The Sun.
London, England, 1840-09-17 00:00:00

FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
(From the Globe.)
THE TREATY OF LONDON.
The ratifications of the Convention of the I3th
July, between Turkey, Austria, Prussia, Russia, and
England, were yesterday exchanged at the Foreign-
office.

In Scotland, as our Correspondent observes, " there
is a choice of Courts ;" the Justice of Peace Courts
being the most expensive and tedious of all the subordi-
nate tribunals. In the Courts presided over by the Ma-
gistrates in towns, and in those in counties where the
Fiscal to the Sheriff presides, the proceedings are more
simple and economical; yet it is but too common in some
of the counties, and in some of the large towns, to summon
individuals for most trifling offences to the Justice of
the Peace Court, in which everything must be coin-
mated to writing, instead of bringing the case before
the mild and efficacious Court of the Sieriff, in which
a stipendiary judge regularly bred to the law presides,
who decides every case on his own responsibility, having
first heard the viva voce testimony of witnesses to prove,
and those (if any) adduced to disprove, the charge.
The Justice of Peace Court in Scotland is, it would
seem, constituted similarly to our Petty Sessions Court,
in which country gentlemen in the commission of the
peace arc directed in their decisions by their clerk, some
practising attorney, who is their oracle, and who pockets
the heavy fees on convictions as a remuneration for his
time and trouble in attending to instruct them in the
law which they are entrusted to administer. The enor-
mous fees taken by the clerk in the Justice of the Peace
Courts in Scotland are actually fixed by the Justices
themselves ; those taken in the Fiscal Courts being
fixed by the Judge; In this respect the practice in
S otland is even worse than that of England ; as the
Justices may be well suspected of a disposition to make
the situation as profitable for their protege as they well
can. Were Lord John Russell, as leader of the House
of Commons, or the Hon. Fox Motile, as Under Sscre-
tary of State for the Home Department, to bring in a
Bill for simplifying the forms and regulating the fees
of summary proceedings in trilling cases in every
Court in the kingdom, such a measure, emanating from
the Government, would be a pledge of the desire which
bas been expressed by Ministers, and the fulfilment of
which has been anxiously looked for by the country, that
the Courts of Law should be rendered more accessible
to the poor, and official fees would not, as now, consti-
tute in trifling cases the by-far heaviest part of the pe-
nalty incurred for unimportant and frequently uninten-
tional infractions of merely fiscal regulations, or for
petty arid trumpery assaults, provoked by impertinence,
or committed without premeditation, or the design of
inflicting the slightest injury. This would prevent the
sympathy which the public feel for offenders, and which
is nothing short of a❑ impeachment of the law, when
they see poor persons consigned to a jail—not for the
offences of rshich they were convicted, but for the ina-
bility to pay exorbitant fees of Court.
(From the Standard.)
What arc the " exploded principles of Government"
repudiated by " practical statesmen" and " rational
Tories themselves ?" is a question which we have in
vain tried to resolve in the particular. The recognised
principles to which we have been accustomed are few
and simple. They are, that the laws must be enforced
by the Magistrate and obeyed by the subject—
that changes must, if safe, be conceded to
reason and justice, but never to violence and wrong
—that the State must be above all things jea-
lous of its authority, never enduring the growth
or presence of a rival power—that every man is en-
titled to the enjoyment of what the law has pro-
ncunced to be his, whether it be a material possession
or a privilege of honour or influence ; and that if
the necessities or advantage of the community re-
quire to take it from him he is entitled to a full
equivalent. These are the leading principles of
government recognised by our ancestors. They have
been violated, we know, by the unprincipled men
who cell themselves, and are called by their crea-
tures, " practical statesmen," upon the same prin-
ciple upon which Fielding, following ancient Pistol,
calls a thief a " practical conveyancer." " Rational
Tories," too, who prove their title to rationality by
professing principles which they practically belie,
and by joining a party which they take pride to insult
and abandon at each convenient opportunity,—" rational
Tories" of this description have connived at the flota-
tion of the old principles of government ; but this does
not prove that the principles are exploded. The laws
against robbery are not exploded, though robberies are
committed, and sometimes connived at. A formal re-
peal is necessary. We are, therefore, we presume, not
unreasonable in asking for the public acts by which the
old principles of government have been directly and
expressly exploded, either in the gross or in the detail.
Such an act would seem to be necessary if only to let
men know what description of government they may
look for hereafter, and such an act would not be without
precedent.

(From the Courier.)
We noticed in our last a new case of embarrassment
which is occurring in the Scotch Kirk out of the strange
prcreeedings of the men now in the ascendant in her
councils. A presentee of the Duke of Buccleuch, and
this presentee, it may be remarked, to the parish in
which his Grace's own principal residence while in Scot-
land is situated, has been objected to by the people on
the ground—to speak plainly and briefly—that he be-
longs, or rather in hoc stalls is suspected to belong to the
moderate side of the Church ! The quarter in which
this opposition originates, it requires no " second Da-
niel" to tell us ; but the secret of the movement we be-
here to be, that in making this appointment his Grace
has not consulted " the Christian people ;" and he has
not, as on a former occasion, applied to a certain emi-
nent Doctor in the Church to say who ought to be pro-
moted. He has not even done, what other patrons often
do, and what the Crown nosy does in almost all occasions,
given a leet of candidates, from among whom the people
may choose. Now his Grace's conduct on this very ac-
count deserves, we thick, the highest commendation. We
all know, that of late years the mode of filling up benefices
in the Kirk, even under the present system of lay patron.
age, has been very much assimilated to popular election ;
and the change has been hailed as a happy one by the
abolitionists of that system. A very little candour and
impartiality brought to the inquiry will satisfy every one
that in the very worst feature of lay patronage the feet-
giving system is neither more nor less than an extension
of it. The patron now-a-days presents four, six, ten
—it may be, as in a late instance, where the nomination
was with Lord Efe—twenty individuals to a vacant
perish. It is true he cannot give to one, as for-
merly, the same chance that he shall ultimately get
the living. Bat he can divide the certainty, among
half a dozen or a score. And this, forsooth, is the
mode by which it is proposed to diminish his tempta-
tion to render his right of patronage subservient to his
political views

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

OLD COURT.

William Bugler, aged thirty, and James Balli,gate,
aged thirty-nine, were indicted for stealing a bank-note,'
value 3001, the property of Edward Wenman Martin,
in his dwelling-house.
Mr. Clarkson and Mr. Bodkin conducted the prose-
cution, and detailed the facts of the ewe as they after
wards appeared in evidence ; Mr. Ballantine defended
the prisoners.
Mr. Edward Wenman Martin deposed that he re-
sided in Upper Seymour-street, and the prisoner Bugler
was in his service, as footman, in the month of June
last. In the early part of year he placed his banker's
book and a Bank note for 3001., in a drawer
in 11;s bed-rocm. He should think that the note was
quite concealed from view. He wrote the number of
the note on the wrapper of the banker's book. The
drawer in which he placed the note was unlocked, and
was what he called the letter drawer. On the 13th
July he had occasion to look in the drawer, and he
found the note was gone. lie had seen it safe, a fort-
night or three weeks before that day. Upon ascertain-
ing his loss he made a communication to the Bank of
England, and shortly afterwards the note was shown
him. On the last Sunday in June Mrs. Martin had a
number of ladies visiting her, and it was the prisoner's
duty to have been in the hall, or the lower
part of tie
ss w
house, and he could have no business whatever in wit-
ness's bed-room. Witness went out fo rabout an hour
on the afternoon of the Sunday in question.
Cross-examined—The prisoner had been two years
in his service. He had three female servants, but
seto
noe
other man servant. The females could have a
his bed-room. The prisoner (Batligate) had never
in his service. Could not say how long it was before
this Sunday that he went to the drawer where he had
placed the note. He entertained a good opinion of
Bugler's honesty before this transaction.
Mr. Joseph savage produced the stolen not from the
Bank of England. It was changed on the 3d July,
and the person who changed it gave the name of J.
Batten, Newbury, Berks. He gave the party a hun..
dyed sovereigns and a ticket, which enabled him to ob-
tain two hundred pounds in notes from another office.
Mr. John Hevekes, another clerk in the Bank, prove 1
that he save the person who produced tlte ticket two
hundred °pound; in 101. and 51. notes. There were ten
101. notes and twenty 51. notes. The witness then
stated the numbers of the notes. A portion of the
notes hadsinee been paid back into the Bank, and among
them was No. 57,160, a 10/. note, and No. 1,313,
a 51. note.
Sarah Brown deposed that she was one of the house-
maids in the service of the prosecutor at the time of the
robbery. The prisoner Bugler was footman, and the
other prisoner, Bathgate, used to come to visit him two
or three times a week. Witness remembered Sunday
the 28th of June. On the 'afternoon of 'that day her
master went out, and witness and the prisoner Bugler
were the only servants in the house during the time he
was absent. In the courser
of the fternoon witness had
occasion to go up to master'sraed
bed-room, and she
brought down his he slippers and pelwe rthem in the library.
She went up again shortly afterwards and met Bugler
coming down, and she asked him adwhere he had been to
and he said, " For the slippers ;" and she 311;4
she had

already brought them down. She observed at the time
that he was in a tremble and appeared very ill, and when
she got down he asked her to fetch him some spirits,
but she did not do so. In a few minutes she saw Bug-
ler go up the area steps and let Bathgate out, and until
that time she was not aware that he bad been in the
house. Bugler afterwards told her that Bathgate had
been there to see him. Before they separated she ob-
served that the prisoners spoke to each other. When
Bugler came in he said that "Jem," meaning Bathgate,
had been there again bothering him for money.
On the Wednesday following she heard a ring at the
area bell, and she looked out and saw Bathgate and
Bugler standing at the area gate talking together, and
the former appeared to be intoxicated. Bugler soon
afterwards came in-doors and said that Jem was quite
tipsy, and he was coming the next morning for some
money, and he was then going into the country to his
wife. She never saw Bathgate at the house again.
Cross-examined.—She had been in the prosecutor's
service off and on for four years.. Witness had been
in the service for some months before the note was
stolen. Witness had some female friends to visit her
occasionally on a Sunday, and her master and mistress
did not object to it.
John Gardner deposed that he carried on the busi-
ness of a livery-stable-keeper in Ely-place, Holborn.
He had known the prisoner Bathgate since the year
1823, and he saw him at his house at the latter end of
last June. He told witness that he should meet him
in two or three days, and witness asked him what for ;
and he said he should want him to go to the Bank of
England, and get changa for a 3001. note. Witness
asked him if it was a good, honest note, and he said it
was. Nothing more passed at that time, but in two er
three days Bat bgate came again to his stable and showed
him a 3001. note, and asked him to get it changed, but
Lvitness refu,cd to have anything to do with it. Nothing
more occurred than what he bad steted.

(The deposition made by the witness before the
Magistrate was here put into his hands, and he was told
to refresh his memory with it.)
Evidence continued—He recollected that Bathgate
said that there was a 3001. note in a drawer upstairs,
and that he could take it and get it at two minute's
notice. When he produced the note, witness refused
to change it, and the prisoner told him he was an old
fool, and would never do himself any good. The
prisoner then went away, and he did not see him again
for an hour and a half, when he wreto a note and
wished witness to take it to a man in Barbican to get
the change for a 101. note. He went to the house in
Barbican, and the man sent a boy with the change along
with him, and witness called Bathgate to see him.
Winen the boy was gone, Bathgate asked him how he
was getting on, and he told him very badly, and Bath-
gate then gave him a 5/, note and two shillings for going
to Barbican. Witness gave him a box, as he said he
waned one, and he went away. Witness subsequently
changed the five-pound note he had received from the
prisoner. When this transaction took place, witness
knew nothing of Mr. Martin or where he lived.
Cross-examined—Bathgate never told him that he
could get the note from a man who cleaned shoes and
boots for a gentleman named Martin. He swore he did
say so before the Magistrate. Witness got his living
by " taking in" horses.—( A laugh.) He had known
Bathgate intimately for many years. He thought as
he had been in many good services that Bathgate might
have had a three hundred pound note in his possession.
He knew Bathgate when he was a groom at Coiling-
wood Hall, Northumberland. Witness thought the
prisoner gave him the five-pound note out of old friend-
ship, and he did not think there was anything extraordi-
nary in it.
Samuel Hart deposed that he was a tailor and
draper, and resided in Barbican. About ten weeks ago,
the prisoner Bathgate came to his shop for a Mackin.
tosh, which he purchased, and gave him a ten-pound note
in payment. He gave the note to a person named
Israel Cohen to go to the Bank and get it changed.
When he told Bathgate that he had sent to get this note
changed, he told him that he was in a great hurry, as
he must get to Holborn by twelve o'clock, to send a
parcel by a coach, and he said he would send for the
change. About an hour after Bathgate left, the wit-
ness Gardner came with an order for the delivery of
the change, and he took the precaution of seeding his
young man, Cohen, with it. _

Israel Cohen proved that be handed over the
change to the prisoner Bathgate, after deducting the
price of the Mackintosh.
William Kenny, inspector of the G division of Po-
;ice, proved that, after receiving information of the rob-
bery, he went, on the 14th of August, to the house of
the prosecutor, and he desired that Bugler should he
brought into the library. Mr. Martin and the female
servants were also present. He then said that a 3001.
note had been stolen, and he toll Bugler that he had
traced the party who stole it, and that this party had
been in the habit of visiting him. He appeared very
confused, but said he was innocent, and witness then
took him into custody, and searched him, but found no-
' thing material upon him. On the 16th August witness
proceeded to a house at Four Oaks, near Birmingham,
where he found Bathgate, and told him that he wanted
him fur a 300/. note that had been stolen from the
house of Mr. Martin, of Upper Seymour-street, Port-
man-square. He said he did not steal it or change
it, neither did he know who stole it ; but
he would tell him who he got it of, and he then men-
tioned the name of the person whom he said he got it of.
He also told him that he was to have 20/. for changing
the note, and he did change it, and got drunk, and lost
50/., and he carried 230/. to the party he had spoken
of. Bathgate also told him that he had bought some
Irish cloth and had taken his watch out of pawn in Lon-
don before he came away. tie then took the prisoner
into custody, and he was remanded ; and upon a subse-
quent occasion the prisoner told him that if they would
make a witness of him he would go with them and show
them where the money was hid, or his wife should bring
the money with her. In consequence of what the pri-
soner said, witness, on Saturday last, again proceeded to
Bathgate's house at Four Oaks, and in consequence of
something he saw done by Bathgate's wife he went into
when-house, and he there found, hid in the ground, a
tin case, which, on opening it, he found to contain 100
sovereigns and eleven 51. notes.
These notes, as well as the 10/. and the Si. spoken to
by the former witnesses were part of those given in
change for the stolen 3001. note.
This was the case for the prosecution. •
Mr. Ballantine having addressed the Jury,
Mr. Baron ROLFE summed up the evidence.

The Jury expressed a wish to retire, and in about
F,.!1 an hour returned into Court, finding a verdict of
Guilty against both priscners.
11'm. _Munro, a respectable-looking young man, was
indicted for assaulting and wcuruEng Mary Anne
Langley, with intent to do her some grievous bodily
Lana.

Mr. Phillips defended the prisoner.
S,:veral witnesses were examined, but when Mr.
Phillips was about to address the Ju:y, they said it was
unnecessary he should do so, as they had made up their
minds that there was no case made out against the pri-
soner, and they therefore returned a verdict of Not
Guilty ; and, at the same time, expressed their regret
that the Magistrate should have sent such a case for
trig!.

Mr. Justice M AULE—It is no part of your duty to
make such a remark. The case was presented before
the Magistrate in a very different aspect.
Foreman—We still entertain the same opinion, my
Lord.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HOUSE.

Johit Davison, the unfortunate author who was on
Monday last charged with having broken a lamp, and
pleaded guilty to the charge, at the same time that he
assured Alderman GIBBS that necessity dictated the
act, was brought up for further examination.
The defendant stated to Ald. GIBBS, who sat yester-
day during the early part of the day for his Lordship,
that he had written to two gentlemen in London who
Lad some knowledge of him as a literary person. From
one of them he had received an answer which he handed
to the Alderman. The other he apprehended was out
of town.

Aid. GIBBS read the letter, which expressed regret at
the circumstances which prompted the defendant to do
what lead to an exposure at a Police-office, and stated
that tl:e short acquaintance which existed between them
being merely of a literary nature, justified the writer in
bearing testimony to his abilities, but had no reference
to moral character.
Ald. GIBBS said that a letter had just been put into
his hands, written by a gentleman who belonged to the
Literary Fund Society, stating that the case in his opi-
nion came peculiarly within the province of that Asso-
ciation to relieve, humanely suggesting animmediate ap-
plication to the Secretary, at No. 4, Lincoln's Inn-fields.
rho defendant said he had not applied to the fund,
because he believed that, to be entitled to claim, a man
must be the author of a voluminous work of repute,
and he certainly ',could make no appeal upon such an
authority.

Alderman Glass asked by what description of writ-
ing the defendant had been supporting himself?
The defendant stated that he had engaged himself of
late in mere sketchy matters, to supply the means of
preventing the separation of the soul from the body.
lie wrote the article in a publication called the
" Queer Fish Chronicle," which was published by Mr.
Steele, of Paternoster-row, a periodical in the line of
" Master Humphrey's Clock," but the speculation did
not tell. He then was engaged by two other book-
sellers successively, but they became bankrupts, and his
small, but hard earnings, were involved in the general
mass of their liabilities. Other creditors suffered in
their purses, but pressing hunger was the immediate
consequence to him, and it was difficult to describe the
task of reconciling the cravings of an empty stomach
with a constant demand upon the imagination and the
understanding.
Alderman Gll3l3spuCtott.linlgd vther well
ey
poor 0 Cfelrillopwrelln
who. ed
had
he
authorship to the pain of more of
bravedd iffi cul t
tyh, e withp e riol
su t
ac-
curately describing what he had undergcue, but wished

to know what he intended to do upon being discharged 1
from custody ?
The defendant, having humbly expressed his thanks
for the ►nterest the Alderman evidently felt in h's se-
vere lot, stated that he had been engaged in writing an
account of the revolutionary movement in the reig❑ of
Richard the Second—a composition combining histori-
cal facts with romantic descriptions and details, and
calculated, at least intended, to invest the truths of his-
tory with poetical decorations. He had already ad.
vanced half-way in the work, when his wants became
so pressing as to compel him to make the disgraceful
experiment, for which he was consigned to the mercy
of a prison. If he had the means of supporting himself
for ten or twelve days, he could complete it, and he
was sure of receiving 31., or perhaps 41., upon giving
in the manuscript to the person who had engaged him.

Alderman Grass—Will a sovereign answer your pur-
pose ? The Defendant—Oh, most abundantly. It
will do every thing for me for the fortnight, during
which 1 may be employed in finishing the work. If I
could procure that sum, I should, I trust, show that
I was not ungrateful, and I should esteem it a most
bountiful act of providence performed for me in a state
of suffering greater, infinitely greater, than I can de-
scribe.

Alderman GIBBS—Very well, you shall have the
money, and I sincerely wish you, my poor fellow, more
success in the world than you have hitherto had. Do
not forget to let us know the result of your labours.
The Defendant, with difficulty said, " May God in
Heaven reward you," and left tl.e Justice room.