The Sun.
London, England, 1830-05-22 00:00:00

DEPARTURES.

J. P. and Lady Catharine Boileau, from Upper Brook-street,
for their seat in Norfolk; Mrs. Lyall and family, from the Pul-
teney Hotel, Albemarle-street, on a tour; John Fisher, Esq.
from ditto, for Hastings; Mr. and Mrs. George Eyre, from the
Burlington Hotel, for Southampton ; Captain and Mrs. Sebright,
from Albemarle-street, for Brighton.

THE ENGLISH PRESS.

(From the Pilot.)

How can Mr. O'Connell, said a London reporter lately,
expect to be reported by the English press, who began his
career by attacking the Times newspaper. This, com-
bined with the total dislike of Englishmen in general to
any thing calculated to do good for Ireland, and the desire
of venal newspaper proprietors to adapt themselves to the
prejudice, this quarrel with the Times is the active cause
of the suppression by the English papers of Mr. O'Con-
nell's extinction speech in reply on Wednesday. So, be.
cause the Times was offended, the other papers are mean
enough to include themselves in the imputations upon
that Paper, by including themselves in the resentment.
But it is a disgrace to the character of the British press,
which nothing can efface. They give all the swaggering,
the froth, the venom of Doherty and North, but they
withhold the reply, which established the charge and ex-
tinguished the aggressors. It shows what we would have
to expect from the British Press, if Goulburn succeeded
in extinguishing our own, and also how little chance the
voice of Ireland, in the British Legislature, has of doing
anything for our interests. It 'demolishes the chance of
fo.rMing an Irish party in the English House, the only
thing relied upon by those who resisted the repeal of the
Union.

;The following are just observations of the ExaMiner,
alluding to the subject of suppressing Members of Parlia-
ment's speeches :
The monopoly which the taxes create secures to two
or three journals (which, in practice, govern the rest) the
power of deciding what part and how much of the pro-
'ceedings shall be made known •to the public ; it subjects
.pUblic men to the caprice of an irresponsible tribunal, to
which Windham and Canning were compelled to submit.
Men of all parties are subjected to the pains and penalties
of this body, and we.are informed that several do no now
suffer as its victims, though they suffer in silence. Does
a 'public man venture to denounce a wide circulating
journal, its familiars soon understand the mode in which
he is to be dealt with, and, as the first operation, his
speeches are cut : thereporters of the other papers, having
a 'strong motive to adopt a relaxation of the labour which
only competition can sustain' follow the example ; and the
unkrtunate offender is made to appear to his constituents
and.ko the world as haVjng, advocated his principles in-
efficiently, and he incurs the disgrace of having made a
failure."

FULL and AUTHENTIC REPORT of the REPLY Of
MR. O'CONNELL, on the 12th INSTANT.
(From the Pilot.)

Mr. O'CONNELL—Sir, I avail myself of my right to reply.
I am able to subvert the sophistry by which the Learned Gentle-
man is sought to be protected. Let me set myself right as to
some of the assertions that have been made. In the first place,
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman has stated my definition of
perjury. My opinion is, and I so stated it on the trial—that the
breaking of a lawful oath, or the taking of an unlawful oath, is
perjury. I was talking to the witness of the nature of perjury ;
and I then said, that if he had broken a lawful oath, or taken an
unlawful oath, he was equally guilty of perjury. Secondly, the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman, in a speech of great length, and
which was rendered sufficiently ludicrous amidst its unwieldy
length by the tragic tone in which it was delivered, has ar-
rived at the Sub-letting Act. The Sub-letting Act in this
discu;sion!—(Hear, bear, hear.)—l cannot conceive how the
Sub-letting Act can form a part of the Solicitor-General's
defence of his conduct ; but he has the happy talent of in-
troducing matters quite irrelevant. Why, Sir, he might
as well have introduced any other event that has take place
sive the flood—nay, even the universal deluge itself.—(Hear,
hear.) But that Learned Gentleman has been singularly un-
fortunate, for he has introduced the only speech of all those
attributed to me which was so inaccurately reported that I
cannot avow it. I avow all the rest. I admit every word he has
read. I now re-assert again every word ; and but that he shrinks
from the proofs—but that he withholds te proofs, I would prove
to his condemnation the perfect accuracy of every accusation I
ever made in this House, or out of this House. It is true that
I spoke of the Sub-letting Act. It is quite true that I condemned
that law in the strongest, the harshest terms ; but the con-
cluding part of the report is quite inaccurate. I never said what
is attributed there to me. Nay, so inaccurate is that passage, that
having met the reporter in the hall of the Four-Courts, on the
morning after that report appeared, I reproached him with its
inaccuracy. The reporter was, as most reporters are, sturdy
upon the subject, and denied the inaccuracy of the report. I
accordingly spoke to another reporter, with whom I was ac-
quainted, and at my request he wrote out the notes he had taken,
which clearly shewed that I had not used the phrases attributed
to me; or rather that they were spoken in so qualified a way as
to bear quite a different meaning. If Thad used the expressions
then, I would not deny them now. If I had now to speak upon
that subject, I would mention it in terms commensurate with my
abhorrence of that Act. It is not possible to find language strong
enough to express my detestation of that statute. Sir, I know of
194 families, aye, families that have been thrown out of their
habitations recently under that law, and are now actually pe-
rishing in the ditches without covering--almost without cloth-
ing or food. Let those who have no wants to feel applaud that
Statute.—(Hear, hear, hear.)—l will begin with the Learned
Solicitor-General of England. He demands my first courtesy.
I agree in his inferences. I only dispute his statement of facts.
But I perceive that the Noble Lord (Lord Leveson Gower) is
about to leave the House. I beg of him to remain one moment.
I will despatch his Lordship first, though out of order.—(Hear,
hear, and a laugh.)—(Lord Leveson Gower returned to his seat.)
I heard the speech of this Noble Lord without surprise or admi-
ration. He took a haughty tone without cause, and a dictato-
rial manner without authority. First, indeed, he assented to
the good taste of my Noble and Excellent Friend, the Member
for Aberdeen (Mr. Hume). My Hon. Friend is certainly not so
fashionably neat as the Noble Lord. He is not such a ruler of
fashion—such an " arbiter elegantiarum" as the Noble Lord.—
(Hear,hear.)—He may not be so dainty or so courtly as the Noble
Lord—but he has qualities which advise the Noble Lord to ad-
mire if he does not condescend to imitate them. He is holiest—
he is straightforward—he hates a job—he loves economy of the
public revenue—he despises the spoliators of the people's money
—and he detects and exposes those speculators whom, in the
present state of this House, he,cannot punish. Such is my Hon.
Friend. He deserves the respect of every honest man—the love
of every good man.—(Hear, hear, bear, and cheering.)—He has,
indeed, already crushed the pretensions of the Learned Member
for--.I really know not what borough.—(Here a cry of " Mel-
bourne Port.")—Aye, it may as well be Melbourne Port as any
other. He has properly denominated that 'Learned Gentleman's
speech, by a word which is due to that Gentleman himself, and
by another equally apposite, which my Hon. Friend has himself
added. He has called it " Salamander Butlbonery," There never
was a more appropriate designation. I now return to the Noble
Lord. He has ventured to censure my conduct out of this
House; out of this House or in this House, I hold his censure at
nought, nor do I undervalue it. He has taken upon himself,
forsooth, to pronounce upon my conduct. I have a right to re-
taliate upon him as a public man. For his taste, for his judg-
ment, I have no regard; I rejoice that lie disapproves of my
conduct—l should be sorry he approved of it. He is mighty in
his own conceit—he is little in mine. If he served my country
I would value him. But what has he done ? What one act of
his official life has been useful to Ireland ? Where shall I find
his services ? He has condescended to accept the salary of an
officer amongst us, I take for granted that ho has received the
emoluments of that office. I do not know hoW he has earned
them. He has ornamented by his presence the apartments of
Dublin Castle. But has he done any act of liberality ?—Has he
promoted any one friend of civil or religious 4iberty ?—Has he,
in short, raised himself into importance or consideration by any
one act of his administration ? I deny that he has. What care
I, then, for the unwise arrogance—the unfounded presumption
—the overweening vanity of his censure. May I continue to
deserve it. His office is, indeed, one of great promise. It is
part of his public career. He is on his road (for such is the mi-
serable destiny of this country) to still higher station. He
is an apprentice in politics, and he dares to censure me, a
veteran in the warfare of my country. His office is a mere
apprenticeship. The present Premier was Secretary in Irelaod—
the present Secretary of State was Secretary in Ireland—so was
the present Chancellor of the Exchequer. Their juvenile states-
manship was inflicted upon my unhappy country. I have heard
that barbers tra n their apprentices by making them shave beg-
gars.—(Laughing.)—My wretched country is the scene of his po-
litical education. He is the shave-beggar of the day for Ire-
land.—(Cheers and laughter.)—l have now done with the Noble
Lord—l disregard his praise—l court his censure—l 'cannot ex-
press how strongly I repudiate his pretensions to importance—
and I defy him to point out any one act of his administration to
which my countrymen could look with admiration or gratitude,
or with any other feelings than those of total dis^egard.—(Hear.)
--His name will serve as a date in the margin of the history of
the Dublin Castle—his memory will sink in contemptuous obli-
vion.—(Cheers.)—1 now turn to the learned Solici•or, General—
and first, let me express myabhorrence
he was in danger of ass•issination lit
is insinuation, that
ilelndh. How unhappy is
the fate of my country—there s not a pitiful slanderer that does
Ireland. ofa
i
meanness of calumnious insinuation, and now here
not pour the vial of his wrath upon her. She is also exposed to the
more galling
is a broad charge of assassination. We feed, we clothe, we
fatten our accusers ; and when there is an occasion to make an
English prejudice available, their assassination is imputed. I
cannot find language sufficiently strong to repudiate this foul
slander, or to express My abhorrence of it.—(Hear, hear.)—
Why, even in the worst periods of our disturbances, the legal
men were safe. 'Fhe White-boys spared, and even respected, the
military. They also spared the legal prosecutors. They consi-
dered both as merely earning their pay, and treated them with
the neutrality of feeling due to mere mercenaries. They killed
no lawyers.—(Several Members I " Lord Kilwarden.")—The
death of Lord Kilwarden was perfectly accidental. He fell by
chance into the hands of a party in actual rebellion—mid it is be-
lieved that he was not known to those who put him to death. For
the present I pass from the Hon. Solicitor-General to the Mem-
ber Melbourne Port, tie has arrogated to him.
fectly characteristic—it contained no argument—it was free from
lseeglfa'flotk°rnielswillieedYl believe, Melbourne
ei
knowledge—it ite:t s of nluybj eccetn rcelirs.c speech His
untouched,sl)eiri-i
order to introduce topics which might earn time approbation of
those who have the moans of rewarding his exertions. It was
divided into two parts. The first was all fulsome adulation of
his legal commandant—adulation as groundless as could well be
procured out of this House by the most accomplished sycophant.

His -VeOnd part was a prepared attack upon me. The pompous
ic
eidean.oi,zetie,
doittrl
\riln jauTgt himselfh:
himha iistsotioeno.ri_stlpocyroco(r,:nni
inanity of his studied periods—his ludicrous self-complacency,
have been well commented on by the Hon. Member for Aber_
praise.—(Cheers.)—«'h:
e) censurer?virulence._onkindness—never
ml, cat Whato,evl,
thtlioiemPthliehn
portance of being my accuser? If, indeed, I had come into this
House nobody knew or cared how—if I had placed myself se-
curely on the back row of the treasury benches, if I had wasted
my nights without daring to think for myself, listening to de-
bates in which I was not allowed to share—considered so unim-
portant to have an opinion ofmy own, but expected constantly to
attend the ministerial troop, and unremittingly to vote with
the Minister, then, indeed, might I be so low, so worthless a'
to be the just object of contemptuous censure. But as I stated
in the House the freely chosen representative of the people,
I can easily, and without effort despise the sickly affec-
tation of phrase—the frothy selection of diction—the empty,
but virulent declamation—and, in short, the .-entire corn_
bination of worthless vituperation which has already been fl)
ufll%,:iihectsatx?ctoclnaersiLminisgeoehstft
arrogance has he t a
justly styled—" salamander buffoonery."—(Cheers.)—l shall dis-
miss the Learned Gentleman's attack in a few words. 1 think
it was in bad taste; I am sure it was in bad feeling—but there is
something worse, infinitely worse. Why, Sir, the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman actually asserted that I had Tscritponed this
motion from time to time—from one day to another day—and
that having run through all these changes, I at length fixed on a
Wednesday, in the hope that there may not be a House. I now
ask, Sir, is this true? Is there one single word of truth in it ?
Judge of the materials of the Hon. Gentleman's mind, when he
pompously makes a statement totally destitute of truth. Why I
never postponed this motion. I 'never appointed any day but
one, and that is this day. And as to the supposing that there
would not be a House, did I not know as well as the Hon. Gen-
tleman himself that there are enough of retainers always ready
to make a House for those who find favour on the Ministerial
Benches ? How can I expect not to be falsely traduced upon
matters which occurred in Ireland, when here, in the presence
of the entire House, a charge is brought against me directly con-
trary to the known truth.—(Cheers.)—l thus abandon the
Learned Memberfor Melbourne Port to enjoy his " salamander"
regard for dull matter of fact, and proceed to the rest of my anta-
gonists ; and here let me thank the Hon. and Learned Attorney
and Solicitor-Generals for England, for the pleasing.contrast be-
tween their good manners and mode of treating this subject.
They contrast strongly and pleasingly with the , conduct
of those to whom I have been hitherto replying.—(Hear.)
—The Attorney-General has founded his argument on a mere
misrepresentation of what fell from me. He misrepresents
my charge, and then says it is unfounded. My only and suffi-
cient answer to him will be found, in the distinct repetition of
my charge, which I shall have hereafterto make. The Learned
Solicitor-General for England deserves a different consideration,
and lat once admit the force of his reasoning. His arguments
are excellent--the facts alone fail him. I entirely concur with
him in his reasoning, but I will easily show that he has mis-
taken the facts completely. I wish he had taken the trouble to
read the deposition of the 29th of April, before he spoke of its
contents. Sir, he has not read it at all. It is not what he says.
It is not a deposition sworn to obtain a warrant. No warrant
was to issue on it. It is a detailed account of the progress of a
conspiracy. It is a piece of history—an historical detail of the
progress of a conspiracy. But of what conspiracy ? Of a con-
spiracy totally differing in its nature and its details from that
which Patrick Daly afterwards deposed to on the table as a wit-
ness, Let the Solicitor-General remember, also, that this depo-
sition relates to transactions of the 27th of April, and that it
was sworn to on the 29th, two days after. Yet this contradic-
tory document was withheld at the trial, and convictions were
had on the testimony of the man who was thus known to the
('ounsel to the Crown to have thus grossly trifled with his oath.
The second mistake of fact which the Solicitor-General for
England falls into arises from the fallacious and deceptive state-
ment of his colleague, the Member for Kilkenny. He is by that
misstatement made to believe that one of the four men accused
of the conspiracy to murder formed at the fair of Rathclare on
the 27th April, 1829, was convicted at the last Cork Assizes upon
the same evidence and before the same Judge. Sir, I totally deny
that the fact was so. It is true that one of the four men tried at the
last Cork Assizes was convicted,but not on the same evidence, nor
for the same offence. The offence for which four men were tried
at the last Cork Assizes, and one of them convicted, was an of.
fence committed on the 2d of March, 1929, and not one of the
four men who were accused by Patrick Daly of the offence of
the 29th March subsequent.—(Hear, hear.) The Solicitor-Ge-
neral for Ireland avails himself of the number being foes in
each of the cases, and thus he actually makes the House, and
even his own colleague, believe that one of the four men accused
at Rathclare, Peter Daly, was convicted at the last Assizes, a
matter in itself totally false.—(Cheers.) Let there be no doub t
of this. The four men accused at Rathclare, by Daly, were
named Leary, Burke, Keeffe,' and Connors. The man convicted
at Cork was named Lynch. Thus the fallacy as to the number of
four men is completely exposed.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The next
mistake of the Solicitor-General for England relates to Mr. Ba-
ron Pennefather. He says that the Learned Judge was in pos-
session of the deposition at the first and second trial. I allege
my conviction that he got that deposition only during the third
trial. I say it is a calumny on that able and humane Judge to
assert the contrary of my statement. If he had the deposition
at the- first or second trial, would it not have been equally his
duty to producejt to the prisoners' Counsel, at the first or second
trial as at the third?—(Hear.) He felt it his duty so to produce
it at the third trial: Would not the production at the third trial
only have been.a direct condemnation of his own conduct at the
two former trials, if he had that deposition at the first or second
trial and withheld it? Sir, I repudiate such a slander on the
learned and able Judge, It is the Solicitor-General for Ireland
who imputes this misconduct to the Judge, I stand up in his de-
fence—l am convinced he is incapable of deserving this censure
—no man ever attained the high station he holds with more
correctness or reputation. lie won the prize by his pro-
found legal knowledge, his strict propriety of professional
conduct, and by his unblemished moral character. He was no
ignorant pretender, who endeavoured to compensate for his
want of legal knowledge by servility.—(Cheers.)---He was no un-
principled adventurer, who being without knowledge of law,
sought promotion by pandering to the bad passions of persons in
power.—(Cheering.)—No, his course was plain, open, and dig-
nified. And now that this fact IS in dispute between the
Learned and lion. Gentleman and myself—to what and to whom
do I appeal? Why, to the notes of the Learned Judge him-
self ? Can any thing but a consciousness that the fact is as I
state it, tempt the gentleman to refuse me thosa notes.—(Hear,
hear.)—lf they shall be refused, then I stand on the fact as
proved by the natural and necessary result of such implication,—
(Hear, hear, hear.)—Allow me one word as to the testimony
borne by the Hon. Member for Cork (Mr. Callaghan). He was
on the second Jury, and he has, it seems made this sapient dia.
closure—that the Jury were agreed' as Ito thesguilt of the pri-
soners, and difl'ered only With respect to the evidenee.(Sitich
laughing.)—Precious and sagacious Jurymen—they were ready
to declare the prisoners guilty, but then they had not sufficient
evidence to convict them. Admirable distinction ! Why, how
could they ascertain the guilt, except by the evidence ? It
was the very thing they had to try, the credibility of the
evidence to establish the guilt. It seems, however, that
the Honourable Member reversed the process, and having
ing first decided that the prisoners were guilty, he then began
to discuss the question of whether or not there was evidence to
warrant that decision. I did, indeed, feel for my clients—per-
secuted clients—at the trial; but how much more would I have
felt if I could imagine their lives depended on the deliberations
of such a sagacious set of jurymen—of men who could continue
for thirty-six hours under such an absurd delusion, with the
Hon Member assisting them to go astray, Was not I right then
to laud the one man of mansion sense who happened to be
amongst them, I have heard of a juryman who refused to
acquit, for no other reason than this, that the charges contained
in the indictment were atrocious, although not proved. The
Hon. Member for Cork was not that juryman I assure the
House.--(Laughing.)—But it was a person of equal sagacity. I
cannot, however, avoid congratulating the House on time access
sion of wisdom which the Hon. Gentleman has brought amongst
us.—(Laughter.)—l also congratulate the Solicitor-General for
Ireland on the support of so discriminating an advocate.—
(Laughter-)—I now come to the lion, Solicitor-General himself;
and first, as a gentleman of the Irish bar, I repudiate and con-
demn in the strongest terms known to the English language, the
practice stated by the Noble and Learned Gentleman of examin-
ing witnesses by counsel out of court. I assert that such a prac-
tice is held in just abhorrence by the Irish bar, that it is utterly
repugnant to our habits and our feelings of propriety. Sacred
Heaven! can the Hon. Gentleman be ignorant of the feelings of
an high-minded profession on this subject ? Yet he stated
it, in utter unconsciousness of its hapropricy. Why, what
an evidence is this of tho absence of professional knowledge.—
(Hear.)-4 do not rest my condemnation of this practice on my
own assertion. I appeal at once to the Attorney-General for
England—l call on him to sustain his Irish colleague if he can,
Let him avow this practice if it be possible. But no—l will not
wrong him. I know he condemns it as much as I do. I also
make a similar appeal to the SoliestorsGeneral for England. I
confidently state that he will not countenance such a practice.—
(Hear, hear.)—aThus, Sir, I am confirmed by the almost una-
nimous assent of the bar of England and of Ireland, in condemna-
tion of this practice, so flippantly, and as a matter of course,
stated by the Learned Gentleman. I know some young and inex-
perienced attorneys have suggested to me, and the parties have
sometimes urged me to see their witnesses. But I have always
rejected the proposal with scorn and contempt. The condemna-
tion of this murder does not rest on their assertions or appeals.
It was a pract ce repudiated in this. House in the strongest terms
in the vcar 1116. On the 10th of February, in that year, Lord
Archibald Hamilton brought forward a charge against the admi-
nistration of justice in Scotland. Amongst the rest this very
topic arose—time examination of witnesses out of Court, He
quoted a strong and emphatic expression of the then Attorney-
General, Sir Samuel Shepperd. Here arq the words—(Mr.
O'Connell took up the parliamentary debates and read)—namely
" that God forbid he; ox any one officially connected with
him, should have any intercourse with a witness in a
case of public justice."—(Much cheering.)—The Attorney-
General replied, but he did not deny the accuracy of the
quotation. • He only qualified the assertion thus—His words,
as reported are, " he had not said lie never communicated
with witnesses. He only said he never communicated per_. sonally with them," Here there is the testimony of the Atter-
nev-Gemeral for England at that time disavowing with his so-
leMnity of an oath, any such personal communication as time
Solicitor-General for Ireland avows he had with witnesses for
three days. I stand on this fact, It is atone sufficient to sus-
, taro me. Here is an avowed mal:praetieC, Let use get the do-
cuments I ask for. Give me th,e authentic documents I require,
and I again pledge myself to establish every word of the charge
I have made' agamst the Hon. Gentleman.—(Loud cheering.)—
The charge I made plain and explicit. It is that being in pos.
session of evidence, to show his principal witness forsworn, he
persevered in the trial, and sought conviction through the in-
strumentality of that witness.—(Cheers.)—This is a serious
charge. He felt it so. Night after night did he taunt me on
this subject. He was ever ready to meet this charge, and the
House cheered him—and what is, the state we arc in at present
Why it is just this—she prudent'', shelters himself from my
charge by refusing me the legal evidence which could sustain it.
—(Loud and continued cheering.)—What has been his defence ?
Why he has mixed up the Sub-letting Act and time Borris-o'-
kane trials with dinner speeches and toasts, every one of which
I avow, with this one topic, with this single accusatiOn• I Will
not follow him at present through his three hours of all Manner
of subjects, and by courting English prejudices. I care not for
those prejudices—l come to the meat question. It is this. Am I
to get the proofs et* not ?—(Hear.)—Those proofs have never been
under my eontroul. They are incapable of being alteavel or in-
fluenced by me. I cannot prove my case without them. With
them I pledge myself to prove my case. (Cheers.) Was there ever
since the world began, such a state of facts as this? I charge the
Solicitor, General with !laving produced a witness, who on timetable
swore to a case utterly inconsistent with a deposition or oath made
by him two days only after the alleged fact—with having this de-
position in his (the Solicitor-General's) possession, and yet that
lie went on and procured one conviction, and sought others on
y
heiittpsaso:mbsgieati man's
evidence.
bwct liam,hilaserntgnecit:aht—nier
n'(sdHoetnep
oeyas
testimony,
itnlki
lassyhr,s;
dit:i:sot,
,temet:
oncc rleintia
ow
evidence. I confute him by showing that there was a cons iction
uittal
of
produced, He denies that the deposition contradicted the ver-
was decisive of an acquittal.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Here he and
his Noble Friend were at variance—he admits that there is a
discrepancy—the Noble Lord says there is none at all, Let
them reconcile that discrepancy between them as they can. I
contradict both,l call for the Judge's notes, which will .hew
what this fellow swore at thetrial—l call for the deposition which
will show what he swore immediately after time transaction—and
this reasonable request—this collyinoing proof I ask for. It is
refused me. The Noble Lord puts it over his dignity. He is
too dignified to give me the evidence.—s(A laugh.) The Learned
Solicitor tint it on no tangible ground, but relies on English pre.
judiee to refuse me what he knows would easabilsh his offence.
He has sagacity enough to know the of eet of the evidence were
it produced. The dignity of the Noble Lord is only equal to the
instructive sagacity of the Learned Gentleman. I repeat it, that
after all his taunts, his challenges, his goadings oa, it comes just
comes to this—he owes his safety to the suppression of the evi-
de„,,—,(cheering.) Here, Omen, is my full and omplete tri-
, If I get the evidence I establish his guilt. If I am re-
fused the evidence, I obtain the inevitable conclusion, that the
evidence is withheld because it would certainly establish his
guilt.—(Great cheering for several minutes.)

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.

ST. ALBAN'S RACES.

FIRST DAY. —The Craven Stakes of 10 • sovs. each, for
all ages. Last mile.
Col. Standon's ch. h. Conrad, 6 yrs.
Mr. E. H. Delme named b. h. Hindostan, 5 yrs. 2
The Shephall Bury Stakes of 5 soya. each, with. 26 added.
Three others started.
Mr. Coleman's br. f. Little Gift, 3 yr 5.......,..... 2 1 1
Mr. Braithwaite's Puzzle 1 3 2

_
The St. Alban's Gold Cup of 100 sous. value.
Six others started.
Mr. E. H. Delme named b. h. Hindostan, 4 yra
Mr. Colman's br. f. Bunter, 4 yrs.

The Wheatbsmsted stakes of sovs. each, with 25 add, d,
was won by Mr. Becchey's br. h. his Highness, besting six
whers.

The Sandridge Stakes of 10 nova. each was won by Mr.
Osbaldeston's b. m. Emma, beating three others.
SecoNn DAY.—The No Man's Land Stakes of 5 goys.

each, with 25 added.
Mr. T. Goodison's b. f. Caradori, 4 yrs 2 1 1
Mr. Shedbury's b. f. Blue Bonnet, S yrs ...... 14 dr
The Verulam Stakes of 10 awe, each, with 50 added,
wan won by Lord Mountcharlin's b. h. Coronet, beating
four others.

The County Plate of 50 says., for all ages, was won by
Mr. Ilungerford's ch. h. Camillus, beating two others.
The Borough Stakes, by a Sweepstakes of 5 sues. each,
with 25 added " By a Friend to the Town and Trade of
St. Alban's," vas•won by. Mr. Searth's cli. b. Wigwam,
heating three others.

A Handicap Sweepstakes of 10 sou. each, half a mile,
gentlemen riders, was won by Caradori b. m., beating two
others.

Tire Birmingham Stakes of 10 scts. each was won by
Mr. Kelke's ch. g. Hawk's Eye, beating two others.
The Farmers' Cup, given by the Gentlemen of the Hunt.
vas won by Mr. Archer's b. m. Lincoln Lass, beating three
others.

YORK SPRING MEETI/iG.
WIDNIIIDAY NIGJJT.
Several fresh names have been added to the list of sub-
scribers to the fund and stakes opened for the improvement
of our races, and the committee are exerting them-
selves with a spirit which is singularly opposed to the apa-
thy that has prevailed for the last three or fdtir years.
Great things are promised. The betting men are so
pletely divided at present, that little or nothing has been
done in the St. Leger, nor have there been any changes
worth noting, except in The Cardinal and his Grare the
Duke of Leeds's horses; the f.tmer is a very smart nag,
and will take more beating than many are aware .f: he
has won his races in an exceedingly neat clever style: the,
latter are out of favour, as well from their ranking as from
a report that the stable is amiss altogether.
The meeting terminated this afternoon with the follow-
_

ing races :
The Sapling Stakes of 50 cove. each, h. ft. ; for
,eolts,
Sat. 51b. Mile and three quarters; 31b. allowed, &c.
(Ten subscribers.)
Lord Scarborough's b. c. brother to Tarrant —.. 1
Mr. Jaques's ch. c. by Swiss—Comedy 2•
Mr. Watt's b. c. Doctor Oloroso 3
Mr. I)owbiggen's ch. c. by Figaro—Thomasina (Mb.) 4
Mr. Gascoigne's ch. c. by Blacklock (31b.) 5
Five paid.—. 6 to 4 agst Doctor Oloroso, and 2to 1 agat
the winner. Thomasina jumped off with the lead, the
others lying in a body well up : Comedy, however, was
so vivacious that Conolly could not keep her behind ; there-
fore, after running 200 or 300 yards, she went right to ti.e •
front, where she remained for near a quarter of a mile, by
which time she became more temperate, and returned to
her place in the crowd. Thomasina carried on the runtliaw •
to the gravel read, and there she declined, Gascoigne's Wu,*
also dead best at this point. Brother to Tarrare now made
play, and just within the rails Comedy and Dr, uharir,a
came up on either side of him—the latter, however, died
away at the stand, and left the race to the other two ; the
run home was extremely severe, the brother to Tarrare
winning by half a head only the other would have won a.
he could have been induced to run straight—he is a milk
rogue. The winner was rode by Nelson.
Handicap Sweepstakes of 15 soy.. each, for all ages. T. Y.C.
Lord Sligo's b. c. Canker
Mr. Foljambe's br. f. by Whisker
Lord Scarborough's br. f. lay Cation
Even on Canker. A severe quick run race, and wort
by half a neck—rode by Lye.
Last year of the Constitution Stakes of 20 SM. etch, b.
for all ages. Mile and quarter. (Eight subscribers,)
Lord Milton's b. h. Medoro, 6 ....... 1
Lord Scarborough's b. e. Cistercian, 4 yrs.
Major Yarburgh's Laurel, 6 yrs
Five paid.-13 to S on Laurel, and 3 to 1 agst Medoro.
Laurel sprung off in front, but was headed after the first
300 yards by Cistercian, who continued the running A
rattling pace to the road, where Laurel came up and Brat
about his neck in' front, but began to. flag at the stand:
Mellor() then came into play, beat off Laurel without au?
difficulty, and in an instant was heachand- head with Cister-
cian a beautiful smuggle home was wun by Medoro by a
head—rode by Scott.
The Stand Plate of 501. for all ages. Mares allowed a ks.
Mile and three quarters.
Mr. Metcalf's ch. f. Giglet, 4 yrs. (Lye)
Lord Fitzwilliam's b. g Dora, 4 yrs.
Mr. Walker's gr. g. Cadwal, 4 yrs 4 3 dr
Mr. Gascoigne's eh. f. by 'Whisker, 3 yrs 8 2dr •
Lord Scarborough's b. c. by Waverley
The last heat won by two lengths. This lace crea'ad
no interest whatever.

In the Two-year-old Stakes of Tuesday it was therlae
of Leeds's filly, by Wanton, that rkn, not the RhodaeauthA
filly, as mentitned in all the lists.
LATEST BETTING AT YORK RACES.
CLEAT ST. LEGER.
8 to 1 agst Lord Cleveland's Raby
10 to 1 agst Mr. Chifney's Priam
11 to 1 agst Mr. Petre's Brunswiekee
14 to 1 agst Moss Rose
IS to 1 agst Mr. Riddell's Emancipator
18 to 1 agst Hassan
18 to 1 agst St. Nicholas
20 to 1 agst Laurie Todd
20 to 1 agst Mr. It. Shepherd's The nirdfnal
25 to 1 agst Maria
30 to 1 agst Duke of Leeds's Lady Mowbray
30 to 1 agst Brine

BETTING IN ST. JAMES'S._(THIS MORNING).
The following is a statement of the betting at the Tun,
in Jermyn-street, up to two o'clock this moruing
lAA ET.
7 to 2 agst Mr. Chifney's Priam
15 to 2 agst Lord Sefton's Captain Arthur
8 to 1 agst Lord Exeter's Augustus
to 1 agst Mr. Ridsdale's Little Red over
9 to 1 agst Brunswicker
13 to 1 agst Lord Exeter's Mahmoud
16 to 1 agst Sir Harry Beagle
16 to 1 agst Sir M. Wood's Ihe Mummer
25 to l agst Mr. Ramsbottom's Zucharelli
30 to 1 gust Wat Tyler
OA Xs.
7 to 2 agst Lord Sefton's Mouche
5 to 1 agst Lord Queensberry's Marla
11 to 2 agst Lord Jersey's Chariotte West
10 to 1 agst Mr. Payne's Brown DueheSs.
The rest as before,