The Sun.
London, England, 1824-11-13 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 12.

DAVIS V. THE BANK OF ENGLAND.
Onr readers cannot fail to recollect that this important case
was tried at Guildhall—that the Jury found a special verdict—
and that the cue was subsequently argued before the Court of
Common Pleas. Since that period, however, the present Ctcirr
Jus4rtcE and Mr.-Justice 6AZELEE have taken their seats in
this Court, and they wished, to hear the argument de nova, be-
fore they pronounced a judgnicnt.
Tide day Mr. Serjeant Vaucinasr was heard on behalf of
the plaintiff. lie commenced by stating, that the appointment
of the Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Gazelee to seats in this
Court caused a re.hearing of this Om. The object of the
Bank of England was to prevent the plaintiff from recovering
under the verdict ; and they objected to pay principally be-
cause the plaintiff' had known that a forgery was committed on
the Bank ; whereas the Plaintiff' insisted upon recovering, be-
catte.the Bank, as lie insisted, must have known, if they had
used due diligence, that his name had been forged to these in.
struments, under which a considerable transfer of stock had
taken place. It was said that in March, IBA, the plaintiffwas
aware of the forgery, and that he concealed WO the .20th of
September following; ..and it could not be denied that the
Bank had no evidence of his adoption of that forgery, but by
the alligamion of such concealment. No doubt the Court, in
directing a second argument, must have been influenced, not
only by the real state of the facts in the case, but by.the mo.
meittous responsibility in which the Bank was involved, rather
than by any difficulty in the application of the law to the pies.
don. The question was one of general concern. Every. indi-
vidual, whether native or foreigner, who had money in our
funds, was interested in it ; and if the dicislon in this case were
tuiverse to the plaintiff; they must feel that property erulan-
, gered in proportion to the vast responsibility of . the Bank,—
In fact when looking at the point morn particularly to be
decided, he did not know in what decided cases the plaintiff 's
right to recover could be impeached. It would be right here to
state, that the form of the action was in Tort, for a breach or
duty in the Bank transferring the plaintiff's stock without his
authority. But suppose the Court to be of opinion that the
stock of the plaintiff was not so transferred, still he had an in.
disputable right of action against the Bank for refusing to pay
the tlividencls waving on that stack.
The Cur trivric E—The damage is stated in the second
and fourth counts of the declaration.
Mr. Serjeant Va G lieN —There were altogether live counts,
that he would now altoge-
ttihieerlialisstemhifarwghicfhrilaiscionnstruidvereart,inatei.d
The facts, however, sup-
plied two points for consideration ; namely, whether they were
sustainable by the first and third or by the second and fourth
counts. First then, werethe Bank guilty of an abuse of their
duty in transferring the stock; and the next, were they justi-
fiabit in refusing to pay the dividend, supposing it not trans.
fered ; and to decide that the Court would have to look at the
relative duty of each party, in conjunction with the facts stated.
The duty of the Bank, as to transfers of stock, was regulated
by various Acts of Parliament, all agreeing as to their
ditty in that ease. The plaintiff' was confessedly the pro-
prietor of stock, And the Bank were precluded from raising the
fit/CMllOa of what interest passed to him in his original transfer.'

At the time this action eammeneed. they admitted the plaintiff's
right to a sum of 10!. on stock, and 1781. in long annuities, on
which he bad received the dividend. At the outset the Bank
acknowledge him to be a proprietor of stock to a large amount ;
and in common with every other stock-holder he had a decided
right to this stock. What then were the duties of the defend.
ants, and who were they ? They were a great public body—the
agents of the public—of the plaintiff, as one of that public;
.and they received a pecuniary consideration for their agency.—
By scat. 31 Geo. 111. c. 34. sect. 3. the Bank were allowed to
take above 400/. for the management of every million.
The eitiEr JVSTICE—That sum has been since reduced ;
but the principle of their being agents and receiving pecuniary
consideration for their agency is the same.
_ _

Mr. Serjeant Vaucttia. N..1-The argument was exactly the
same, and if the agent were guilty, of negligence, he must make
good the damage ; anti the law gave a right of action to that
effect. It would be useless to discuss this principal further.
The first vol. of Cornyn's Digest, article " Action to the Cane,"
was an authority on the point ; and, in later editions of that
work, it was laid down m illustration of the principle, that an
action on the case lay against the Bank for refusing to trans:
fer stock. In the case of Dingley v. the Bank of England, an
application was made to the Court of King's Bench tier a man-
damus to compel the Bank to make a transfer of stock ; but
the Court there said, " No, you have a special action," which
was saying, in other words, we never doubted if the Bank ne-
gligently discharged their duty, that they were Hot liable in an
action to repair their wrong. A hook was specially provided
at the Bank for the insertion of the names of the proprietors of
stock.

The CHIEF Jurricz.--They have credit In these books for
the amounts invested.

Mr. Serjcant Vnuoll A N.—The Act of Parliament directs,
that a book of registry should be kept in the Accountant-Ge-
neral's office. The first of Geo. 111. regulates the precise
method of transfer and mode of attestation, and the same lan-
guage was to be found in all the subsequent Acts upon the
same subject. The party owning stock, or the agent authoriz-
ed to transfer stock, was to insert their several names before
any transfer could take place, and the purchaser of the stock was
also obliged to sign his name. Iletbre proceeding further in
this case, he (the Learned Serjeant) did not know if any ques-
tion were to be raised as to the. -plaintiff being the legal owner
of the stock.

The CHIEF Jurrict.—lt would be In your favour still
more if he did not accept the stock where the dividends were
paid after. _ _ _

Mr. Sergeant VAUGHAN—The party could only have had
his stock by subscribing his name: mitt there was in the margin
of the transfer " a recommendation to accept the stock." In
the case of trustees, that was rarely acted on, and in many others,
too,—
Mr. Juatice PARK—There can be no doubt on that matter.
Mr. Sergeant VAUGHAN—Was it not a violation of the duty
of the bank to tranfer the stock ?

The Eittt Er JUSTICE—But did the Bank transfer the stock ?
They merely held the book to the party who transferred.
Mr. Sergeant VAUGHAN—They permitted the transfer; and
more, they registered the improper party as a proprietor.
Mr. Justice Pane—And that brings us to the question, if in
doing so they acted wrongfully ?
Mr. Sergeant VAUGHAN—In the case of Sir Richard Sutton
a. the Bank of England, the Court held they were guilty of ne-
gligence. so as to sustain an action for an unreasonable delay in
transferring stock.
The Cit tEr JusTicE—What became of that ease P

Mr. Sergeant VAUGHAN —No motion was made upon it.—
The sum recovered wal small, being the difference in the price
of the funds at the period of demand to transfer and the actual
transfer and he merely mentioned it as a principle which, if
not recognized by the Bank, would no doubt have been long
since resisted.

Mr. Justice GazEr.rt—Tn that case the Bank sent a letter
`to the wrong place, which caused more delay than was deemed
actually necessary. It should not be forgotten, too, that the
Bank was guarded in every way, and it was proper it should
be so. The power of attorney was to remain a number of
hours in their hands, and they were to judge of its genuine's,
and make every necessary enquiry. The care and the discre-
tion were all confided to the Bank, not to the purchaser, anti
the Bank, of course, was liable. If then, such was their duty,
such their breach of it, and suchthe loss attending such breach—
The CrtrEr..ittlericE—But there is still another point. Is
the stock transferred? sFor if not, it is the duty of the Bank
to pay the dividend.
Mr. Sergeant Ira tteribtx—This, my Lord, was a forged in-
strument, and the interest cannot pass. We stated that the
Bank refused to pay the dividends; suppose, then, that the
defendants arc liable, the question next came to this—was the
conduct of the plaintiff such as .to divest him of his legal re-
medy ? ,It,was said that six months had elapsed after the for-
gery was known to the plaintiff before he made the disclosure
to the Itankl and on that all he would say was this—was there
ever a moment in which a clear cause of action did not exist in
the plaintiff'? And if that be so, the question came to this—
was the cause of action so divested by other circumstances.
The Cu 1E? J s'r e—A mum ing, for the sake ofark:ument,
that the.ttock.stands in his name, is there any thing to divest
him of his dividend ?
Mr. Sergeant VATIGUAX—ReaIIy this, my Lord, renders all
further argument unnecessary on my part. It is the root of
the tree.
The CsuET JurrlCE—Suppose I have an estate, a forged
.conveyance takes it from meothat forgery is known to be a mitt-
prision of felony, but could I not afterwards sue for my rent ?
Mr. Sergeant Vans:Haw—The title to the stock is indis-
putable.; the dividend is only an excrescence upon the stock,
and therefore not disputable. The plaintiff might be hulloed,
if guilty of any criminal act; but crimes and civil rights should
not be thus confounded. If there were any assent here to the
conduct of the felon, it amounted to compounding felony. But
wouldit be any answer at a trial at the Old Bailey, to say that
a subsequent assent justified a previous forgery ? Certainly.
not. The finding of the Jury in this case was by no means
imperfect as to the assent; they found no assent, but merely a
concealment. - This tmse, no.doubt, was of great magnitude to
a public body, who are so often liable to be imposed upon ; but
it was much fitter that the responsibility should lie on them,
than on an individgal. After what had fell from the Court, he
felt he need say no more ; and trusting that he had fulfilled his
duty to his client, he should wait to hear what was urged by
the other side, satisfied that the verdict would not be disturbed.

Mr. Sergeant TADDY, for the Dank, contended that the tic-
don in this case was not brought for refusing the transfers, but
Ihr permitting the transfer to be made by some unauthorised
person ; that the stock was lost thereby to the plaintiff; and
then the declaration thus concludes--" by means whereof the
plaintiff has been deprived of his stock." It would be suffi-
cient for this day's argument to say, that the facts of the case
did not chew that any stock was lost, in consequence of such an
unauthorised transfer. The stock was never demanded by the
plaintiff—no refusal to give it was set forth or proved ; the
allegations In the first and third counts were that stock was
lost, but those were not supported either in law or in fact. It
would be an improper conclusion of law to say .t stock was
lost ; and, Infart, there was nothing by which thasCourt could
see that the stock did not belong to the plaintiff: Ilis only
demand was for the dividends.

Jus.r lc H—Vou appear to argue on the first and
third counts . but the second and fourth assume that stock was
standing in his name.
Mr. Sergeant 'FADDY—Hp was not going to chew that the
stock was lost ; and as to the transfer there were no means of
»hewing what its effect might be.
Mr. Justice GaiEL.KE—You appear to say that no damage
appears under the first and third counts—that is to say, special
damage.
Mr. Serjeant TAMPI—So. It was for the other side to prove
any and what damage, by such unauthorised transfer.
Mr. Justice Bullitolloll—Could you divrove any damage
if necessary ? The breach assigns that the plaintiff was de-
prived of his dividends and other profits; do you call that, or
not, a damage ?
Serjeant Tarmy—We wish, my Lord, to argue the
MC here as we would in error, arid to meet the points exactly
in issue between the parties.
Mr. Justice Gas:ELEE—The concluding words of the pas-
sage in which the damage it alleged runs thus—" and the said
Governor and Company of the Bank 'of England have wholly
neglected their duty, and have refused to pay all such demands
anti profits ats lu woulddin have accrued if the stock had remained in
the name of the said plaintiff, and not been transferred." This
was the l
I dividend. allegation of tldedfirtshtacot unt.
1 Mr. Serjeant thatappreiene
applied to the

The-CIIIEP4USTICE Well, Come to the point: what do
you answer about the refusal to pay the dividends ?
_ .

Mr. Serjeant TADDY —lt was first to be seen if they were
entitled to the dividends. It certainly was the duty of the
Bank to pay all dividends, hut in this case the demand was
to pay all dividends due on the of th of September.; where.
as, for six months before that, the plaintiff knew that they
bud 'been received 'h an unauthorised person. It would cer-
tabilrbe fatal to public justice if a party could bring his action
after such conduct on his own part, and beside after shielding
the felonious offender and -favouring his (*cane. Laying the
nearness of the blood of the parties out of the question, he was
satisfied the Court never could sanction the bringing an action
wbetr the,plaintiff's conduct had-been such as it was in this par_
denier, CaSe. It' the plaintiff' here were tried for rnisprison of
felony, though no one would wish to press him hard, yet still,
ifs man, though acting on and up to the principles of nature,
violated-the law, he must suffer as the law ordained. If the
felon were here, the plaintitf could not sustain a verdict, because
lie had no good ground of action ; and the felon not being
here, being out of the teach of public justice, and .the

tiff knowing and favouring his escape, how could the plaintiff
bring an action in the case? The plaintiff only informed the
Bank of the forgery in September ; money was lent to -
in June—

Itlr. Justice PARK—IIow lend money in June when the
party left in April ?
Mr. Serjeant TADDY—The question here, after all, was,
could this action be maintained on any principal of common
law; and next, was it desirable it should be maintained, on
grounds of public policy ; Actions in this case, let it be re-
membered, were created by Stat. Edward 1., commonly called
the Statnte of Westminster 2d. and had for their object some-
thing of a &mum and i►{juriunn really committed under all
the circumstances of the Case. But an action originally well
vested, might be divested after, as for example—in case of the
enticing away an apprentice. It' the master brought his action
against the apprentice, he could not bring another against the
person enticing him away. But here theparty suffered the bank to
pay on unauthorised ruthority—he suffered no daninuns no in-
seitim—The Bank were the sufferers, and yet, on the 30th
September, the plaintiff came to them for the payment of
those very sums which he knew were paid away before. If
the plaintiff had only dealt fairly and properly by the Bank, he
might have had his dividends. Suppose this were the case of
a private individual. Suppose that I know a man has forged
my power of attorney for a certain sum, and that he goes to my
steward and obtains that sum, he believing the instrument to
be genuine, could I, with such knowledge, bring an action on
the case against my steward for the payment over again ola sum
which I knew to be so obtained, and to the obtaining of which

I had so manifestly lent myself ? Such a case would not be
suffered in a Court of Justice. An action on the case was only
allowed the an injury done, and here the injury was done to the
Bank, by not giving them timely information.
Mr. Justice PAux—l want to know this. Suppose I buy
stock, sold to me under a forged power of attorney, of which
know nothing, how could the Bank be injured by paying me
the dividend ? In other words, could they retain my dividend
Mr. Sergeant TanDr llitnk are certainly bound to
pay those who are properly authorised to receive. But surely
the Bank wete not to pay both—the authorised, and unau..
thorised to receive. _

Mr. Justice Gaztv.tr —No, but if they pay the unau-
thorised, that is their business. The properly authorised must
be paid, and you know that tke cashier Of the Bank gets a
gross sum to pay their" proportion" to the proper parties.
The CHIEF JUSTICE—Can you find any Act which says,
that if stock is not found placed to my name, it is not reason-
able to conclude it has been actually transferred ?
Mr. Justice PARK-4 wish to -know, does your argument
only extend to the dividends under the '2d and 4th counts?
Because, if so, has not the plaintiff a right of action for the
dividends of the next half year ? This I put to you us an 811,11.
ment of candour.

Mr. Sergeant TADDY—It would be very difficult for Coun-
sel to answer such an argument. Be knew this, that the Bank
meant nothing but what was right. They were but the mere
conduit-pipe to the public, and they only acted up to their duty
In resisting a case like the present.
TheCIIIEF JUSTICE—Your argument goes against the
right of bringing an action on the case to recover those divi-
dends, which you allege would have been paid to the plaintiff,
but for his own fault. Now, I ask you, is not this rather a
ground of cross action by the Bank, than of the forfeiture of
the dividends by the plaintiff? I'll tell you why I think so;
because the Bank would be pat to prove their loss, and very fit
it would be. _ _

rjeant TADDY—In contract of its debt, a cross action
might be brought; but in case it is different, and for the very
obvious reason of avoiding circuity of action. In an action on
the case, the whole facts of it arc to be considered, and if an In.
jury or wrong be not to be gathered from the whole appearances
of the case, then it is not maintainable.
The CHIEF JUST icx—Whether that be a sufficient answer
to meet my difficulty, I shall not say ; but it is certainly inge.
Mims.

Mr. Sergeant TADDY—.The Bank wished for instruction
from the Court on this important position. I contend that no
action, for any matter arising collaterally or directly out of any
felony, can be maintained, until conviction of the offender takes
place, or public justice is satisfied. Public justice was often
necessarily entrusted to individuals, and it was right that those
individuals should be protected in the performance of their
duties. It was observed that civil actions merged in the felony
—but that was not always the case. The case of Dawkes anti
Kavanagh, reported in Styles, 346, was a case in point. Kava.
nagh was indicted for robbing a house, was tried, found guilty,
and burned in the hand. Dawkes afterwards brought his action
of elausistnfrvit, and the defendant pleaded he was not guilty,
and a special verdict was returned. A question then arose, if,
after the burning; of the hand, the action could be maintained ?
and the Court held that it could be, for the first injury
.was done
to the Commonwealth, for which the punishment was inflicted,
and then the party was amenable for the individual wrong..—
This was after conviction of the felon. In the case of Higgins
and Butcher, 1 Levintz 247, it was held that the party injured
could maintain his action, though not a third party.
The CHIEF JUSTICE—You'd find that difficult, I think, in
case of murder.
Mr. Sergeant TADDY—In Dawkes and Kavanagh, Ist Rolls,
657, the party was protected for the felony for the good of the
commonwealth, and the trespass to make up the loss to the in.
dividual. In that case, it was held, that the latter action was
mainable, and that Dawkes in bringing it had done his duty.
From the time of Bracton, it was held, that all the King's sub-
jects were to give notice of felonious transactions, and not to
remain duos nudes, vel dies, without giving information of them
to the King. And the same principle was to be found in the
21st Henry VIII. ch. 11.
The CHIEF JUSTICE—There is, however, this difference
between the Statute and the Common Law. By the latter, no
writ of restitution could be sued out, if any tardy delay took
place, whereas, by the former, the felon was even after attaint
to be taken upon evidence.
Mr. Sergeant Tatou-it—lt is right it should be known, that
every one is guilty of a misprision of felony, if he know others
to be guilty of a felony, and do not state it to the proper autho.
Sties; this was clearly laid down in 1 Hawkins, p. 251. Be-
sides, in this case, the plaintiff allowed the forger to escape.
The Cii icy JusTicu.—There is no evidence before us
that the plaintiff was privy to the escape, or that he was by to
favour it.
Mr. Justice 13unitouou—Suppose this man was taken a
month after before a Magistrate, and examined on another cri.
minal charge, would the plaintiff here be guilty of a misprision
of felony ?
Mr. Justice PAnic—This man was taken for a forgery on
the house of Drununond. Some delay took place in his second
examination, and until that was disposed of, what service could
the plaintiffs disclosure do the Bank ?

The CffIEF JUSTICE-Isuppose Brother Taddy means the
Bank would have taken greater care of him.
Mr. Justice Pmts—l suppose the Bank leave those-matters
to the care of the proper authorities.
The CHIEF J frr cr —I wish to call your attention, Brother
Teddy, to the liability of innkeepers and carriers when the
goods consigned to their care are feloniously stolen. Now.am
I to wait to bring my action until they have prosecuted the
felon to conviction.
Mr. Sergeant TADDY—If the innkeeper knew who the felon
was--.
The Cum. Jurrice—l take it that the Bank stands in the
very same .ituation.
Mr. Justice PARK—Does the general proposition you started
just now apply to all cassea before conviction for felony or only
to this case ?

Mr. Sergeant TAnDY_I mean it generally, though particu.
larly in this case. The beamed Sergeant, with considerable
eloquence, contended that general policy called loudly on the
Court, as well as the special facts, to discountenance actions
like the present.
Mr. Sergeant VAUGHAN having briefly replied,
The CHIEF JUSTICE said, we have received all the Infor-
mation which talent, industry, and ingenuity could supply us in
this case, and we should be wanting in our duty to the public
if we did not take time to give our judgment on this important
subject. We shall give notice when we mean to pronounce it.

COURT OF CONDELEGATES, Nov. IL
batory, BRISCOE V. BRISCOE.
There was a full Court this morning, and half an hour's dis-
cussion upon Lady Briscoe's application to have the term pro-
which had been assigned her, opened, in order to allow
of the examination of two witnesses whom she had offered to
produce on the last Court-day.
Their Lonnsturs rejected to-day's application also; re-
fusing either to extend the term, and allow the examination of
the witnesses to be taken, or to rescind the conclusion of the
cause; which now, therefore, stands definitively assigned for
argument and sentence.

COAL MARKET, Nov. 12.
Ships at Market. Ships sold Price.
25 Newcastle - 194 . 303 Od to 40s 31
17i Sunderland . . 9 . 36s 9d to 42s Ott

MaTUOD OF PRESERVING SHALL BEER.—A
Lady, desiring her butler to be saving of an ex-
cellent tun of small beer, asked him how it might
be preserved. " I know• of no method so effec-
tual, my Lady," says the butler, " as placing a
,barrel of good ale by the side of it 1"

INDIA.

f

(From the Singapore Chronkk.l
THR TRADE OF SI NOAP011.1:.
SmaleottE, JUNE 10.—We have the pleasure
of laying before our Readers the following statement shelving
the resort of European and Native shipping to the port of
Singapore, for the purposes of trade or refreshment, from the
end of December, 1822, to the beginning of January, 1024.
The number of port clearances granted to European vessels .
during this period, amounted to 20g. Of these 47 cleared out
for H indostan-42 for Malacca and Pinang-48 for China-9 fir
Great Britain-4 for Manila-3 for Sium-4 for Tringanu and
Kalantan-5 for Borneo-29 for Java—fl for Sumatra-11 for
Borneo, and I for New South Wales. The tonnage of these
vessels amounted to upwards of 73,000 tons, but ae must be ,
evident enough from the nature and situation of the place, many •
of the vessels put in for the convenience of wooding and water-
ing only—others again traded to a small extent--some took in
a large portion of their cargoes, and a few the whole amount of,
the lading. The place indeed is so conveniently situated, from
the facility of ingress and egress, that almost every ship that ,
assed through the Straits of Malacca, touches, if for no other
view than to obtain information. Indeed out of 424 veesels Char
passed passed and repassed the Straits of Malacca during the y
1823, we think that not more than six or seven passed on with-
out touching, and these were chiefly Duch men of war.
The next most important branch of trade is probably that of
the Chinese Junks of Canton and Fokien. In 1823 these
amounted to six in number, in all about 3,000 tons. These 1
Junks import and export complete cargoes to and (rain Siege-
pore only.
The native trade from Siam amounted in 1823 to 34 Junks,
which mar be considered equal to 11,000 tons. 'rite greater
iacTc ha eanndatii,vienantragd)etraaidthe
(Ili!
number of these import full cargoes, and carry' way an eSllllai
°rehectiliv../Citlhiitniaingadtrunng die
"me.
Sri >
lent. A few have traded previously at the prt of •I"3 'al
Pinang, and touch at Singapore to make up their cargoes. I,
amounted to 27 Junks, and to about COO tons. Ti C;,,ts
' number of these also (with the exception of n very few 10 '2' '
•
The trade of the Indian Islanders ea SingaP°e" mat 1
divided into the following classes--That of the liugis—,ol
ottale_
Borneans—the Sumatratin, and that of the blalaystis in
„ev,
immediate neighbourhood. The whole of the Port elea"l'c'ss
throughout the year on account of all of these arnounte
.t
1,345, and in this enumeration, the Wile vessels are of ueic:sanstihy;
frequently included between this port and every pinceliotun t
1 out
Straits of llalacca; frequent intercourse is kept up tl. , g ale
the year, and there ix, for example, a class of vosc"—al/44n
Prohu I:laical—which often makes 3 'voyages aof betwif,;,l
Singapore and the Dutch settlement of Rltio, about 60itni a
distant. The most important branch of the trade of the in ilia,
Archipelago, is that of the Bugia, who, from their (listen . :
and the nature of the monsoons, make but one voyage thrals,
re Alone..
b.,„
out the year. In 1823 the Bugis pmhtts of the different: 000
tries they inhabit, which trade to Singapore, were nnt,led trade
80 in number, amounting to nearl 3,000 tons. 'lll° nee
with the State of Borneo P is another considerabir bra
a...
roper
oisrscaollrrcinell
of the Island trade which is worth particularising. Poil:),Y,
amount to about 2.5 large prahus, or to a tonnage 01,
‘,.:„,,
1,500 tons. The whole of the native trade of thee rcll,ll.rye
ymcaedeiaateblsericolfruanty,y andoft
to Singapore, taken together, exclusive of the eperlo
may be reckoned at 4,500 tons annually. i 1 amm"
l'he result of these different data show that the whole Sings'
of shipping and vessels of all descriptions touching of Mid-
pore for the purpose of trade, or for the convenience 01_71104
mg, watering, and refreshing during the year 18231 ant'
to but little short of 100,000 tons.
ye• wait down t° ti"
Oar distant readers may be interested to know that the P
which at present affords these advances, or es
year 1818, a haunt of pirates ; that no European (hoots.
vessel ever visited it, and that as late as the year IBM , „gel,
of his Majesty's frigate Greyhound cut out ami reetjto sa
from one of the most secure spots of the present has l'itto
European vessel, which had fallen into the liana of the P
in question. estimateh ewri which tsw
would
11 I anitctesn,:::l:,
in 03•Wie
We are concerned to learn that the pirates have Aga ~,,,le
their appearance in our neighbourhood. The schooner (soli ja
Macqueen, on her voyage from Singapore to natavit!'s.sits °I.
with a piratical prafm off the second point in the t,...a pull.
Banat. The strength of a lar rahtt well WWI, ace' ihelit
Ing about 60 oars, was so much superior to any reitetend, cola
a small vessel, of not more than 18 tons, with few 0011,1supans
offer, that seeking.safety in flight presented the °ld/molting
of escape. The pirate immedietely gave chase, so , sere
fast up with the schooner, while close haulcd, tnefiissg- .
obliged to bear away before the wind and return t°,,,,,,f0f
pore. The schooner, in returning, encountered a strong lsi, got
pirates at anchor in the Straits otiDryan. She unfortunide'sch
aground upon a reef, in endeavouring to avoid thens;slisteil
being observed by the pirates, the whole squadron Mt doubt.
wsighed anchor, and prepared for attack, making, sti."o.- or 1.1
sure of their prize, now incapable of escaping. 11" f-ts see-
the schooner, six in number, with considerable ditliea ',sett%
seeded in getting her afloat before the pirates grad gatorisson,
gunshot, and being luckily favoured with a stronllssol the
she soon got beyond the reach of the prahus, who t'all; of 111 e
pursuit to a considerable distance. Captain Thorat°hTcs ON
schooner, informs us that the number of prelims 'e is ser
seen together, was not less than twenty-five, all of the sod
rently well armed and manned. The flag shown hi site
of them was of a dark red colour, with a black border.
n h Vt.
On Tuesday the Ist inst. Colonel Nahuys, late "-te west),
dent at the Courts of the Emperor and Sultan of
of
to
ed on board the schooner Freak, in prosecution of his
,tao is
Calcutta • from whence we are informed he intends ea of the
settlement' EuroPe. Several of the European gentle ad on hi'
attended Colonel Nahuys to the beach,
il fro the
leaving the shore a salute of thirteen goo underlie h the ".
oftheinsulated
saluting battery. When the schooner got weig
turned the salute with fifteen guns.
v 011-'5
GREATCircumference
(PARADISE), IN THO latST 11r 1.
Yoe'
EXCAVATEDIated TEMPLE
CL‘Ynik:
' 00
. • fl
height of ditto from the area - " " :5°
• 11l
Depth of the excavated area from the outer gate
~
Breadth of ditto ditto from the side piazzas
backof the -u
The three piazzas (forming the sides a
and
13
Great Temple) in continuity
Breadth of each piazza -
'
Height of ditto ditto
-
- • 43
Number of pillars supporting roof - l4-1
Ditto of sculptured figures - - - • 151
Hall of Keylas (ascended by 38 steps), length - ' luj
Breadth of ditto ditto - - - •
A room in the side mountain, in length • , hii.
Ditto ditto, in breadth - - - • 0 cia,-
le, 'I in •
There are several other a in this Tell%.,,das be. 1
partments
rately sculptured. There are many other teMplee• .'' mils 19
nde lor 4
nearly in the centre of the range, which exte 1 a.)
a half in length.--(Copt. Scely's Wonders V-8°
1 1 1c It of
111 a. FAUNTLEIWY.- We do riot to.u.. I , 00
.....e 01 A
sary or proper to comment on the v" I row
ill ' f
unfortunate gent lemon, as his fate " ,f tl
on the decision of the Law or the tnercY `3,(er
Law, _ char ,
Sovereign, hut in justice to his private two .1
we insert the following paragraph; ta4.el%
contemporary journal:— , 401
of in -1` ler,
" Although the incident,: of domestic life cans ,9 itre
,11
cases, be considered fit subjects for public discuseto_lio suse
theless becomes necessary, in some instances, to nuotsets/le,
circumstances, with a view of explaining what Vol tom r?
be left in that state of mystery which might Lc a,eet.
neous conclusions. The tale first circulated of ta—ssves •
between Mr. and Mrs. Fauntleray being the co,ntsieso
erics:.
remonstrance from the lady's brother, is ragoutsaleieti ry setovs‘
—That event was, as we understand, the les set 7
Mr. Fauntleroy, who, by a fortuitous circionstenla%ostioe
deto be here explained, had placed himself to
..,, we !0!
whichmanded that step. The motive for entcr,t,rti 1,,t toll
engagement, of which the duties were to cease
dictated;ff 01
church dcor, was honourable, as was that which 0 era
eternal separation justifiable. Mr. F. tl ough DS; IsaYeen,
Ronal sacrifice by that ermucement, for the salce of , to disce...
the child she bore him, had, nevertheless, resolvett,..,ion *7
tinue the association ; on what grountl that res_,';', for rea,
formed it is not necessary to inquire. That sontecl.„om 111."0
scntment on his part did exist, may be infer The'
„oeios,s
Fauntleroy's allusion in her second letter. .I.llslStst it 01,
made for Mrs. Fauntlerov was liberal, and that st_lfs'es in he'
have been so, must be concluded (ruin various pesa''Frosste t°
stress . eel
letters. From what cause the pecuniary entb 40,1 a
which Mrs. Fauntleroy refers originated, we find Rat..,'ios to 5t,',.1..
letters; but there certainly is not the slightest :11,U.. pones%
breach of pecuniary engagement on the part of 11,i_rs ,gas store
soy. Mr. F. evinces great affection for his son, vs ti a lean!
On tog
than once visited him during his confinement. , ,sosen ,
occasion he took a favourite seal from, his watch, sru_rceishis.o,
it to the boy, with that solemn adjuration of remempi ran 1,1 spiel
; probably no length of time will ever erase from a n IX, ;nth ;
bility. Mr. F. had for two or three days ee"
seeded by gel
' posed, and the interview with Mrs. F. was sua_ _ Teo
weakness and depression. Mr. F. has, however, ow „ttie
. srto g"
, that tranquil equanimity of mind which has hsth
consolation to his friends."

BOO°
Sine'
I wooil-
iounb_—

lie Walt
to i.he
r natiw,.
hiboa—.
iptured,
out, sn
pin°

tCh
to t
of". 1
op 1!
i
tf
'tiro tv3li-
sh° le-

E ybits
4s, ye:ot,i
- 91
- 10
- i 1

110
- 1:1

•
• to
• Jul
• 94;

, • •
cl,b°
,ci
a no ng
IAA " .
pa
A

it necPl:
of th`°
(11Tund
r oto
ioracit
ff"")