The Sun.
London, England, 1815-02-06 00:00:00

COURT MARTIAL ON SIR JOHN MURRAY.

WINCHESTER—FOOtTgENTII DAY, SATURDAY, FEB. 4.
Sir John Murray made a-statement in reply to
the fresh. eviclenee which had been brought against
hint: ILallowell had complained of his
acensotionof his hawing kept back th'efi'rst letter,
front him to Sir E. Pellew. Ile had never, how-
ever, tnati.ethat accusation against the Admiral ;
he had only said, that he had regretted that cir-
cumstance at the time, and still did regret it. As
to the letter which he had written to the Admiral
on the 9th, he did not know that it had any par•-
ticitlar to the last which he had receiv-
ed from him. At the time he.wrote that letter,
he di:l, however, disbelieve the .report
cared of two thousand French having arri%ed at
TortOsa, and a body of their cavalry at Am-
pulla. He did believe, however, that one thou-
sand had arrived •at Turtosa (as General Capons
had informed him)) and•he believed that to be
the number also froth a proposition made to him
from. Tortosa, to • attack that plc e, .and that
the inhabitants woUld endeavour to deliver up one
of the gates to hint during such attack. He had,
however, received 'no such information as would•
make it necessary for hint to raise `the siege on the
7th or Bth, as the Judge Advocateahad contended
he ought to, have done. As sto the manner lit
•which the diSpatch of 'the 14th was sent off, Ad-
miral Hallowell had waved entirely the secrecy,
and had merely endeavoured to prove that there
was no hurry. HI must, however, say, that he
wrote the' dispatch in the idea that there was
great hurry„ and"forthat reason he did not wait
to have it regularly copied. It was purely by ac-
cident that he discovered that the Admiral had
written'a letter; and if it had not been for that •
accident, he • did not believe that the _Admiral
Would have ever made the signal he stated, of no-
tice to the fleet that there was an opportunity of
s'endingletters triEngland. Major-General Don-
kin vvas still here in' attendance, and, although,
from laudable motives, he had refused to answer
a question that he had asked hint about those cir-
camstances,'yet, if the Court would put the ques-
tion to hint, he had no doubt but that he would

,explain it. •
As to the variety of orders he was said to have
given on the 12th, he could easily explain them.
The first order given to General Clinton at an
early hour in the morning, to advance three bat-!
talions 'of his and as many of General Whitting-
hon's division' to the Guya, was to corer a retro-
grade movement to be made by General Copons.
That General, however,- having fallen back in the
night, the order of course was countermanded,
having no longer any object. As to the second
and third order; tlrey were sktbstantiaily the same;
the principal difference, however,. was, that the
last did not give such precise directions 'about
keeping out of the fire of Tarragona on his march.
The 'writer for sending his baggage to a place
where it-could be embarked in safety, did not ap-
pear to him to 'be an order that could he W-ell
complained of. As to the laSt order for his final
embarkation, it was not surprising that lie should
trust some part of the arrangements to a General
of such rank as Sir William Clinton'. He had
• never recollected .03 much accuracy in ordets and
• dates as .Gen. Clinton had shewn on the present
trial which was the more remarkable, as he
was deficient in his recollection in malty
• other points. As Sir William had, however,
never himself cominanded :an army in the
field, he thought that he should not put so harsh a •
construction on the number of orders which were
issued on the •day of the 12th. It was singular,
however, that Sir 'NV. Clinton should not be able
to find time to do what he was desired to do by
those orders, but that. what he was expressly de-
sired not to do, that he did with the greateit
alacrity. He alluded to the spiking the guns, and
that strange mistake he made in not recollecting
the signal which lie himself had arraoged with
the Officer at the battery. It would 'laic been
natural to suppose that a consciousness of his own
error in this respect should have inclined him to.
be .somewhat more charitable in bis constructions
on the conduct anti niotiveS of others. He was
surprised at. Admiral Hallowell wishing to press.
upon the' Court a' letter which he wrote on the
19th of June, when he, himself had objected to
his producing a letter from Ali. Tupper4 on the
ground that it was Written after the transactions.
Ile probably ought not to have felt this surprise,'
as 'it was so muds in unison with the rest of the
Adriiire.s conduct throughout the trial.
Sir John' Murray then proposed to call General
Donkin to the point he had Stated. The Court,
however, over-ruled the proposition, conceiving
it irrelevant to the trial.
Mr. Larpent then sa:d; that there was one ob-
servation in the .statement of Sir J. Murray ‘Vhich
he must explain. As to his having given private
advice'to Admiral-HI:Howell about the production
of a letter, all he had advised, him to do was to
produce it to the Court, and take their opinion on
it. It was their province, and 'not his, to decide
on what ought to be admitted. When he was
out of Court, be was as ready to give his advice to
one patty as to the other ; and in point of fact,
he . had given advice to Sir John Murray much
often; v tlein to the Admiral.
THE JUDGE ADVOCATE'S REPLY.
',Mr. LARPENT then began his reply as to the first
Qrd. second charges. lie had at first supposed
tleet. such reply would be unnecessary ; but as Sir
John Mtn ray had gone into such great length of
ahgtenent, in answer to the observations he had -
made, and as he had taken quite a new ground of
defence, he found it his duty to claim the right tef a
'elcosecUtor to reit;;;?-. As, however, many of those
aieuneot4 ,:eere•a4r.vered by his first observations,
he should refer flie,C4irt to them. He was most
anxious, in this case, to be considered as not
wishing toTpreSS any
.point against the prisoner
further than bis duty required of him, Notwith-
standing the compliments been paid
him by Sir J. Murray) he klt duty
to do away the effect that
appeared to him faliaciouS, might" otbet.v4o_ pro.
dice. As he had not had time for,such arreni.,,emeot
in reply, he should follow thepraejpil paints of the
defence which Sir J. Murray ha,llett up avainst 11P)
charges brought byhim.The first pole t that he slioo4
take notice of, was the difficulv of a hich Sir .1- ~.144

_ .
tee L tie Tril ii,ihrt h This di fil-
et' !ty.- lie -chtieeive;l to tra, not froth *the tn:antier
the'elearae..-; evere bat fitto :oWn 'Con-
duct. Ife elute! conceive that one hliim and dh-
reet answer might have been given to bro:h 't'bese
_ charges. Suppose-that Sir John Murray 'had been
io a coudition to give this answer, '" previous to
the Ilthe I had not heard of the advance of Sa-
chet, halt only oVecaen, whom I was 'prepahed
; en that day; however; 1 was informed
of the rapid advance and proximity of Suchet,
ml rah :iev that it was not possible to save the
‘Nrole; if I had staid, without giving battle to, a
review enemy, which would have risked the
wiette." Such an answer would, in his opinion,
hare been perfectly satisfactory. If Marshal Sachet
had descended from the clouds at Perillo, on the
12111 of Sone, with 12,000 men, when Sir J. litte-
r.: had every reason to believe hies on thehlluccair,
Liao Valencia,t hat would have been a sufficient justifi-
cation for retreating at that particular time, add for
leaving the gaits behind. Sir J. M. had, however,
proved, both by his own letters, and by the evidence
he brought forward,. that be did know of the ad-
vance of Sachet long before the 11th. It was
tle-refore-his, duty to' have calculated, previous to
that time, on the means of saving his army, with
its guns and stores, in the very probable case of
his being obliged to raise the siege of Tarragona.
Sir J. Murray had stated, that he had brought
no evidence in support of the first and second.
. charges.
_lie thought, however, that he had
brought sufficient, evidence in producing Sir John's
own letters'. His case was, 'that after Sit John
had formed a decisive opinion that Tarragona
could not he taken, he still cnntintrod to Jain'
gaits and stores. All that were exposed to risk,
after this conviction was formed in ilk i ijud, was,
exposed iu vain. As to the approach olDecaero.
it John appeared to be perfectly
a: ell in-
formed of it ; and by his letter of 'the 2nd, he.
stated that Sachet had left the Huccar on the 2hh,
and arrived at Tortosa on the 9tlt. When'
he-had heard of the actual arrival of 1000 at
Tortosa, and Of 200'J at Lerida, be could have no
doubt bat that those were advanced corps of Sit-,
cliet, corning to raise the siege of Tarragona. By
the 9th all doubts of the nom: neat of Suchet
to the North were removed from Sir John's mind.
What other object could Suchet have in this thoVe-
went but to relieve Tarragona ; alit! when Sir
John was well informed of this movement, and
'firmly believedethe infOrmatioa, why did lie htot
sooner calculate the time that Sachet wool(' pro-
tidily arrive, and carry off his army with all their
gnus and storra ? While there was a chance 'of
iel;inta Tarragona, the stay of Sir John Murray
in Catalonia might have been excusable ; but why
should he stay there when every rational prospect
ttiaing it had vanished ? Previoas to the 10th,
enough had been done to draw Decaen from his
phsitions in Cataloaia. Enough' had been done
a:so to make a diVersion in favour of, the Duc
del Parque in ValenCia. He could not see any
practical or moral effect that was. produced by
continuing the siegelooger. Ile could really
not discover tier imagine any bad• moral effect that
_ was to result from pursuing a different line of con-
duct. But Sir John Murray bad endeavoured to
shell?, and as he'thought fallaciously to shoe, that
lie had no other alternative than that of pushing
on the siege as late as the night of the II th, or of
suddenly abandoning it. if he (Mr. Larpent)
were reduced' to make his choice as to which of
these measures he approved,. he should certainly
choose the latter, and refer to the evidence of Ge-
neral-- Donkin for an ample justification of this
opinion. But there was another and a third
course, which; in his view of the question, ought
to have presented itself to the judgment of Sir J.
Murray. Why was the aka r. continued till the
12th, after all hopes of success had vanished, and
the certain approach of a superior enemy had been
known for several days before ? During these
proceedrags on the eastern coast of Spain, an en-
terprise was going on in the west, precisely simi-
lar in its objects, and in all its circumstances, ex-
cept the conduct of the different Commanders. The
siege of SoSebastian bad been brought to that crisis
when every preparation wasanatured for the assault.
The French General, the Duke ,of Dalmatia, sea
lected this period for the purpose of making a des-
perate effort to relieve Pampeluna, by turning
the right of the Allied army ; well knowing that
it he succeeded in that object; the left, which sup-
ported the investment of St. Sebastian's, must be
compelled also to tall back. What was then the
conduct of the Duke of Wellington, atlealtted to.
lie one of the first Generalsof thiS or any other
age -? He immediately ordered all his heavy ord-
nance to be removed to a place of safety, lest -he
sh6ultl be obliged to abandon the siege; and al-
though it considerably retarded hiseoperations, he
did-not deem it advisable to expOse to :possible
loss or capture any part of his battering train:—
And yet if ever there was a Commander juS-
third in calculating on the favours of fortune,
or in drawing on that ample stock of character
Which he had previously ace:tire:lh it certainly
was the Duke of Wellington, who felt that he dared
not do that at Sc. Sebastian's which Sir J. Murray
had done at 1 arragooa. General Donkin's testi-
mony Inrnisted ample confirmation' of the indeci-
sion of Sir John Murray ; for how could he have
been induced, unaccustomed as he was to disclose
ltis intentions to others, to have communicated
tia design of raising the siege so early as the 9th
to General Donkin, unless his mind had actUally
been made up as' to that measure, which he,' ne-
vertheless, delayed carrying into execution until
tie Ittorning of. the 12th ? flow could he have
contemplated such a proceeding, utiless assured of
the certain approach of Marshal Sachet's army, it
brin' his resolution _not to \raise. the siege,' as
stated inehis defence, in consequence of Decaen's
cc, but to risk in this event an' engagenteht
with that column of the enemy ? Gen'eral Dunkin,
it appeared, had also then forewarned Sir John
Nurray respecting the possible loss of 'the gaps ;
alai vet no l repareo ioas were made, no steps taken,
precautions cased tip to the morning of thel 2th,
aoard against that disaster. On the I Ith, Marshal
Sucdhot was'..k.e.O.wn to he at Tortosa ; hnt his
cettain' advahee in force lot' the obvionsi purpose
fit re:lu',iin Tarragona bail been known three
days bz,•tnt C by confidential and authentic connuu-
nicAtio,

ti!c
,Mille at which he might arrive
w:istlierdThc.a matter of oak:111%0cm tor the
Qudi:tcv-Mast4,:r-fic.iieral's ()thee. lay, tlicti, (lid

was destitute of
inforisiation ; or where Was the dithenity of cal-
culating the ordinary rapidity of a Freoch army,
so as to prevent the necessity of leaving any thing
behind ? 11Vhy in, one case give the enemy credit
for ati althost preteenatinal activity, and in the
other Act on the suppositiOn of a dilatoriness not
to be expected from the most sluggish foe ?
Instead of governing his proceedings by a rational
calculation of probabilities,-
.;Sir John Murray
seemed to-rely altogether on chance, and he who
chose to commit hituself to such direction, must
stand, the 'liaz'ard of the die. Another ground
taken in the defence was, that aft this was done
feoth 'an excessive care for Sire Edward l'ellew, and
a fear that his operations in the Bay of Rosas might
be impeded by not lea'ving the guns behind atTar-
ragona. If this real;' was one of the motives, he
must really say that it was paying too high a
:compliment to Sir Edward.Pellew, at the expence
of the honour and character of the country. He
had bee'n not a little surprised, in the course of
the defence, to hear a British General speak of
the loss of his buns, as if it were merely the loss
of so much old iron ; and as if it was a matter of
pecuniary value, and not the wound inflicted on
the national honour which was alone in question.
He now came to the second Charge, at which
Sir John Murray had described himself to be
e‘iitalis; shocked and astonished. The charge con-
sisted of two parts—first, :wit; t respect to the dis-
obedience '(;1-' instrection ; and, secondly, of a ne-
glect of ditty.: Sir 7. Murray had overlooked this
distinction, and .confined his defence to the accitsa-
tiou of disobedience. He had c;snsidered it to in-
voiye merely a question of policy, which question
was riot all before the Coart. I'rOm this doctrine
he must beg leave entirely th dissent;'' He denied,
too, that the case was nudeour,, admitting the•
trusts committed to Sir John Murray to have been
as discretionary as he rePresented. It had been
urged that there was no precise titne fixed in Lord
Wellinaton's instructions for proceeding with the
army to Valencia, and that it was kit to his own
jUdgment as a question of tiiue and means. He
would put it, however, to any General present,
whether if he were ordered by the Prince Regent
to take the command'ofaui tepedition for the ac-
coniplishmeut. s
of a n'etific Objtiet, 'he would not
conceive it to be his duty to proceed to execute it
with all possible dispatch, Or Whether he would
feel himself justified in staying some tittle lie
way to trya little experiment of his own ? That
the question- was one of means, or, in other
-words, of practicability,' he could • undeistand
butt he did not sae the force of the' logical distinc-
tion between tnean.-and time on this oecasion.—
The fact was, any positive time-Was tittelly out
of the question; but Sir J. Murray haling been
compelled to raise the siege of Tarragona, which
was the first object of his expedition, had only to-
refer to hi. 4 instructions to discover that his next
and immediate consequent object was to land the
army at Valencia. If in not thus acting Sir J. M. was
not guilty of positive disobedience,be was still liable
to the charge of a neglect olduty. It it was said that
any advantage was to be derived by remaining, why
was the embarkation from before Tarragona so
hastily executed ; and why were the gnus alma- .
Il
(loved lest .an action with. the enemy might be
hazarded ? What, when this was once the state
of things, what was left to Sir John Murray but
to proceed immediately to Valencia, and carry into
effect the otheteohject 'of ;the expedition ? In not
so doiug; it vas evident that the plan of Lord
'Arellington was frustrated, and every end of the
campaign on the eastern' coast of Spaia.s6 tar
counteracted. Sir John Murray has supposed a
case in his own exculpatiOn, which case was,
hOWever, not founded in fact. He had supposed
the possibility, that after the battle of Vittoria,
which happened to occur at this period; Sachet's
retreat into France might have been inter-
cepted by the. army under his command. He
could hardly suppress a smile when he thus heard
this little -army, which Was unable to Yen:knit at
Tarragona, or to move anyway except towards their
transports, by a species of pantotnittrical meta-
moiphosis, suddenly converted into a force com-
petent to fight'Stiefict, with an array swelled in
its nambeYs•by the United strength of all its gar-
.risons: Without, however, adverting further to
any such sanguine hopes or schemes- of visionary
success, he should proceed to another topic of the
defence... It.had been said, that a!great latitude
'of construction had been left tO Sir John Murray,
in order thathisdiscretion might remain unfet-
tered; and his judgmentalependent on events and
circumstances. This
,Was described as what in
a
law would be called condition precedent. Un-
doubtedly, Lord Wellington never had supposed
that Sir John Murray possessed arty dominion
over the elements; that he was endowed with any
supernatural attributes, or bathe could achieve
11-alimpossibilities. the 'elements,' however,
interfered to prevent hint Iron; embarking his
4rinoni Was it 'so imperinusily' necessary to
leave his guns behind bins on account of the
near approach of the enemy, and yet to send
,
his cavalry forward to the Col de Balaguer,
on the very road on which that enemy Was
advancing, to be exposed as cavalry must always
be when contending without support against a
column of infitnery '"?' 'Sir John Murray had
inStruction to proceed to Valencia as
only a casual observation, anti a kind of anticipa-
tion of what was probable, by Lord Wellington.
This construction he differed front altogether, and
Was satisfied that a simple reference to the letter
of his Lordship would justify his interpretation.
Here the Judge Advocate remarked 'on Sir John
Murray's observation, that' the second charge
would never have been framed but for Admiral
Hallowell's letter. This statement was quite itt•
correct, the charge having been framed without
any teference whatever to the complaint oy opi-
nion'of_that (M!. ice on the subject of the embark-
ation. S:r John Murray scented to have forgot-
ten that his letters expressly stated the object of
embarking the whole of I.IIC infantry to be to cut
off a nieision of Sachet's army at Vanddlos. That
.attempt appeared to hint' to be most idle and hope-
less. He !mist contend that Sir J. Murray had
acted contrary to' the instructions 'of Lord Wel-
lington, to embark and return to Valencia, and
attediately join the right of the Spanish' army
there,' in case of failure on Tarragona. He sob-
oiitted to the Court that the word immediately:
must apply to time, and not to his place• in the

pilnht, ling,, a., oho rav ccitistrtkd
In that sense, the word w"ould have been quite
superfluous and void of nieanitir. Sit •3ehn ap-
peared to rely hi his •tleleoce, 'Ol4 the kvord "
mitten orders" being introdt*”..ed in the
Charge. It the Court were, hOWever, of opinion
that the word " express" couldliot' be proved to
•be the proper deseriptinu 'of these orders, they
might find him guilty on part of. the *charge. If
even no orders had, been disobeyed, they viirltl
have another part of the charge to consider; and
that was " neglect of dirty." Sir John Murray's
successes in Catalonia and Valencia were certainly
not of that description that could ha've,warranted
him in departing from the nwanin..c of the Duke of
'Wellington's histructions. It certainty did appear
to him that Sir John Murray Was apt to form his
decision on the iotelligence. of th'e last hour,
without pursuing any consistent plan. If the
Court were of opinion that he had acted con-
trary to a plain intimation given him by the
Duke. of Wellington as a guide for his conduct,
he thought that they must find. him guilty on this
part of the charge. IVhat he conceived to
be Lord Wellington's motive . for giving the
order was this :—The Spanish armies had gene-
rally fancied that. their defeats were owing to not
luiving a sufficient proportion of cavalry in their
army: The Duke of 'Wellington, therefore,
'thought that it would give 'great confidence to the
armies of tte Due del Parque and Elio to have
with them in Valencia, that small but well up-
-p'oilocd cavalry that teas attached to the army of
Sir John, Murray. Altera variety of other obser-
vations," the -Judge Mew:we concluded, by ex-
pressing- his entire. convictiott, that from the high
ch.aracter of the weathers whocomposed this CoUrD,
their decision, whatever it might be, would he
stud) as to give perfect satisfaction ip every think-
iug man in the eommunity:
Court thA..b adjourned till ten o'clock on
Monday, when Adm. Hallowell is to make his reply.

SALFORD QUARTER SE•;SIUN.S.

THE KING V. 4ntrAliD MAYSTON Atirs Wll. MAYSTON,

rot A CoNsPiRACY

The trial of the defendant; in this prosecution
carne on at these Sessions. Edward Mayston was
formerly a resident in Loudon, but. had from.the
month of November last carried Ott business in
Miuteliester, as a. calico-printer, to a considerable
extent. 'William Mayston was a Manchester wace,
houseman, in Friday-street, London. The chalfges
against the two defendants, as made out in cri.7.
deuce, were, ft?). having conspired together, on the
11!th of December last, to defraud the. creditors
ofEclwattl Mayston, creating fictitious debts,
and giving fraudulent securities; for having on
the,sanie day conspired to obtain goods, with an
intent to•delraud the owners ; and for having, on
t!,e 13th of. December, obtained goods to it Consi-
derable amount from a number of country manu-
facturers, under the pretence of giving good
bankers' bills, when, in fact, no such hills were.
meant to be given ; the bills actually given being
nothing more than bills drawn by the defemiants,
upon a banking-house: where they had no ellects,
and were not even known..lt appearedalso in evi-
dence, that for some time•past Edward Mayston
had been in the habit of sending goods to a large
amount to %lint. Mayston, the other defendant; of
Which no account had been kept, except in the
carrier's delivery hook ; which book Wtn. May-
stun had attempted to bribe a servant of Edward
Mayston to get into his possession: And, that
the defendants had proposed to pay it creditor a
large,debt of 3000 H, and uwards, it he would sanc-
tion a propos:lV tot a composition to the creditors
.it large, of u hat would appear on the face Of the
book., knowing that the gicatest pat t at the pro-
perty bad not been entered. Atter a trial of eight
hours, the Jury, from a few minutes consulta-
tiou, declared the defendants gnilty, mid they
were sentenced to three years imprisonment in
Lancaster

Before passim;' sentence, the Rev. W. 11. thy,
the Chairtuan of the Court, addressed the pri-
soners, in which he said,‘‘ I never knew in the
course of my c perience„so continued an exposure
of meanness, ti tid, aod dishonest v, in every slope,
as. this trial has afforded. lt is true„persons it+tve
boeit called to speak to the character of ~gory,
Mauston; -and they,have .sptiken favour-.
ably of you, but
.they spoke only so far as came
within their knowledge. As to you Edward May •
stun, no person in this. populous town has conic
forward to bear testimony to : your character.
Thereis, however, no difference between .you.—
Yon, Edward i'slaystoti, affected to carry on busi-
ness, but it was in a strange manner; forbidding
the clerk
,to make any regular entries respecting
.the dispoSal of_the goods. All was to. be private.
And upon the bailiff's ,entering the premises, you,
William asked the clerk to obtain. out of the ware-
house, the ottlybook in which traces 'of the goods
could be found.. All things ate as black as they
can be, aid your conduct shows the extreme base-
ness of your dispositions.—With respect to the
conspiracy, it is as, cleat' as the sun at noon-day.
Both of you conspired. Edward got bold of the
goods and probably William was. to have gone off
with them.—lt is of the. utmost importance to
this town, and to the commercial world in gene-
ral, that such conduct.should be severely punish-
ed. If by swindlers such as.yon are, (for neither
I, nor any person acquainted with. these transac-
tions, can consider you in any other light), ap-
parently in a high and respectable situation, and
one of you living 'in the fit st street in the town,
persons are to be thus defrauded, who can be
wife ? You had in less than two mouths procur-
ed goods to the amount of Five Thousand besides
Sirteen. Hundred Pounds. Considering the nature
of your conduct, and ,the great importance of
punishment those guilty of such procedure, the
,Court would have made public exposure in the
pillory a part of your punishment ; but as your
evidence will probably be called for in other .mat-
ters, the Court have thought proper not to inflict
it, though richly deserved."

Mr. BRAND, the Member for Hertfordshire, has
informed his tenantry, that on account of the pre-
sent agricultural depression, he will cOutiuue to
allow the landlord's duty out of their
.respective
rents; though the- Property, Tax should not be
renewed, wliich, with the Tax upon the Tenant,
i~ ill reduce their payment three shillings an:i six-
pence in tlit: pound, or iie.vente.cn and a half per
cent.

LAW INTEJ,LIGENCE.

COUrCr 'OF r:ING S Put. 4.

JohtiS'on, the late Cltt:k.of the rititee' "t
the LivrpOol Docks, convicted at Lim as. er
-
sizes of the offence of 'embezzling the. 1)o k
wAS thiS day iiroughi hie() COuri, in custody, Co
assign errors upon his indictment. He accord-
ingly deliVered his assignments of errors to the
Clerk of the Crowtt Office, and was then &sired
to name the CounSa to arghe the errors on iris
behalf. Hematned Mr. Scarlett and Mr. \IT limo;
and the Court appointed WednetZtv next El":
hearing their arguments in the ExCliequer
her.

TEit KING V. KEhRISOS.

This Was an indictment against the defend,,ni
for nGt repaisltLt a public bridge over a
canal in the• nountv of Suffolk. The defendaat,
had been convicted, but. a point two Teserved foc
the Court on the following grounds !—The canna
passed through a turnpike-road, and the proprie-.
tors erected the bridge in question ; but it, vc,l.`
now contended, that they were tine bbund to keeP
repair, inasmuch as it, Wai erected for the
service of the public, and therefore the repairing
it was a tax which the public ought to 'discharge.
It was further contended, that the propektely4
were not bound even to have erected the bride.
in the first instance,. no such provision being made
in the Act authorising the cutting of the canal. -"
Lord ELLENBOIIOIiGH observed, that the pro-
prietors, by .cutting the road, had destroyed the
public Nvay, and were bonud to make it good
again, .although no•mention was made it, the:Act
of Parliament of building bridges. Iu the Acts
incorporating ,the different Water-work Compa-t
Ines, power was given to .them to break up the:
ground for the purpose of laying down their
pipes. Not a single word wa3 said of making the
streets good again, by covering the pipes, and re-
storing a level way for the public; vet,• he ‘Va5
inclined to think, if the ravages committed by
these Companies in the public thoroughfares of
the metropolis -were nut -made good again, and
that in a more speedy manner than bud been the
case on Some former occasions, many of them
would discoveri•to their cost, that though no pro-
vision tor that purpose was made in the Acts of
Incorporation, they were not less liable for the
restoration of that which they had destroyed, 'lice
proprietors of the canal were •also bound, having
destroyed the public highway, to restore to the
public a free passage, •by building the bridge.--
With respect to the question of repairing it, who,
he would ask, derived advantage from it ?
the proprietors of the canal, who received the pt.(
fits of that canal ; or did the public, who having;
before had a solid and level road to pass over, noyY
instead of it bad got is bridge ? , Those Whose
plans veil-161Tc' the erection .Of a bridge in tho-L'
spot were bound to keep it in repair. The Order
of Session, which called upon the defendant, as
the representative of the Company., to repair tild
bridge, was therefore established.

POLICE INTELLIGLNCE