The Sun.
London, England, 1830-01-14 00:00:00

v, is
ads s
hroat
:king
'pa&
sired
,Ip to
cause

OLD BAILEY.-(TIIIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.

NEW COURT.
- -Qibson' a lad of eleven ears of age, was found

tkscit:3l stealing, on the 24th December, sixteen pounds of
L Ve property of Mr. T. Collins, butcher, Piccadilly.
stoi
"be/cher was indicted for receiving, knowing it to
-11 k, ,on the 29th of November last, fourteen yards of
9/., the property of Mr. John Bidwell, Vigo-
' Regent-street. Verdict—Guilty.

11,21O;(1° Archbishop of CANTERBURY has taken
"411,ek.in Richmond-terrace, where his Grace will reside
'II Palace at Lambeth is undergoing repair.

These Sessions commenced this morning, before the
Right Hon. the LORD MAYOR, ALDERMEN, and the
usual city Officers.

The fudges in attendance are the Chief Baron ALEX.

ANDIM and Mr. Justice GA zer.r.s.
Ann Thomas, aged 26, was indicted for stealing in the
dwelling house of John Phillips, 50/. his monies.
Mr. C. Phaurs stated the case for the prosecution,
from which it appeared the prisoner had been occasi-
onally in the service of the prosecutor, landlord of the
King's Arms public-house, Orchard-street, Westminster.
It was the custom of Mrs. Phillips to keep her cash in
stockings; her husband WAS not aware what amount of
cash she bad. On the 10th of December, the whole of the
money was missed, and suspicion resting on the prisoner,
she was taken into custody.
Mrs. Phillips deposed that, on the day preceding the
robbery, the prisoner sod herself were up stairs together,
when the prisoner perceived one of the stockings contain-
ing some money, and laying hold of it, said, " Oh, oh, I
see, mistress, you have some blunt here ; I dare say master
does not know of it." The following day sovereigns and
half-sovereigns, to the amount of 50/., were missed, and
the prisoner absconded. It was the custom of the witness
to keep 10/. in each stocking.
Charles Bland met the prisoner a few days after the
robbery near the MArsh-gate ; he said to her, " You are
the very person I have been looking for." She replied,
" You have nothing to do with me." He then gave her
in charge of a police-officer. On searching her there were
found 11 sovereigns and half-sovereigns, She was a►ked
What she had done with the remainder, oen she said,
" Oh, what a bother about the money, I only took 121."
This evidence was confirmed by two other officers, who
added there was nothing said to induce her to make any
confession.

The Jury consulted for short time, an i then returned
a verdict of Guilty of stealing to the amount of 4/. 194.
This verdict does away with the capital part of the
charge.

Wm• Mealing, aged twenty-five, and Wm. Adams,
aged twenty, were indicted for stealing, in the dwelling-
house of Miss Elizabeth Musgrave, 27 silver spoons, and
a quantity of other articles of plate, to more than the
value of 1001.

Mi.sEli;elreth Musgrave lived in Green-street, Hanover-
square. The prisoner Adams lived in her service for 17
months previous to the robbery, but was not in her em-
ploy at that time. Witness was out on Christmas-eve.
The plate was safe in her bed-room the time she left
home. On her return she found the house in confusion,
it having been ascertained that the plate had been stolen.
The plate now produced was her property. Witness had
no knowledge of the other prisoner
Agnes Smith—Was in the employ of the prosecutrix at
the time of the robbery ; knew Mealing, who had been
once or twice to Miss Ttlusgrave's house. On the night of
the robbery both prisoners came to her mistress's house
together; they were there about two hours, during which
time they were playing at cards. Shortly after Adams
came in, he went out again to purchase some gin and
cloves. After they hid been playing at cards some time
the heard the front door bang to, and said to Adams what
can be the meaning of that, and asked him to go up weirs
with her, which he aid, and on entering ber mistress's bed
room found the cupboard door open. Witness ran down
stairs and called the police. Adams assisted her in calling
the police.

Cross-examined—Knew Adams before he went into
the service of the prosecutrix ; he always maintained a
good character.
William Bond, a police serjeant, stated that on Christ-
mes-eve he and two other police-men went to the prose-
eutrix's house, and searched it ; it was in the same state
as described by last witneas; a chisel was found under the
bed ; there did not appear to hare been the least violence
used in getting into the house. Witness took Adams and
two young women into custody. Adams at this time de-
nied all knowledge of the robberee
By Mr. Justice GAZELEI--Took all the persons in the
house into custody.
Benjamin Bates stated, that in consequence of some-
thing he heard he went to No. 12, Rochester-row, Vaux-
hall, the prisoner ?dealing was there, and he was taken into
custody. On taking Adams to the police office he said be
wished to make a full disclosure of the robbery.
By Mr. CREIW/LL—Was any thing said by Miss
Musgrave to induce the prisoner to confess.
Witness—Miss Musgrave said, in the presence of Adams,
that it would be better for them to confess, and if her plate
was found she would do all in her power to avoid a prose-
cution, and that she would forgive them if they would
tell her at once, and not give her any further trouble.
Adams, however, positively denied all knowledge of the
robbery.
Miss Musgrave recalled—l said if you will at this mo-
ment confess the truth, and tell me where my property is,
I will tell you to a Go, and sin no more,' and I will for-
give you." These were the very words.
By Mr. CRISSWILL-On her return home on the night
of the robbery her feelings were much excited, but has a
perfect recollection of the exact words.
Mr. Citisswier. submitted, that as a promise bad been
made, what the prisoner stated to the officer could not be
received in evidence against them.
Mr. C. PHILLIPS submitted, that as the promiae was
Only a conditional one, with which Adams refused tricorn-
PIY, what he stated was legal evidence.
Mr. Justice GAZELEE decided that the statements were
admissible.
Benjamin Bates recalled—Adams told him he wished
to state the whole affair of the robbery. They then went
into a private room at a public house, when Adams wrote
the Paper now produced. Witness never said a word
Previous to the paper being written, to induce him so to
do. In consequence of the information contained in that
paper, witness went with two other officers, to Mr.
Appleyard's, in Prince's-row, Lambeth, and found the
chest containing the property now producad.
effThe paper was here read, it was to the following
ect :—"1 do hereby certify that there was no one con-
cerned in the robbery besides Wm. Mealing and myself,
and if the property has not been sold, I believe
it may be found in a chest belonging to
Wm. Mealing, at
Mear. Appleyard's, carpenter, Lambeth. I planned tht.
mns by which Mealing got into Miss Muagrare's house.
(Signed) " WM. ADAMS."
Mr. Justice GAZELEI
informed the Jury that when
hthey came so consider the case against Mealing, they
ired recollect this document was not evidence as against
he not being present at the time it was written.
Acis----4 Clements, a police officer, saw the prisoner
anu at the watch-house, when he requested pen, ink,
4"a Piper. Witness told him to be careful what he wrote,
4--
ait would be produced in evidence against him. The
Paper was here handed in. It was a letter to the sister
°L healing, and ran as follows
beau Maav,—l am sorry to say that I am guilty.
and Mary Evans are innocent. The only one con-
e ted with me in the robbery is one near to you.
" Your's, " WM. ADAMS."
11°n Adams also was found a letter written in pencil,
by
the`
OLD
Mealing, it was to the following effect
r" Oen Faisxn,—You bad better be careful, and say
;11 e More about me than you can help. I wish you to look
Ohto what you do say and bow you act ; for if you
to be transported, 1 had rather not ; pray, therefore,
"' careful for my sake. " Wlll. MEALING."
ill The witness said he found the property now produced
I,lpchest at Mr. Appleyard'a.
rs. Appleyard stated that the *best belonged to the
,_trser Mealing, who used to go by the name of Warren.
kiWilliam Church, a police-officer, was on duty near
44 Musgrave's house on the night of the robbery. He
et: ,t},e prisoner Mealing two or three times during the
thltlLlng in the street. When witness approached him he '
4ed away at a very quick rate.
tll.llllr. CausswiteL—Never saw the prisoner before
kt •
4
1
115 Inght, hut is quite certain he is the same man.
Was the case for the pre•ecution.
greydefence strongly protested that Miss Mus-
e
a in •
tvtiol Promised him unconditional forgiveness,
had
filith'rti the paper that had been read. It was on the
that promise, backed by the persuasion of Bates
tire rid
""nenta, that he made a confession; it ought not
it.ft4le now to be produced against him.
414, ling denied any participation in effecting the robbery.
eery '' Justice Gazzertir re-capitulated the evidence at
kiltatPeat length, and the Jury after a few
minutes'
eon-
soth, returnecla verdict of Guilty against both pri-
t
Tb~t
1)ti,o: Jury and prosecutrix joined in recommending the
to mercy-

TITHE SYSTEM.

TO THE EDITOR OF TILE SUN.

had intended through the medium of
your Newspaper to have addressed some observations
to the gentlemen who are to compose the Devon-
shire County Meeting, on the subject of Tithes.—
But in this cold weather it may, perhaps, be more
discreet to ask for answers to the following ques-
tions

Why should not the Fundholders, who possess
an annual income of thirty millions, contribute to
the payment of the Clergy ?
Why should not the land in England be relieved
from this intolerable burthen, as has been done for
the land of almost every other country in Europe ?
Would it not be more just to pay the Clergy by
a general tax on the whole community ?
In whatever way it may be determined to pay
the Clergy, is it fit that one-half of that body should
be abounding in wealth, with little to do; and the
other half obliged to work hard for a remuneration
which scarcely gives them decent support ?
Is residence one of the duties of a Clergyman ?
Finally, can any reasonable man suppose that the
present system can be long maintained ?
I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
AGRICOLA.

CHURCH REFORM.

LETTER 111.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

SIR,—My last letter concluded with remarks on
Mr. Cox's proscription of the Benedictte; next in
order come his strictures on those important features
of our Liturgy, the Creeds, which he appears to re-
gard as indequate to their object, and incomplete in
their structure. "If we except," says he, " their
" bold and explicit development os' the important
" doctrines of the Trinity, and the twofold nature of
" Christ, they exhibit rather a cursory reference to
" historical facts, than a recognition of Christian
" doctrines. The inspiration and sufficiency of the
" Scriptures, original sin, the vicariou sacrifice of
" our Lord, justification by faith, and the nature
" and necessity of good works, are either entirely
" omitted or indistinctly alluded to in these ancient
" symbols."
After a censure so comprehensive as this, Mr.
C.'s readers will be less surprised to find that he
does not perceive sufficient reason for the retention
of any creed as an essential and inseparable part of
public service ; from which proposition we shall be
fully prepared for the deduction following it, that the
three creeds might still be retained, but should only
be used on our different festivals; while their place
is to be supplied by " a sort of abridgment of our
own articles." Can it, however, be asserted with

ustice that the creeds do exhibit rather a cursory
reference to historical facts, rather than a recogni-
tion of Christian doctrines—when, in one or another
of them (besides the grand doctrine of the Trinity),
such doctrinal points as the following are explicitly
avowed and recognised :—Baptism for the remission
of sins—the sufferings and death of Christ for us
men and for our salvation—the resurrection of the
body—the return of Christ to judge the quick and
dead—the final account to be given by all men of
their own woks—the final separation of the wicked
from the righteous—the eternity of Christ's king-
dom, &c. &c. The author appears to have used the
term " indistinctly," in reference to the creeds,
with some latitude; not, perhaps, bearing in mind
that the evident object of these compositions was
comprehensiveness of statement, and not minuteness
in detail. Let it be granted, however, that there
are some Christian tenets which are not fully stated
in the creeds—there still seem sufficient and most
weighty reasons for their retention, as inseparable
parts of public worship. Is not faith in the true
Jehovah, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, the dis-
tinguishing characteristic of the true religion ?
Why, then, should we omit in our congre-
gational devotions that which is the salt and sa-
vour of them all ? Mr. C. assumes that he has sug-
gested the only alternative, except that of "supply-
ing any deficiencies of softening down or expunging
any unguarded expression in the creeds. The di-
lemma may be apparent to him—it will not be so
clear, I am persuaded, to the generality of his
readers. It is admitted, with him, that every al-
teration, by invalidating the identity of the creed,
would necessarily deprive them of their principal
value as ancient and authentic documents." But,
while this truth is manifest, it also evidently fur-
nishes another argument for their retention in their
present ancient, venerated, and unadulterated form.
The observations on the State Prayers will be far
more generally assented to. The author has judi-
ciously fortified himself by Archdeacon Paley's pious
and excellent remarks on this subject, and recom-
mends abbreviation in the Collects for the King and
the Royal Family, with the disuse of all compli •
mentary epithets. The anecdote that our late ve-
nerable Sovereign, George 111., erased from his
Prayer Book the words most religious and gracious
King, and inserted in the margin miserable sinner,
is happily introduced by Mr. C., in confirmation of
his opinion as to the unsuitableness of the epithet,
when applied to an earthly Monarch.
Accusatory epithets, such as those charging eur
national enemies with pride, malice, &c., are pro-
perly condemned (p. 81). The practice seems to
be condemned in precept by our Lord himself; and
his own Prayer furnishes a model for Christian sup-
plication, free from every word of this tendency.
At the conclusion of the Morning Prayers, it is
proposed to exchange the Apostol'cal Benediction
for the divinely.inspired form recorded in Num. vi.,
v. 24, 25, 26. This is at once so beautiful, so im-
pressive, and so appropriate, that, were any change
necessary, it must commend itself to the approba-
tion of every pious mind.
Passing to the Occasional Services, I find some
important remarks on that of Baptism. Most useful
would it be to give in the Rubric a clear and short
explanation of the liturgical sense of the word "re-
generation." Perhaps no theological term has been
productive of more acrimonious controversy than
this—perhaps none has excited more serious, and
frequently painful feelings, than this. Many, if not
all, the objections brought against its use in the
office of baptism, would, in great probability, be re-
moved, as Mr. Cox supposes, were the distinctions
drawn by the Bishop of Litchfield and Coventry
frequently and clearly recognised in our public dis-
courses. That Prelate's excellent remarks on this
momentous subject are quoted by Mr. C., and well
deserve the attention of every member of the Church
of England in particular, and of the Christian world
at large. Some alterations in the office may be de-
sirable ; but the greatest caution is demanded, lest
its sacramental character be trenched upon, or un-
scripturally lowered.

The general disuse of certain portions of the Mar-
riage Service affords the strongest possible argu-
ment for judicious alteration; but I am at a loss to
comprehend the author's objection to the introduc-
tion of St. Paul's allusion to the mystical union be-
tween Christ and his Church in this office. Nor do

I perceive the " benefit" to arise from the churching
of women at any other time than during public wor-
ship. The use of the 116th Psalm seems to imply
thanksgiving in the congregation. The proposed
alteration in the Funeral Service, by substituting an
expression of resignation, in the place of thanksgiv-
ing, seems justified by its greater general accord-
ance with the feelings of the bereaved relatives—
while, at the same time, it is less in the spirit of
the introductory sentence, which acknowledges the
right of the Lord, who gave, to take away again,
and therefore adds—" Blessed be the name of the
Lord."

The Comminatien Service may be somewhat
prolix, but the other objections seem destitute of
sufficient foundation. The service throughout is
dignified—solemn—awful—admirably calculated to
set forth God's abhorrence of sin, as well as his
determination not to clear the impenitent guilty.
Our author dislikes the sentences as imprecatory ;
but this, I think, they cannot fairly be termed.
They are declaratory in the mouth of the Minister