The Sun.
London, England, 1831-11-18 00:00:00

BRISTOL, Nov. 17.

The city is all in motion to-day. An answer has been
received from Lord Melbourne to the memorial, declining, on
the part of Government, to institute the inquiry prayed
for, and pointing out to the citizens the mode that should
be adopted for redress. The following is a copy of the
communication from his Lordship :
" Home-office, Nov. 16, 1631.

" have the honour of acknowledging the receipt
of a memorial, numerously signed by merchants, bankers,
traders, and other inhabitants of the city of Bristol, deeply
lamenting the riotous and disgraceful proceedings which
have recently occurred in that city, and the sad destruction
of property resulting therefrom ; stating further, that the
lives and properties of the citiz,ins were entirely at the
mercy of a desperate mob, and that the memo-
rialists are firmly convinced that all this might
have been prevented if proper precautions had
been adopted, and earnestly requesting that I would
cause an investigation to be instituted, as the only
course that will pacify the mind of the public, and restore
confidence in future.
" It is certainly to me no matter of surprise that so large
a number of the inhabitants of Bristol, who have signed
the memorial should feel themselves deeply affected
by the melancholy events which have recently taken place
in that city, and that they should be most anxious to
seize the earliest opportunity and the most effectual means
of relieving themselves from the imputation of having
either encouraged or permitted such lawless and out..
regent's violence. It is impossible not entirely to agree
with the memorialists that the fullest and strictest in-
stigation which the law authorizes and empowers is re-
quired to be instituted into the conduct of both the civil
and military authorities. If there is reason to presume that
these unfortunate events have had their origin in supine-
ness, neglect of duty, or delinquency, such delinquency
should be inquired into by due process of law, and accord-
ing to the established forms of legal proceeding. If the
disastrous results which have been witnessed are to be at-
tributed to an imperfect and inadequate constitution of the
civil authorities, such imperfection can only be remedied
and supplied by the exercise of the Royal prerogative, or
by the intervention of the power of the Legislature.
" I am not aware of any other coulee being open either
to Government or to individuals, which would be sanctioned
by precedent in this county, or conformable to the laws
and the Constitution, and it therefore becomes my duty to
request you to assure the memorialists that in either case
his Majesty's Government will be most anxious to receive
all the information which can be collected relative to the
late calamitous disturbances at Bristol, to give to it their
most attentive consideration, and submit it to those advisers
who are the most competent to decide upon its import
and bearing, and to adopt upon it such measures as may be
required either of animadversion upon the past, or of pre-
caution for the future.
" I have the honour to remain, Sir,
" Your faithful and obedient set vant,
" MELBOURNE.
" James E. Bailie, Esq.. &c."

This answer has excited the greatest interest; and the
question among the citizens now is, What is to be done ?
what course should we follow ? The Committee ap-
pointed at the late public meeting has been called together
to-day, and means will be taken to have a pul4ic meeting
convened forthwith, to resolve upon the measures that
should be pursued.
The Court of Inquiry, relative to the conduct of Colo-
nel Brereton, assembled to-day at the Merchants'-hall, at
eleven o'clock, to enter upon an investigation. It has
been resolved that the Court shall be a close one, and no
spectators were, of course, admitted. The following is
a copy of a hand-bill circulated with reference to the in-
quiry :
‘. Bristolians—There is a Court of Inquiry to be held
at the Merchants' Hall, Kiaig-street, this day, Thursday,
17th instant, at eleven o'clock, with regard to the conduct
of Colonel Brereton, which, it must be remembered, did
not injure your frit nds and relatives during the late riots.
We all know that Colonel Brereton used every constitu-
tional and justifiable means to disperse the people. Let
those who can bear testimony in his favour, go forward
and volunteer their evidence."

A reward of 1001. has been advertised to-day to he
given upon the discovery of the incendiaries who attempted
to set fire to the premises of Messrs. Wild and Son, of
Radcliffe-street, on Saturday night last.
A report is circulating through this city, that there has
been great rioting at Merthyr Tydvil, and that the mili-
tary has suffered in the conflict that took place. I merely
give you the report, but cannot say on what foundation
it rests.

FASHIONABLE INTELLIGENCE.

EXCHEQUER COURT.-(TITS'DAY.)

MASON V. wEssmit.

In this case Mr. EvAsrs applied for a rule to show
cause why the execution which had issued should not be
set aside with coats. The caseappeared to he as follows :
A son of the defendant bought a horse from the plaintiff,
for which the defendant had, at different times, paid to
the amount of 101. For the balance he was served with a
copy of a writ, on which he went to the attorney of the
plaintiff and paid a further sum of 1/. to account, and
proceedings were stayed. The defendant heard no more
of the matter till a bailiff came to his house and levied
an execution on his goods. Upon this the defendant, ac-
companied by a friend, again called upon the attorney
and remonstrated with him upon such a proceeding. The
only answer given by the attorney was, " did you not sign
a cognovit ?" The defendant said " No." The attorney
'hen said, " 0, I thought you did," and walked out of the
The Learned Gentleman stated, that this fact was
sworn to, both by the defendant and the friend who accom-
panied him, and the defendant further swore, that he never
did sign any cognovit.—The Court granted the rule.
Mr. STARIIE applied on behalf of Mr. Tomlins, the
town clerk of the borough of Richmond, that he (Mr.
Tomlin') might be allowed to make his ream of the
fines levied in that borough by affidavit.
The Learned Gentleman stated that for the last year
there had been only one fine of five pounds levied, and on
his agent applying at the Exchequer-office in Somerset-
house to make the return, he was informed that it could
not be received except made personally, or a commission
must issue to see that the return was properly made. Ile
considered that, as the sum was so small, it would be too
much that Mr. Tomlins should be put to the expence of
coming up from Yorkshire, or that an expence of three
guineas should be incurred for a commission.
The COURT granted the application, and stated they
would make it a general rule, that where the sum was
under five pounds the return might be made by an affidavit.
urLLTEE. v. CAMPBELL.
This was a case of trespass, in which the plaintiff re-
covered damages for 2701.
Early in the term Mr. Follet obtained a rule to skew
cause why the damages should not be reduced, or a new
trial had on the ground of the damages being excessive.
This morning Mr. C. F. WILLIAMB chewed cause
against the rule. He stated that the trespass fur which
such damages were given was not a common case of tres-
pass, but one which was much aggravated by insult.
The plaintiff was a large and respectable farmer, and the
defendant, Colonel Campbell, a Commissioner of Excise
and a Magistrate, who employed workmen to make a pub-
lic road through a park of the plaintiff. The plaintiff, when
he found out what was going forward, gave notice to the
defendant to cease. In reply, the defendant said "
you, if you say any thing more, I will put on more men."
The plaintiff then gave a written notice, hut the workmen
still continued working, when the son-in-law went to the
plaintiff to remonstrate with him, and said you have re-
ceived a written notice, and therefore you must know you
aie acting wrong. The defendant said, " Yes, I have re-
ceived notice," at the same time taking it out of his pocket,
when he tore it up and threw the pieces in the gentleman's
face, saying the plaintiff was a purse-proud fellow. The
workmen contnued at work for three weeks, when they
were restrained and the action brought. The Learned
Coun•el considered the insults given such an aggrava-
tion as to justify the damages given, and cited several
cases where the Judges held that large damages were the
best means of restraining wealthy men from insulting
others, who were inferior to them in station, and they
would never interfere in such cases, with the verdict given
by the Jury.
Lord LYNDHURST here interrupted the Learned Gen-
tleman, and suggested that a comproniise between the par-
ties would be the best means of settling the matter.
Mr. WILLIAMS was willing to take half of the verdict.
The COURT thought 1001. would satisfy the justice of
the case. The actual damage was only 131.
Mr. Witi.tAats would take the 100/. if 301. was paid
for the expence of a journey into Lancashire, which the
plaintiff had taken to see if his landlady had given the
defendant leave as he alleged.
Mr. FOLLETT, for the defendant, would much rather
that the cause should be argued fully before their Lord-
ships, but would not proceed against so strong an opinion
as was expressed by the Court.
After a long conversation it was settled that the rule be
discharged, and the verdict reduc d .o 1201.

room.

PALACE CO URT.-(THIS DAY.)

HAYCROFT V. WHIFFEN.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff to recover
the aura of 11. 18s. Id., being the balance of a bill of Si.
for ironmongery goods supplied by the plaintiff to the
defendint. The parties live at Deptford.
The amount of the damages having been proved,
Mr Ross on the part of the defendant, submitted that
the plaintiff was not entitled to recover in this action. There
was no question as to the amount of 11. 18s. ld. being due,
and being the balance of a larger sum. Those facts
being undisputed, the plainCff's remedy should have been
by suing the defendant in the Court of Requests for
the hundred of Blackheath, within which the defendant's
residence was situated. He (Mr. Ross) should contend,
that, under the Act of Parliament by which the Black-
heath Court of Requests was constituted, the plaintiff
was not only liable to be nonsuited, but also to pay
the defendant treble costs. That Court was esta-
blished for the recovery of debts under forty shillings,
by the Act of the sth George 111., chap. S. That
Act was further extended and explained by the 10th
George 111., chap. 29. The third section of the
latter Act stated that if any suit for a debt of less than
405., contracted within the district of the hundred of
Blackheath, be carried into any other Court than that,
the defendant might plead the general issue ; and if the
defendant be proved to reside within the limits of the
Court, ju !gment should be entered for the defendant, and
the plaintiff should be liable to pay treble costs. The ques-
tion therefore was, whether the debt sought to be recovered
was under 405., and whether the defendant resided within
the jurisdiction of the Blackheath Court ; these were in
the Learned Counsel's opinion established in the affirma-
tive, and therefore the plaintiff could not recover. The
Learned Counsel cited the case of Clarke and Asken in
supp-rt of his argument, which was tried before Lord
El enhorough, which was a question as to the jurisdiction
of the Southwark Court of Requests.
Mr. CAPRON, for the plaintiff, submitted that the pre-
sent was not the time to make the objection. The
questio❑ of residence within the jurisdiction of the
Blackheath Court, and the amount of the debt, were
solely for the consideration of the Jury. The Acts cif
Parliament referred to stated that the defendant should
prove the amount of the debt and jurisdiction, &c. Now
no evidence had been given by the defendant to prove
those requisites.
The Learned JUDGE said it was at present purely a
question for the Jury, whether they were satisfied of the
amount and residence.

The Foreman of the Jury said he and his brethren were
satisfied of these facts.

The Learned JunGE left it to the Jury, that if they
found the debt to be under 408., and the residence to be
within the jurisdiction of the Blackheath Court, it would
be their duty to 4iirl a verdict for the defendant,

The Jury found a verdict for the defendant.
The JUDGE then gave the defendant's Cognsel sn op.
portunity to move to enter a verdict for the plaintiff, with
1/. 18s. Id. &images, if his directio❑ to the Jury should
appear to he wrong.

COMMON PLEAS.—(THIS DAY.)
The Court were occupied the Ivho!e morning in hea
ing !notions for new triali of no pnlilin inte7e4;

The place where the Peers of France hold
their sittings is the Pa'ace of the Luxembourg, in the fau-
bourg St. Germains. In allusion to this circuT.st.inci arid.
to the agitation the peerage question, kigaro say's,
the Peers of France are like the King of Ifoi.LaNn, they
are unwilling to surrender an inch of Lurein4rg."
There is to be an investiture of the litlit,r;ltS
cf the Order of St. Patrick, on 'iliursday, the 4th2 in•t.,
at the Castle, at which the Companions and Grand Offi-
cers of the Order will attend in full costume. The Mar-
quis of Dov'Nsitiii7 and the Karl a LA NDA ff in.-
vested with the insignia on that occiaeigr..—l)Alli.
The Loo n (31-14No4ott has presented the
Rev. Enwaitn JAz!tEs piiirri, 8.A., of Exeter College,
Oxford, and fifth loin of T. H. H. Ptiirrs, E•q of Leigh-
ton Hotise, in. the co-anty of Wilts, to the very valuable
i-ectory of 'St. John's, in Devizes. This is the first time
this preferment has been given without the influence of the
close hot ongh of Devizes.

Some of the Pcjiq,h r,efugees in Paris are
about tq pultiish a 3,.uhaal, called, 4e Polonaise.
We regret .to liear that on the evening of
Monday se'nnight there was some slight dike lay of an' at-
te'mpt to renew the disturbances at Worcester, which had
hen so promptly suppressed on the preceding saturday
night ; but tfie decidedMedsures adopted by the litayort
einided ,
soon' p.,!Vm tfits, and
i549,44,,r: Mulford Journal.