The Sun.
London, England, 1841-10-29 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, OCTOBER 29, 184 i

DISTRESS AT BOLTON.
Our readers may remember that Dr. Bowring brought
before the House of Commons, in a discussion on the
Corn-laws, some cases of individual distress at Bolton,
that Sir Robert Peel caused an inquiry to be made into
the circumstances stated by Dr. Bowring, and that on the
report made by the Assistant Poor-law Commissioner
who prosecuted the inquiry, Sir James Graham and Sir
Robert Peel persuaded the House to believe that the
statements made by Dr. Bowring were exaggerated, if
not unfounded. Since the close of Parliament Mr. Com-
missioner Mott's report has been published, and has
been exultingly quoted by the Tories as a floorer for Dr.
Bowring and the Bolton Anti-Corn-law agitators. In
self-vindication the latter have collected evidence on the
subject, and have published the result in a small pam•
phlet. It is impossible for us to give entire Mr. Mott's
report and Mr. Naisby's vindication, but we shall endea-
vour to place the matter fairly before our readers, and
enable them to decide as to the credibility of the two
statements.
Dr. Bowring said in the House of Commons, speaking
on the authority of Mr. Naisby :—" I visited (says the
informant) a man and his wife,'with four children ; I
found two of the children Tying on a piece of straw,
without any covering. I went up stairs, and found the
father dead on the boards, without bedding or bed. His
wife told me that the day before he died he wished for a
little bread and cheese, but in vain. The neighbours
said he had died for want of food." Another wretched
case.—" A man, his wife, and two daughters (it is a
Guardian of the Poor who speaks) lived in a cellar, the
wife and daughters out of work ; this man earned about
four shillings per week by weaving ; I was fetched by
the neighbours, who told me the man had died of hun-
ger ; I found him lying dead on one of the looms ; they
had neither bed nor bedding. I caused a Jury to be
summoned; their verdict was, Died for want of food."'
He felt a difficulty in selecting cases from the many
mournful examples he held in his hand. His correspondent
had been called to visit a family which he was informed
was in a state of starvation. He found the father had
just sold all he had to pay his rent, and had removed,
with his family, to his father's, whither he followed him,
and found the man, his wife, and four children ; another
brother, his wife, and three children ; a third brother,
his wife, and one child, all the men out of work—all the
women far advanced in pregnancy, in a house four-and-a
half yards square ; they all slept in a room above of the
same size, and lay upon little but straw.
THE CASE OP JAMES PEARCE.—We shall follow Mr.
Mott, in speaking of this case first. Into 1)r. Bowring's
statement, Mr. Mott was deputed to inquire, and ac-
cordingly he went to Bolton, where he appears to have
remained one day. "I found," he says, " that the case
in which it was represented that a Coroner's Inquest
had given a verdict of Died for want of food,' was that
of William Pearce. With regard to this case no ver-
dict was given by a Coroners jury." How Mr. Mott
found this out, seventeen months after the evept, does
not appear. He ascertained that Mr. Taylor, the Coro-
ner for the borough, had held no inquest ; but Mr. Mott
admits that Mr. Rutter, the Coroner for the county, and a
Coroner's jury went to the house of W. Pearce; but Mr. Rut-.
ter was then satisfied, says Mr. Mott, "that the circum-
stances under which Pearce died were not such as to require
an investigation by a Coroner's jury. Mr. Mott might have
obtained Mr. Rutter's attestation of the fact, as he ob-
tained Mr. Taylor's certificate, and not having obtained
it, Mr. Mott's assertion wants the support of evidence
which might have been easily produced. Mr. Naisby
states that the circumstances were inquired into by a Co-
roner's jury, and that " one of the jury called upon me
the day the inquest was held, knowing I had taken an
active part in getting an inquest over the body, and
stated they had returned a verdict—Died from want of
food; and as a proof that that was the impression of the
jury, Mr. Staton, reporter for the Bolton Chronicle, who
was one of the jury, stated at the Guardian meeting on
Friday, the 10th of September last, in reply to a question
from a Guardian, That he was on the jury, and they re-
turned a verdict of—Died from want of food. "Phis
proves that the jury were of that opinion, whether the
Coroner recorded the verdict or not. No one ever
thought of disputing that the man died from want of
food."
On this part of the case it is clear that there was
an investigation, and that the jury came to a decision,
which decision appears not to have been recorded, a
loose mode of practice, which perhaps explains why Mr.
Rutter was not called on to state the particulars of the
case from his official records. Dr. Bowring and Mr.
Naisby were wrong as to the verdict, but the important
inquiry is whether the death of Wm. Pearce was caused
by destitution and starvation. Mr. Mott's report runs thus :
—" I visited the house in Howell's Croft, and examined
the widow, Ellen Pearce, and the statement made by
her would certainly not justify the charge of her hus-
band's having died of want of food. She informed me
that her husband died in the month of February, 1840,
being above a year and a half ago ; that he was 65
years of age ; that he had been ill 18 weeks ; that he
had plenty of work when he could do it; that he had
worked at intervals during that time, and that herself
and two daughters were fully employed, and were earn-
ing together about 9s. 6d. per week at the time of her
husband's death ; that he had not applied for relief, for
they were comfortable then.'"
For this assertion Mr. Mott has the widow's evidence,
and the negative statement of several guardians and
relieving officers that they knew of no such cases. He
also has the registered certificate of Pearce's death, at
65 years of age, from gradual decay. At the same time
he admits, that after such a length of time " it is difficult
for persons to recollect the particulars of the case."
Difficult therefore for Mr. Mott to collect evidence from
other persons than those who noted the case at the time,
and recorded their impressions, but not difficult fur
them. Now their statements are to the following effect:
—" Thomas Bradshaw deposes as follows—l was elected
relieving officer to the Relief Fund Society on the 22d
of February last year. On the Sunday following my
appointment to such office, I was waited on by Mr. Coop,
comb-maker, of Great Bolton, who stated that a man
residing near his house was starving to death—this
would be about eight o'clock in the evening. Mr. Coop
requested that I would immediately go and see him. I
did so. And when I got to the place alluded to by Mr.
Coop, I found Mrs. Coop there, and the man dead. I
was informed he had been dead about a quarter of an
hour. I felt the corpse, and it was still warm. I noticed
the cellar to be in a very wretched state. Through the
wall of the back part of the cellar I perceived dirty
filthy water oozing through the crevices of the bricks,
which I afterwards found proceeded from a midden-
stead adjoining the cellar. There was a nauseous smell,
and which I considered very unhealthy. All the furni-
ture in the cellar was a small three-legged table, an old
chair with scarcely any bottom ; and a three-legged
stool, such as children use ; there was a small bed-
stead, on which was placed some sacking, containing
shavings ; the shavings were quite visible through
the sacking. There was no covering. The bed was
quite wet with damp, and stunk with filth ; so much so,
that I gave orders to have it burned ;_ which, I believe,
was done after deceased was buried. The corpse of
Pearce lay on a loom, without any covering, but
Mrs. Coop lent them a pair of sheets. The value of the
furniture altogether, I should consider, would not fetch
2s. if sold. I asked the woman and her daughters whether
they had any food. They said, " They had not tasted
that day." I went to my house, and brought them a
quantity of broth, which they all devoured very vora-
ciously. I was in the cellar whilst they partook of it,
and one of the daughters, immediately after she had taken
of it, began to vomit very much, which I attributed to
an excess of appetite, and being kept without food so long
previously. I may add, that previously to partaking of
the broth, they began to quarrel amongst themselves
which had the greatest portion. I reported the case, and
they were duly relieved. On the Tuesday following,
the Committee sat, and they were ordered to be relieved.
I now refer to the book in which the Distressed Cases'
are entered, and I find that they were relieved with a
grant of three shillings per week. I find the following
entry, Pearce, Ellen, widow, Howell-croft, to receive 3s.
per week for an unlimited period ; and the following entry
in the remarks, Husband supposed to have died from
want.' "
James Webster, a town missionary al Bolton, who
received information that Pearce had died from want,
went to his house on the 24th of February, and his
evidence precisely confirms that of Mr. Bradshaw. The
case is entered on the Benevolent Society's books, as in
the books of the Relief Fund Society, " Died for Want
of Food."
Nancy Beswick, who had known Pearce for four years
before his death, makes a similar statement, and con-
firms the destitution of the Pearces by many particulars.
We will quote a portion of her evidence
About three weeks previous to the death of Pearce
I stood against my own door-step and saw Pearce com-
ing towards my house. There are three steps up to my
house. He looked very wan, and pale as death, and was
so weakly that to get on to my house floor he had to go
down on his hands and knees and creep up. He had
been in the habit of weaving for us some months before,
and I had missed him for a month about the day I am
now speaking of. When he got in he said, Nancy, do,
bless you, make a sup of tea. for I am dying for want.'
I made him some tea and a little toast, and he devoured
it very greedily. When he had done it, he told me all
that he had had for three or four weeks back ; he had
had nothing but a basin of gruel per day to subsist upon.
In about a quarter of an hour after the old man had had
the tea he was seized with sickness, and I had to obtain
the assistance of neighbours, for I thought he was dying.
We reared him up in chairs with pillows, and in about
three-quarters of an hour he came round. I then asked
him why he clammed himself to such a degree, and he said
as he did not belong to Bolton he could not get relief. He
pulled tap his trousers and showed me his legs, and they
appeared nothing but skin and bone, and it was frightful
to see him. He was taken home by my husband, and
I and. his wife went to the Overseers' office to represent
the case to them. We saw Bridge, the assistant to the
Relieving Officer, and told him the case, and he was very
saucy, and said we had better mind our own business.
I gave in the name of Pearce to the officer myself, for
although his wife was present when the officer asked her
husband's name she could not tell, and desired me to do so.
The officer said he would visit the case, but whether he
ever did so or not I never ascertained, and I never heard
anything more until about three weeks afterwards, which
was that he was dead. I heard this the same night that
he died, and went to the cellar. I there found them in a
most shocking state, and the cellar smelled so much that
I could not remain in it. He was laid out on the loom,
with a sheet over him. I noticed in the back cellar there
was a sewer, or midden channel, ran through, and the
floor was covered with nauseous filth and water. All
the goods in the house were a broken three-legged table,
a stool, chair, and the bed, made of sacking, without
covering. I went again on the Monday morning, and
turned down the sheet to look at the corpse, and there
were hundreds of creeping filth upon him. I pointed out
the filth to his wife, and she appeared to be quite vacant.
William Coop's evidence is precisely to the same
effect,
hct,me.eoMonpltehteelyone handcorro corroborating
tingthat
testimonyo
of Mr. Bforuardsahpro..
We .
rently disinterested witnesses to the shocking destitution

-•Utbia -..E CENSUS OF 1841.
PIRE.
INro LATION OF ME BRITISH
E"just been
,toNivrt,t_ the results of the census which haz:ire
at Bri-
4kttrST it appears that the
of 27 o'niteland in the present year amounts to upwards, .11g.
population of
f,'''"llo.s:t-h-wite°llo of 'souls. The return for the three %
as
*Tio% uftunel Islands, and the Isle of Man, 1
••-....
ieZtalinitanTiduidll-
Jersey,d..alee: n:d......3.1. Sian
Guernsey,

.... 15,901,981
.... 2.624,586
.... 8,203,382
124,079

Thig i, T0ta1......
merchant
41,,lenekelusive of the army and andnavy,.
abroad, or
?lot ondail°at, and of all persons travelling 26,856,028
taf,. th_ et a roof en the night of the sth of June. Includ-
taken at
27,000" e elasss,the population may be safely
1841. Mu% whieh is an increase of about 2,000,000 since
i.leNnaelnftto this
.is added the population of the colonies
of of
thell this country, it wilt be found that the 13
that
ofittl i 3 this
Crown are more numerous than
of ?: other civilized monarchy or republic on the
Nssibele Zl°l3e. After making every allowance t for
q th - exaggeration or uncertainty in the accounts
face_o
tafek eln or Australian population, we maye_
nisi saY that her Majesty Queen Victoriais the soy n
of thet3ifi a hundred millions of subjects—a larger porutiroo.
Pttit s "'lan race than has ever obeyed any one E
the (Iverein since the downfal of the Roman empire.
AkitPri°Pulation of the other great Powers of Europe and
of wv, 4at the present time is pretty nearly as follows,.o
44'°'11 the
thirty millions may be of the Russia..
Itlaci,4" the rest a mixed multitude of Cossacks, Cal
1,4 ;Tartars, and other wandering tribes, or of Poles,
Ilelitla.ni.4ll3, or Caucasian mountaineers, bitterly hostwilea.to.
hqt follr'4ans, and either in open insurrection, or onlyo .
010 t ,
011,41, an opportunity of being so :—France, 35, 00 0
the t"11' 33,000,000 are Frenchmen in the proper sense of
l'iats .111' and about 2 000 000 Algerine or French colo-
II le the Webt Indies 'Cayenne, Senegal, the Isle of
ci'll'hoo
0%,,ci
~, and l'ondicher'ry • Austria, 30,000,000,11 .
vrassi°,,l ernlana, Hungaria'ns, Italians, and IYricaan_a !
m th"'„,.bout 14,000,000 to 15,000,000 of GF.T..nwoi.
the A., united States, 14,000,000 of freemen, chiefly
,14,;.8,iig10-Sxon race and 3,000,000 ofnegroes, chiefly
--Liverpoo/ Time
Nl)l4iriT ------'4.-------_____
N, M.D.
**--Are —or DR. WILLIAM Borro
tkiif 1 regret to have to announce the demise of this
arid 14', Prattioner. He was a man of considerable talent
of Ileliassie attainment, and was deputed by the College
tfa%Zi_3'sicians to deliver the " Herveyan Oration" at the
a(.l iiang fneeting of that institution. e ied on n
Of severe of an affection of the
heart, after d several days
te
atiffering, and in the 54th year 91 his age.

Vicar of this parish, is the president, end the Rev. J. S
Birley, Vice-President, in which the° following important
information appears:—` Number of individual* consti-
tuting the families of applicants, 2,656 ; eTsrar income
per week, ls. 22d.; average income per week of part es
relieved, 1041 d."
We leave these matters to =he their own imgession
on the minds of the people.

of the family, and we have on the other the denial of the
wife, who insists that they were comfortable before her
husband died, and the negative evidence of some G uardians.
But if the family had any earnings, as Mr. Mott states they
had, it would be a terrible reproach to the widow had her
husband died of want, and she not given him relief, or,
wanting the means, had not sought out the proper quarter
for assistance. She had strong motives for making out
a case in her own favour, and we consider, therefore, not•
withstanding her assertion, and the certificate of death
which proceeded from her, that the balance of testimony
justifies the assertion that Wm. Pearce died from starvation.
Dr. Bowring and Mr. Naisby spoke the strict truth, except
as to the doubtful circumstance of the verdict. At the
same time the death of an aged man, surrounded by a
family, whom all the witnesses describe as of weak in-
tellect, and rendering him no assistance,is no evidence what-
ever of the working of either the Corn-law or the Poor-
law, and ought never to have been quoted in Parliament.
In all individual cases so much depends on the
character and prudence of the individual, that it is very
rarely such cases can be adduced as a general rule, or as
illustrating a law.
JAMES BRISTOL.—The next case, that of James Bris-
tol, does not seem to us to afford any contradiction. Mr.
Mott's statement is this :
" This man emigrated with his family from Alton
Priors, in Wiltshire, in 1836. He was then 35 years of
age, and his wife, Ann, was also About the same age.
They had six children, three of whom were of suitable
ages for the factory work. He did not emigrate through
the agency of your Board, and consequently had some
difficulty in procuring work. Such a family would,
through the migration agency, have obtained employ-
ment for a period of five years, at not less than 30s. per
week ; but James Bristol could only procure work for
himself. and engaged with a master at 15s. per week.
The relieving officer, Mr. Brown, states, that he was
applied to by Bristol's family, some months before his
death ; that the Guardians ordered him to be relieved
with 2s. 6d. per week for four weeks, and reported his
case to the parish to which the family belonged ; that
an answer was received, refusing to allow him out-
relief, but offering to take him and his family back ;
that he communicated this to James Bristol, and they
did not apply again ; that he afterwards met with an
accident in his master's employment, which rendered him
incapable of working, and reduced him and his family
to great distress."
The widow's statement is as follows:
" Ann Bristol says—My husband died about two years
ago. I recollect, when he was laid out dead, Mr. Naisby
then coming to visit us. My husband was laid out on
the necessary door, up stairs, covered over with a sheet,
which a neighbour had lent us. I was lame myaelf at
the time, and could not walk. My child was blind at
the time, having the St. Anthony's Fire: she was then
nearly sixteen years of age. I had another daughter,
very ill also, aged about thirteen years. I had four
other children besides, the eldest of which was nearly
eighteen years of age, the next nine years of age, the
next seven years of age, and the other four years old;
altogether I had six children. For three weeks pre-
vious to my husband's death we had nothing but three
shillings per week coming in; and we had to live some-
times on potatoes, sometimes on porridge; but had only
one meal a day, which we generally made about four
o'clock in the afternoon. I think it was for a fortnight
that we had to confine ourselves to one meal a day,
sometimes having porridge and sometimes potatoes.
When Mr. Naisby found us in this state, we got more
food, otherwise I believe I should have lost more of my
children, for we had got as far distressed as we well
could be to be alive. About five months previous to my
husband's death I had a child sucking, which died; and
I feel sure that its death was occasioned by my not being
able to give it suck, for want of sustenance. I had no
bed, bedding, or anything whereon to lay, when Mr.
Naisby visited us. I had only a stool whereon to sit, for
myself. I had no shop where I could get provisions at :
they all refused to give me credit. My husband wished
for a bit of cheese and bread, the day before he died,
but I was unable to procure him any."
It is confirmed by the statement of Betty Brown,
which we quote for the illustration it affords of the ter-
rible condition of the poor at Bolton :
" Betty Brown says, I knew the last witness's husband
previous to his death, also all the family for about two
years. At the time of the death of Bristol, I laid him
out, on the top of a necessary door. I assisted to undress
him, he having died with his clothes on, in which he had
lain for many weeks, having nothing besides to keep him
warm ; when I cut his trowsers legs and stocking legs
open, there were large quantities of creeping filth, which
had eaten quite into the flesh, and his legs were nothing but
putridflesh and scabs. He had nothing but straw to lie
upon, which was spread on the floor. One of her chil-
dren had the St. Anthony's Fire, and the rest were all
more or less very sickly and bad. They all slept together
in one room, and the wife of Bristol had a great hole in
her leg, and could not walk or assist her husband ; but
after she had received relief and had got bedding, she
began to come round. I recollect Mr. Naisby coming
down, when Bristol was laid out on the necessary door,
and I then told him the man had died for want, and I
know such to be the case."
THE KIRKMANS' CASE.—On the third case, that of the
Kirkmans, there is too little difference of statement to
require an observation. It is admitted on both sides
that the Kirkmans were crowded into a small room, that
they were bricklayers out of work, and that when their
condition was known to the guardians of the poor they
were relieved. We agree with Mr. Mott that the case
does not imply "inattention to the wants of the necessi-
tous poor." On the whole we conclude that Mr. Molt's
report confirms all the material points of Mr. Naisby's and
Dr. Bowring's statement, except that a verdict, in the
case of Pearce, was recorded that he died of starvation.
The substance was there, the form was wanting.
We cannot, however, close our remarks without ad-
verting to Mr. Mott and his employers. In the debate
Sir Robert Peel made a remark which threw the blame,
if any, of the miseries which Dr. Bowring had detailed
on the mode in which the Poor-law was administered.
A Poor-law Commissioner was sent to inquire into it,
and his great object throughout obviously was to exone-
rate the administration of the Poor-law from any im-
putation of not attending to the wants of the necessitous
poor. The Learned Commissioner kept this object in view,
throughout his brief and hurried investigation, and en-
deavoured to make out a case favourable to the Poor-law.
It does not inspire us with any confidence in his impar-
tiality, when we find, at the commencement of his re-
port, these remarks, which had no relation whatever to
the case in hand, in which, according to his own state-
ment, no verdict was recorded :
" It is to be lamented that verdicts should be given,
implying such an awful neglect of •duty as that of al-
lowing a fellow-creature to die of want, without the
most satisfactory corroborative evidence A
case has recently occurred in Manchester, where the
verdict of the Coroner's Jury, on the body of a poor
woman, was Died of diseased lungs, and other parts,
and want of food.' The relieving officer had received
no notice of the inquest, and the Coroner, on being ap-
plied to by the officer to offer an explanation, admitted that,
had his evidence been received on the inquest, the Jury
could not have returned such a verdict. In the town of
Liverpool, last year, no less than seven different verdicts
by Coroners' Juries declared the persons to have ' Died
from want of the common necessaries of life.' On in-
vestigation it turned out that, in five cases out of seven,
money was found on the person ; and one was the case of
a young man of wild, dissipated habits, who was at the
time of his death, and had been for some weeks pre-
viously, living with his father, a respectable man, at
Liverpool, and in neither case had any application been
made to the parochial authorities for assistance."
Mr. Mott, then, begun his investigation in the spirit of
fiercely repelling imputations on the administration of
the Poor-laws, and that spirit he carried through-
out. He is a partisan, not an impartial judge ;
and if there were any need, which there is not,
to doubt on the subject, we should at once
conclude that Mr. Mott was not to be trusted. Prompted
more by zeal than by his instructions, he went out of
his way to make comparisons between the number of
houses built at Bolton and the number required, and to
satisfy his Corn-law employers, made the hardy asser-
tion that " there are now 3,456 more houses in Bolton
than the number required." But Mr. Mott proves by
his observations that the people of Bolton are badly
lodged. In every one of the three cases quoted, the
people had most miserable accommodation. To provide
the inhabitants of Bolton with better lodgings is a
praiseworthrspecielation. By what rule could builders
guide their operations ? In the year 1837 there was
great prosperity in the manufacturing districts ; and the
builders, having no more prescience than lawmakers, did
not foresee the distress that was to come in 1838, 1839,
and 1840. They followed the only practicable rule they
could have for their conduct—the progressive increase of
the population, in numbers and wealth prior to 1837,
in constructing houses in the following years. That
those houses are not wanted, according to Mr.
Mott, is a proof of the fatal stop which
has been put to the prosperity of Bolton.
Instead of Mr. Mott reporting to his employers that
there were too many houses in Bolton, he ought to have
reported that the prosperity of the town had received a
severe blow, as was proved by numberless untenanted
tenements, while the wretched inhabitants were living in
cellars beneath dunghills, and exposed to the dripping of
the most noisome fluids into their damp and cheerless
dwellings.
The partiality and ignorance of Mr. Mott being made
plain on the face of the report, we cannot give Sir
James Graham and Sir Robert Peel any approbation for
the confidence they placed in it. For the Tury Journals,
more eager to take an advantage than to weigh testi-
mony, Mr. Mott's report is a most acceptable document ;
but Ministers of the Crown should have some respect
for their office and character, if they have none for their
opponents ; and they should, in quoting Mr. Mott's re-
port, have warned the House and the public that it was
a partial defence of the Poor-law administration. They,
however, quoted the report in a partial manner,
and produced the impression that Mr. Naisby
and Dr. Bowring exaggerated the distress at Bol-
ton. The loathsome statements we have copied, and
Mr. Mott's unoccupied houses, teach a very different
lesson. The scenes described by the evidence of Nancy
Beswick and Betty Brown are such, till we read their po-
sitive testimony, as we supposed were never to be seen in
Christian England. We hope that evidence, loathsome
though it be, will be read, and that the rich and the
noble, and particularly the ladies and clergy of England,
will feel it their duty to remedy the evils brought to
light. If the ladies of England be not lost to the feel-
ings of womanhood, they will never allow their husbands
fathers, and brothers to have any rest till those
laws be abolished, which degrade the condition
of the people of England to the level of that of the Hot-
tentots. Mr. Naisby's pamphlet concludes by the following
reference to the present condition of the people at Bolton
" It may be said that these cases having occurred some
time ago, that distress is not so great in Bolton at pre-
sent. On that subject I beg to refer to a report which
has been published and circulated in Bolton, within the
last ten days, by the Committee of the Society for the
Protection of the Poor, of which the Rey. J. Slade,

IRELAND.
DUBLIN, OCT. 26.—The weekly meeting of Repealers
took place to-day in the Corn Exchange, ➢lr. DZ•Clelland
in the chair. _ . .

When Mr. O'Connell entered the meeting, which was
very numerously attended, he was loudly cheered as the
new Mayor. Amongst those near the Chair was an
eastern Prince, attired in the costume peculiar to his
country, whose appearance attracted much attention. His
name is Conaschi Courzetchelli, and he is about to visit
from Am
enclosing 401. ;from Quebec,ria
were
enclosing
—from Brooklyn,
5a
Mr. O'CONNELL moved the insertion on the minutes
of the document from Canada, and expressed his de-
light that the Canadians could be admitted to mem-
bership in that Association, as they were British
subjects. Their American friends, although not ad-
missible as members, could co-operate with Ireland by
sympathy, by their contributions, and by forming public
opinion in their favour. As a British legislator, he had
always voted against every oppression sought to be in-
flicted on Canada, and in favour of any measure brought
forward', for her relief, but the moment her inhabi-
tants had the folly anti wickedness to resort to arms, he
ceased to interest him-self in their behalf. Had they
kept within the limits of the law they must have been
successful, but when they attempted force they found the
British too powerful with bayonet and cannon, and were
ut down as they deserved to be. His secret was to be
always in the right, and never to violate the law.—
(Cheers.) He was, therefore, glad of the opportunity of
making a marked distinction between the maniac strug-
gles of Papineau and the peaceful agitation in which he
(Mr. O'Connell) was engaged.—(Hear, hear.)
Two other communications from America were then
read by the Secretary ; one from Philadelphia remit-
ting 2001., the other from Boston enclosing 1001., which
were received with vehement cheering.
Mr. O'CONNELL said, that he would close the corres-
pondence from America for that day by reading a letter
from Judge Doran, of America, and he pledged himself
that one of the first letters which he would despatch from
the Mayoralty-house would be one in reply to him.—
(Cheers.) The generous sympathy of their friends in
America overpowered him, and he wanted language to
express his gratitude. They had received by that day's
post no less a sum than 350 i. ; and it was not, therefore,
surprising, that grateful thankfulness to America for
munificent contributions should be the prevailing senti-
ment throughout Ireland.—(Cheers.) He sincerely
hoped that nothing would occur to sever the bonds now
existing between Irishmen and Americans, and that the
" vexed spirits" at both sides of the Atlantic would be
quelled by their mutual good sense. He had read with
the deepest horror and disgust a paragraph in the Times,
in which the writer had the audacity to threaten the
great American nation. He had the unpardonable
impudence and audacity to strive to 'bully and terrify
a people amounting in number to 17,000,000. What
was this writer's object ?—evidently to foment a war be-
tween the two countries.—(Hear, hear.) It was a most
traitorous document—injurious to the country—men-
acing blood and war—dangerous to the throne, and
inimical to national liberty throughout the world. Was
the man insane enough to fancy that his paper thunder
could terrify the noble American people ? He might
as well think of frightening soldiers with a pop-gun, or
beating back a regiment of grenadiers with the squeak-
ing of a child's penny trumpet.—(Laughter and cheers.)
There was se pride about republicanism— for the Repub-
lican had no master—which was apt to be exaggerated
and to lean to irritation and excitement. This the Times
knew well, and intended nothing but mischief in sup-
porting the Tories by articles like that to which he re-
ferred. However, they would meet with no sympathy from
Irishmen. Irishmen would never enter into an insulting
crusade against the Americans. They would continue to
obey the law and support the Throne ; but at the same
time, and above all, they would hold a firm attitude of
defiance towards that miscreant faction the Tories, and
their lying, villanous, and insulting organ, and show that
the harmony between Britain and America could not be
disturbed. Was it not enough that the Tories had a pre-
ponderating influence in both Houses, and controlled
the Queen—a power obtained by depriving the operative
of cheap bread; by giving the aristocrat two slices of the
loaf without reserving a morsel for the poor man? Was
England insane? Was her destruction coming on, and
was that insanity indicative of her approaching dissolu-
tion? He hoped sincerely that the omen might be false,
and concluded by moving the insertion of the letters from
America on the minutes.
Several communications having been read,
Mr. O'CONNELL again rose, and said, that he should
move that the meeting at its rising should adjourn until
that day week, because on Monday they would be en-
gaged in electing the new Lord Mayor.—(Cheers.) He
congratulated the citizens on the triumph which had
been achieved, and announced that out of fifteen Wards,
the Radicals had obtained eleven. With regard to the
triumph they obtained, he called on his fellow-citizens
to rejoice and be glad.—(Cheers.) They had cause, but
still though the old Corporation was the most robbing,
jobbing, peculating one that ever existed, they would
forgive them now—they would bury it in the "Devil's
Pit," where the Tipperary boys buried the tithes—they
were gone, joy be with them.—(Laughter.) There ho
was now Alderman of two Wards—(Cheers)—and
Member for two counties ; but what he liked best—there
he was a Repealer.—(Cheers.) But the most disgraceful
means were employed against them. Some said, " Vote
for the Government candidates ;" others said, " Will you
vote for the Papists ;" and Mr. Alexander Ferrier moved
the influence of the Bank of Ireland against them. They
threatened, bribed, worried, vexed, harrassed, and yet
they were defeated, and he would be the first Magis-
trate in the first City of his native country, and he would
use his best exertions to be patient and impartial
in
performing the duties of his new office—in exercising it
with a total absence of sectarian or party strife or fa-
vouritism—and with the sole view of lessening the bur-
thens and increasing the franchise of his fellow-citizens.
—(Cheers.) No person should expect of him to show
favouritism to cast or creed. He loved his friends--he
forgave his enemies, and he never was in better humour
to forgive them than at present.
The meeting was adjourned to this day week.

SHERIFFS' COURT, OCT. 28.
WOODING V. DAVISON.
This was an action brought for the recovery of the
amount of a bill of exchange for 15/. which was al-
lodged to have been accepted by the plaintiff who was a
Trinity House pilot.
Mr. BOVEN stated the case for the plaintiff, and called
several wimesses, who proved that the endorsement
on the bill, executing the acceptance, was in the defend-
ant's hand-writing.
Mr. CHADWICK JONES, who appeared for the defence,
cross-examined the witnesses at great length, when they
admitted having heard the defendant accuse a person
named Jones, who was his brother-in-law, and was under
trial at the Central Criminal Court on a charge of
felony, of having frequently forged his name to Bills of
exchange ; and called witnesses in proof of this, wital
the Jury returned a verdict for the defendant.

me in the morning. Nothing more passed relating to
his wife.
By the COURT—He seemed in good spirits.
John Charles Davis--I am a cutler living in Aldgate.
A person, I believe to be the prisoner, came into my
father's shop at about one o'clock on the 21st September.
Mr. C. Pitman's objected to this evidence being gone
into, as the witness could not swear to the prisoner.
Lord ABINGER supposed all he could say was that a
person had purchased a knife.
Mr. PAYNE would not press the point.
The witness then withdrew.
Thomas Quinlan—l am a private watchman in East-
cheap. On the night of the 21st of September I met the
prisoner at about five minutes before ten; his hands were
in his pockets, he said Good night. At ten I saw him
again, and he asked me if I should be back in
five minutes. I said, I hope so; anti in about two minutes
after I was called to the King's Head by a potboy. I saw
a man lying at the front of the bar. He was not dead
then. I saw two ladies in the bar.
James Jarvis—l am a porter in Fenchurch-street. I
was in the parlour of the King's Head on the night
of the 21st of September. I heard a scream, went
into the bar, and saw Mr. Burden staggering. I un-
derstood him to call for a doctor. I remained with
him until one came. I saw deceased fall.
Eliza Burdon—l am the widow of the deceased James
Burden. He was 38 years of age. He kept the
King's Head, Eastcheap. I saw the prisoner there on
the night of Tuesday, 21st September. I was sitting in
the bar with my sister. I know the prisoner, that mur-
derer.—(Here the witness became much affected, and the
prisoner sobbed audibly.) My husband was sitting
asleep. A table was near him. I heard a step coming,
and saw Blakesley. He sprang to my sister, and saying,
"My wife or my life," stabbed her in the right side. My
sister was his wife. He then turned round and stabbed
my husband when he was asleep in his chair. He had a
knife in his hand. He then attempted to stab me, but my
sister prevented him. He then went out of the bar with the
knife in his hand streaming with blood. My sister and
my husband followed him as far as the bar door, and my
husband reeled against a dresser, and I heard him say,
What is the matter. The prisoner turned round with the
knife in his hand and looked at them; he came back
half way across the passage, threw the knife down, and
went out of the house. I never saw the prisoner after.
My husband fell down, and we sent for Mr. Smith, the
surgeon. My husband died shortly after. He had a silk
pocket handkerchief over his face when he was asleep.
Cross-examined by Mr. BODKIN—We were sitting
inside the counter. A person coming in would have to
walk the leng;:i e: the counter to get to us. He had
passed round the counter when I first saw him. I was
sitting on one side of the table and my husband on the
other. I had
-spoken to my husband about five minutes
before he was awake. Not half a minute elapsed after
he came in before he stabbed my sister. My attention
was directed to the prisoner. I can swear my husband
did not rise up before he was stabbed. The knife was
thrown away by the prisoner outside the counter, but
my sister went and picked it up and threw it in the in-
side. I never mentioned this before, for I was never
asked. I think he held it in the left hand. I did not
see him attempt to inflict any wound upon himself.
Daniel O'Connell—l live in Fenchurch-street. I was in
the parlour of the Kings Head on the evening in ques-
tion. Shortly after 10 o clock I heard a shriek in the bar.
I went into the bar and saw two females standing, one
lying over the bar, and Mrs. Burdon was coming out
after her husband. Mr. Burdon was standing just out-
side the bar, he fell against me, and that broke his fall.
The police came directly. Jarvis was there by nay side.
James Croft—l was pot-boy at the King's Head. I
heard a scream on the night in question, and ran to the
bar from the tap room. I saw prisoner going to the door
with a knife in his hand, he came back and tossed the
knife outside the bar. I fetched the doctor. Mr. Burdon
was standing outside the bar.
Cornelius Smith, surgeon, in Gracechurch-street, saw
deceased lying on his hack on the night in question in
the bar; he died in about a minute after I arrived. I
found a wound in his abdomen one inch and a half in
length, and half an inch in breadth ; it was a gaping
wound. The intestines were protruding, the instrument
had penetrated five inches into the cavity of the abdo-
men ; a knife might have inflicted it.
James Bradley—l am Sergeant in the City Police. I
was called in to the King's Head, Eastcheap, on the night
in question. I found the knife produced in the bar ;
this was at ten minutes past ten. There was blood on
it. I went in search of the prisoner, but did not find him.
Mr. Smith recalled—such a knife as that produced
would inflict the wound.
Mr. Davis recalled—This is the knife I sold on the
morning in question. I sharpened the knife at the back
as well as at the front at the request of the prisoner,
who purchased it. No one was in the shop when pri-
soner purchased the knife, but two men passed through
while he was there.
Thomas Dunn—l am a policeman of the Hertfordshire
constabulary ; I apprehended the prisoner at Hitchin.
Pilgate, a policeman, and myself saw him loitering
about the market-place. I said, "It's a fine night ;"
he said, "I am almost mad." I asked if we could ren-
der him any assistance ; he said, " I suppose you have
heard of the dreadful circumstance in London." ' I said,
" Murdering the landlord and your wife ?" He said,
" Yes." I took him to the station ;he went to sleep, and
frequently awoke, exclaiming " That scream ! that
scream !" He said, " I did not intend to murder Mr. Bur-
den. If he had not got between my wife and myself,
he would not have been hurt. I intended to kill my wife
first, and then myself." I frequently cautioned him.
Mr. PAYNE said this was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. C. PHILLIPS, for the defence, said that as the cir-
cumstances of the case would be likely to become the
matter of investigation, he had no discretion as to the
facts he should lay before the Jury. The facts were too
clear, for him to attempt to deny what had been set
forth in evidence. It appeared that his wife had been
detained from him by Burden, why did not appear. He did
not attempt to argue that this detention of his wife was
justification for the crime ,- but let them look at the
effects of that detention. The prisoner was attached to
his wife. This detention was sufficient to drive the
prisoner mad according to his own statement, and
he would put it to the jury, whether his con-
duct throughout was not that of a madman.
His telling the police that he could have shot Burdon ;
his whole conduct showed that he was goaded to mad-
ness; and like all madmen, the first object which he
attacked was the woman he most dearly loved. Did not
his whole conduct prove that he was not in his proper
mind ? He should show that the prisoner's mind was
naturally one which being excited would be driven to
madness ; and then he would ask if some interposition
ought not to take place to prevent this dreadful occur-
rence being consummated by one still more dreadful ?
He should show that he wandered from his home for days
without being able to give the slightest reason for his
conduct. It would be shown that he had set up a brew-
ing business without any knowledge of the business, and
without connection. The Learned Counsel then went
on to give some particulars, which he stated lie
should prove in evidence. All these were marks of an
intellect so feeble, that cruelty would be likely to drive
it to madness. On another occasion, he had
attempted to enter into an agreement to set up as a
baker at Foot's Cray, for the purpose of supplying Lon-
don with bread. When the matter was explained to the
solicitor, the agreement was cancelled. On another oc-
casion he had fancied he had a large interest in coaches.
He represented himself to his wife as a man of property,
and said his guardian was living at Enfield.
When they went to Enfield, of course they found
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. it a delusion ; and when Burdoa stated so to
Yesterday being appointed for the trial of Robert
the prisoner, he went into a convulsion of rage, ran off
and was ultimately found at Gravesend. Was it impro-
Blakesley, charged with the wilful murder of Mr. James gable that the refusal to restore his wife, and the in-
Burden, the Court was crowded to excess at a very
suiting denial of all knowledge of him, should have
early hour. driven a man with such a mind to desperation? Was
Mr. Sergeant ARABIN took his seat upon the Bench at it right in Mr. Burden thus to have held him up to the
nine o'clock, when oliceman as an impostor? He hoped he should
Robert Blakesley was placed at the bar to p!ead to the
indictment, charging him with stabbing Sarah Blakesley, not be misunderstood—he derst did not give these as
ood—he
instances ofinsanity, but as indicative of such
with intent to murder her. The prisoner, who was
a state of mind as might be driven to insanity
dressed in mourning, pleaded not guilty. His demeanour
by the extreme cruelty that had been practised on him.
was firm and decorous, without the slightest appearance He e
would not trespass further on their time, but would
of levity. He was then removed. sit down, satisfied that their verdict would be at all
(Before Lord ABINGER and Mr. Baron GURNEY.)
events just, and if possible merciful. He then called
James On the arrival of the Judges, the prisoner was again Blakesley, the prisoner's father, who seemed
placed at the bar, for the purpose of taking his trial on
much affected ; the prisoner also appeared quite con-
the indictment for the murder of James Burdon, to vulsed. The witness—l am prisoner's father. lam a
which he pleaded Not Guilty yesterday. Blackwell Hall factor. Prisoner had a very bad illness
Mr. PAYNE, in stating the case for the prosecution be- when between four and five years old. He was subject
sought the Jury to dismiss from their minds all they to paralysed limbs ever afterwards. He would drop
might have heard on the subject, and to come to the -de-
down, and lose the use of his limbs for
cision as to the guilt or innocence of the prisoner with-
hours. He has not been subject to attacks in the
out prejudice. The Learned Counsel having stated the
limbs since he has grown up. We have always consi.
facts of the case, called the following witnesses. I dered and treated him as weak and foolish. You could not i
Edward Beeston—l am a policeman in the City police.
reason with him. His reasoning faculties appeared at li
The prisoner came to me on the morning of the 21st of
times gone. It remained so until he went to school be-
September. I first saw him about three o'clock. I was
twecn seven and eight years of age. I was sent for by
on my beat. He said his wife was detained from him by
the master to see how Ile would stand for hours by the
Mr. Burden, at the King's Head, Eastcheap. He said
wall while the other children were playing. I have
he would get a summons for Burden from the
seen him so. He left school when thirteen years
Lord Mayor. I offered to go with him to be of age. He was brought up to my business. His
his witness, when he went to claim his wife;
occupation was to make entries in the Day-book.
we went to the King's Head at seven o'clock, and saw
He has left my house frequently without giving us any
Mr. Burden in the bar. When Blakesley claimed his
notice or making any preparation fora Journey. He
wife, Mr. Burdon said, " I know nothing of you, go out of
has been away for a fortnight. There had been no dif-
my house." I said to Mr. Burden that I was come as his
ference with any of the family. On his return he
witness, as he intended to go before the Lord Mayor.
would n
a day or two
appear quite incoherent
appeared sorry for what be bad
incoherent and embarrassed, and
Mr. Burden said, " I know nothing whatever of after
him." I said, am I to take that as an answer ? not
done but I could get from him where he had been,
He said "Yes," and Blakesley and I left. Blakes- or what he had been doing. I have frequently
ley said he had been unfortunate in business,
seen him in the warehouse in a state of extreme
and on that account his wife had been kept there.
itation and have had great difficulty to get him to
Cross-examined by Mr. Pumairs—l saw him first at '
three, and the last time at seven. I had seen him be-
tween five and six ; he bore the appearance of having irritate him. In 1835 or 1836 he attempted to open a
been up all night. . brew-house. He had no knowledge of the trade, nor any
himself.. We were always particularly cautious not to
George Allen, hair-dresser, Lime-street—The pre- from my own knowledge. I spoke to him on the sub-
in question, and .
sect. He said he had applied for a loan of money. Ho
said that his wife and his property had been kept from J .
means of carrying it on. I knew nothing about this
soner came to my shop on the morning
him by Mr. Burden, of the King's Head, Eastcheap. had obtained some, and I gave him some to pay it. It
He said he had been unfortunate in business at Seven-
nscurccbeeaddinbge.
place at Foots Cray. I asked
oaks, and that was the reason Mr. and Mrs. Burdongabaout his manufacturing bread, and
were against him. He said he had demanded wabaosutabobt 401.tsin I had had a communication in 1838
himbringing aboutt it,tc or
London in a cart. He said he was
his wife of Mr. Burden that morning, and had
been refused ; that it was enough to drive any manbusiness, nor
mad ; and if he had had a pistol he would have shot him. Ie
knew
i r means. In 1839 Mr. Brookes, of Tot-
He showed me a letter he had from his wife, beginning any pecun ay
siorrthat
nothing
etbsicagw
ofthetrbee wbearkeiningobhuosipnees
" Dear Bob," and appointing to meet at the same place. came in, and Mr. Brookes said that my
Cross-examined by Mn BODKIN—He came to be my son. H
tenham, madec a communication to me, and asked for
horsesfor
shaved. He did appear in an uncomfortable state of •
mind. He spoke rationally. the Cambridge coach,
and asked why he had not corn-
ted his arrangement. My son said he had never
William Blacker—l am a City policeman. I saw the son had taken some stabling from him for -
prisoner at half past nine in the morning of the 21st Psi; him.. I said Robert, Robert, what new thing is this. He
of September. He said he hato demand his wife,
d been usi tended he never had seen 3.1 I 3 ok r. ro es.
My sonleft
my house in April 1841, and has never re-
and that they, were going to turn him out of the house. • My house was ever open to receive
turned since. him,
We were passing a butcher's shop at the time, and he
Mr. Burden once made a communication to me about a
pointed to a knife and said—If I had had that in my d guardian living at Enfield. M
sid nothing a con
suppose
hand I should have made use of it. I said, Nonsense.;
and he said—By God I think I should. He said he hadsb about and
not been in bed all night. I saw him again at six in the been heard of for three week
into Somersetshire on business; he wanderedyson was
sent
I had never. .
On his; e advertised
evening. He came up, and asked me if I was going to man. return his in-
tellect seemed so weak that I dared not converse • h him.
stand half a pint of porter. I gave hint some, and he iwith
1 Cross-examined by Mr.
said he was going to see his old woman by and bye. I I PAYNE-My son was never
was with him for two hours. He said that he would meet su Jecte to any restraint nor to any medical treatment.
h• d
‘ By the COMIT—IIe kept the day-book under my
for a situation as a farming