The Sun.
London, England, 1836-07-06 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JULY 6, 1836.

as to the spuriousness of this document would be the
same, inasmuch as its publication could not fail to lead
to explanations which would soon set the army right
as to the legality of such General Order. To pre-
sume that General EVANS could be mistaken, as to
the fact which that document assumes, was impossible;
and to suppose that he was unaware of its monstrous
tendency, would be to suppose him unacquainted with
the first principles of moral rectitude.

But astonishing as it may appear, it seems that the
document alluded to was really authentic. In answer
to a question put to the Noble Foreign Secretary by
the Right Hon. the Member for Tamworth respecting
this General Order, Lord PALMERSTON admitt«l
that such an Order really existed, though he was not
officially cognizant of the fact. Coupled with
this admission, is a declaration on the part of
his Lordship, as a Minister of the Crown, dis-
claiming all connection with the acts of General
EVANS, and fairly handing over that Hon. and
Gallant Officer as a boon to her Most Catholic Ma-
jesty. The Noble Lord positively assured the House
that the act complained of was not the act of a British
officer, but the act of
,an officer in the service. of the
Queen of SPAIN. This declaration places General
EVANS in an unenviable predicament. If the authen-
ticity of the General Order be proved, he has committed
a heinous violation of the laws of this country, and cast
an indelible stain upon his character as a man and an
officer ; and if he presume to act upon the order so
iss" d, nothing can be clearer than that (not being an
o..,cer in the British army, and subject to the orders of
the British CoMmander-in-Chief), 'he may be brought
to plead for his life at the Old Bailey. But we must
not condemn 'General EVANS unheard. A charge
Which 'affects him so very seriously will, of course,
Meet With prompt attention.

COMMON HALL.-(THIS DAY.)

A Common Hall was held this morning for the election of a
Sheriff, in the room of Thomas Tck,g, Esq.,- who was elected
on the. 24th of June, but who paid the fine, and was excused,
Mr. WiLsoN, who proposed Mr. Terwr, excused himself for
the nomination of a gentleman who preferred to pay the fine.
Mr. Tegg bad intended to serve, but some after circumstances
had altered his mind.

John Johnson, Esq., citizen and spectacle maker, whose
name was in the list, was declared duly elected.
There were very few citizens present.

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

GUPPY V. FEW.—JUDGMF.MT.
This was a motion made by the defendant to discharge an
order of the Master, by which leave had been given to the
plaintiff to amend his bill, being a bill of discovery for the
production of all hooks, papers, &c., in the pleadings, mentioned
by way of defence to an action brought by the defendant Few.
The original bill was filed by Few, claiminv to be entitled to
certain patent rights granted to the late Mr. Charles Edward
Howard, and prayed for an account of the profits which the
defendant had made by the use of the patent, and payment of
what was due in respect thereof. The answer having been
put in, and cause heard on the 10th of November, 1830, a de-
cree was made, by which the Bill was to be retained for three
years, and Few was to be at liberty to bring an action against
Guppy.
The MASTER of the Ports having gone through the details
of the case, said the question was whether, under the circum-
stances of the case, considering the question at issue between
the parties, the direction given at the hearing, a full answer
having been put in and an order having been made for the
production of such documents as Guppy was entitled to upon
the case made in the Bill, after a rehearing of the original
cause, and a space of five years having elapsed from the time
the action was brought, it was a proper exercise of the discre-
tion of the Court to allow the plaintiff leave to amend? His
Lordship thought it was not, and therefore the motion of
the defendant, Few, must be granted; but, under the circum-
stances of the case, he thought the defendant was not entitled
to the costs of it.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT

OLD COURT.

- - - - -
Philip. Gawp, aged 40, a clock-maker by trade, was indicted
for stabbing, cutting, and wounding Charlotte Gamp, his wife,
with intent to murder her. Another count stated the intent to
be to do her some grievous bodily harm.
On the prisoner being placed at the bar it was intimated
that he laboured under insanity.
Mr. Cope, the Governor of Newgate, stated that the priso-
ner was brought into his custody on the 23d of June, since
which time he bad manifested symptoms of insanity, and par-
ticula'r attention had been paid to him, but he seemed uncon-
scious of right or wrong.
Mr. Macmurdo, the surgeon of Newgate, confirmed the
statement of Mr. Cope.
Mr. Justice VAUGHAN informed the jury, that from what
they had heard, there could be no doubt but that the unfor-
tunate prisoner was of unsound mind ; it would be useless,
therefore, to pursue the enquiry.
The jury then returned a verdict of acquittal on the ground
of insanity, and the prisoner will be detained until the plea-
sure of his Majesty be known.
ARSON.—Henry Matthew Meads, aged 15, was indicted for
feloniously setting fire to the dwelling-house of Mr. George
Crookes, a grocer, of Lambeth-walk, to whom he was an ap-
prentice.
Mr. ADOLPHUS and Mr. BODKIN appeared for the prosecu-
tion, and Mr. PHILLIPS for the defence.
The trial is likely to occupy the whole day.