The Sun.
London, England, 1823-12-31 00:00:00

TOOTH-ACHE AND EAR-ACHE.

FERRY'S ESSFiNCE has received the sanc.
tion and support of the most Distinguished Person-
ages in the kingdom, together with the united Testimony of
the first Physicians in Europe, and numerous favourable corn.
ments in highly respectable Medical bornels, where it has
been declared to he the " Rest thing ever discovered for the
Tooth-ache and Earache."--It instantaneously relieves the
most excruciating Pain, preserves the Teeth sound 'and firm,
prevents further Decay, effectually cures the Scurvy in the
0111118. fastens loose Teeth, and renders them Firm and Ser•
siceable to the latest period, and etrectuelly Prevents the
Toot h-ache.

Sold in P•ittlec, at Is. lid. and is. 9d. by Butlers, Chemists,
N 0.4, Clisopside, St, Paul's, and it eo, Itegent.street, (Firer
the Argyle Rooms), London ; Wisterloo.placa, Edinburgh ;
Sacksille.strert, Dublin ; and by the principal Medicine Ven.
den throughout the United Kingdom.
(r.l' Us careful to ask for " Perry's Essence for the Tooth.
ache.

ASSESSMENT of TAX Ei at GREENWICH

Last night a meeting of the inhabitants " of
the parishes of Deptford, Greenwich, Charlton, and Wool-
wich, was held at the Mitre Tavern, Greenwich, to take into
consideration the propriety of petitioning the Lords of the
Treasury, anti the Commissioners of the Board of Taxes, for
the removal of the grievances occasioned by the present assess-
ment."

At 8 o'clock the large' room of the tavern was filled to excess,
and after some difficulty in the appointment of a chairman (the
office having been declined by several persons present), Mr.
Clarke was called to the chair.

The CNAIRMAN then opened the business of the meeting, by
calling their attention to the excessive grievance endured by
the rack-rent calculations for the rates made by the present sur-
veyor, Mr. Wm. Thistleton. He described their inevitable ten.
dency as being to depopulate the district, and throw upon the
poors rate for support, those who, although ureible in many
instance* to pey rent, were yet, according to the new schedule
of rates, called on to pay taxes which they were unable to en-
dure. This conduct on the part of a Surveyor was calculated
to defeat the intentions of the Legislature in reducing the as-
sessed taxes—a course which the liovernment could never have
contemplated.—(Hear 1)
B M-. ENNETT proposed the first resolution, which Wfli to
petition the Lords of tile Treasury for the removal of the Sur-
veyor, Mr. Thistleton, when
Mr. NVEI it condemned the early introduction of personal
attack into this debate. iirhy, if any complaint were made,
not do so in a formal and regular manner ? and then it would
appear whether the individual were oppressive, or merely act-
ing in obedience to the orders of those who had a right to in-
struct him in the performance of his duty. The oppression of
taxation was one thing, and the mal-administration of their
collection another: but heave they condemned the individual,
they ought to take the trouble of ascertaining, whether or not
his conduct was governed by the duty which his instructims
imposed.
[Here there were several cries of " No," and some indivi-
duals came torward and asserted charges of extra assessments
against the surveyor. This led to a long and desultory conver-
sation, the result of which was, that Mr. Thisleton's name was
omitted in the petition to the Lords of the Treasury, and that
of " the surveyor" permitted to remain, to obviate the personal
objection. A petition was at length agreed to, as well as a simi-
lar one to the Board of Taxes.] The following is the sub-
stance:— _

" That the said surveyor has made tree of most unwarrant.
able means to ascertain the value of property, and having ob-
taied such knowledge, he has invariably reek-rented the holders
thereof, and when he has not been able to ascertain the value,
ihe has n; most, instances assessed them to an enormous degree,
thereby compelling the holders of such property to produce
their receipts, Ate., to obtain a repeal of such duty; and in some
instances he has threatened to make a surcharge of eight years
back. How far the said surveyor may be borne out by Ins in-
structions, your petioners know not ; but humbly presume
that it is not the wish of yolir Lordships, or any part of lily
Majesty's Ministry, to sanction the use of undue severity in the
collection of his Majesty's revenue.
" That the Legislature did, for the relief of the people, repeal
a moiety of the assessed taxes; and whereas the said repeal
did affect carriages, dcc., and has taken place' many who com-
paratively could afford it, have been relieved. The said sur-
veyor, to increase the remaining assessment, has descended to
the very sink of pau.perism, and enforced the assessment
upon small tenements inhabited by poor people, who hitherto
have not been able to pay their rent, and which, in consequence,
were not Charged in the assessment; the effect of which will be,
that the landlords of such tenements will also suffer greatly, as
many of theM will be given up, and the parties will apply to the
parish for relief.
" That after a most minute inquiry, they have not been able
to ascertain that any other district is oppressed in the manner
here complained of.
" 'The petitioners 'therefore humbly pray, that your Lord.
ships will be pleased to remove the said surveyor from being
surveyor, or apply such other redress as your Lordships may
think lit,"
A committee was then appointed to carry. into effect the fur,
they measures necessary to promote the object of the meeting,
and thank,' being void tothe Chairman, Mr. CLAUICE, briefly
acknowledged die compliment paid to him, and said that he, as
well as the other inhabitants of the district, only desired to have
fair play in the payment of their taxes. They wished to give
the tiovernment what the law required, and what the honour of
the Crown, and the exigencies of the State, demanded ; but
they were at the same, time determined to resist what they
deemed to be an .unjustifiable demand. The meeting broke
up at nine o'clock.

Ort Tueiday the old Bridge of Earn was put
up by public roue, and bought by Sir D. .'ION CRIEFFE for
the sum of 255.! This old fabric, which' has stood the test for
time immemorial, was, by the town's records, thoroughly re-
paired about 300 *ears ago, and is at that time suited to have
been "an auld, (rail; and ill biggit brig." It is itipposed one
of the oldest in the kiugdont.—(Glarpre Chronicle.)

RETAIL, BREWERIES.

A Court of Petty Session* for th* County of
Middlesex was held yestesday at Brantford. The business
which was expected to come before the Magistrates gave to this
sitting an interest not often excited by meetings in Petty Ses-
sions. The question to be decided was the important one to
the public, whether brewers, with a common brewer's licence,
have power to sell beer in smaller. vantities than gallons
(not to be consumed on the premises), without a victualler's
licence, granted by the Magistrates. l'he Court was fixed for
11 precisely, but before that, time the large room in which it
was held was thronged by a great number of respectable indi-
viduals, who conceived themselves particularly interested in the
decision of the question.
Soon after 11 o'clock, Colonel C.l.lTrs**ol. Wm. Carom.
Tort, Esq„ JAMES LAWSON, E 19., and the Bev. Dr. BoND,
magistrates of the county, took thetr seat* on thelench ; Col.
CLrrntaoß in the Chair. After the dispatch of some routine
basins,* of no Importance.,
• Mr. Clarke,. the cicvk to the Megiatwates, called on tbet
formattomi, " Proctor againit.Thoinas Brook and Jas. Crook."
The first of these was read. It stated, that on the 13th of
December instant, Edward Proctor; of Coppice-row, Clerken.
well, gentleman' who prosecuted as well for himself as on be-
half of the poor of the parish of Ealing, came before William
Crighton, Esq. a Magistrate of the County, and gave infOrma-
don that sifter the 20th of September: 1705, and six months
before the day of laying the information, to wit, on the 11th
of December, 1823, at the parish of Ealing, in the said county,
Thos. Dove Brookes, of the said parish, brewer, did, in the
house of the said Thos. Dove Brookes, without being duly li.
censed, sell ale by retail in smaller quantities than 41 gallons,
contrary to the statute, whereby the said Brookes forfeited the
the sum of 201: and costs, half to the informer (Procter), and
half to the poor of the said parish of Ealing. There were
other count. in the information, charging the defendant with
selling ale on his premises, and also permitting It to be sold
contrary to the statute.
A similar information, for a similar offence in the same pa-
rish, and at the same date, was laid against James Crooke,
but it was not entered into at this period.
Mr. PLATT appeared as Counsel for the informer ; Mr.
LANOIIAM as Solicitor.
Mr. TALFOURD for the defendant ; Solicitor, Mr. Yr/ix'.
As soon as the information was read,
Mr. TALro tr au ssid he had a preliminary objection to make
before the evidence was gone into, which if the Magistrates hold
valid, the information must be quashed without going farther.
Who Mr. Procter, the informer, was he did not know ; but
this he knew, that he was not an officer of time Emilie, nor his
2tlajesty's Attorney-General, and he contended, that by the
56th Geo. 111., cap. 3, no prosecution for a penalty under the
Excise could be valid, or at all taken cognizance of by any Ma-
gistrate, unless instituted by an officer of Excise, or by or with
the concurrence of his Majesty's Attorney-General. The
Learned Gentleman then cited several statutes, to sliew that this
was an information within the meaning of the 56th Geo. 111.,
and as such should have been prosecuted by an officer of Ex-
cite, or by the Attorney-General, and that not being so laid, the
Magistrates could take no cognizance of it.
Mr. PLATT, In reply, contended, that before the act of Ches.
11., no licence could be valid wi h the authority of the Magi-
strate, and that all subsequent acts, though they went to regu-
late the licence as far as the duty, and of course the revenue,
were concerned, still left the police of them to the superintend-
ence of the Magistrates. The Solicitor of the Excise or the At-
torney-General would not interfere on those occasions, unless
the revenue was likely to suffer. They were interested only for
its protection in these matters; but the regulations respecting the
order and decorum which were to be observed in the houses
where ale was to be sold—the care that the public morals should
not be violated—that the public peace should not be broken in
those places, was left to the jurisdiction of the Magistrates, and
of any thing which concerned such matters they could take cog-
niztune, no matter by whom the information before them was
laid. To support this view of the case the Learned Gentleman
cited several statutes. He contended, that from the earliest pe-
riod, when the selling of ale, beer, and other liquors, became a
subject of Parliamentary exacnnent, the regulations of the per-
sons and places by whom and in which such liquors were vend-
ed for consumption on time premises, was left under the jurisdic-
tion of the Magistrates.
Mr. TALrounD replied at some length to time arguments of
his learned opponent. In tile course of his reply, he took occa-
sion to notice the letter of Mr. Carr, the solicitor to the Excise,
in answer to an application of Mr. Denies, respecting the legality
of common brewers selling beer or ale without a victualler's
licence. The letter was as follows :
" My dear Sir,—The answer given to Mr. Palmer is, as I
have always understood it, full and explicit to his present ques-
tion. A licensed brewer, who disclaims the allowance made to
common brewers, and pays time full duty as a retail-brewer, may
legally sell beer by retail, to be consumed eliewhere than on hie
premises, without incurring any penalty.
" I am, ace, " T. W. CARR."
Col. CLITTIEROIC asked whether this letter was founded on
any Act of Parliament? Being answered than() acts were cited
by Mr. Carr, he observed, that as such it could be looked upon
only as 111 r. Carew opinion.
After consulting with his brother magistrates for a moment
Col. Cr.rrnEttor stated that they overruled time obje
ctiun.,
Mr. PLATT then proceeded on the merits of the case. It
was, he observed, an information, not laid for the purpose of
extorting the penalties, but to try time important question, whe-
ther a common brewer, by not claiming the allowance, might
retail beer without a retailer's, or in other words, a victualler's
licence. The act he relied upon in support of this information
was the 36th Ow. 111., by which it was enacted (sec. 113),
" that any person who shall sell rile or beer, or any other ex-
cisablc liquors, by retail, or shall penrtit or suffer any ale or
beer, &c., to be sold in his, her, or their house, outhouse, or
other place, without being duly licensed so to do, and shell
thereof be duly convicted, shall forfeit 201, and costs ; anti,
on a second conviction, shall he rendered incapable of being
time eafter licensed to keep an ale-houile, or to sell beer or
olier liquors by retail." Ile would not trespass farther on
the tinie of the Court at present, but call his witnesses to
prove that the defendant had sold beer and ale contrary to
this act. He would reserve himself for further cotranent, for
Isis reply to any case which might be attempted to be made on
the tither aide:

Ile then called and examined John Thompson, who stated.—
I live in Marylebone parish, 19, Upper Ogleoureet. I know
the British Brewery. It is in Brentford. I can't say i is in
the parish of Ealing. On Thursday, the Ilth instant, I went
to the brewery for beer in' the evening. I saw two or three
persons there, serving out the beer.. One of them served me.
There is a counter wtthin a shop. There were persons coming
away with beer which they had purchased. I purchased a
quart of what is called their best ale, for which I paid 11t1. Mr.
Brooks (the defendant), I believe, keeps the Brewery. They
said it was the British Brewery.
(It was here admitted by defendant's counsel, that Brooks
kept the Brewery.).

.
Cross-examined" by ;fir.T Al 4 0 V1M.... I.,saw others coming
out with beer. I saw printed' panne .stuck up in , the place,
stating, " No beer purchased here to be drank on the premises."
The shop was fitted *pas a shop and. counter fur selling beer.
I saw nu person* drinking there. It was here admitted (to
save time) that the defendant had acted without a victualler's
licence--Here the case closed for the informent.
Tauroußn then addreosed the Bench. Hs began by,
begging that no persons present Might express their feelings
in Court by any applause or disapprobation of what might
pass on either side. (We should have stated before, that con-
siderable applause was elicited from the audience (a very
crowded one) by same observations which fell from the
Learned Gentleman in the commencement of the proceedings,
upon the impoliey and injustice of
,restricting the cheap
sale of the general beverage of the people.] Such an ex.
pressiort of feeling, he now observed, was wholly . unsuited to.
the present time and place. His client, he continued, WAS, a
wholesale brewer, And had been so ?or a considerable time. In
consequence of opinions Which had been publicly stated as to
the legality of selling beer by retail, with a comnrou brewer's
license, and also of the opinion given on the subject by the So-
licitor of the Excise, which the Court had heard read, be had
made up his mind to become a retailer brewer, not claiming
the allowance. To this, on application to the officers of excise,
he found no objection. His stock was therefore re.gaugetl,and
he acted throughma in the most open and undisguised manner.
To his surprise, however, he found the present information laid
against him, not by any officer of excise, hut by f.te
already named. But the parties were not satisfied with one
information; far there was another still pending against another
individual for the some offence. It was said the object was not
to claim the penalty ; but ilthat were the tact, where Yeas the

__—
necessity of the siconti infotwation I, One won't' have bees

sufficient to try the question of law. But to the case. He
(Mr. Talfourd) apprehended that by common law a brewer had
a right to sell his beer by retail. In contending for the right
of the common brewer to sell beet by retail (not to be con-
sumed on his premises), he would have to notice two classes
of statutes ; the first being to regulate alehouses, as to
their management, with respect to order and decorum ;
and the second being for the regulation of the cornmon
brewer, without reference to alehouses. Ile would endea-
vour to show, that though the Legislature interfered, from time'
to time, in regulating the manner in which sellers of ale were
to conduct themselves and their houses, it in all -those regula-
tions recognized the riht of the common brewer to sell by re-
tail. By the sth and 6th of Edward VI., chapter 25, entitled
"An act for keepers of alehouses to he bound by recogniwice„"
it was set forth, that intolerable abuses and injuries. "to the
commonwealth" had grown up through ouch abuses as were
had in " alehouses and tippling-booties," and a power was
given to the Magistrates to ,put a stop to the sale of beer in
common alehouses ;" and it went on to enact, that no person
should be allowed to keep any common alebousir or tippling-
house, but such as were permitted at quarter-sessions, or by
two Magistrate', who were, thereby directed to take recognik.
ances from the parties for the preservation of order in such
houses. The apt contained a clause allowing beer is be sold
at fairs; but it evidently related not to the suppression of the
sale of ale or beer, but to the suppression of disorder in the
houses where these were sold and consumed. The lid Charles
1., cap. 3, for the better enforcing sth and 6th Edward VI.,
enacted, that any person selling ale, not being licensed to keep
a common alehouse, &c., should forfeit a penalty of 20s. ; but
that evidently referred to the former act for the regulation of
alehouses; for if not, it would prevent the sale of beer al-
together; and it was obvious that it must be taken in this
sense, fin in the fourth section, where penalties were im-
posed, the words " being en unlicensed elehouse-keeper"
were annexed to the term " offender," and the words " shall
offend in any of the premises," shewed that the terms before
used were, when taken together, applicable to alehouse-
keepers only. After reciting some other acts, which, lie con-
tend, hid In view the recognition of the right of the com-
mon brewer to sell without a victualler's licence, the Learned
gentleman proceeded to the 411th Geo. 111., which enacted
(after reciting the 44th Geo. 111., by which a stamp of 'N. 2s.
was imposed on licenses, granted by Magistrates, for selling beer
or ale by retail) that the acid act (as far as the stamps on the
licence by Magistrates) should be repealed; and then it wont
on to enact, "that every person who shall sell beer or ale, to be
drank or consumed in his house or premises, shall, before be sell
such beer, ale, &c., to be so consumed, take out an excise 11-
eence." By this Act themanagement of the duty was placed al-
together under the controul of the Excise. The Act (3d Geo.
IV.) commonly called Mr. Bennet's Act, had, he contended,
the same meaning, and in the regulations which it enacted re-
specting the forms of licences, left untouched the rights of the
common brewer to sell by retail beer, not to be consumed on his
premises. Would it, he asked, be contended that *brewer
should descend to the rank of an alehouse-keeper before he
could get a licence to sell by retail ? The 411th Geo. 111.
should be taken as a key to all the preceding Acts, as applying
to the selling of beer by retail, not to he consumed on the pre-
mises. What were the whole scope and object of all the pro-
ceeding acts ? Not to prohibit the sale of ale, but to regulate
the houses in which it was to be sold and consumed. How did
the common brewer, selling by retail what was nut to be con.
sumed on his premises, interfere with the spirit or letter of those
acts ? Did he prevent the accomplishment of the and they
seemed to have in view ? On the contrary, he was aux-
iliary to that object, by withdrawing the temptation so often
held out to individuals in those places where beer and ale
were sold and consumed. It withdrew that great encourage.
ment to tippling—the society and example of those who were
addicted to it; it withdrew the temptation to gambling and
other vices, which were encouraged by. constant visits to tip-
pling houses. The practice of the. common brewer, who sold
by retail, to be consumed off' his premises, wits an encourage.
ment to temperance and domestic habits—two qualities gene-
rally inconsistent with a very frequent resort to the public.
bowie. 'raking, then, the whole of the acts he had mentioned,
he contended that none of them took away the right of the com-
mon brewer to sell by retail, where the liquor was not to be
consumed on his premises. He would now come to other Acts,
by which it appeared that the Legislature had from time to
time recognised the common brewer's right to sell by retail
without a victualler's licence. By the 12th of Charles H.,
chap. 24, it was enacted, that every barrel of ale brewed by a
common brewer, or other person, was subject to a certain duty,
and it mentions " all those that tap out, publicly or privately."
By the latter word, must evidently be understood those who
sold by retail, as distinguished from the common brewer; but
the section on which he relied was that in which it was stated
that persons selling by retail should not have for leakage, &c.,
certain allowances which were granted to others. By the 411
Geo. chap. 30, it was enacted, (section I 8), that no per-
son " not being a common brewer," should be allowed to re-
tail beer at and after a higher rate than three halfpence per quart,
without entering into recognizances, and having a licence as
a common alehouse. keeper, under a penalty of M. over and
above any penalty to which he might be liable for selling with-
out such a licence. Was not this, he would ask, a direct ad-
mission that a common brewer might so sell ? Was it to be
supposed, when the Legislature made this direct exception in
his favour, that it would require him to enter into recognizance*
as n common alehouse-keeper? The Acts which would be re-
lied upon on the other side, were Acts which prevented the
common brewer from selling by retail, and at the same time
claiming the allowance as a retailer for consumption on his
premises. Could it be said that no common brewer WAS in
existence when those Acts passed ? The supposition would
be absurd; fbr the common brewer was expressly mentioned,
and mentioned for the purpose of exempting in selling by re..
tail from saute things to which the alehouse-keeper was liable.
The fact was clear, that the right of the common brewer was
recognized, and the regulations were made not to exempt him
from selling by retail, but to guard against the frauds and eva-
sions which might be practised by others. Me would assert that
the principle upon which this opposition rested, proceeded from
a spirit which he would not then characterize. The object of
the laws and regulations ho had noticed, was for the security
of the Excise revenue, and also for the better regulation of the
pike of tippling-hosece. The laws did not prohibit the drink-
mg of ale ; they only went to regulate the houses where it was
drank; anti it a remedy were desired against the mischiefs
of such houses, where could it • better be found, than in the
common brewer, who stood between the consumer and those
manifold temptations which the resort to the public-hottee
threw in his way. The common brewer stood between the
consumer and *Lich temptations—between hint anti beggary,
and held Out en inducement to hint to enjoy A good and cheap
beverage by his social tire side, without risking the dangers to
which the public-image exposed hint. It wits said that the
common brewer did this for his own interest, and net for the
public good. It was not to be expected, that in his acts he was
to expose himself to lose of propel ; but if this were made it
pound of objection to hint, how would it apply to the whole-
sale brewer ? What had the Megistrates then betbre them
but a contest of overgrown monoroly against the exertions of
humble anti honest industry ? the man who sold his beer as
the defendant, acted as it friend to Society. The defendant, in
the remorse he had pursued, ucteti in a fair and manly manner,
and cousietently with the regulatiotos of those public officers of
customs, who would have prevented him if be acted contrary to
law. In conclusion, the Learned tientlenuoi expressed a hope
that the couttutit of his client might be viewed in that tight by
the Bench which would meet the justice of the case.

Mr. TALVOI/w0 now called George Peacock, an officer of
excise, who 'proved that the defendant had given him notice in
the regular form that he intended to cell :►s a retail brewer.
His stock was re.gauged for that purpose, and he was charged
the additional. duty.

In his cross4examination he said, that defendant had dis-
claimed the allowance, if a publican brewed his own herr,
he would have the same to pay as defendant.
The licence under which the defendant acted, was then
put in. •

Col. CLITISEROK asked whether thAt was sufficient under
the,Act, without s Magistrate's licence.
Ur. TALrotrtu said, thAt his argument WAS, that the.eotn.
mon brewer, who retailed beer not to be consumed on his ))re.
mites, was exempted from IN necessity of obtaining a ;Wag's.
trate's licence.

itiitthows, keeper of the Excite &turtle of the &mkt,
moved that the defendant took out hie licence ,as u common
,revecr, and gave the regular notice. •: • •

Mr. DAOkltt, a collector of excise, stated that the lizerice pro-
duced was the outfit° that was granted to all common brewers.
By Colonel CLIIKEROE.-114vt you, in the course of the

last 12 mouths, received any ii;rections hum the Board of Ex-
cise respecting these licences ?
Witness.-1 have received' this (producing a paper.) The
paper was about to be read, when
Mr. PLATT objected. The present was not an excise case,
and the instructions of the Board of Excise,. unless they were
under the direct authority of an Act of Parliament, could not
be taken as evidence of what the law was. Their opinion, how-
ever wise, was not law.
Mr. TALrouan submitted that the paper would" be evi.
deuce, if it were only in mitigation of the penalty.
Mr. PLATT repeated, that if such was the object, the pre.
sent was not exactly the moment. lie then repeated ids former
objection.

Mr. TALFOURD said he wished to show that the defendant
carried on his trade as common brewer accoirding to the regula-
tions of the Mitch*.
The Corms. decided against receiving the Inetructions given
to the officer by the Board of Excise, and also against she
ceiving the excise licence as common brewer, as arnffielent evi-
dence of defendant's right to sell by retail without a magi-
strate's licence.
Mr. PLATT replied in support of the Informationoind in A
speech of some length conteuded that the Legislature never in.
tended to exempt the con 'men brewer from the nitetattityof having
Magistrates' licence for a retail trade, more than the common
alehouse-keeper. If such an exception bad been intended, it
would not have been left to inference, but would have been
clearly and expressly declared in all or some of the many Acts
which had passed with respect to licence& It was not deniel
that the power of granting licences was given to the Magistrates
for the prevention of riots or disorders, in the retail of beer.
Why should the retailer, who sold beer to be consumed in
other places than his premied, be exempt ? It was absurd to
say that such sale 'would be exempt from the dangers to which
the other mode of retail was liable. Persona who thus got
cheaper beer would he likely to consume the greater quan-
tity of it; and though they might not drink it on the premises
where it was purchased, what was there in law to prevent a
man living next door from hiring out A, room where such
cheap beer could be drank P As he did not sell it, there was
no law to prevent hint ; and thus the whole alleged abject of
this newly discovered interpretation of an Act would be'defeatett.
But he contended, the acts relied upon had no such meaning,
and the act upon which the informer= was founded was ex-
press upon the necessity of having a Magistrate's licence along
with the excise licence, without any exception of common
brewer or other. The Learned Gentleman then wont, seriatim,
through the cities cited by Mr. 'l'alfourd, and maintained that one of them was of sufficient force to evade the plain and
obvious meaning of the set on which the information was laid.
In conclusion he observed, that if the Bench decided against
the Information now, the same question would soon be raised
in another ferns ; but if they decided against the defendant, he
would have his appeal to the Sessions, and eventually.the ques-
tion would come before the Judges of the land, who would
inform the public what was the law on this point, so that here-
after there could be no doubt respecting it.
The Magistrates consulted together for a few moments, after
which,
Colonel CerTnEnot delivered the judgment of the Court.
He said that in delivering the opinion of himself and his brother
Magistrates he would make only one observation. When ha
saw such e numerous end respectable assemblage of the Gen-
tlemen of the neighbourhood on this occasion, he was convinced
that the subject before them was considered a most important
one. In the opinion which the Bench would pronounce, they
would give what was the best judgment ; but it was a satisfac
tion to them, that their opinion was likely to come bithre a
higher tribunal, where its merits could he snore effectually de.
cited. The opinion of the Court was, that the information was
valid, and that the defendants must e convicted.
Notice of appeal was immediately given.
It was now intimated, that if the Quarter Sessions should
affirm the conviction, the informer !wail press only for half
the penalty, and that for the parish.
After some short discussion, a conviction was recorded on the
informetion against Mr. Crooke, for a like offence, but with the
understanding, that on the affirmation of the first conviction,
judgment would not be pressed on this.
it Visits, the defendant's solicitor, here wished to know
from the Bench what was to be done with reaped to shutting
up or keeping open the breweries, against the proprietors or'
which the convictions had been recorded-
The Magistrates declined giving any advice on the subject.
The defendants in that respect must take their own course. The
defentlAntl now entered into the proper recognizances to prose.
cute the appeal, and the Court adjourned.

From the LONDON GAZETTE, Dec, 30.

BANK RI TPTCY Si) P ERSEDE D.
John Robinson, Burstein, Stattbrtiabire, manufacturer of
earthenware.

BANKRUPTS.
I.lenjamin Buller, Stratford .upon-A von,iVarwiekshire, corn-
dealer, to surrender Jan. 22, 2.1, Feb. 10, at the Golden Lion
Inn, Stratford-upon-Avon. Solicitor, AIL flall,Ghat James.
street, Bedford-row.

John Henry Mortimer, Lostwithiel, Cornwall, brandy,mer-
chant, Jan. 14, 13, Feb. 10, at the Bush Tavern , Bristol. So-
Bettors Moors. Vizard and Blower, Lincobes-inti.lields.-
William Hurt, Manchester, grocer, Jan. 9, 10 Feb. 10, at
the Bridge-water Anus, Manchester. Solicitors, Illessrs. Net-
tleshipp and Bicknell, Crocere-hall.
John Pratt, Hatton-wall, Ilatton-gartlen, pavier, Jan. 10,
20, Feb. 10, at the Bankrupt** Court, Basingball-street. So-
licitor, Mr. 11allton, Clittbrd's Inn.
Phillip Acton, Congleton, Cheshire, innkeeper, Jan. 8,9,
Fe-t. 10,'at the Roo Buck Inn, Congleton. Solicitors, Nowa.
Milne and Parry, Temple.
John ;lames a ,
nd William Somi ivepool, snip-builders,
Jan. la; 10, Feb. 10, at the Vorka Hotel, Lirverpool. Solicitor
Mr. Leigh, Charlotte-row, Mansion-hutise.
James aingshaw, Latchford, Cheshire, timber-ineralitint,
Jan. 30, 31, Feb. 10, at the Nag's Head, 'Warrington. Bo-
licitor, Mr. Leigh, Charlotte-row illausion-honse.

January 20, H. P. l'elerin, Colite-houselnaurance.
broker—Jan. 27, J. 61. Flower*, Ltoultnhall-streitt, tailor—
Jim. 27, T. IL Evans, Strand,. wiite-roorchanc--Jan. 21, J.
Innen, Chalfont, Olour.esterrinre, clothieta,-.Jan. 10, J. P.'
elsforti, underwtitm

, .
CERTIFICATES, JAN. :Alt
J. Heys, Stockport, draper-4i.. Clerke, St. blOhliN-stireet,
elerkenwelt, slioctooket-11. tiverstheod. Sielibey-errukervey,
master-vorrincr—E. 14010, nilliter.street, broker-3. Huck-
toast, Briatol, botcher.

PARTNERSHIPS D'ISHOLVEIO...
W. and T. Page, Holborn, wirie-rnot,'Ullto--
W. Hughes and J. Loa) T' ,Tobm, Liverpool, obip.cvuors,v..l.
Tobin, W. Al. 1)1164111, and W. Ittighes, ',Atm-pool, insurance-
brokers-- H. tittilterfolit, E. 10. EVL re and C. J. Lynd,Bra-
bant-court, Plitlpot-lone, tnertlionts.—:).,A betels's, 8. a...Ben-
yuly, and 1. Zaffrany, Costlettoeet, 1-Inuithotitch,, merchants-
P., 6- and T. olukk, quiet walls, near A bardet
m r, eleth-
anufactuters-:-E. iiilllloit and . Rent, Bury St. Erim dads,
pawrilirokers-.;-.1. Hinson and T. Oratn, isine,toue•
chants—W. Biggs and 11.. Jenkins Strand, *hoe..
tnakers—J. Hard, Birntingtiarn, ante T. (111140,
Warwickshire, lime-ilealefli*S..lllorgan and J. .Powelli ,Belatol,„ linen-drapers—T. MA J. W. Cartwright, tipper 'Pluititelt..strees,.
bricklayers-11. Hyatt, Al. .11sv v, ond W., Andre. ivsl Stieptou al al let, 'Sumersetshi re, dyers—J.., 3. 0., and W, H. Mtll6,lllark-
-lone, so fat an regards .1. o..Mins —J. Bermat, J. 10,.„kluneu.
And .1. it. Fry, Bristol, haberdashers, so far as regards SAW,
Fry—ll. W. Ilytield, and 0. tlylield, ebating,expss,
booksellers—A. Henry, jun. NV. Clinloner, and J. teLnAtnyy,
Manchester, 111erchants-7. /tows and P. Nokersle Man-
cheater, linen-drapers---- rbed and C. flatitiugton, Kingston..
upon-flull, wine-Inept:bouts—J. (1, Newton, Bridestow, and.R.
Eastcott, Broadwood-Widger, 1/evonshires Lute-burners-41.
A. Barker and 4- Burford, Panorama, Strand—E. Scott and
J. Brittaii, Plymouth, beer-j.—J. Thompson antl
it
Handley, Leek, Statl'ordshire, silk manufacturer.

1- t' 1 ' •'
1 t
TH E Com ET.--f I. ite appearance crierlitleresi to
be a Comet new)), discovered, will ho &mid in the 8.8. E.., 4
five in the morning, near to the constellation Argo', and is
probably the Comet foretoKhrOr. Halley. '- ' ',•- . ,'
~ ,—. ... .. The poor irthribituri IS nna te'llarttry of trig'ptrisb
. . of Charlton, .Kent, to the number of 001 wee 114 01, at Christmas by order of Sir THOStAaI M ON, MARION IV LLI
Bart., now on the Concinent, with liberal donstir,art of bread,
and meat.