The Sun.
London, England, 1830-08-25 00:00:00

SCOT
1
IREL,

ification.

LAND.
11. Drununottd, Egg,
,AND.

--
Sligo, Aug. 23. Galway, Aug. XL
E. J. Cooper, }lig James Lambert, Esq.
General King. Sir John Burke.
Down (County), Aug. ft Tipperary (County), Aug. 23.
Lord Castlereagh. Hon. F. A. Pnttie.
Lord A. Hill. T. Wyse, Esq.

Dr. hioNx, in his recent " Life of BENTLEY,"
sayashe was " reported to have managed a collusive elk of
wheat in Cambridge market on the day when the prices of
that article, according to which the College tenants pay
their half-year's rents, were to be determined"—a practice
which is pretty well known to have existed in much later
times, if not to this very moment.

OVERLAND JOURNEY FROM ENGLAND TO
INDia.—ln the introduction to this interesting Work,
just published, giving an account of this arduous under-
taking, Mrs. Colonel Emoon says, " I may rattly declare
that I am the only lady who ever travelled to India over
land ; and probably mine is the first Journal ever kept by
an Englishwoman In the Desert of the Thebais, and on
the shores of the Dead Sea." The authoress underwent,
indeed, many strange adventures in wild and perilous
places, and her book may be considered perfectly unique.
THE NATIONAL LIBRARY.---,We are re-
quested to state that the new library about to be com-
menced by Messrs. Cot eunN and BENTLEY, under the
superintendence of Mr. Gm°, is to he called The .21ra-
tional Library, it having been deemed advisable to alter
its original title of The Library of General Knowledge,
on account of its similarity to those of several other ex-
isting Works. The first volume, containing the Life of
BynoN, by Mr. GALT, so long expected, will now cer-
tainly appear in a few days.

ASSIZES-(RECItIVED THIS DAY.)

OXFORD CIRCUIT.-GLOUCESTER, AuG.

HAINES STEPUFNS,

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, it youth 14
years of age, to recover compensation in damages for de-
famation of character. The defendant had pleaded a jus-

Mr. CAMMIELL (with whom was Mr. ALRXANDER)
stated the case for the plaintiff at considerable. length and
in very glowing colours, as to the serious injury likely to
result to his youthful client by the words spoken by the
defendant. It appeared from the statement of the Learned
Counsel, and also from the evidence of several witnesses,
that the defendant is a parish clerk, and also a ts:hool-
master. On the ;20th of January he was officiating in his
former capacity at a funeral, when some dispute arose be-
tween the plaintiff's father and him (the defendant). There
were a number of persons in the church-yard, and in their
hearing, the defendant said to the plaintiff's fatter—" I
have lost ten inkstands and a quantity of quills, and I have
no other reason than to believe but that your son has stolen
them." These were the words complained of, and what
formed the ground of the present action. On the cros—
examination of the witnesses, they would not swear po-
sitively whether the defendant made use of the word
" stolen" or " has them." They also proved that there
were very angry words between the partiee before the of.
fensive words were spoken, and also that the defendant was
never applied to for an explanation or apology, but the
first communication respecting an action he received was
on receiving a writ. It also appeared there bed been some
dispute between the parties respecting the defendant's ap-
pointment to the office of parish clerk.
Mr. Serjeaut LunLow addressed the Jury for the de-
fendant, he ridiculed the importance that had been at-
tarhetl to the case by the plaintiff's Counsel, and also the
exhibition he had made of the boy in pointing him out to
the Jury. Actions like the present were in his (Mr. Ser-
jeant Ludlow's) opinion disgraceful; it was fermenting
and perpetuating petty disputes into an affair of import-
ance, merely for the benefit of the attorney. The de-
fendant was a respectable man, anti from the office he held
as connected with the church establishment of the king-
dom, was entitled to respect.—(A laugh.)—Something
had been said about his appointment to that office, but be
would take it for granted that it was a proper one,
for he hoped the country would never be disgraced
by the clergy making improper appointments. It
was absurd to suppose that the words used, (and there was
a doubt even about the exact words that had been spoken,)
would materially, if at all, injure the boy's character. The
defendant had pleaded a justification, but he (Mr. Serjeant
Ludlow) advised him not to put that plea to the proof, for
if he proved that the boy took away the inkstands and
quills, yet that would not, in law, be sufficient, unless it
could be shown that he did it with a fraudulent and felo-
nious intent. The cause which gave rise to the action
might have been settled in two minutes without coming
into a Court of Justice, and if the Jury returned a verdict
for the defendant no one would suffer except the attorney.
If, however, they found for the plaintiff, nominal damages
would be quite sufficient, recollecting that the words were
used in a moment of irritation.

Mr. Justice PARK, in summing up, said the defendant
had acted wise in not calling witnesses to support his plea
of justification ; but (said his Lordship) I very much dis-
approve of the proceedings on both sides--..such trumpery
actions never ouvlit to disgrace a Court of Justice. It was
true that by law the plaintiff was not compelled to give
any notice of his intending to bring an action before issuing
a writ, but it would be much better if he haul done so ;
and (continued the Learned Judge) it is really quite
amusing to witness the importance Counsel try to throw
into such cases. I thought from the opening that we hail
got again into the days of Roman oratory—such cruelty
was depicted, and Cicero-like the party whose cause was
advocated introduced to the Clan t. Really, Mr. Campbell,
you could not have got any sleep last night.—(Great

laughter.)—lsis Lordship than directed the Jury to give
temporate damagei.
The Jury immediately returned a verdict for the plain-
tiff.—Damages, One Farthing.
The remainder of the day was occupied in a question
relating to the right of the Rector of the parish of Berkeley
to tithes, and was not concluded when the pest left.
'William Williams, aged se, was indicted for bur-
glariously entering the dwelling• house of Thomas Powell,
at Stroud, in this county, and stealing therefrom a large
quantity of linen and wearing apparel, value SOL and up-
wards, his property.
The charge against the prisoner was clearly established.
Verdict—Guilty. Sentence of death recorded.
The prisoner is also committed on seventeen other
distinct charges of felony. Mr. Justice Rosamiurr said
he should not, however, try them, as he would he sent out

of the country on the present conviction for his life.
Sentence of death was recorded against Benjamin
Walters, aged 28, convicted of stealing a horse at Chel.
tenbum, the property of Joseph Cole ; against William
Martin, alias Job Moulder, for stealing six sheep and six
hunts, the property of Mr. John Hooper, of flartpury ;
and against Abraham Leach, for breaking and entering
the dwelling-holm of John King, and stealing two gowns,
value 10A.

Thomas Arundell,(l7), was convicted of breaking into
the dwelling-home of a poor miserable- looking old woman,
named Gay, in the finish of Stroud, and stealing there-
from► an old looking-glass and an umbrella (or rather part
of one), her property. When the articles were produced
they appeared to excite astonishment that any one should
put his life in jeopardy for such trumpery things, which
it was natural to suppose the most indigent being would
not have stooped to pick up had he seen them lying in the
high road.
Sentence of death was recorded. The old woman
begged most piteously that the pri,ioner might not be
transported. Mr. Justice BosaNgurr said he should not,
but he would ace what good a long confinement and hard
labour would do.

Mr. Justice IlosAuclurr yesterday sent a reprieve to the
Under-Sheriff of Berlohire, for John Andrews, (aged ta7)
who was convicted and ordered for execution at the
Abingdon Assizes, for a rope on Ellen Cunningham.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—LANCASTER, Auc. 23.
Both the Judges arrived here on Saturday evening,
when the commission Was opened, and this morning Chief
Justice TiNuaa. -(Mr. Justice Flayi.xv preside, in the
Civil Court) charged the Grand Jury, and expresstd his
sorrow that in a calendar, which war by no means heavy,
that there should be so luny cases of a serious nature, and
deserving of the utmost attention of the Grand Jury. His
Lordship then directed the attention of the Jury to the
cases of rape in the calendar, and observed that the want
of consent was the essence of the offence ; but with regard
to two of the cases, he thought there was some doubt
whether the want of consent was sustained by the deposi-
tions; but with 'respect to the third case, he was sorry to
say he could offer no such observation. His Lordship then
adverted to cases (three in number) of maliciously wound.
ing, under 9th Geo. IV., and said that, although one of
the cases appeared to be one of great aggravation, he
doubted whether the depositions were sufficient to bring it
within the spirit of the Act ; because it had always been
held that in cases under this and similar Ade, the wounds
must have been inflicted with some cutting instrument,
which did not appear to be the ease in 'this instance ; and
if the Jury should be of opinion that the evidence was not
sufficient to sustain the present Bill they would ignore
it, and he should direct the prisoner to be detained,
in order that another Bill should be preferred under
a more recent Act of Parliament, " for assaulting
and wounding with intent to murder." He was
sorry to observe the numerous cases of manslaughter
in a calendar unusually light—the greater part of
which appeared to have arisen from fights, but he con-
ceived that the great proportion of offences of this de-
scription arise from the density of population in this county.
John Gordon, aged 20, was indicted for killing and
slaying Joseph Youde, at Pendlebury, near Manchester, on
Sunday the 15th of May last.
Mr. AnMsraoNta stated the case for the prosecution,
and called two witnesses, who proved that on the evening
of the day named in the indictment the pawner and the
deceased were at the Wheat Sheaf public-house, in reptile•
bury, with several others. A dog belonging to the psi-'
soner was standing near the deceased, who pinched the
dog's tail and made him bark ; the prisoner immediately
jumped over the table, and addressing deceased said, "---
thee, what art thee doing with my dog'" and he and the
deceased began pushing one another about, and during the
struggle the deceased fell upon a bench is the tsp-rveni)
and as soon as he got up another struggle ensued, and he
was thrown down upon the tap •reom fender ; one of the
company west and separated theta, and tThile Youde was
getting up the prisoner kicked him in the lower part of
the belly ; Youde went home and complained of
great
pain in the part where ho received the kick.
A surgeon was called in, but Youde died the following
evening.
Mr. Emmerson, surgeon, residing at Worsley, near
Mancheder, swore that be was called in to attend the de-
ceased on the morning of the day after the injury was stto-
Mined ; that he complained of a violent
pain in the belly;
reined:es. were applied, but he died the following evening.
' On the 18th, the body was opened, and, upon examination,
the stomach and intestines were found to be very much
inflamed, the otnentum gangrenous, and the bladder bora.

He attributed the death of the .deceased to this stale of the
intestines, &c., alit!, in his opinion, a kick in the lower
part of the belly might have burst the bladder.
By the Juno e--There were no external marks of vio-
lence on the body when I opened it, but such might have
been there on the 15th, and have disappeared by the 18th,

the day on which the body was opened.
For the prisoner, a witness named Thompson was called,
and he swore that Yonde held the prisoner's dog between
his hands, and shook bins at the prisoner. That d friend
of the deceased said, '' Let us pinch the dog's tail—it will
anger Gordon," and that they did pinch the dog violently.
Witness said to the prisoner " if 1 were you, John, I would
take my dog from them," and prisoner got over the table
for that purpose, and a struggle ensued, but witness never
saw the prisoner kirk Yontle, The prisoner was a very
civil msn, and in good employment.

In eross-examination he admitted that it was necessary
for one of the company to prevent the prisoner from kick-
ing the demised down on the fender.
LORDSHIP summoned up, and the Jury immediately
found the prisoner Guilty.
Ilis Lounstur, in passing sentence, observed that if this
sudden quarrel, which had terminated so fatally, had been
decided by a fair manly fight, the Court worthd have pro-
nounced a different sentence from that which the inhuman
and brutal conduct of the primmer, in kicking his oppo-
nent, called upon the Court to pronounce. Tee sentence
of the Court was that the prisoner he transported for
seven years.

Abcl Hyde, aged 23, was arrai.nied upon the coro-
ner's inquisition, charging the prisoner with the killing
and •laring of Sarah, his wife. The Grand Jury ignored
the bill prefer red against the prisoner.
Mr. BRANDT, having tailed the case fur the prosecu-
tion, called
Alice Walley—On the of August last my husband
and I were ;11 company with the prisoner and his wife ut
the Woolpack public•house, in Pendleton, which we left
about nine o'clock in the evening to go home. Whilst on

our way home the prisoner wished to go another way, and
told his wife to go home and get Lis supper ready, for he
should not be long. away. The wife raid she would not
go home, but would go wherever the prisoner went. The
prisoner again asked her to go home and get his supper,
but she refused and said she should go with hint, anti she
followed him. He turned round and gave her a shove
with his open, hand. She walked on shout three pares,
and fell down on theground "kitwes n her belly and her aide."
The prisoner, Rot thinkin.; he had done her any harm,
walked on, but when I went up to her I saw the blood
flowing from her body, I called the prisoner hack,
and asked him to go fur a doctor, he went immediately
and seemed very sorry ; wt en he shoved her I was standing
within a yard and a half of them, but did not see him do
any thing but shove her ; I will not swear that he did not
kick her; I did not see him kirk her.

Cross-examined by the prisoner—Your wife was sub-
ject to tits, but I cannot say that she had one when she
fell dawn, she never spoke to me after she fell down.
By 'a Juror—The woman was drunk.
By the Juno s—The prisoner was drunk.
The Constable who apprehended the prisoner, swore
that the priscner admitted that he gave her one kick on
the —, but that he never kicked her before in his life.
The prisoner was a sober peaceable man, more so than the
gem rality of coll'ers.
Mr. Burch—He examined the deceastd on the next
th,y, and found a ruptured arty ry in her —, he attri•
buted her death to the loss of blood front that artery ; she
was six months advanced in pregnancy ; she was a very
healthy subject; in his opinion a fall would not occasion
a wound of that kind.
Sir N. TINDAL—If the woman had fallen on any thing
sharp, would it not make such a wound ? Mr. Burch---
I think not, my Lord, from the situation of the wound
which was in the centre of her body.
Sir N. TINDAL,....WOUId it kick from behind produce
such a wound ? Mr. Burch—lt might, if she were on her
knees at the time, or if she got the kick whilst in the act
of falling forwards.

The prisoner in his defence denied having kicked Isis
wife, and said that what he said to the constable was,
that he had never kicked her once in his life.
Two w►tnesses gave the prisoner a good character for
humanity and general behaviour.

Ifs LORDSHIP in summing up, left it to the Jury to say
whether they believed that the prisoner kicked his wife in
the manner stated by the constable, or whether they thought
that the wound was produced by her falling upon any
sharp aule.tance. If they believed the latter to be
the more probable, then they would acquit him ; but if

not. they would find him guilty.
The Jury immediately found the prisoner Not Guilty.
Joseph Dean, aged 21, was indicted for killing and
slaying Samuel Leech ; and John Edge, aged 23, And
'Joseph Float, aged 25, were indicted for aiding and assist-
ing the said Joseph Dean.
Mr. fiensvaorro stated the case for the prosecution.—

Mr. llaamer appeared firr the prisoner Edge, but the other
prisoners hail no Unwire!.
James Leech, the brother of the deceased, swore that
he was present on the morning of the 12th of April last,
when a pitched battle was fought between his brother and
the prisoner Dean, at lionghsend, about four miles from
Manchester. The prisoner Edge seconded the prisoner
Dean, and the prisoner Plant seconded the deceased.—
They fought about twenty five rounds. In the tenth
round Dean caught the deceased by the leg, threw him,
down and fell upon him with Lis head on his (deceased's)
belly. The prisoner Plant said it was foul play, and was
taking the deceased out of the ring, and claimed the battle-
money, 21. The prisoner Edge said, that if Plant took
his man away the battle-money would be forfeited, and
then Plant brought his man back, and 12 or 13 rounds
more were fought, when Dean (it was said), kicked the
deceased on the head whilst down. Witness could not say
whether the kick was intentional or accidental, but he saw
Dean's foot come in contact with the head of deceased, as
Dean was falling over him. Plant again attempted to take
his man away, but Edge said it was an accident, and that
if the man were taken away Dean should have the battle-
money. Three other rounds were then fought, but in the
last round, deceased without a blow fell insensible', and was
carried home in that state, in which he continued unti'
half-past eleven o'clock at night, when he died.
In cross-examination he said he did not know that

brother had often challenged Dean to fight. His brother
had once before fought a pitched battle, and was taken out
of the ring in an insensible state.
Two other witnesses corroborated this evidence; and
one of them added that the kick given by Dean, towards
the dose of the fight, was intentional, and not accidental.
In cross-examination they denied that they had con-

but they ad.
Mr. Oilier, a surgeon, at Manchester, deposed that he
ythely)otryteioren friends of tbifattltilee-dmL
ecoyeal.
Intriibttuetdedihaatn
was called upon, on the I 4th of. April, to examine the
body of the deceased, and he found several bruises on his
head and face. There was an effusion of blood on the
brain, which occasioned his death. The effusion on the
brain might be caused by a kick. The effusion was caused
by external violence of some sort.
Cross-examined by Mr. IlaaNter—The vessels of the
brain are liable to be ruptured when in a state of disten-
shin, which might be produced by the exertion of fight.
ing ; but I don't think that in this case the rupture was
produced by such exertion. When the vesicle are die-
tended, the exertion of fighting might rupture one or two
vessels; but in this case there were a hundred vessels rup-
tured. It is possible that by over exertion a great many
vessels might be ruptured, but, if they had been so nip-
tured, the appearance would have been different from what
it was in this case.
The prisoners having been called upon for their defence,
the prisoner Dean raid that lie had been frequently chal-
lenged by the deceased, hut refused to fight him, until the
challenges were so often repeated, that he. cou'd not bear it
any longer. The prisoner Edge said that he knew no-
thing of the battle until a few minut -a before it was fought,
when he was called out of his bed by a man named
Vickers, who prevailed upon him to be second of Dem...
The prisoner Plant said nothing in his defence.
Witnestea were called by Dean and Edge, and they een.
firmed the statements made by the prisoners, and gave
them good characters for humanity.
Hie Lot snip, in summing up, said that the challenges
given by the deceased were no justification of the prisoners,
and if the Jury believed that the deceased came by his
death in consequence of the injuries received in this battle,
they must find the prisoners guilty.
The Jury immediately
found all the prisoners Guilty.
His Loansme, in passing sentence, observed that he
had carefully looked through the evidence in order to see
if sty of these unfair practices which prevailed in fights
in this part of the country had been resorted to in title
instance; for if they had, he should have felt himself
bound to pass a very severe sentence. Such had not been
the case, and it would therefore operate in their favour.
He compassionated the youth of the prisoners, and he
trusted that the lenient sentence which he was about to
pronounce would have a beneficial tercet upon them when
they again returned to society. The sentence of the Court
was—that earls of them be imptieoned -six months in
Lancaster Castle, and kept to herd labour.
John Manion, aged SO, was indicted for killing and
slaying Jane, his wife, at Manchester, on the Bth Augual's
Mr. STA AXLE stated the case-for the prowution, and
the facts of the case, as they appeared front the taidswe?

wore as follows ;....The prisoner (who is a labouring man) 1
and his wife occupied a room in a house in Manchester,
and one of the witnesses (Mary Sibley) occupied the
cellar under their roam, About eleven o'clock on
the day named in the indictment this woman was
sitting on the cellar steps, when she heard the prisoner
and h►s wife talking angt ily together. The prisoner said
►o his wife, " Its'yen don't turn tip that shilling, by J—."
The room door was at this time open, but the witness
hearing the wife say in a faint voice, " Oh don't, oh
don't;" went towards the door and called the prisoner, who
made no ',knower. She then went to the door, which
was then ditened nn the inside, and having again called

the prisoner and his wife, and not having received any
answer, she went and alarmed the neighbourhood, and
several women who knew the deceased came to the door
and cAdupon the priseuertoypen it; hut he at first

did not matt; any answer, and they head the wife make
some noise " as if struggling for breath." They re-
ratedly called to the prisoner to open the door, and
hiving at length opened it they entered the room,
where they found the prisoner sitting by the side
of the bed with his wife on his knee. Her fare was

Flack and swollen, and the prisoner said that she had
f.llen in a fit, and he assisted !he women in putting her on
the bed and undressing her. One of the women said t
him " You murdering villain you have choked her," and
the prisoner made no reply. A doctor was scut for, but
before he arrived the woman was dead.

The prisoner having been asked if he wished to the
women any question., said, " No, they are all friends of
my wife, and I don't want to ask them any questions—

►hey will all swear for her."
Mr. Oilier, surgeon at Manchester, deposed that he
was called upon on the 9th of August to open the body of
the deceased, which be did. He found the mark of a
'evere blow on the external putt of the left cheek,
and under that mark there was an effusion of blood,
even down to the hone. There was a considerable
effusion of blood all over the brain, including the com-
mencement of the spinal marrow. In other respects the
body was in a healthy state. The immediate cause °Meath
was the effusion of blood upon the brain, which witness
attributed to external violence—apparently a blow. The
external marks of violence would be sufficient to account

for the internal appearances.
The prisoner, in his defence, said his wife had fallen
(town in 4 fit again►t the side of the bed...that when he
took her up he did not think she was dead—that ho had
never struck her, and that there were at the time two men
in the room who could prove what he said, but that he had
not money to pay their expellees front Manchester to
Lancaster.

His Loansuir, in summing up, observed that it was'
possible that the woman might have Wien against the aide
of the bed, and have done herself the injury which
occasioned death, and if the Jury had a ressonable doubt
upon the 'abject the prisoner was entitled to the benefit of it.
The Jury immediately found the prisoner Guilty.
His Loensute, in p►ising sentence, observed there
could be no doubt of the propriety of the verdict, and if
' the indictment had been preferred for a charge of a more
serious description, be could not conceive how any Jury
could, upon such an indictment, come to a conclusion dif-
ferent from that of the Jury upon this Occasion ; and if
such a verdict had been pronounced, the prisoner mutt
have answertd fur it with his life. The prisoner bad com-
mitted an act of the gros►est brutality and inhumanity to-
wards his own wife, and he (Chief Justice Tindal) should

•
be guilty of a dereliction of his duty if he did not award a
severe punishment. The eentence of the Court was, that
the prisoner be transported for the term of fourteen years.
Two other eases of Manslaughter, which were entirely
devoid of interest were tried to-day, but it may nut he un-
worthy of remark that the only eases tried to-tioy were
eases of Manslaughter. There are no less than sixteen out
of forty-four in the calendar.