The Sun.
London, England, 1847-05-28 00:00:00

rate. I consider that lam conscientiously bound to re-
fuse to pay it.
The LORD MAYOR—It is my duty as a magistrate to
enforce the payment. lam under a legal necessity to
act peremptorily upon occasions of this kind; I have no
alternative. My duty is a mere matter of form, which
I have no power to alter.
Defendant—lt is no matter of form for me to part
with that for which I have laboured, for purposes which
I cannot recognise, and to which I am opposed from
principle.
The LORD MAYOR—You know well that you are lo-
Rally bound to pay the church•rate. Where can be the
good in putting yourself to the inconvenience of refusing
to do what, you must be aware, you are compellable by
law to do?

Defendant—Your Lordship has mentioned the consci
entices reason I have for objecting to pay, for the law
of the land has nothing to do with conscience; conscience
has nothing to do with a civil magistrate.
The LORD MAYOR—I think quite otherwise. I have
this moment sentenced a man to imprisonment as a rogue
and vagabond for three months, and it was because my
conscience told me that the man was guilty that I passed
judgment upon him. The law of the land perfectly co-
incided there.
Defendant—My conscientious objection is founded
upon the principle which I recognise, that the Church of
England is based in error. That church holds to bap-
tismal regeneration, which I consider to be altogether
fallacious and destitute of foundation in the Bible.
There is no mention of such a thing at all in Holy Writ
as baptismal regeneration.
The LORD MAYOR--I am not bound, as a magistrate,
to enter into a discussion of this kiad, and I shad ee.
hear any more upon such a point.
It was then regularly proved that Mr. Burgon was
chargeable with the rate to the amount represented, and
The LORD MAYOR told him that if he questioned the
validity of it, he must give notice to that effect to the
magistrate, and his appeal would go before an ecclesias-
tical tribunal.
Defendant—l have already mentioned my conscien-
tious objection on the ground of the recognition of bap-
tismal regeneration by the Church of England. I have
another objection to state. I have reason to believe that
there is a great endowment in our parish. I believe
that there is as much as 8001. a year, which ought to be
appropriated to the repairs of the church, to contribute
to which I have been summoned; and it is my opinion
that if such appropriation took place there would not
be any necessity for applying to me.
The LORD MAYOR—That is a matter to which my
jurisdiction does not, as you very well know, extend.
Defendant—My Lord, my first objection, which ori-
ginated in a conscientious scruple, you have set aside.'
The LORD MAYOR—You may continue to entertain
that objection, but I am ob!iged to act as a civil magis-
trate on the occasion, or I become liable to be served
with a mandamus.
Defendant—When I saw that my first position was
likely to avail me nothing, I thought it necessary to try
another, and I mentioned the command of funds in the
united parishes as a. rational excuse for refusing the ap-
plication. I am not (as our reporter understood Mr.
Burgon) a believer in geographical or in parochial Chris-
tianity, and I cannot see why the Church of England
should compel those who do not subscribe to her dec-
trines to subscribe to her support. I pay tithes in addi-
tion to the expense which the imposition of this church-
rate inflicts upon me by the sale of my goods. Your
Lordship must see that education, likewise, is involved in
this question.
The LORD MAYOR—Yes. I apprehend that you are
one of these who so strongly objected to the Ministerial
plan of education ?
Defendant—Just so. I objected for the same reason
that the Bishops objected to the Maynooth grant—
Jest the plan imposed upon others the hardship of
paying for what they did not approve. Now, inde-
pendently of my objections in point of conscience, I con-
sider my claim of exemption upon the argument of the
possession of funds in the united parishes worthy of
consideration, although I certainly prefer going upon
the higher grounds. The subject is associated with
many other questions, but it is identified with the educa-
tion question. We hear people talk of the necessity of
religious education, but religion is not a thing weich
depends upon education—it is dependent upon faith,
which is not to be taught.
The LORD MAYOR—It has been frequently observed
to those who object to the laws by which the country ey
reside in is regulated, that they are at perfect liberty
to remove to some place better adapted to their taste. I
admit that you are perfectly justified in asserting your
conscientious scruples ; but I am bound as a magistrate
to enforce the law at my own peril, and I cannot make
your case an exception.
Defendant—l have within the last thirty years been
put to the expense of 500/. for what I never make use
of, and what never has been of the slightest service to
me. The Church has scarcely left me an article of fur-
niture of any advantage to me. I hope her minis:ers
will, upon this occasion, seize upon looking-glasses and
such things as are not indispensable, and that they will
leave me my bed and bed-clothes and a table and

chairs.
The LORD MAYOR—Depend upon it you will not be
subjected to any annoyance which you will not bring
upon yourself.
The defendant, who is, we understand, a gentleman of
high respectability, then retired, and a warrant was made
out against his goods and chattels.
Thomas Fitzgibbon, a labouring man, was brought up
charged upon suspicion of having caused the death of
Peter Doyle.
It appeared from the evidence of a woman who lodged
in the house in which the prisoner and his wife resided,
that the deceased and Fitzgibbon and Mrs. Fitzgibbon
had been drunk, and quarrelling and fighting on the
landing-place, and that the deceased was heard to fall
down two flights of stairs ; that he and the prisoner
fought afterwards ; and that it was necessary to convey
the deceased to the bospital, where he died.
Remanded till Friday.
GUILDHALL.
Charles Thompson, aged 24, a person of respectable
appearance, was brought before Mr. Alderman Moon,
charged with stealing two books from the shop-window
of Mr. Noble, a bookseller in Fleet-street.
Mr. Noble stated that he did not wish to press the
charge, as he believed the crime was committed through
poverty, and on account of the prisoner's previous re-
spectability.
Mr. Alderman Moor/ said he would consider of that
when he had heard the circumstances.
Mr. Humphrey, a law-writer, on Bread-street hill,
stated that on passing through Fleet-street he saw the
prisoner secrete the hooks under his coat and walk away.
Witness followed him into Fetter-lane betore he inef
with a policeman. Witness pointed him out to the
officer. and saw him stepped.
Walter Tyler, City policeman, No. 373, said that upon
asking the prisoner if he had not a book under his coat,
he replied he had ; he had Shakspere's works, which
had been lent to him by a friend in the Strand. He
produced the volume from under his coat. Witness told
him he thought he could take him to the shop from
which he had just stolen it. The prisoner assured hits
what he said was perfectly right, but witness would not
take his word for that, and conveyed him to the station,
w;,ere a second book called the " Gift," was found in his
pocket, as well as some duplicates relating to books.
Mr. Noble identified the two books.
Mr. Alderman MooN asked the prisoner if he wished
to make any statement ?
The prisoner said he was in great distress.
The ALDERMAN asked him what trade he followed ?
The prisoner said he was not of any trade, but he had
been in business, and he put in letters to show his former
respectability.
Mr. Alderman MooN asked if he had followed any
occupation recently.
The prisoner said he had not.
The ALDERMAN said, he could not yield-to Mr. Noble's
recommenda'ion, for it would end in his turning the pri-
soner loose in a short time to prey upon the public again.
The prisoner's previous position was rather an aggra-
vation of his crime, for as a man of intelligence he
knew that he need not have resorted to stealing becaus,
he was destitute. Those who had the means made con-
tributions a. poor-rates to prevent any unemployed mem-
ber of society from being driven to stealing. He felt
himself bound to commit the prisoner to trial. The
prisoner might hand his papers to the judge and show
what probability there was that he would be removed
from the state of necessity in which he had lately been.
He was committed for trial.
Captain. Spence, of the 89th Foot, who had been
charged on the preceding day with stealing four cigars,
and who appeared to be in a state of insanity, was
brought up and delivered to his friends to be inornedia (ply
conveyed back to the regiment, which is lying at Dover.
He had come to London on leave of absence for a fort-
night, and had exhibited some eccentricities that left
little doubt of the state of his mind.
BOW-STREET.

A middle-aged man, named Harry Hartnett, was
placed at the bar before Mr. Henry, under the following
circumstances:— _

The charge sheet represented the prisoner as having
been taken in custody on suspicion of being an accessory
to the murder of the infant child of a woman named
Cleveland, keeping a house of ill- fame in Upper Wel.
lington-street, but;the charge was not signed.
Mr. HENRY inquired what was the nature of the
charge, and by whom it was instituted?
Mr. Mosely, who attended to watch the case on behalf
of the parish authorities of the Strand Union, observed
that the prisoner had been brought to Bow-street by
the direction of Mr. Bedford, the coroner of Westmin-
ster, before whom an inquest had been held on the body
of the deceased child of a Mrs. Cleveland. A medical
gentleman, it appeared, had made certain statements to
the coronerrespecting an interview which he had had with
the prisoner, whose remarks induced him to suspect
that he was an accessory to the child's death. The pri-
soner consequently attended the adjourned inquest, and
desired to be examined upon the subject; but the coroner
advised him not to criminate himself, and, on his then
declining to make any statement, ordered a constable in
attendance to take him before the magistrate at B.iw-
street. Mr. Mosely reminded his Worship that another
party, who had refused his name, had been remanded by
Mr. Jardine on a similar charge. He (Mr. Muscly) had
no instructions in the matter, but merely wished to ex •
plain how the prisoner came before his Worship.
Mr. HENRY asked if anybody was present to give evi-
dence against the prisoner ? Mr. Lawson (the medical
gentleman above adverted to) said that he was prepared
to repeat the statements he had already made before the
coroner ; but they did not go to prove that the
prisoner was actually concerned in the murder of the
child.

Mr. HENRY desired the constable to produce his autho-
rity for taking the prisoner into custody.
The constable had no authority but the verbal direc-
tions of the coroner. _ _ _

Mr. HENRY assured the constable that they gave him
no authority whatever, unless accompanied by a war
rant; and his Worship expressed his surprise that the
charge was taken by the inspector.--Discharged.