The Sun.
London, England, 1830-02-10 00:00:00

SENTENCES.

Mr. Justice Ihrusy—You Robert Alexander are to re-
ceive the sentence of the Court on having been found
guiity upon the trial of three informations filed by his Ma-
jesty's Attorney-General ; you John Isaacson are to re-
ceive the sentence of the Court, on having been found
guilty upon the trial of the last of those three indictments;
and you George Marsden I shall speak of by and bye.
The first of these indictments is an indictment reflecting
upon the character of the present Lord High Chancellor,
and reflecting also upon the promotion of the present
Solicitor-General. The ontline of the charge is, that the
Lord Chancellor, as Privy Councillor, had corruptly
advised and procured the advancement of Mr. Sugden to
the office of Solicitor-General ; and that you published
that libel in the form of a conversation between Corporal
Trim and Uncle Tuby, taken from the works of Sterne.
You have introduced amonT other matters, this
UNCLE I oar—And if a Major should lend his General all
his fortune, say :15,000/., for example, what then ?
Ta►x—To be placed in the General's shoes, your Honour,
before the end of the campaign."
This is, we admit, quite satisfactory. There is reason in
this merit, and there is point, too, in the argument,
which Mr. Sugden and another Learned Personage will
be at no loss to comprehend."
Nov that information charges, that you published that
with an intent to insinuate and cause it to be believed that
the Lord Chancellor had corruptly advised and procured
the appointment of Mr. Sugden to the office of the Soli-
eitor-General.—a charge certainly of a most grave and se-

risus nature; fot, if it could he supposed for one moment
—if it could he believed as a fact (and it is asserted in this
paragraph substantially as a fact) that there had been cor-
ruption in the conduct of the person who fills the high
office of Chancellor—the highest judicial office in this
kingdom—and who is materially instrumental in advising
his Majesty with respect to the appointment of the
other persons who are to fill judicial offices, what
opinion could the public entertain of the Chancellor ?
or of the character of any of the persons who should be
appointed by him—a Chancellor who the public should
think it possible could be actuated by a motive of that
description ? He would be unfit for the office, and doubts
might possibly arise as to the character of the persons
whom he so recommended. Your affidavit states that it was
not intended to apply to the Lord Chancellor ; that you
had a conversation with a person, on whose respect ibility
character, and veracity you could rely, and that he told
you the Duke of Wellington had been lately in the City;
that he had been buying up estates in the neighbour-
hood of Stratfieldsaye ; that he was borrowing money, and
that among other persons lie had borrowed 30,000/. from
the present Solicitor-General. It is unfortunate certainly,
if that really were the intention of your mind, that you

should have expressed it in the language which this libel
contains. Because many men were called, from different
classes and departments in society, upon the trial, for the
purpose of saying who in their opinion was the person
alluded to; and every one of them concurred in the
opinion that it referred to the Lord Chancellor, and
to no other person. When you look at the in-
ternal contents, in my opinion, it is excessively difficult
for any body not to arrive at the same conclusion. Can it
be supposed that Mr. Sugden expected to be placed in the
shoes of the Duke of Wellington ? He might by possibility
expect, and hope to be placed some time or other " by
the end of the campaign"—to nse the expression of the
libel—in the situation of the Lord Chancellor, but it is
not at all likely he could ever expect to be placed in the
situation of the Duke of Wellington. It does not stop on
that inference, because it says, that "Mr. Sugden
and another Learned Personage will be at no loss
to comprehend this." Now we are in the habit,
whether rightly or not, I don't stop to enquire, to
speak of the law as being one of the learned pro-
fessions, and when you speak in common conversation in
the House of Commons, or in other public places, you
very frequently speak of lawyers, by the appellation of
the Learned Counsel—my Learned Friend—the Learned
Gentleman on the opposite side of the House. The word
learned is consequently applied to persons in the situation
of the law, but never to my knowledge has it been
applied to a great military gentleman, though be
may happen at the same time to be the Prime
Minister of State. It, therefore, seems to me
that if that were the intention, you were most unhappy
in the language yeu used ; and it would be well, before
you again take upon yourself to be the writer of a para-
graph, as you profess yourself to have been in this in-
stance, to take care that that language shall not be of an
obscure and ambiguous nature, but that it shall be
known to whom it applies. The Learned Judge then
stated the substance of the two subsequent indict-
ments, and with respect to Mr. Marsden, that the
sum for which he had been :arrested was for duties due
to the Stamp-office, extending to a period considerably be-
yond the six weeks usually allowed by the Stamp-office
as their period of credit.
The sentence of the Court upon Mr. Alexander was,
that upon each of the three indictments he be imprisoned
in his Majesty's gaol of Newgate, for four calendar
months, making on the whole, twelve months:
that upon each indictment he should pay a fine to the
King of 100/., making 300/. That he should subse-
quently give security for his good behaviour for three years,
himself in 5001. and two sufficient sureties in 250/. each,
and that he be imprisoned until the fines were paid and
the sureties given.
The sentence of the Court on Mr. Isaacson was that
he should pay a fine to the King of 100/.
The sentence on Mr. Marsden was that he should give
security for his good behaviour for three years, himself in
100/. and two sureties in 501. each.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
CLIFFORD V. STUMP.

Mr. Serjeant ANDRIWS moved to show cause against a
rule granted in this case, which was moved by Mr.
Serjeant Wilde to have the bail-bond delivered up to the
defendant. The action was brought on a bill of exchange,
on which the defendant, Mrs. Elisa Stump, was the in-
dorser ; but she alleged that she got no value for the bill,
which the plaintiff contradicts in his affidavit.
Mr. Serjeant WILDF. argued, on the part of the defen-
dant, that the motion should be made absolute. He pro-
duced two affidavits, which stated that the defendant had
not received any consideration for the bill, on account of
which she was arrested.

....
The COURT decided that the motion of Mr. Serjeant
Wilde should be made absolute.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.

William Mullins, a boatswain in the Royal Navy, was
opposed by Mr. BARRY, on behalf of Richard Carpenter,
and John Shot opposed the boatswain in person.
The insolvent belonged to his Majesty's ship Trafalgar.
For wounds received in the service he bad a pension of 121.
a year, but this income the parish-officers of Portsmouth
received on account of a " family affair." Beyond this he
had 85/. a year salary, and 2s. a day provision-money.
Mr. BARRY said he did not wish to impede the insol-
vent's discharge, but he trusted the Court would recom-
mend the Lords of the Treasury to deduct something from
the insalvent's income.
The COURT observed that the Lords of the Admiralty
had never consented to make any deductions while an
officer was " afloat," from the consideration that his pay
would barely discharge his current eypences.
Mr. Shot, the creditor, opposing in propria persona,
wished to know to what family affairs the insolvent alluded
as connected with Portsmouth.
The insolvent said it was a domestic affair, and he did
not like to answer.
Mr. Commissioner HArtars—You must answer the
question, Sir.
Insolvent (after considerable hesitation)—It is for the
support of my first wife.—(This communication excited a
good deal of surprise in Court. )
CHIEF COMMISSIONER—IS she alive, or not?
I don't know, Sir.—(Laughter.)
CHIEF COMMISSIONER—You swear that you do not
know whether your first wife is alive or not?
Insolvent—l can't say, but I shall know next quarter-
day, I dare say. Should she be dead, the pension reverts
to me.—Case adjourned.

THE MARKETS.—(THIS DAY).
CORN EXCHANGE.
We have at present this week small supplies of all kinds
of Grain, and ♦ery little Flour. The Wheet trade re-
mains unaltered from Monday's quotations. The sale of
Barley is extremely dull, much being left on hand from
former supplies. Beans and Pease support the rates of
Monday. Oats of good quality fully maintain their late
quotations. Flour unvaried.

ARRIVALS.
Wheat. I Barley. I Oats. Flour.
200 qrc. 1,500 qrs. 3,100 qrs. ,500,sacks.

English
Irish
Foreign

- brie.

HAY MAIIKETS.—( A t per Load of 36 Trusses.)
SMITHFIELD.
Coarse heavy Lowland Meadow Hay £2
New Meadow Hay 0
Useful Old Ditto 3
Fine Upland Meadow and Rye-grass Hay 3
Clover Hay (extra fine)....Cs 5 ..Generally
Oat Straw /I It to £1 18 1 Wheat Straw 2

o to £2 13
o 0 0
3 3 10
15 4 15
O 4 15
O 2 5