU and G. E. Hill, isinnuigham, linendraPent—S.
coin and J. Bennett, Saekville-street, PiceadLly, hatters—lL N. Long
and J. Ilulborow, Wootton-under-Edge, Gloucestershire, millers—G.
Itawlinaon, G. Boughton, H. C. Hextall, and I. Johnson, Cheapaide,
City, ailkmen, so far as regards G. Boughton—J. Tate, W. Jamieson,
and R. Jamieson, Dukintleld, Cheshire, cotton manutleturers-11.
Walker and Maria Walker, Leeds, oonfeetioners-6. N% tilts and 8.
Gardner, Birmingham, button manufacturers —J. Wrigleyand W.
Wrigley, llusteada.Within-tieddleworth, Yorkshire, cotton yarn
doublers.
SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS.
'ICOR Canrorau., Cumnock, Ayrshire, wino merchant, Dee. 13 and
Jan. 3, at the Crows Inn, Kilmarnock.
ROUST PATON, Paieley, timber merchant, Dec. 17 and Jan. 7, at the
Saracen's Ileadlon,

gig; tie- sit
we the Ch
aeewly
wI
Commies Pi
loweemote,
as el Ow
of dew
dimpe the
that posed
tble Ole up
Pieyer-aew
seas elf fek
TM Altielo
= pet
11 the=
Bostend 6
view knit
estidiseset
Lai wee
=21:1
woe WM
ef the Artl
&Mu el
I .s
\