The Sun.
London, England, 1830-09-18 00:00:00

DIPARTUILES.

The Marquis of Northampton and family, from Thomas's
Hotel, Berkley-square, for Italy ; the Earl of Orfbrd, from ditto,
for Sufiblk ; the Earl ofrortarlington, from ditto, for Doncaster;
' Captain and Miss (Jarrett, front Morley's Hotel, Cockspur-street,
for Portsmouth ; W. Dickinson, Esq. from ditto, for Brighton ;
W. Wilson, gm. from ditto, for Dublin ; the Earl and Countess
of Mansfield and family, for. Hastings; General and Madame
Sabloukott; front Warren's Hotel, Regent-street, on a visit to
Mr. and Mrs. A ngestein,at their seat, Weeting Hai, Norfolk;
Monsieur Jaubert and Monsieur Gentler, from the Brunswick
Hotel, Jermyn-street, for. Paris; Charles Greville, Esq., front
Georite-t,treet, Hanover-sqtutre, for I)one.aster ; Lord Ache-
son, fromSutiblk, for Huntingdon; Mrs. Stuart Hall and Miss
Easttnont, from,Batt's Hotel, Dover.street, for Southampton;
W. Wiltshire, Esq., from Fenton's Hotel, St. Jametes.streel, for
the Continent ; Sir William and Lady Cosway, for Sandgate •
Lieut.-General Ilia% and Miss Scariett, from Bryant's Hotel',
Conduit-street; Captain Buller, and party, from Lon 's Hotel,
New Bond-street, for Doncaster • Samuel Worrell, Esq., front
ditto, for ditto; Cot Bowyer, from ditto, for liraywick, near
Reading; Henry Richardson,Esq., from ditto, for Weymouth;
Capt. Symons, 7th Dragoon Guards, from ditto, for Canterbury;
J. lawn, Hs' q., from ditto, for Oxford.

It is stated that an eminent capitalist has
bought 800,000 Qmsols fur the late King of FRANCE.
We believe it is true.—Marning Paper.
Tiu:ro is a story told of a gentle Quaker,
which carries with it no unimportant moral. The story
goes tlitathe Quaker, finding a dog in his larder robbing
it of its contents, could not bring his mind to inflict any
severe chastisement upon the animal, as contrary to the
mild precepts of,his order, but resolved to content himself
with a parting admonition ; so opening the door to the
dog,. he cried after him.—" Mad dog ! good people, a mad
dog !" the merciful consequences of which may le readily
imagined.

OLD BAILEY.-(THIS DAY.)
QLD COURT.
SENDING A THREATENING LETTER TO HIS ROYAL MU

NESS TUE DUKE OF CUStBEKLAND.

At ten o'clock the Judges having taken their seats in
Court,
nomas Aga, who described himself as an author, was
placed at the bar, charged with sending a letter to the
Duke of Cumberland, threatening to kill him.
The prisoner is an elderly man, of very respectable np-
pearance ; he wore a military coat, and conducted his own
defence. On being called upon in the usual way, be
pleaded Not Guilty in a firm tone of voice.
On the Bench sat his Royal Highness the Duke of
Cumberland, Lord Wynford, and a great number of other
distinguished individuals.
Mr. GURNEY (with whom was Mr. WICHTMAN)
stated the case for the prosecution. The Learned Counsel
stated that the prisoner had written a book, which he sent
to the Duke of Cumberland, offering to suppress it if his
Royal Highness would pay a specified sum of money. His
Royal Highness refused to do anything of the kind, or enter
into any arrangement for its suppression. The prisoner
in consequence sent the letter that formed the subject of
the present indictment. In that letter he threatened that
if the Duke did not instantly comply with his demands
that he (the prisoner) would act the part of a Fenton or a
Bellingham. The Learned Counsel then called the follow-
ing witnesses:—
Richard Mayne, Esq. examined—l am one of the Com-
missioners of the New Police. I 'received the letter now
produced from the last witness; it was enclosed in an en-
velope, which I destroyed.
Prisoner—Mr. Mayne is subpoenaed on my behalf; I
therefore shall not ask him any questions till I enter upon
my defence.
Colonel Poten examined—l sin private secretary to his
Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland. I received the
letter now produced from Mr. Mayne, the Commissioner
of Police ; it was enclosed in a note from Mr. Mayne.
Prisoner:--I should wish to ask Colonel Poten when he
gave the note and its inclosure to his Royal Highness,
what observations his Royal Highness made ?—Colonel
Poten—l really cannot recollect what passed
Mr. Charles Gardener examined by Mr. WIGHTMAN.-..

lam a clerk in the office of the police. I received the
letter now produced by the post. I afterwards gave them
to Mr. Mayne. They were addressed
,to the Commis.
sionera of Police.'
Prisoner—My Lord, the witness appears to have a very
imperfeCt knowledge of the instrument put into his hand ;
and if be had not been pressed by the Court, he would
not have sworn to them.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY—He has not sworn positively,
only to his belief.
Prisoner—The letters were addressed to his Royal
Highness, and therefore I think they are not properly set
forth in the indictment.
Mr. Justice Baxtrer —There is another count in setting
them forth.
Prisoner—l have no other question then.
Prisoner—When his Royal Highness received commu-
nications of such vast importance, he must have made
some observatlr Cannot Colonel Paten recollect some
vestige of v occurred ? Colonel Poten-1 cannot.
Prism .—The Colonel is a witness for my defence,
there' .e for the present I shall decline asking him any
more questions. But I hope the plea of non nd ricordo
when the proper time arrives will not be allowed.
Re-examined—.l sent the letter to Lord Wynford, after
it had been read by his Royal Highness.
Thomas Quick examined—..l am a police-officer. On
the 17th of July, about seven o'clock in the morn-
ing, I saw the prisoner come out of a house, at
Kensington. I followed him from place to place,
until he got to Kew-green. I then saw him accost
a servant dressed in mourning within about two hundred
yards of the Duke of Cumberland's house. The servant
afterwards went in the direction of the Duke's gate, but I
cannot.tell whether he wont in or not. A carriage drove
up. I saw the prisoner look into the carriage very
earnestly. The servant came back to the prisoner, who
afterwards walked backwards and forwards before the
Palace for an hour and a half, and then walked away.
By the prisener—l was instructed to follow you by
order of the Superintendent. I was told to watch you.
Prisoner—What were your instructions? 'Witness—To
follow you wherever you went.
Prisoner—Did he tell you for what purpose ? Wit-
ness—Not at first.

Prisoner—Was you not told that my object was assas-
sination ? Witness—Not directly.
Prisoner—Was you not told my object was a malicious
ene? Witness—l had no instructions on that point. I
had no instructions to prevent you doing any thing, only
to watch you.
Prisoner—Could you have prevented ma from murder-
ing the person I addressed on that day or any other ?
Witness—l would if I could.

Prisoner--That will not do. Was you near enough to
have prevented me? Witness—No, I was not if you had
fire arms. I thought from the manner of the servant
that he was an acquaintance of yours. On the day in
question I believe there was a marriage to be celebrated at
Kew. There was no other public festival.
Prisoner—Did you not know on that day that Mr.
Jelf, tutor to Prince George, was to be married to a Lady
in Waiting ? Witness—l did not.
Prisoner—Were there not a great many carriages going
to his Royal Highness's on that day fi Witness--I only
observed two. In the carriage that you looked at there
were three or four individuals, two of them ladies. I

cannot tell whether you bad any arms about you.

Now none.

Prisoner—Could you not from my bulk form a correct
judgment whether I was or was not armed? NVitness—]
could not; you had your arm in your coat-pocket behind.
I could not tell whether you had arms in your pocket. I

. •
did not ace you speak to any other person than the servants.
Prisoner—lf you had seen me attempt to murder any
one, could you or tiro ild you have prevented me ? Wit-
ness—Most certainly, I could.
John May examined -I am It superintendant of the
New Police. On the 1 aof July I went to Kensington
in the evening; I went L No. 17, King-street, where 1
found the prisoner ; I showed hint a letter, and asked if
he knew the hand-writing ; he said yes. I then asked
him if he hid been to Kew that day; he said he had. I

asked him i► his name was Thomas Ashe; he said yes.
I irked him it `‘e came from near Carlisle; he replied
that he did. I hen took hint into custody. Prisoner
was examined at ,w-street on the 19th. 1 then showed
him the letter. At he then said was taken down in
writing.

Mr. Justice BAYLRY—If it was not, it is a great neg-
lect on the part of the Magistrate.
tly the prisoner—It was on a Thursday that I called
at your house ; I saw the landlady when I called ; I was
in private clothes, I had a conversation with the landlady ;
the object of my visit was not to set her as a spy upon
your objects and actions; I did not inform her that I was
a police officer; I did not wish her to conceal from you
that I had been at the house; I could 'have apprehended
you on any day; it was a quarter before ten o'clock when
I apprehended you ; y6ll were either in bed or about
getting in.

Pri;oner—ls it a duty incumbent upon you to take
people out of their beds at night?
heed them in the morning ? when you roight appre-
Mr. Justice Ils.vutt—That is a question of law.
Prisoner-.-I should say of humanity, my Lord.
Prisoner—Did you not know that I was ill at the time?
Witness—l heard you bad been taking medicine. When
I showed you the letter you said that it was your own
hand-writing,
Prisoner—Did I not make any other observation ?
Witness—l do not recollect; I took you to St. Afartin'a
watch-house.

Prisoner—Was there any glass in the windows ?
Mr. Justice TIAYLEr—Your treatment after you were
apprehended does not bear on the present question.
Prisoner—Did you, as it was your duty to search my
lodgings, find any thing suspicious? Witness—.No,
dill not.

Prisoner—Should you have thought from my appear-
me, person, and mariners, that I was an individual likely
to commit a murder. Witness—l cannot answer that
question; there was nothing suspicious.
police magistrate. I have corres-
poni‘dier4Corthan—i am a magistrate.atperion named Thomas Ashe. I never saw
him, and therefore cannot swear that the prisoner is the
person.
Mr. Justice BA YLlty here itsquired if there was any fur-
ther proof of the prisoner's hand-writing.
Mr. GuRNEY said that he had not, as what the prisoner
said at the police-office did net appear in the depositions.
Mr. Justice IlsvLev then told the Jury that it was ne-
„alley to prove the hand-writing Wore they could convict
the prisoner. It was stated by two witnesses that the pa-
wner acknowledged at the police-office that be was the
writer of the letter; if he made such an acknowledg-
ment, the law required that it should have been re-
and that- to make it legal evidence
re-
duced
to writing,
wlss,nwelicessaly that it should be produced to-day.
This wag not done, and therefore the prisoner was en-
titled w the benefit of such an omission. On the part
of the prosecution Mr. Conant was called;
that gentle-
man had corresponded with an individual named Thomas

•
Ashe, but .lte did not know
_that individusl' personally;
neither ha 4 he ever leen him write ; therefore there was
no proof from
_c_ his evidence that the prisoner was the same
person. finder these circumstances he was entitled to an
acquittal.
The Jay consulted for sortie time, when t}.e foreman
said, "MY Lord, are we now to consider what verdict
we shall return ?"
Mr. Juitibe 13AVilv—Vbere is nothing for you to con-
sider; I stated to you the? rounds on which the prisoner
was entitled to an acquittaL—(liis Lordship here again
explained to the Jury the Want of legal evidence of the
hand-writing.)
The Jury then returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
The prisoner, who haii-taken copious notes of the evi-
dence, here begged of the Court to be allowed to address
the Jury and explain the fiature of his defence.
Mr. Justice Ilavt.tty—.:.That is a course that cannot be
allowed. I „hope you Will be mindful of your conduct in
future.

Prisoner (evidently labouring under considerable emo-
tion)—Allow me to say, my Lord, that I shall bear
no malice nor towards any one from this prosecu-
tion being instituted. He then left the dock and was dis-
charged.