The Sun.
London, England, 1841-06-28 00:00:00

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

St a,—ln reading your leadin& article, inserted in last night's
Sun, respecting the line of conduct most likely to be adopted
by dna clergy, I could nut help calling to mind the following
recent characteristic fact

The Tory candidates for the West Riding, Wortley and
Denison, started from this town on their canvassing to Holm-
firth, Delph, and Alarsden, last Wednesday. At the latter
place the Rev. M. Maxfield, the village pastor, introduced Alr.
Wortley to the electors, who, in his address to them, made use
of the following language:_" The Whigs tell you that the
alteration in the sugar duties, brought forward by them,
would reduce the price of that article three-pence per lb. I
mean told you it is a d—d lie." Did the worthy incum-
bent rebuke this scion of aristocracy for his blackguardism ?
Not he, indeed. Nay, did he-not identify himself with this
low phraseology by neglecting so to do? No wonder there are
three Dissenters to one Churchman, when the clergy of the
Church associate and make 'common cause with such men.
Mr. Denison also stated at the same place, that in the United
States the Americans had a tax on corn ; but he was speedily
silenced by a person in the crowd calling out, " I have lived in
that country 15 years, and I know what you now state to be
false ; they have no tax at all upon what they themselves pro-
duce."—Your's, faithfully,
Huddersfield, June 25, 1841.1 JOHN SMITH.

HORRID MURDER AT .18..NARESBOROUGII.-
It is our painful duty, as journalists, this week to record
one of the most atrocious and cold-blooded murders
which has ever disgraced our criminal annals, com-
mitted early on the morning of Saturday last, in this
town. The unfortunate victim is Mr. Joseph
Cocker, a respectable and inoffensive old man, land-
lord of the White Hart, near to the Market-Place,
who of late has resided alone, managing his own
honsehold affairs, with the exception of a char-
woman once or twice a-week. On the night of Friday,
three young men named John Bennison, Henry Nutter,
and Charles Gill, apparently from previous arrangement,
went to the house of Mr. Cocker, with an intention to
rob and murder him ; they stayed some time, and had
some refreshment, and as it was very late, the poor old
man treated them with some ale, in order that theymight
go away peaceably ; but, awful to relate, it was now
the time when the tragic scene was to be accomplished.
One of the panty locked the door, and Bennison com-
mitted the diabolical deed by beating out the brains of his
victim with a ha n-tm er taken for the purpose ; they then left
the house,
but thinking they had not perfectly finished their
bloody design, returned, and again beat the deceased in a
dreadfullmanner with a poker
anti the weapon before alluded
to. Providentially, at this crisis, a woman named Snow,
the wife of a shoemaker who lives near the place, hear-
ing. a moan, thought the deceased might have been
taken ill, and had the curiosity to go and look through
a window, when she was horror stricken to beholl Mr.
Cocker lying in his
gore at the feet of his assailants, pre-
senting a shocking spectacle ; an alarm was instantly
given, and the fiends decamped, taking with them the
hammer and some silver they had lobbed the house of.
They took the Harrogate road, and threw the hammer
into the Nidd, near to the High Bridge, but finally
agreed to return into the town, where they were appre-
hended shortly afterwards; and admitted their guilt. An
inquest was held on the following afternoon, when the
Jury returned a verdict of " Wilful Murder" against
John Bennison as principal, and Henry Nutter and
Charles Gill as accessories in aiding and abetting. The
prisoners were conveyed to York Castle at four o'clock
on Sunday morning.—York Couramt.

THE ENGLISH CATHOLICS AND
TORYISM.
ELECTION TACTICS OF LORD JOHN MANNERS.

In their present desperate attempt to clutch at the
spoils of office, the Tories are driven to the employment
of every shift that they think likely to be, in the smallest
degree, useful to their case. We last week exposed at
some length the disingenuous tactics, and the beautiful
disregard for truth, of their old and hardened leader,
Sir Robert Peel. We have now to occupy ourselves with
the shifting and crafty behaviour of one of the callow
birdlings of the same black and voracious brood.
Looking about on every side for the means of snatch-
ing their prey, the Tory leaders have inveigled a young
lord, by name and title Lord John Manners, and brought
him as a raw but hopeful recruit, to swell out th 4
ranks of their candidates. Having caught him, they
send him down to Newark, to succeed Sir Thomas Wilde,
and to reap the fruits of that infernal system of
corruption and intimidation against which the Solici-
tor-General has struggled so long and so manfully. Not
content with this, finding their young recruit apt and
useful to their hands, they resolve to turn him to yet
better account. They accordingly clap a few tawdry ri-

bands in his hat, transform him -into a regular recruit-
ing sergeant, and send him down amongst the Papists,
to beat up for fools and knaves to drink Sir Robert's
health in the bounty-money which that crafty chief, un-
able to pay his troops qfler they have enlisted, dispenses
so liberally, to entice them before they have enlisted.
The pamphlet to which we alluded last week, we
take to be a proof that the Noble Lord needs a few
Catholic voters in and round Newark to insure his
return ; that the iron visage of the _Duke of Newcastle's
tyranny in that ill-fated borough needs to be decked out
with a few flowers of artifice and delusion, to make its
attractions complete ; and, lastly, that some hues
are entertained of its being possible to kill two
birds with ono stone, by catching a few foolish stray
Catholic votes elsewhere with the same artifice which is
intended to serve its first turn at Newark.
Lord John Manners we imagine to be one of that
party whom the world calls Puseyites. We have so often
professed our respect for the motives and intentions of
some of this party, and our cordial good-will to them
all, so far as they are sincere, that we shall not be sus-
pected of any unfriendliness towards them if we reso-
lutely and promptly protest against the propriety of any
person—even though he be an inexperienced and "rather
NO" Tory lordling—abusing our generosity and for-
bearance so far as to make it subserve a very unfair, and
rather vulgar electioneering stratagem.
The request to Lord Edward Howard to vote against
himself, is amusing and characteristic enough ; but the
same exhortation, addressed to the whole Catholic body,
is still more amusing ;it is positively puny It is im-
.

possible to hit upO'n a more astounding absurdity than
that of trying to persuade the Catholics of Great Britain,
on the ground of some mongrel principle, to take part
against their own self-preservation ; against religious
freedom for their poor ; against the religious and ortho-
dox education of all of them ; against the salvation of

our Irish brethren from—it maybe massacre—is cer-
tain to be the most brutal and loathsome injustice ; in
a word, against a great struggle to prevent either
the re-enactment of the penal laws throughout the

empire, or the administration of the laws now existing in
the spirit of the penal laws. This is certainly one of
the most modest specimens of assurance that it has ever
fallen to our lot to encounter ; and as these propositions
are—though in some sort verbally disclaimed, yet in
reality—urged by the young man* with a vast degree
of lofty dignity, and a most coxcombical assumption of
superiority, backed even by offers of favour and good-
will if we should be so fortunate as to please him, we
will venture to use the greatest plainness in explaining
to the Catholics of Newark why we think it their bound-
en duty not to be gulled by the honeyed language of
the noble candidate, but to poll every Catholic elector
against him at the Newark poll-books.
His Lordship desires us to adopt the suicidal policy
we have just decribed, on the ground of its being impe-
ratively demanded of us by a certain principle. And
what, let us ask, is this imperative principle ? Oh, it
is to " stand upon the old ways ; " to " keep up the old
English aristocracy ; " to " preserve what little re-
mains (I speak not now of endeavouring the res-
toration of aught that has been lost or neglected)
of old-fashioned charity and social intercourse between
the higher and the lower classes ; " to withdraw
from the fellowship of the Atheist, the Democrat, the
Dissenter, and the Leveller ; " to " unite ourselves to no
party ;" but to " act upon our principles unfettered by
any ties ;" mid, finally, to support a Tory candidate as
readily as a Whig candidate, provided the Tory candi-
date will prcimise—(and we can believe his promise—for
Tory candidates are a false and perfidious race upon the
hustings)—to secure for our priests " permission to ad-
minister the rights of our religion in workhouses and
prisons ;" and we suppose, though this is not mentioned,
full and impartial justice in all respects for all Catholics
in every part of the empire. If we had done this in past
years, says his Lordship, if the English Catholics " had
spoken out," " the piratical expedition from the Isle of
Dogs might have been averted ;" and along with it the
failure of Charles the Fifth" of Spain, which our cha-
ritable author " lays at the door of the English Roman
Catholics."
His Lordship's call upon us to separate from atheists
is indeed a call to separate from all parties. The Tories
have as large a share in atheism as any other party that
ever breathed, and they have had it for a longer time ;
nay, the atheism which has been let loose in these
latter days, and has spread such frightful devasta-
tion over Europe, first issued from the kennel of the
Eery pack. The first cry of atheism in England
was a Tory cry. All through the last century the
main upholders of Tory principles in England were
atheists_orsceptics. All through the last century the

Act-of-Parliancent-begotten establishment was defended

by Tory atheists and sceptics. Lord Herbert of Cher-
bury, Hobbes, Bolingbroke' Hume, and Gibbon—the
line stretches out from the days of James the First to
the threshold of the prs'nnt century. From these Tory
philosophers it was that ciltaire, Rousseau, and their
later followers, drank that periicio..us and damnable in-
spiration, the frighful effects of have for a time
frightened the atheists whom the establisNuent encloses
within its gates, or numbers among its weTh.wishers,
from an open avowal, of their profligate and degraJin.g
tenets. We'never heard of the Tories proclaiming their
aversion to an alliance with atheism, until their gentle-
manly atheism had given birth to a democratic atheism
of an honester breed, which impartially toppled down
earthly kings as well as the Heavenly ; Prelates as well
as the God of whom they are the AlinisterS. Even
now, at this very moment, we are in doubt whether,
if we were to join the Tory party, we should not
be joining as many secret and hypocritical atheists,
as in joining the Liberal party we should have to
join bold-faced and avowed atheists. It is so hard
to have to choose between atheism pure and atheism and
hypocrisy conjoined, that we quite approve of his Lord-
ship's advice to form an independent party, and to yield
ourselves up unreservedly to neither of the two factions
in this Protestant country.
As to forsaking the company of levellers and
democrats, as his Lordship wisely advises, we
have the same difficulty as before ; or rather, we
have the same reason to applaud his exhorta-
tions to us to be independent. We have as great au
aversion to levelling as his Lordship ; we have quite as
warm a love of " old-fashioned charity and social inter-
course between the higher and the lower classes ;" and
we have done the little that lies in our power to shame
the unchristian aristocracy of this country out of their
shameful violation of these old English principles ; nay,
we have gone even further than his Lordship, who, it
seems, would be content with the preservation of the
small remains of Christian feeling which now, form the
last link between the noble and the ignoble, while we aim
at " the restoration of all that has been lost or ne-
glected," as the only means of warding off the most fear-
ful convulsions. But then, on the other side, we know
full well that if we were to join . with the Tories, we
should form no junction whatever with old English feel-
ings and principles. It is precisely because we love to
stand upon the old ways that we hate and loathe from
our inmost souls the pestilential novelties of Toryism.
It is precisely because we venerate—as a whole—our
old English aristocracy, and the majestic and compre-
hensive Constitution, which with their aid, the Church
founded,—conservative as it was of all the natural forces
and powers of society, of democracy as well as of
aristocracy, cf the people as well as of the King ; pro-
tecting all, but restraining all within their proper
limits—it is precise:ly because we venerate the old Catholic
nionarchy,-the old Catholic aristocracy, the old Catholic
democracy, the old Catholic priesthood, the old Catholic
Constitution which loved all these, and trusted them all,
and bound them up into one coherent and harmonious
system, that we abhor and detest the monstrosity of that
modern Toryismwhich had its birth (in the days when
the foundations of anarchy and Protestantism were being
laid) in the adoration that, in defiance of gospel and law,
authority and reason, was offimed up to the bloated sen-
sualist and tyrant whose execrable offences formed the
basis upon which the Protestant Establishment was built.
Levelling we dislike; democracy, as an exclusive system,
we dislike; aristocracy and monarchy, as exclusive sys-
tems, we dislike also. But we take leave to tell his Lord-
ship, that we c insider Toryism and Level ism (if we may
coin a word) as merely different and opposite symptoms
of the same moral pestilence, to the putrifying influences
of which our modern sects and parties have all owed the
mi ;fortune of their birth. As it is impossible, then, for
a Catholic who really loves and understands the good old
times to lore Levelling, so it is equa impossible for
him, and for the same reasons, to love Toryism.—Tablet.

* We have never been so happy as to hear the name of Lord
John Manners mentioned before the last fortnight, and there-
fore we must crave pardon, if we are in error in supposing
that the present delinquent is the John James Robert Man-
ners, who, according to the peerage, was born in Dec. 1818,
and, therefore, at the present moment, wants just half a year
of being 23 years of age.

COLONEL SIBTHORP AND THE ODD FEL-
Lows.—Colonel Sibthorp, on Monday night last was pro-
posed as a member of the City of Lincoln Lodge of Odd
Fellows. The ceremony of initiation proceeded unin-
terruptedly until the gallant gentleman was required to
give the pledge, « I will never wrong a brother, nor see
a brother wronged, but in all cases will apprise him of
approaching. danger." To this he refused to respond,
declaring that he could not bind himself down to the
principles of the lodge ; and, with many professions of
loyalty to the Sovereign, he took his hat and retreated,
leaving the brethren in amazement at the sudden change
in his determination, particularly as the fulfilment of the
pledge demands nothing repugnant to morality or right
feeling, to which the Colonel is so keenly sensitive.
Many affect to wonder at the matter. Why should
they ? The Colonel most likely deemed that he was to
be permitted to insinuate himself into the body and
Toryise it ; but finding a bar to his purposes, he could
not leap it ; his conscience would not allow him to vow
not to injure a brother ! when he knew that exclusive
dealing, and every other practicable species of vindic-
tiveness, were the elements of Tory " principles I"
Lincoln Mercury,

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, June 26.

DOE DEH. HENRY C. STURT t.-WILLIAM HOBBS.

This case was partly heard on Friday, and the defence
was opened at the sitting of Court to-day, It was an
ejectment to recover certain lands, &c: in the manor of
Hoxton, of considerable value, which had been in the
possession of the Stun family for upwards of fifty years.
In the year 1839, however, the present defendant, having
served an ejectment on tile tenant in possession of the
name of Matthews, by collusion with that person ob-
tained possession, which he has since held up to the pe-
riod of bringing the present action. The case excited
much interest from the higk''station and wealth of one of
the one party, and the mean condition and poverty of
the other; a topic which the Learned Counsel for the de-
fence did not neglect to make a fair use of Mr. Start,
the member for Dorsetshire, a man of old family, high
connections, and great wealth; William Mobbs. the de-
fendant, a man born in a workhouse, and without any
visible means of subsistence, whose father was said by
the witnesses to be a man of " irregular habitS," which
were explained to mean " playing at skittles at a public-
house adjoining his residence, and being brought home
drunk from thence every oilier night in the week." By
this course of dissipation, it was said on the part of the
defence, he had dissipated 'a large fortune, consisting of
property in Hoxton which he had acquired through his
first wife, and reduced himself to that state that he was
obliged to spend the last years of his life, with his second
wife and her two children, James Mobbs, an elder brother
of the defendant (since dead), and the defendant, in the
parish workhouse.
The chief evidence in support of the defendant's claim
was a will signed by John Mobbs, his father, a year
before his death (in 1791), and whilst in the workhouse ;
by which he devised in the most untechnical and un-
grammatical terms, " estates," " plate," and " funded pro-
perty," in a manner that seemed incomprehensible on
the part of one who, though having or thinking he had a
claim to the first, had certainly none whatever to the two
last species of property. This will came out of the cus-
tody of the Barbers' Company, in whose muniment room
it was said to be discovered by the brother of the defen-
dant, since dead, who had made a previous search some
time before without success. Great doubt was thrown
on this part of the evidence. There were also produced
two receipts fir rent in 1774, signed John Mobbs, and
other evidences which were open to exception.
On the part of the plaintiff it was shown that he de-
duced title from his grandfather, who was seised in fee
of the manor of Hoxton ; that the rents had been ever
since 1793 paid to him and his family ; and that old in-
habitants, one of whom had lived for fifty-seven years
opposite to the house in which defendant's father, John
Mobbs, was said to have resided, had never heard of such
a person, or of such a claim being made as the one now
set up.

Lord DENMAN summed up, and the Jury, after a sho:
deliberation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, June 26.
BELL V. GARDINER.

This was an action on a promissory note for 300/. Mr.
Sergeant Chlannell and Mr. Whitehurst appeared for the
plaintiff ; Mr. Sergeant Talfourd and another Learned
Gentleman for the defendant.

This was an action commenced by the plaintiff as the
public officer of the Provincial Bank of England, who
were the holders of the promissory note in question,
against the defendant, a schoolmaster, who had given the
note by way of taking up a bill, for the payment of which
he had been applied to as indorsee. It appeared that
the bill, which the defendant' had indorsed, had subse-
quently to that indorsement been altered both as to the
date of the bill and the day at which it was stated to be-
come due ; and the defence was that that alteration hav-
ing been made without the defendant's knowledge or
consent, his liability ceased, and that consequently the
present plaintiff, to whom the second security had been
given, could not recover upon it. The questions in fact
raised upon that plea were, whether the defendant had
knowledge that • alteration in. 'the bill when the pro-
missory note was given. On one side letters and con-
versations were given in evidence for the purpose of lead-
ing to the inference that the defendant was not aware of
the alteration ; whilst on the other side it was sworn
that the former bill was produced and handed to the de-
fendant when the promissory note was given.
After the summing up of the Learned JUDGE, the Jury
found a verdict for the defendant.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
HATTON-GARDEN.

On Saturday Mr. Sibert, master-tailor, of Fleet-street,
attended by numerous other respectable tradesmen, ap-
plied to Mr. Combe for his advice and assistance, under
the following circumstances :

Mr. Siber'i stated that a man of respectable appear-
ance.and good address, and blind, whose name was dis-
covered to be Rigby, and who was connected with a gang
of swindlers, had with his associates been practising the
most extensive acts of swindling in the neighbourhood
of the Strand, Fleet-street, Holborn, and the west end
of die town, and scarcely a respectable tradesman resid-
ing in the Strand and Fleet-street had escaped being
cheated. In some instances they had obtained goods to
the amount of 100/., 2001., and 300/. Rigby, who was
the principal against whom theyapplied,represented him-
self as an independent man; he was generally accompa-
nied by a groom, who was connected with him in his
swindling transactions, and the plausibility of his man-
ners lulled suspicion; and after giving, large orders for
goods, he directed them to be sent to a house in the
neighbourhood of Bedford-row, Holborn, which being
done, and the money subsequently applied for, they
found that the house was besieged by defrauded trades-
men, who were laughed at, and refused payment for
their goods.

111r.ComnE inquired whether any of the applicants
could bring forward any case to substantiate a false pre-
tence, for dui purpose of obtaining the goods, and to
warrant an apprehension?

Mr. Sibert replied, that they certainly parted with
their 'goods in such a way....that•st might be construed
legally into a matter of debtor and creditor, but it was
evident they were the unsuspecting dupes of swindlers.
He, however, mentioned one case, in which something,
he thought, bordering upon a false pretence, was
adopted. They (the applicants) did not like, singly or
individually, to take the responsibility upon themselves
of giving the party into custody until they applied for ae-
vice upon the subject.

Mr. Comm could not assist them : they might, if
they thought proper, give the party into custody upon
their own responsibility, and endeavour to make out

a case.

Mr. Sibert said, that it was a lamentable thing that
respectable tradesmen should be liable to such gross im-
positions by designing persons, and said, if the law
could not catch hold of them, it would be a caution to
the public, and check such vagabonds, if the press would
give publicity to the case.
Mr. COMBE suggested that, as he could not assist
them, the best thing they could do would be to consult
with some respectable attorney' on the subject, to in-
struct . them how to proceed to catch hold of the party
so as to fix them with one false pretence. The appli-
cants gave a description of the blind man, who had been
the. principal in the transaction, and it corresponded in
every respect with that of a person who held a promi-
nent situation at the bar of this court between one and
two years ago, when he was charged with being con-
cerned with another party, who advertised in the news-
papers that he could procure a clerkship on the London
and Birmingham Railway for a douceur of 50/., and
committed for trial- They were placed at the bar of
the Old Bailey, when the former pleaded guilty, and
the latter took his trial. They were convicted, and sen-
tenced to a year's imprisonment in the House of Cor-
rection. The former, who at the time of his appre-
hension lived at Newington, Surrey, as a broker, was
afficted in his sight, and after being confined in the
House of Correction for a very short period lost his
sight altogether, and he was eventually pardoned and
set at liberty (as we understand), in consequence of his
heavy affliction, by Lord Normanby.
The applicants thanked his Worship for his attention,
and left the court, saying they would con:,ult with an
attorney, according to his advice.