The National Register.
London, England, 1821-04-09 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL REGISTER

l'he house then divided ; she numbers were—Ayes 96,
Noes I2O—Misjority against Mr. Creevey Si.
A reinarkatile peculiarity in this division was, that Mr.
Ties 'ley, Sir J. Macintosh, Lued A. Hamilton, &c, voted
with the ministers on This motion. . . . .

1111. HU.IE also, b, fore. the Speaker left the chair, next
mese,' a long remolinian- that it be an instruction to the
committee to take into consideratitio the recommendation
of the fiancee committee of 1817—to revise all the civil
offices, 4:e. and as they became vacant, to adopt new re-
gulations respeetingdliern, where they should be deemed
necessary.
Lord A. HAMILTON seconded the motion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed
the resolution, and contended that considerable teduction
had taken place in the last two or three years. Whenever
a vacancy occurred, inquiry was mode if the place could
be abolished entirely; and a here that could be done, the
salaries had in' must instances been reduced. He de-
fended the system oftentuneration t 5 public servants anti
their widows, which, he contended, were beneficial to the
public services.
Sir J. NEWPORT condemned the allowance to many
of the retired officers, as too large, and particularly that
to Lord "larawley.
Mr. D. Brune and Mr. W. Pole defended Lord TA.
rawley.
A long discussion followed.
Mr. HUME ultimately withdrew his resolution, and the
house a ent into a Ctivilajltet
Lord PA LMEIOTON, alter stating that the fir,t retro-
hititm referred to the Was Office, mo%eit that 30,11!s1.
' 18s. Bd. be granted so his Majesty to defray the dial ge of
allowances for the office of the Secretary at War.
Col. DAVIES observed, that doling itie war, when the
(Into a of this ollice were ten times greater than at pi esent,
the whole cost of the War Office iu I An aas 3;',3531. anti
to confine the expenditure of Site present !o that suin
would scarcely be unreasonable ; he, however, was dis-
posed to be satisfied with a Malley reduction, and lie
should therefore move, us au aniendment, a vote of
43,0001. instead of 30,4t131.
Lord PALMERSTON would be content to take for
the present year the War Office estimate of ISJ6; the
charge of 1806 being, not 37,3351. as the hon. and gallant
member apposite had stated, trot 59,830. some liandreds
above the estimate now demanded. It should be remem-
bered, however, that in 1 00 the constitution of the War
Office was adapted only to the transacting of the current
business ; and that it vas not until the year '&00 that the
department for the settlement of arrear accounts, the
charge of which for the present year was 17,0001. was
established by the Treasury.
Col. DAVIES was 'early to stake his credit that the
estimate for 1806, as it appeared from the papers in the
possession of the house, did not exceed 370451.
Mr. HUME insisted that the noble lord opposite (Pal-
merston) had increased at every point the expense of his
department, and was prepared to prove, that if 20,0001. a
year more was voted to that department, the noble lord
would find employment for every shilling of it. In 1514,
when this country had 236,000 men under arms, the esta-
blishment of the War Office, the stiocrammation list, cost
32,1361. and it had gone on increasing, tram year to year,
until the cost of 1521 was laid at 04,6.201.; so that the
economy of the noble lord had efft erect an increase, since
1814, of about 2,5001. He did believe that by attention
and economy the expense of that office might be reduced
nearly one half; but as half a loaf was better than :to
bread, he should support tile amendment of his hon. friend
near him (Col. Davies) for the reduction of 5,0001.
Sir H. YARNELL complained of the amount of the
superamiliation list, and particularly referred to the esta-
blishment of commissioners of military accounts ill liclaild.
Lord PA LAIERsTON said that the II ish boat d of coins
missicners were appointed by act of parliament.
Mr. W. Smith and Col. Davies enforced the necessity
of ecoaomiaing toe military establislinient.
Mr. H. 0. BENNET ridiculed the idea of any saving
having been voluntarily made by the noble lord and his
Majesty's ministers. In fact, whatever saving had been
effected in the military establishment was forced from
them by a sort of gentle ravishment. (A laugh.)
Mr. bIABERLY objected to the present system of
1, agency," and contended, that 15,0901. per amtum (the
Italia the charge) might be saved, if government took
the agency luau its own hands,
Lord PALMERSTON defended the present agency
system, on the giound that it atturded considerable faci-
lities to olficets, when, for instance, they wished to ex-
change from one regiment to another, which, were it dit-
lc rently conducted, (114 could not possess.
Mr. T. WILSON ram eased his determination to vote
for the saving of 5,0001. which he conceived could be
leered under the item of agency,
Lord PALMERSTON said the present vote had nothing
to do with the agency, which was included fu the vote for
hind forces agreed to some days ago.
Mr, CREEVEY said, or found that they were indebted
to the Secretai y at %Vat , 20001.; to a first clerk, 1,411(11.
and to a principal CILI it, 1,2001. His idea was, that they
ought to have those gentlemen before the home, (Heal.)
He ',Wald like to see a vie' ls with 1,1001. a year. (Laugh-
ter.)—An officer iii the army purchased his (70 ! l is-ion at
a great expense; after much service, and many gallant
exploits, lie was, pet haps, matte a peer; and w hat did lie
receive to support his diviily Why, 2,4/01. a year.
And here came a clerk meth !,4L)01, pet annum 1 He
should he glad to see bow this gentleman went to Ins
office, whether in a curriclo or tilbury laugh); lie
should wirdh to know whet Sisal lie passed at his othec.
Foe his Own past, he was convinced toe business cculd be
dune as W2ll at 7001. as at 14001, a ',Cdr.
After a desultory conveibution, tt,e committee divided,
+-For the ainslidnir lit, ti—Against it, 'Un--Majority,
The house then te,oluerl, Report on Monday,
The other orders of the day were Rico disposed of, and
the house adjourned. •

A revolution tool: place at St. Michaels on the
let of March. The governor was deposed, tuid
placed under Arrest the island declared independent
of Terceira, and only subjeet to the governinunt and
Cortes of Portugal.
Four persona were committed from liatton.garden
office on Friday evening, on chines or uttering
forged 44 notes. It gentleman, who attended on
heliall of the Dank at England, stated that Aria
the la of May no mom oua wr two poupd notes
be

=~

FROM TUESDAY NIGHT'S GAZETTE.
BANKRUPTS.
3. Maberly.Welbeck Street, Marylebone, coach manufacture&
Solicitors, Alessrs. Bartlett and Co. Nicholas Lane.
J. Bigsby, Deptford, brewer. Sols. Messrs. osbaldcaton and
Co. London Street. Fenehurch Street.
C., R., F., and E. Coupland. Leeds, spirit merchants. Sol.
Mr. Wiglesworth, Gray's Inn Square.
P. Dewsbury, Altrincham, Cheshire, corn dealer. Sole
Messrs. Bruntlrett and Co. Temple.
P. Cope. Bridgnorth, grocer. Sols. Messrs. Bcpbow and Co:
Lincoln's Inn. _ _

W. Holding, Devonshire Street, Queen Square, wine merchant.
Sole, Messrs. Wadeson ant Co. Austinfriars.

B. and J. Trmigliton, Wood Street, silk throwsters. Sol. Mr.
James, Bucklersbury.
DIVIDENDS.

April 2K, S. George andit. W ebb, Bristol, sugar refiners-
-14, T. Austin, .1. Gregory. and J. Itusson, Bath, haberdasher....
26, T. Story, Ilunworth. Norfolk, miller-21i, S. Copland, Holt,
Norfolk, miller-95, R. Hodgson, Bishop Wearrnouth, Durham.
baker-26, C. Seaman and G. Etheridge, Norwich, goldsmiths
—24, J. Grover, I lastings, Sussex, linen draper-28, J. Peters,
Dorking, Surrey, lime burner-2S, A. Kelly, Colonnade, Pall
Mall, jeweller-28, It. Farrer, Bread Stiect, Cheapside, ware.
houseman-25, J. Blackburn, Witham, Essex, corn factor-27,
W. Willans, South Shields, clothier—May 1, 11. Burgess and
.1. Hubbard. Miles Lane, Cannon Street, svolstaplims-5, T.
Worth, Talbot Court, Gracechurch Street, haberdasher.
CERTIFICATES to be granted iptil VI.
T. C. B. Pryer, Fenchurch Street, saddler—J. Bryaunt.
Liverpool, merchant-W. Wildman, Whitechapel Road, plumber
—G. Dlogg, Aldersgate Street, jeweller—J. Watson, Leyland,
Lancashire, farener--J. Leone, Coventry, builder—J. Rutter,
%Vinterton, Lincolnshire, merchant—T. Tipping, Warrington.
LancaAiire, miller—S. Treliane, Exeter, silversmith—.J. Anda.
son, West Smithfield, bookseller—T. Wottun, Bristol, bather
factor.

4SSIZE lA7 Ei.LIGENCE.
SURREY.
COLTON V. NELSON.

KINGSTON, ArRIL wi,s an action of assault
and lalse imprisonment. The defendant pleaded a
justification.
The case tea; this :—The keeps a broker's
shop in Snow's-fields, Sloane-street, and the defendant
at the time of this transaction, kept a gin-shop in Black.
friars-road, near the bridge, On the 18th of October
-last the plaintiff stops at the defendant's house to take a
class of porter, and by accident he broke the tumbler.
from which he drank the liquor. The waiter told him
he must pay es. for the glass; he demurred to the demand
but gave his address, promissing to call next day and
produce another glass, or the price of one. The waiter
took the address to the defendant, who was in the bar.
The latter insisted that he must then pay the money, or
leave the same of the glass, and immediately snatched
his hat, in which was LI silk handkerchiel„ off his head
and laid it a one-side. The plaietiff remonstrated
against this cou'iltiet, upon which tile defendant said, if
he was not satisfied tic must go to the watch-home; and
instantly called to a night pat rule and gate him in
elm r.te.
No evidence was offered fm. the defendant. and the
Jury, under the learned Jodge's directions, found a ver-
dict for the plaintiff--Dainag;s 51.—casts 40s.

TARLING V. TAYLOR.
The cause of action arose out of a public-house dispute
at Carshalton, which ended in the defendant's striking
the plaintiff on the nose, and producing a copious he.,
morrhage. There was much abusive language between
he parties.
The case went to the jury under the learned judge's
direction, and a verdict was found for the plaintiff:••
Damages 40,,
EDWARDS V. LUCRECY AND ANOTHER.

This was an action brought by thu plaintiff to recover
from the defendants a compensation in damages for an
injury sustained by the overflowing of the head of water
belonging to the defendant's mill, over the garden ground
of the plaintiff,
It appeared that the defendants were, in March 1819,
proprietors of a tide-will, situate upon the Thames,
initerliithe, in this county, mill was worked
Il by
a head of water admitted by the flood tide into 11
pond appropriated to that purpose, the regress of which,
during the ebbing of the tide, wt:rketl the mill, Thu
will pond was protected by artiKial banka, which it was
the duty of the defendants to keep in repair, and the
jacent low lands were laid oat as gardens, in the pose's.
sion of many different occupiers, 01 whim the preen{
plaintiff was one.
The case set tip by the plaintiff was, briefly, that on
the morning of the 4th Nlarch, 181 Q, in conserience of
smile tie licence in the management of the flood gate,
nealt-at the river belonging to the defendants, the water
iu the :will pond rose to an extraordinary height, ran
r the worth: course of the banks, and flooded the
gardens on the other side in all direetions, by which the
plants and seed growing in the plaintiff's garden WM*
conwletely washed away, and some damage was dune tr.
his cisvelhilg-ttouie. it appeared that on 1114 0eca:;46.11
the engineer, who had been in the habit of superintends
ing the gates, was absent, and he deposed that if those
sues had been properly uianaged, the ajlegild injury
could not have oceitired.
The jury, under the learned jnelge's direetion, found
a verdict for the plaintiff---I)atitages ebl.
XErtlltr-A 11414 P0r41.41.4Y 0? Tirk FOUTO WATlllta

woax.s.
This waii an action by the driver of the Godaintlish
coach, against the defetidatits, for slot repairing a ti.lol
us the swish of St. Mary, Newingtoo„ thronch which
their work; were carried, in consequence of which Ilia
plaintiff was thrown off the bo;, and broke his thilsll•
jn consequenco ola ntis.take in the description of the
pariah in which the accident 113ppeiteti, the pleimiti
noawittd,

PROWW unit,
Solomon Joseph Waft iildiCtad far ataalitias at NfIVA
into', on the 9:14 or 444) gold ourereigns,
the in operty of NI estrs. Whitmore and Co. Thera wig
itlitsr colons, laying the property to be ill other person.,
This excited copaislerable toterebt.
Is oppuriLd ovidcoco.• Qo tlta 6.4tl of Aqiifi;

_ ~,_._

-

last, a parcel, containing 400 gold rivereigns, was sent
from the Golden-cross, Charing-cross, by the Chichester
coach, directed to Messrs. Hack, Dandy, and Co. of
Chichester. There was but one inside passenger in the
coach. When the coach arrived at the Oephatit anti
',aside, St. George's-fields, it stopped fur above five
ininutes to take up outside pasenigas and baggag,e.—
NVheii it supped to cisange horses at the (list stage out
of town, we inside passenger, who had paid his tare to
Colchester, was illiSsitli. This excited some suspicion
in tile coachman, and on searching the coach seats,
where the parcel had been locked up, it was also gone.
It appeared upon enquiry that the noirle passenger left
the coach when it stopped at the Elephant and Castle,
and nu doubt was emelt:tilled that he had cart ied attic
parcel with tun. The question was, whether the pri-
soner was the man. The coachman and the guard, the
latter of whom accompanied the coach to the Elephant
and Castle, expressed their firm belief that he was
the person, but neither of than would swear to him
positively.
The prisoner declared his innocence, and said he was
prepared to stew that lie was at home with his family
at tile time the robbery was co ttttt tutted.
Accordingly four persons, Lazarus Joseph, the priso-
ner's tither, Edward t,Vhite, a person coo nected with the
custom-house. Isaac Alexander, secretary and reader to
a jewish synagogne, Ann Edanunds, a female servant of
the prisuaer, and Samuel Coleman, one of the outside
passengers who had ravelled with the Chichester coach.
were called, and the substance of their testimony was,
that the prisoner had arrived front llamburgh with his
father on the 221 of August, that ne was in bed at his
house in Berwick-street, Soho, at seven o'clock on the
morning of the 23i1, when LIIC robbery was alleged to
have been ,coi ttttt Med, that he was down at the custom-
house on the morning of the 23d at nine o'clock, and
that he was nut the inside passenger who had left the
coach. A great number of respectable persons, Chris.
lions as.well as Jews, spoke of Min as ati hottest and
industrious 111411.
The case went to the Jury tinder the learned Judges
directions, and they totind the prisoner Not Guilty.
The prisoner had beets out on bail, and had surrendered
to take his trial.
THE KING v. LED AND ADOTHER.
KINGsTON, Aram 4.—This was an action filed by the
Attorsies-General a4anist the Mend:tuts, for ussuulliii,g and
obstructing ancxcrse ullicer, named Goldsmith, in the exe-
cution of its duty. Tile Jury found the defendants
THE KING v. LONG AND TWENTY-ONE UTH•1111.
This ass an indictment against the delendauts,who are all
journeymen hatters, for a conspiracy to raise the price of
wages. It was arranged ott both sides that the deteudants
should suffer a verdict of Guilty to he recorded against them,
and when brought up for judgment, to urge such molter in
mitigation as would not ben defence to the iudiettnent. A
verdict uf Guilty was accordingly entered.
THE KING O. SELLKAN.
This was an indictment against the defendant, for an al-
:teed nuisance, its erecting a building in the London-road,
Lambeth, within tell sect of the footway, contrary to the
pruvi.ious of the 26111 Geo. 111. for reguiating the roads its
St. George's-fields. The defendant was Ii ied in January
sessions, POO, fur the like Miracle; and acquitted by a Jury
who had a view of the premises.
The Jury, in the present case, after hearing evidence on
both sides, found the defendant Guilty hut it is understood '
that the question as to the condruction of the Act of Parini.-
ment will again come wider the consideration of the King's
Bench.
DENNISON V. DAVIS, ESQ.
This was an action by a livery t against the de-
fendant, who is a magistrate of this comity for a lilac!,
false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution, without
any reasonable or probable cause.
The ease proved on the part of the plaintiff was in sub-
stance this.—The plaintiff had heen a footman in the ser-
vice of the defendant, who resides at Epsom. In the
month of Julie last lie quitted his service, and entered
into that of the Harmless de Tessier, with a good char-
acter given by the defendant's wife, time former agreeing
to give him 221. a year for wages. On Sunday evening,
the XStli of June, in consequence of some appointment,
which was riot very distinctly proved in evidence, the
piano iff waited upon the defendant to receive a quarter's
wages remaining (hullo him. Some altercation occurred
about the platiisitl 's livery, and irritating language
arising oil both sides, the defendant seized the plaintiff
by the coat, and atteripted to turn him out of the house.
The pi:Willa, coustruing this into au assault, struck the
defendant. Upon which the defendant and his sun, both
resented this indignity with great promptitude. The sou
sit ipped of his coat, and give the plaiittiff a severe drub-
bing; he was hinted into the yard, and both defendant
and his sou continued beating hint until sonic of the
neighbonis came to his assistance, in conserpteme of the
cry of minder, and rescued trim from further violence.—
l'he same evening the defendant %slow a letter to the
Baron de Tessier, sou of the lady abovenientiuned, and
who resided in the house with his mother, grossly reflect-
ng on the
This letter was not sent to its destination until the fe.l-
losviug morning. In a fortnight atter the above men.
twined lever was sent, the defendant caused the plaintitt
to be apprehended by a warrant, taken from his place,
and carried to Union hall from whence he
was committed fur an assault upon the defendant (al-
leged to be conimitted on the 25tli of Juni.) slier La vIIIY
tour hums confinement, although time w vie ollti r ma-
gistrates residing in the defendant's own • lisle neigh-
bourhood. He was brought to trial at the following
Quarter :Sessions, and it appearing nu the defendant's
own admission, that lie had committed the first assault,
tine plaintiff was acquitted. For theme ye VC lal ilijeil les the
pla,iitilf brought this action; first, fu. the libellous letter
—second, for the fielne. oupriwmucut ; and third, for the
Malicious prosecutluti, without en) rvasonable or probable
cause. The case thus stated was fully estadlished in evi-
dence.
1 he Lord Chief Baton summed up the evidence fur die
jury, and gave it as his opinion in point of law, that the
letter in question was undoubtedly a libel, and observed,
that none of the slanderous matter contained in it had been
substantiated in evidence.
The Jur) retired Mt-about a quarter of an hour and found
their vetoict for the plaint 111.•••• 04111414C11, 4 Costs. 40,
:DA "ISLA EtilllZlL—lieu, IV luting, it uricklayer'si curter,

.441/