The Sun.
London, England, 1841-11-05 00:00:00

which were returned by the defendant, after th e market
price had fallen, on the alleged ground that the ,bulk did
not agree with the samples. The Jury found .(br the
plaintiff. •
Mr. llumrintEv moved for a rule for a new tried, on
the ground that the verdict was again
atst
Athlderman e evi-
dence, which attempted to show th
Magna), had altered the samples in order to
evade his contract. It was of great importance to the
defendant that such an imputation should not lie upon
him, and, certainly, as was the opinion of t
ffiheent Judgto bear
e on
the trial, the evidence was by no means suci
it out. The Learned Counsel went at some length into
the evidence, to show that the bulk did not agree with
the samples, and that, in reality, the latter were proved
'to be in the same state as furnished by the plaintiff.
Rule nisi granted.
MARGATE PIER COMPANY V. HURST.
The defendant is a coal merchant, who, since the erec-
tioh.of-the Margate Pier, had been accustomed to land
coals upon that erection, paying to the Company a toll of
4s. per chaldron, according to the Act, 52, Geo. 111.,
c. 186. But in 1835, the Metropolitan Coal Act, the
Ist and 2d Will. IV., was passed, by which coals were
directed to be sold by weight, and all contracts respect-
ing coal, wherein the term " chaldron " was used, that
term should be understood as equivalent to twenty-
five cwt. But in the General Coal Act of the
same year, which applied to the whole kingdom, except
the metropolis, there was no provision for such a change
of the measure into a denomination of weight ; but
there was a clause enabling parties to apply to the jus-
tices in Quarter Sessions whenever any dispute arose.
The mode in which the Margate Pier Company chose to
apply the Act, in the adaptation of their rate of tolls to
the altered denomination of coals, gave great dissatisfac-
tion to the coal merchants, who refused to pay the new
rates. This action•was brought to try the question, and
a verdict was returned for the plaintiff's.
Mr. F.R.LE this clay moved for a rule for a non-suit on
the ground that the claim of the plaintiffs was contrary
to the legal interpretation of the Act ; according to
which he contended that the defendant had overpaid the
plaintiffs in the amount to which he had consented to pay.
The COURT considered the verdict well found, and re-
fused the rule.
DAVIS V. THE CORPORATION OF SWANSEA.
Mr. JAMES applied for a rule to set aside the verdict
for the plaintiff. The action, which was tried at Gla-
morgan before Mr. Justice Erskine, was brought against
the new Corporation of Swansea by the plaintiff; who
had been treasurer, collector, and common attorney to
the old Corporation, to recover compensation under the
Municipal Corporations Reform Act. The Mayor ar.d
Council disallowed his claim (9730, on the ground that
he had not properly set forth the amount of his income
derived from the office during the previous five years, as
the Act required. The plaintiff, instead of rendering a
detailed account, stated the average of his income in
those five years to have been 641., the value of which,
taken as an annuity for life, was the sum laid in his de-
claration. Mr. James contended at great length, on the
part of the Corporation, that the plaintiff had not com-
plied with the Act, and therefore that the verdict in his
favour could not stand.—Rule nisi granted.

PINKNEY V. BOOTH_
This action was tried before the Sheriff, and a verdic
was returned for the defendant. The particulars of the
case did not appear to-day, when
Mr. NEWTON moved for a rule to set aside the verdict
on the ground that it was received and entered by the
Sheriff in an illegal manner, and was, therefore, null and
void. In the first place (as we understood the argu-
ment), the trial was postponed by the Sheriff until a
day subsequent to the date, when the writ was
originally made returnable ; and, in the second
place, the trial having come on, upon the last
day of the Sheriff's jurisdiction, the Jury retired
to coasider their verdict shortly before twelve o'clock at
night, and did not deliver their verdict until more than
an hour afterwards, when, the Learned Gentleman con-
tended, the writ and the authority of the Sheriff had ex-
pired. The verdict was, therefore, invalid and illegal.
The Loan CHIEF JUSTICE asked whether the plaintiff
objected at the time of the jury's retiring, or at all, before
their verdict was delivered ?
Mr. NEwTost replied in the negative ; but added, that
the protest against the verdict was handed to the Sheriff
immediately after the verdict was given in.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—The plaintiff took his
chance of a verdict in his favour, and thereby virtually
consented to the course pursued. In such a case the
Court will not interfere.—Rule refused.
HANMER V. HAILER.
The defendants were in partnership as coach-makers
with a person named Heifer, and this action was brought
to recover the sum of 6801. upon a bill of exchange ac-
cepted by Helfer in the name of the co-partnership, and
endorsed by the plaintiff. It appeared that the father of
the Hailes had (before the making of the bill by Heifer)
givsu 3 guarantee to Hanmer for the payment of
all sums advanced bona fide for the use of the firm.
Differences arose between the partnership, and the
[Tidies denied that the monies advanced by Hanmer
through Helfer, were for the use of' the partnership, and
the latter accordingly gave the bill in question to enable
the plaintiff to proceed, as he had keen advised that he
could not, under the circumstances, maintain an action
upon the advances.
The Jury found for the plaintiff, but the Lord Chief
Justice, before whom the case was tried, reserved seve-
ral points.
Mr. ERLE now moved for a nonsuit on the points re-
served.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said all the facts of the
case were before the Court, and their Lordships would
• take time to consider their decision, as the questions
involved were of considerable importance, commercial
and legal. Probably they would direct a special case to
be made ; and if so, the plaintiff could not object to join
with the defendants in agreeing to one.
REYNOLDS V. MONKTON.
In this action, which was brought against the plaintiff
for an :assault, alleged to have been committed in church,
by dragging the defendant out of a pew, the right to
which was disputed between the parties, a verdict was
found for the plaintiff, with 1. damages.
Mr. ERLE moved for a rule to set the verdict aside, on
the ground that the defendant was justified in what he
had done, by his right to the pew.
The COURT did not think that any question of law
was at issue, atd as the facts were admitted, and the
damages were of so small an amount, their Lordships
would not interfere.—Rule refused.
WALKER V. THE BLACKWALL RAILWAY.
In this case the ATTORNEY-GENERAL obtained a rule
to show cause why a mandamus should not issue
to the Sheriff of Middlesex, calling on him to summon
a Jury to assess the amount of compensation to be paid
to the plaintiff by the defendants, for the deterioration
of his property. The application was made by the 31st
section of the Company's Act of Incorporation. The
case had been already tried before the Sheriff, when the
plaintiff was nonsuited on account of the irregularity of
his notice served upon the Company. In that notice he
had included all his property situated in the neighbour-
hood of the. Railway, whereas the clause under which he
claimed allowed compensation only for property situated
within fifty feet of the Railway. A new assessment upon
an amended notice having been refused, a mandamus
was necessary.—Rule nisi granted.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 4.
BARTHOLOMEW V. CARTER. - -

In this case, which was an action against a Middlesex
constable for false imprisonment, and which has been re-
peatedly reported in detail, a verdict was given for the
plaintiff in 40s. damages.
Mr. HUMPHREY this day obtained a rule to deprive the
plaintiff of his costs, under Lord Denman's (the Frivo-
lous Suits) Act, inasmuch as the Judge did not certify
in Court immediately upon the delivery of the verdict, as
the Act requires.

GIBSON r. BRAND.
'1 he plaintiff and defendant are silk-manufacturers,
and the action was brought for an infringement of the
plaintiff's patent in an improved process of manufacture,
by which the gum is more effectually and at less cost re-
moved, than by the operation previously employed. The
Jury found for the plaintiff on some of the pleas, but
generally that there was no infringement ; with other
special findings.
Mr. Sergeant CIIANNELL, after an argument of great
length, and a minute detail of the technical peculiarities
of the processes employed respectiVety by the two par-
ties, obtained a rule nisi to enter a verdict for the de-
fendant on all the pleas.

EWAN V. EVANS.
In this cause an action had been brought against the
defendant for breach of duty with respect to a certain
writ of execution entrusted to his charge against a per-
son of the name of Rawlins, a debtor of the plaintiff s.
The defendant pleaded that he had not taken the goods
in execution, nor levied upon them. The allegation
made by the plaintiff was that the defendant had made a
seizure, but had not levied thereon. The verdict passed
in favour of the defendant, and Mr. Sergeant Talfourd
obtained last Term a rule to show cause why the verdict
should not be set aside, and a new trial had.
Mr. Sergeant BOMPUS,
for the defendant, now showed
cause, and stated that it was impossible for the Sheriff
tO levy in this case, inasmuch as a distress previously
issued had swept away the whole of the goods and
chattels of the debtor, leaving nothing, whatever to sa-
tisfy the plaintiff.
The Loan CHIEF JUSTICE said it had been decided in
the Queen's Bench, that where the Sheriff has several
writs against the same property he took the first. The
verdict must stand.—ltule dismissed accordingly.

EXCHEQUER COURT, Nov. 4.
(Sittings in Banco.)
WILLIAMS V. BAILEY.

In this case an action having been tried on
the
exchange, and a nonsuit obtained by the defendant,n
Cresswell moved to set aside the nonsuit, ground
that the act of one partner must bind the other.
Mile refused.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT. Nor. 4.
IN RE LADY FANNY HYDE PARKER. a billmorf.
o
The insolvent in this case was the relict of the late
Admiral Sir Hyde Parker. She has been frequently ex-
amined in Court, and all the facts of the case have been
already before the public.
Mr. Cooke, the insolvent' counsel, said the case had
been already heard by the Learned Chief Commissioner,
who ordered its adjournment for service. his client
was very far advanced in years, and was in very delicate
health. In the schedule a debt of 4201. was stated as
due to the estate, and at the time it was doubted whether
the person owing it was solvent, but it had been since
ascertained that he was, and this sum further will be
available to the creditors to the amount of 7s.in the pound.
Mr. Commissioner LAW said the case had been already
closed by his Learned Colleague, and he could not think
of entering upon it again. He could only adhere to the
judgment as recorded in the book.

During the last month, exclusive of the 31st,
the Paris Savings' Bank received 2,659,936 f., from 19,228
depositors, of whom, 2,403 were new ; and 2,242,000 f.
were drawn out.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
FROM THE DAILY FAFRRS OF YESTERDAY.
HERALD.—We have already expressed a very
strong opinion that on the result of all the evidence as
yet before the public, a case of extreme ladies and un-.
business-like management in his office of Comptroller
of the Exchequer attaches to the well-paid Lord Mont-
eagle. Having watched with very great attention all
the proceedings which have been subsequently taken in
the lamentable affair of Mr. Beaumont Smith, and the
enormous depredations charged against him, we lament
to state that our opinion of the blameable deficiency
of his Lordship's " controlling " administration of his
own department remains unshaken. We have not
been moved from it even by the plausible circulars
which have been issued under his Lordship's signa-
ture, impressed with all the cunning and fencing
though they be which are so characteristic of his
apologetic genius. The first of these actually seemed
to claim, on the part of the Noble Comptroller,
same merit with the public for the parental and foster-
ing care with which he had adopted a process of exami-
nation and collation calculated to allay all unnecessary
anxiety in the minds of the holders of Exchequer bi ls,
in the shortest possible interval of time. To read it
no man, uninformed upon the premises, would suppose
it to be possible that the worthy gentleman who was
about to be so provident and prolipt in informing the
victimised of the actual extent of their loss, was the
very party without whose culpable permission of a sys-
tem which appears to have been disgracefully lax and
imperfect—a system over which he was placed with
the express purpose of comptrolling, and secur-
ing its operations, at a large annual stipend—that
loss never could have accrued, or et any rate
have existed so long without detection and expo-
sure. In the second of those circulars, the same
fidgetty Peer—busy, active, and garrulous as a
cackling hen on discovering the loss of half her brood
of chickens--surpasses himself in the sharp-witted but
complicated contrivances which he propounds, as glibly
as if he had tested and confirmed their reae'y working.
Here, a plan for checking the bills ; there a plan for
stamping them ; here a receipt with " his" signature,
(if anything can prevent Exchequer bills from falling to
a discount, this must be the very trick) ; there, a
crowning plan for exchanging the verified bills against
the " sign-manuel" receipts. All this is very Rice-ish.
But lo ! with the usual fate of the ex-Chancellor of the
Exchequer's plans,—fiscal, financial or "superficial,"
(his Lordship knows our meaning in this last epithet),
this Exchequer-bills-exchange-rcceipt-and-bill-issue
plan break down two or three days after its
enunciation. Then comes the third circular, with
an acknowledgment that the sublime invention sat out
in its predecessor will net work quickly enough, in
spite of that considerate regard (which W hig chiefs
usually betray for the convenience of their clerks),
wherewith he finds it necessary to exact the attendance
of the latter at eight o'clock in the morning, to make
good the mischiefs which may have arisen during his
own absence of eight weeks, or some such period, in
twelve months from the scene of his own official
greatness. This last circul ir, accordingly, suggests
a modification of the infant " plan," at this early
period of its existence, and by a happy obscurity
of language confounds the notion of " fraudu-
lent "issue" with that of " fabrication and
forgery" of the bills in question. But we trust that
innocent holders of such bills will not allow themselves
to be deceived by this sort of assumption. Lord Mont-
eagle has happily not quite so much official power as
that which he thought proper to exercise in contuma-
ciously refusing to act upon the recorded opinion and
desire of the House of Commons in more than one vote
to which it came for the settlement of the claims on
Denmark ; and for the capricious prejudice with which
he combated, in a spirit almost personal, the appeals of
some large claimants on the funds long since subscribed by
Prance for the compensation of the just demands of Bri-
tish claimants upon her, under treaty and convention. We
strongly suspect that there will be very few bills to which
unauthorised signatures will be found to attach, and
consequently very few for which, in the end, the Trea-
sury will not be liable. We have shown in two
former articles that for these bills to be valid. negotiable,
and (as in Aslett's case) recoverable securities they
need not carry genuine, so long as they bear officially
permitted or recognised signatures. By a case, which
will be found in our police report of the day, it would
seem that the palpable irregularities which every new
stage of the evidence published as to this Ex-
chequer bills affair developer, are likely to com-
municate their evil it.flucnce even to the magis-
terial bench. Yesterday a Mr. Ernest Rapallo,
aged forty-three, said to be a stock-broker, was
examined at the Mansion-house before Mr. Al-
derman Wilson. At the request of the clerk to the
Solicitor of the Treasury, Mr. Burnaby, Clerk to the
Magistrates at the chief office, Bow-street, read a state-
ment made by the prisoner (who was charged with
having been a confederate with " a person already in
custody" in itsuing false and fabricated Exchequer Bills)
before 11Ir. Hall, the Magistrate, at an examination
which took place there, into the circumstances con-
nected with the recent extensise frauds, at the Tree-
sery, on the 25th of last month. Mr. Burnaby did so,
eter stating that the prisoter Mr. Rapalla came down
to the Treasury of his own accord, on that occasion, ac-
ccmpanied by another gentleman, after being repeetedly
admonished by Mr. Hall not to say anything whish might
criminate himself, and that all he did say would be
brought as evidence against him. Mr. Ripen() made the
statement, for the remarkable particulars of which
we refer to the report in question. lie admitted among
other facts that he had known Mr. Beaumont Smith for
many years—that he first introduced to him a Mr.
Solari, since deceased, with whom Smith had large trans-
actions in the way of advancing Exchequer bills ; that
Solari dying about a year ago, Rapallo succeeded to the
" heaviest part" as he emphatically termed it, of a vast
speculation, and thereupon made an application to Mr.
Beaumont Smith to assist him, which was done
with—Exchequer bills :—that he bad had various but
not many, transactions of this kind with him, the very
last about three weeks ago to the amount of eighty-one
thousand pounds of bills—and the preceding ones to
the tune of between one hundred ar.d fifty thousand
pounds and two hundred thousand pounds and one hun-
dred and thirty thousand pounds I—that in every in-
stance Smith had been most solicitous in insisting upon
the return to him of the same numbers as those he
lent ; that Mr. Rspallo had in all cases returned every
bill, of the same number, &c., as that which had
been lent to him by Smith ; that he knew Smith would
demand them of him every time the usual Government
advertisement for funding or paying off such bills, so
numbered, appeared : and that he never supposed the
bills were other than genuine : that it was no business
of his to inquire how they were come by ; that he sup-
posed there was no irregularity in it ; that when he
wanted Exchequer bills he addressed his letters of ap-
plication to Mr. Smith at the Comptroller of the Ex-
chequer's office, and that he knew what Mr. Smith's ap-
pointment was and what its salary. He admitted that in
the earlier part of these transactions from the time of
Solari, downwards, it had been agreed that Mr. Smith
was to have a share of the profits of the specula-
tion "if successful ;" and that the last applica-
tion he had made to Smith was for bills (on which
he raised money) to enable him to pay his dif-
ferences on speculations in Spanish Bonds. These,
as we have stated above, he declared he had re-
turned. Now the legal adviser of Mr. Rapallo con-
tended that that individual ought never to have been
apprehended :--that he had of his own accord, and
acting as a free agent, presented himself at the Tiea-
sury, to afford every information in his power ; that he
had done so, morcovar, under the advice of his legal
friend ; that be now confirmed his former admission of
the "st itement" taken down at the Treasury before
Mr. Hall by Mr. Burnaby, the clerk ; and that inasmuch
as there was nothing before the magistrate to criminate
Mr. Rapallo in any charge of forgery, or fraudulent
issue of these bills, knowing them to be forged or
fabricated, there was no case for his detention. The
clerk of the Solicitor for the Tee isury pressed
for his detention ; but on Mr. Burnaby's exami-
nation it appeared that ho bad grounds for " be-
lieving" Rapallo to have been implicated in the
fraudulent issue and as a confederate with the party
forging the bills. On further questioning, Mr. Bur-
naby said, "he could state of his own knowledge,"
(which a day or two ago Lord Monteagle and his
deputy could not do of theirs), that certain numbers
among these fraudulent issues were forged bills :
and that Rapallo was implicated in the examina-
tions which had been taken of another party not now
properly present.
wTeh
hliengka di
av
si
setre
dof that IVI r .
hßapallo—veryere
wa
sa
o
charge of forgery, or of fraudulent issue, knowing
the bills to be forged, against his client ; and he also
demanded how Mr. Burnaby could be held compe-
tent to speak to the genuineness of Exchequer bills ?
We wait to see this objection and this question an-
swered. We do not hesitate to declare (albeit we
have our own opinions of Mr. Rapallo's statement,
conduct, and responsibilities) that there was nothing
to justify the course final'y taken against him yester-
day. It was urged by Mr. ;Mule's representative,
Mr. Resell and M. Burnaby that the party whose
admissions implicated Mr. Ripen() was then under
examination elsewhere. What of that ? On what
ground did Alderman Wilson refuse bail for Ra-
pallo? The worthy Alderman adrdute I,—on none :
but then, he said, there was so much excitement among
Reawll
the public,—the news of the " fraud" met him iu so
privileged finder many quarters—that he must coinntii the prisoner !
Ho wick, had
recently discovered thal Sir Robert Peel was not a
lsk,ifththee been told that Lord
statesman of an enlarged mind, but that luckily for
mankind his ill-manne.ed but eery credulous Lordship
was—the " intelligence" of which Alderman Wilson
spoke, though it might have been more astounding,
ought to have had just as little to do in guiding his
judgment on the question of release or taking bail. But
then the worthy Alderman wavered ; he began to per-
ceive the ricketty weakness of the case against the pri-
soner, rnd probably would have taken his legal adviser's
guarantee for his appearance. From a parentheecal
, observation of our reporter, however, we conclude that

the illuminations of " absolute wisdom" are not yet
wholly withdrawn from the oracles of civic law.
44
" Antrum humane, petit :--"
(Yet he did not leave the Justice-room ;)"..
64
" Delius inspirat vate %"
The worthy Magistrate rejected even the modified ap-
plication of Mr. Rapallo to be placed under the cus-
tody of the City officers, and decreed that accurately
to meet the peculiar exigencies of this very remarkable,
and very complicated, and very doubtful case, the only
course to be taken, with any degree of security, cer-
tainty, or legal accuracy was-,--to commit him to the
City Compter ! But the constitutional good nature of
a British subject prevailing over the unconstitutional
precipitation of an Alderman who " takes sweet
counsel," he declared that he would limit his re-
mand only till to-morrow, and thus give the Go-
vernment, by taking the re-hearing at twelve
o'clock this day, the opportunity to bring forward what
evidence it might have to substantiate the case against
Mr. Rapallo. Need we say that we feel no sympathy
with Mr. Rapallo, beyond that which our reverence for
the forms of law and the just weight of evidence de-
mands that we should show to any one whom we con-
sider, in the case brought before the bench, to have been
so horribly treated as this party unquestionably was ?
What answer was given to Mr. Lefroy's question,
where was the evidence of forgery ? None. And
why did not the exchequer appear, if it meant to
insist upon the case, in the person of Lord Mont-
eagle himself, or of his deputy, or of some subordi-
nate functionary, wills one of THE bills charged to
be forged, fabricated, or fraudulently issued. The
prisoner's atteste I statement—the bill—and Lord
Monteagle or his deputy's evidence to its fabrication or
forgery—would have supplied an abundant case to jus-
tify Rapallo's committal, even to Newgate. But then
the cross-examination ! What a case would that have
supplied against the controlling management of the Ex-
chequer ! One or two facts that appear on the face of
Mr. Rapallo's statement bespeak a coolness in applying
for—a facility in granting—and a possibility of tiding
over, for years, undetected—supplies of paper conv2rtible
into "bright shining mettle," which provoke—whilst, like
the wealth of that brewing concern which found a George
Robins in no less a personage than Dr.Johnsoo, " they may
enrich, beyond—the dreams of avarice." Mr. It t-
pallo,—an Italian we baiieve, must have been an
admirer of one of the most serene and consummate
creations of Shakspeare, when he coolly asked this Mr.
Smith, and Mr. Smith—absolutely without any appa-

rent corresponding interest in the affair as coolly con-
sents,—to give him the accommodation of eighty-one
bills of 1,0001. each .a be seems to have laboured in the
very spirit of that reckless knight who said to his Prince
Rob me the Exchequer, Hal!"
And in the emphasis with which he dwells on Mr.
Smith's tenacity and his own precision in replacing the
bills at the stipulated periods he had not forgotten the
( ther part of the injunction
" And do it with clean hands."
TIMES.—We observe in a Morning Journal of
Tuesday, a letter appealing to the public in favour of
the London compositors and pressmen, now, as it as-
serts, suffering under greater distress than has occurred
" during the lngthened period of the art of printing,"
i. e., " about four centuries ;" " and hundreds," it says,
" can attest the fact." The letter itself, as the extract
might lead one to surmise, is of true Radical calibre,
rather bold in its assertions, rather peculiar in its adap-
tation of conclusion to premises, not pointedly accurate
in its English, and even unusually stocked with " ra-
diant beams," " gates of knowledge," " suns of the mo-
ral system," " effulgent " whirlwind moans
of distress," and so on. It states, however, that out
of 2,500 compositors now in London, upwards of 1,300
arc out of work and 500 are not earning more than
10s. a week ; and this, if it is not, like the " fact"
above quoted, a mere random assertion (and the writer
gives his name), must involve most heavy suffering in
the class, not always very provident, to which he be-
longs. It is with mixed feelings that we notice this
statement. Doubtless, if the distress exists as there
described, and we lia%e no reason to doubt it, it has a
powerful claim on our charity ; and we are not unwilling
to hope that its mention in our columns may attract
towards it the notice of those who are ab'e and willing
to assist the sufferers. But, on the other hand, it is
our duty, not lessened. but increased by circumstances to
which we shall immediately allude, to caution those cha-
ritable persons against the particular channel through
which the letter in quest ion proposes that the relief should
flow ; which is a committee of " the trade," i. e.,
the body of compositors and pressmen, organized
at a "general me.ting" had at the Mechanics' Insti-
tution, Southampton-buildings. Now, of these "ge-
neral meetings of the trade at Southamption-buildings,"
we have had some little experience. We have before
us a paper issued by-one of them a few years back,
containing 22 articles, drawn up to serve as a basis
for a general union of the trade, with objects which may
be gathered from the following paragraph :
" To give increased efficiency to the measures of this
body an extensive s.ystent of communication will be esta-
blished with the various societies in the country, so that
the measures of the different provincial societies may at
at all times be forwarded, by the co-operation of the
compositors of the metropolis ; and that the latter in
their turn, may not have (as hitherto) their views
frustrated by the introduction of strangers, unaware of
the causes of their disputes, and who are frequently
lured into engagements by the plausible misrepresenta-
tions of unworthy employers."
And again—Article XII. :
" That as the Trade Council is established for the
purpose of procuring for every compositor such a re-
muneration for his labour as the scale and acknow-
ledged custom warrants, they shall 1)3 empowered to
use all prudent and legal means to obtain the subscrip-
tion of every individual in the trade ; and shall endea-
vour to secure compliance with their decisions, and to
prevent any other person from assuming the right of
deciding the prices of work, or of dictating what course
should he pursued in any dispute with the employers ;
but they shall not levy any subscription (nor permit any
to be levied in their name) except such as have been
previously agreed to by a general or delegated meeting
of the trade."
This union, which had long existed under another
form, was organized as far as London was concerned,
and proceeded to claim absolute jurisdiction in all mat-
ters between employers and employed, dictating to the
one what terms they should give, denouncing the others
if they acceded to any ethers, and establishing itself (as
we have seen) as leader and protector of such "strikes,"
partial or general, as it might deem advisable should
take place. Before it had been established two years
we were favoured with some little specimen of i, s
working, which we suppose may be taken as a
sample of the rest. Some twenty-five )ears previous the
Times had been disohedeint to some regulations or
ether of " the trade." On this had followed, first a
defeated strike, then a general anathema of the office,
the consequence of which was, and is, that any who,
after having worked on uur paper, return to the " book
trade," are, as the trade's own report words it, the sub-
jects of reproach and persecution. We ourselves, in-
deed, did not experience any great embarrassment or
discomfort from this state of hostility, but it must have
operated rather severely upon that class for whose pro-
tection it was enforced, by excluding them from any
share in an establishment considerably larger than any
of its kind in London, and, as the " Trade Council" .'!id
not pretend to deny, notoriously liberal in its payments.
Notoriously liberal, we say, for the following was part
of the exordium of their own manifesto :
" The compositors of the present day are told that
the Times-office is considered unfair, and they know
that those who have worked on that paper are the
subjects of persecution ; but wiry it is closed, and they,
the men, are persecuted, is not known, perhaps, to more
than 200 persons in the whole trade. We have long
been accustomed to hear, at almost every turn, that the
men on the Times are liberally paid for their labour ;'
that hundreds doubt the justice of closing an establish-
tneot which employs more persons than any other daily
journal; and which to many has been represented as a
kind of Valley of Diamonds, in which it Is only neces-
sary to enter in order to secure an ample supply of pre-
sent necessaries, and a handsome competency for old
age. t
" A tedious history," we still say, in the words of the
Council, "of the disputes of the Times-office is not
necessary for our purpose. * * # In 1810, the
Times-office was closed,-and men and boys were em-
ployed upon the paper fora few years, when at length the
house was again opened, and declared fair. But in
1816 the house was again closed, and has never since
been re-opened, Several internal complaints have
caused men at various times to leave, and it is ninetem
years since this house was under the influence of the
trade." * *

Now the said Trade Council, taking all these cir-
cumstances into its consideration, that the sacrifice
was so great to its own proteges, and the offence so
long past, thought it discreet, " in order that igno-
rance of the state and practices of the Times
nearspaper should not: be pleaded in extenuation
by those who hereafter may work upon that journal,
and in order to guide the trade in their decisions upon
the subject ; believing that a knowl.!dge of the vit
will
go far to effect a cure, and t,•usting that the trade will
believe that the efforts of the Trade Council in this
particular result from a sense of duty and love of jus-
tice," to place before the trade the Original cause of
quarrel, and pass resolutions denunciatory of those who
continuel to work with us, after an " attempt at ad-
justment," to the following tune :
" RESOLUTIONS RESPECTING THE MODE
OF WORKING ON THE TIMES NEWS-
PAPER, AGREED TO ON THE 15TH OF
NOVEMBER, 1835.
" 1. That the division of labour on The Times news-
paper into day and nightwork is contrary to the long-esta-
blished practice of the business, and cannot be recog-
nized by the London Union of Compositors.
" 2. That the bookmen having, in 1793, joined with
the newsmen in ejecting apprentices from newspapers,
present employment of them on the Times newspaper
car not be recognised by the London Union of Com-
positors.