The Sun.
London, England, 1841-08-18 00:00:00

by long possession to be the owner of the property
in question. The law allowed him to do so, and
half the great estates in the kingdom were only held
by the same tenure, and the poor plaintiff had as
much right to the: undisturbed possession of his cot-
tage and a quarter of an acre of land, as Lord Grantley
had to his immense possessions. He called upon the jury
by their verdict to protect his poor client, and to show
the world, and all thoso who might be disposed to act
in a similar manner, that they would not oppress their
poorer brethren with impunity. He would ask them after
all the plaintiff had suffered, whether two hundred and
fifty pounds was too great an amount of compensation.
He did not wish for vindictive damages, he merely
asked for sufficient to enable the plaintiff to remove,
with his family, to another parish, where he might
obtain employment, and forget the injuries he had
received, and pass the remainder of his days in peace
and quiet.

Lord Chief Justice TINDAL then addressed the jury,
and said the present was an action against the defendant
for trespass, and assault upon the plaintiff, hut there
had been no proof of any assault, and that part of the
subject must therefore be dismissed from their minds.
They must not be led away by the addresses of the
Learned Counsel, but they were bound to give their
verdict upon the evidence alone. The Learned Judge
then proceeded to remark upon the circumstances
of the case, and he said it was for the jury to decide
whether Lord Grantley had made out a clear title
to the property in question, and if the jury
thought he bad failed in so doing, the plaintiff had a
legal title by posession, and the trespass must be taken
as proved ; and the only question would be the amount
of damages that should be awarded to the plaintiff for
the suffering and the inconvenience he had undergone.
The Jury then retired, and, after being absent about
half an hour, they returned into Court, with a verdict
for the plaintiff. Damages—Two hundred and seventy-
five pounds.
We understand that, in the case of Bogle v. Lawson,
application was made to Chief Justice Tindal, on behalf
of the pAintitf. to certify, in order to enable him to get
his costs, but the Learned Judge refused to do so.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
_ BOW-STREET.

William Lee, John Faversham, and William Lewis
were brought up for further examination, having been
remanded on Tuesday last, on a charge of embezzling
money, the property of Mr. Eliason, the lessee of Drury-
lane Theatre.

[An error appeared in our report of the case on its
first hearing, as we stated that the two prisoners, Faver-
sham and Lee, were committed for trial.]
Mr. Podkin, the barrister, appeared for Lewis.
Mr Burgess said he had no further evidence to offer
against Lewis. The only evidence he had to offer fur-
ther against the other prisoners was that of Mr. Jones,
the Treasurer ; a point of objection had been raised by
the prisoner Lewis, as to his being in the employment of
Mr. Eliason ; and he (Mr. Burges) was prepared to
prove by the evidence of Mr. Jones, that an engagement
existed between Lew, and Mr. Eliason ; and he was
also prepared to prove that it had not been correctly
stated at the last examination that any arrear of salary
was due to the prisoner.
These facts were admitted by the Counsel for the pri-
soners, and the proof was not gone into.
Mr. JARDINE said that Lewis must be discharged, as
there was not sulficigat evidence against him to consti-
tute a felony. There- 'eras great suspicion, but he might
be able satisfactorily le answer it.
Mr. Burgess said he should apply to the bench for an
order that Lewis should find bail to answer any charge.
Mr. Bodkin said he would rather his client entered
with the required bail, although he (Mr. Bodkin) was in
a condition to ask the Magistrate to discharge Lewis
forth with.

The required sureties were entered into, and the
prisoner was discharged.
The evidence taken on the former occasion was then
read over, and

Mr. Flower applied, on the part of Faversham, that
bail might be taken for his appearance at the Sessions.
Mr. JARDINE said, its the Sessions were so near, being
on Monday next, he did not feel disposed to grant the
application.
The prisoners were then fully committed for trial.
The Court was crowded by a great number of the
members of the theatrical profession.

THE WALDEGRAVE OUTRAGE

ON THE POLICE.

The following statement has beens---ent to the Morning
Post, as the ease of William Duff, Esq., convicted, in
conjunction with the Earl Waldegrave, of an assault on
the pollee :
Sta—l beg leave to inclose copies of a memoral and
of affidavits of facts addressed to her Majesty, through
the Secretary of State, by my brother, Mr. William
Duff, now suffering imprisonment under sentence of
the Court of Queen's Bench. I have to request that
-on will do me the favour to publish them in the co-
. Is of the Morning Post. My brother is believed
e world to be guilty of a most brutal assault ;
• is he is entirely innocent, and the object I have
in view is to clear his character of a foul stain.

The parties who really committed the offence are
Sir Willoughby Wolston Dixie, Baronet, and Mr.
John Bell, the lately-elected Member for the borough of
Thirsk, who have hitherto eluded detection and almost
suspicion, and my brother has, unfortunately, from care-
lessness on his part, and mismanagement of his defence,
been made their scapegoat. Sir, W. Dixie was, accord-
ing to his own admission, the person who beat the police-
man on the head with a heavy stick, and Mr. J. Bell was

the person who kicked him the chest. I have invited
them severally by letter to come forward, take upon
themselves the consequences of their own misdeeds, and
clear my brother's character ; but this they have both
po,itively refused to do. I have therefore, no course
left to me, having in view the vindication of my brother's
character, than to submit the facts of the case to the
juagment of the public.
I am, Sir, your most obedient servant,
FOLLIOT DUFF, 34th Regiment.
Barracks, Gosport, August 13, 1841.

IN THE QUEEN'S RENCII.-THE QUEEN AGAINST THE
RIGHT HON. GEORGE EDWARD EARL WALDEGRAVE
AND WILLIAM DUFF, INDICTED FOR AN ASSAULT ON
THE PROSECUTION OF CHARLES JOHN WHEATLEY.
The lion. Robert Grimston, of Grosvenor-square, in
the county of Middlesex, taketh oath and saith, that
on the occasion of Lord Waldegrave's being taken into
custody by the policeman at Hampton Wick, on the
fourth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and
forty, Mr. Duff repeatedly exclaimed, in the hearing of
this deponent, " Pray use no violence ;" and that the
said 'Air. Duff and this deponent, after Lord Waldo-
grace's release from the grasp of the policemen, beg-
ged the party to go home quietly. That the said Mr.
Duff, in company with this deponent, immediately went
towards home. That, is about ten minutes afterwards,
this deponent and the said Mr. Duff, who had proceeded
about a mile away from Kini.,,ston, were overtaken in a
fly at full gallop by the party whom they had left be-
hind, and informed of the collision which had, in the
mean time, taken place. And this deponent saith, that
no blow had been struck by any one of the said party
in the presence of this deponent, or to his knowledge
and belkf, and particularly that the said Mr. Duff did
not-strike or give a blov-, or use any abusive language
to the said policeman, or any other person there, whilst
this deponent was in his company. And that the said
Mr. Duff and this deponent were quite unconscious of the
conflict which subsequently took place until they were
informed thereof as aforesaid.

IN THE QUEEN'S BEACH.-TIIE QUEEN V. THE RIGHT
HON. THE EARL OF WALDEGRAVE AND WILLIAM DUFF.
William Duff, the defendant above-named, being now
confined as a prisoner in the Queen's Bench prison
maketh oath and saith, that the whole of the allegations'
contained in the annexed petition of this deponent are
true in substance and matter of fact.

TO.t•.; -...riEEN'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY.
The hum 1.114.--ition of Win. Duff, a prisoner confined in
the Queen's Bench Prison.
Most humbly showeth—That your petitioner is now
under sentence from the Court of Queen's Bench, having,
been on- the 3d of May last ordered to be imprisoned for
the term of six months and to pay a fine of twenty
pounds, and further to be imprisoned until such fine be
paid, which sentence was so passed upon an indictment
charging your petitioner, jointly with the Right Hon.
George Edward Earl Waldegrave, with assaulting one
Charles John Wheatley, a constable of the Metropolitan
Police Force, on the fifth day of June, one thousand
eight hundred and forty, the statement in support of
which charge is contained in the depositions on oath
made by the prosecutor and witnesses before the Magis-
trate, an official copy of which depositions your petitioner
begs leave to refer to and to transmit with this his
petition.
That your petitioner is most anxious not only not to
deny any one of the facts connected with the charge
upon which he stands convicted, and for which he is now
suffering the sentence of the law, but also to disclose
every fact connected with the transaction which
may in any degree bear and throw light upon the
same, in the hope that the sentence which has been
passed upon your petitioner may be considered by your
Most Gracious Majesty, and that such mitigation as the
circumstances may warrant may be afforded in the pre-
mises.

That, although your humble petitioner does not deny
his association with his co-defendant and other parties,
on the evening and at the place deposed to by the pro-
Realtor, he most poSitively denies any participation in,
or even having been present at, the infliction of the vio-
lence which became the subject of this charge, he, your
tt,,),refl]gr with a friend, (the Hon. Robert
Grimston) hTfiT parted company from the Earl Wal-
degrave and his other companions before such violence
(so proved to have taken place) did take place ; and for
tae purpose of proving such assertion clearly, your
humble petitioner takes leave to draw your Most Gra-
cious Majesty's attention to the following statement of
.

Your petitioner, together with the Earl of Wulde-
gram the on. Robert Grirnston, Mr. Bell, c.f. Thirsk,
Sir Willoughby Wolston Dixie, and Mr. Connolly, of the
sth Dragoon bpards (being six in number), attended
Epsom itace4- ofrthe 4th of June, 1840, and afterwards
returned and diaed with the said Earl Waldegrave, rt
his house at Strawberry-hill, where your petitioner is
o!)liged to admit that much wine had been taken. After
dinner it was proposed to go to Kingston fair, and about
eleven o'clock the whole of the said party departed toge-
ther in a hired carriage, called a fly, for that place ; and
after having been in the town of Kingston, and as they
were
returning towards Strawberr •-hiJ, the carriage
stop opposite the Swan Inn, at Hampton Wick, and
the whole party got
Your petitioner went across Cross the road to a house (which
it has since appeared A
as
oeeupied. by a woman who
which keeps a mangle, but hie fact
vpzttittlioorler.diild not
then know) to recd the signboayroduro
but your petitioner did not try tc, open the 'said house,

said house, as has-been erroneously supposed by the wit-
ness for the prosecution.
At this time police sergeant Churchill came on horse-
back from towards Kingston-bridge, and Sir Willoughby
Wolston Dixie went up to him, and began a conversa•
tion with him, and shortly afterwards your petitioner
and the Earl Waldegrave joined the said Sir Willoughby
Wolston Dixie, and the said police sergeant, and cer-
tainly heard the said Sir Willoughby Wolston Dixie,
who had first began the conversation, using some abusive
language towards him the said police sergeant ; but
your petitioner positively asserts that neither himself nor
said Earl Waldegrave used any abusive or offensive lan-
guage whatever towards said police sergeant, nor did
either of them interfere with him, except that while speak-
ing to him your petitioner, inadvertently and without
any offensive intention, laid his hands on the bridle of the
said police sergeant's horse, which the said police ser-
geant desired your petitioner not to do, and your peti-
tioner instantly-desisted. At this time John Wheatley (the
prosecutor) came up, and sergeant Churchill directed
him (Wheatley) to throw his light upon your petitioner
and the rest of the party, and to go to the said fly and
look for the; rest of the party, and to go to the said fly
and look for the owner's name • upon which said Earl
Waldegrave, your petitioner, and said other parties went
towards the said carriage with the intention and for the
purpose of setting off and going home ; and when the
said Charles John Wheatley attempted to look at the
name on the carriage, the Earl Waldegrave pushed him
aside, whereupon sergeant Churchill called to the said
Charles John Wheatley, " Take them into custody,"
or words to that effect - and thereupon the said Charles
John Wheatley seized the Earl Waldegrave by the col-
lar, and after a short scuffle threw his Lordship down
upon the ground.
Your petitioner, thereupon, assisted, with Mr. Grim-
ston, in getting said Earl Waldegrave out of the hands
of the said Charles John Wheatley, by opening or un-
clenching the hand of the said:Charles John Wheatley,
who so held the said Earl Waldegrave, but no blow
whatever was struck by any of the party in so disen-
gaging the said Earl from the policeman's grasp. That
when the said Earl was so released, the policeman ad-
vised the whole party, to go home quietly, and your pe-
titioner and his friend, the Hon. Robert Grimston, con-
sidering such advice proper, determined to follow it,
and they both joined in such advice ; but finding an in-
disposition in the rest of the party to follow such recom-
mendation, your petitioner expressed bis determination
to leave them, and immediately went away towards
Strawberry Hill on foot, together with the said Robert
Grimston, and left the place entirely, your petitioner's
other four friends remaining behind with the carriage,
and in parley with the policeman.
Your petitioner and Mr. Grimston having proceeded
(walking leisurely) about a mile on the road between
Hampton Wick and Strawberry Hill, were overtaken by
the said carriage, the said Earl, Mr. Connolly, and Mr.
Bell being therein, and Sir Willoughby Wolston Dixie
being on the box, and by them your petitioner and his
friend, the said Mr. Grimston, were informed of the
violence which had taken place, and the injuries which
had been inflicted on the said Charles John Wheatley,
after your petitioner and his friend, Mr. Grimston, had
left their said companions ; and but for such informa-
tion your petitioner would have been quite unconscious
of any violence whatever having been used towards the
person of the said Charles John Wheatley, or any other

person.
That from the above facts it will be manifest that
although your humble petitioner was present before and
up to, and while the Earl of Waldegrave was collared
by the prosecutor, and assisted in disengaging his
Lordship from the hold of the policeman, your petitioner
was not present during any part of the affray which con-
stituted the grave part of the charge for which he has
been sentenced; and in part proof of your petitioner's
statement, he takes leave humbly to refer to the deposi-
tions sworn by the prosecutor and witnesses before the
Magistrate when first this matter was investigated, a
copy of which depositions, as before stated, accompany-
ing this petition, and on reference to which it will be seen
by the evidence of the witnesses Churchill and Wheatley
that they speak of four gentlemen only, evidently im-
pressed with the belief that there were four only, be-
cause there were only four remaining when the outrage
was committed, although originally there had been six
persons present, including your petitioner and the Hon.
Robert Grimston. It will also be found that the said
Charles Churchill also speaks of Lord Waldegrave as the
person who first accosted him, when in truth it was Sir Wil-
loughby Wolston Dixie who so accosted him, and used
the offensive language he complains of. He also de-
scribes your petitioner to have tried to unbuckle the

throat-fiand Of his bridle, which, on his part, was a mis-
apprehension, your petitioner having merely placed his
hand inoffensively on the bridle, and removed it on its
being noticed by the said Charles Churchill ; and it will
be observed further, upon reading such deposition, that
the said Charles Churchill does not depose to having
witnessed any act of violence, and that he did not consi-
der that any breach of the peace had been committed up
to the time of hii comrade Wheatley going to the car•
riage and taking hold of one of your petitioner's compa-
nions ; for in such deposition he says as follows :—" The
other three wished him not to hurt their friends, and I
rode away to Kingston to get further assistance, as I an-
ticipated a breach of the peace."
And upon reference to the evidence of the said Charles
Wheatley, it will be seen that he also speaks of four per-
sons only, and he describes the scuffle in which he re-
ceived the blows to have been after Sergeant Churchill
had gone for assistance, for he says, " I called out for the
sergeant, but he was not there."
• That such being the evidence, in which there was, in-
deel, scarcely any proof of your petitioner's identity, ho
was advised to permit the trial to proceed, it being con-
sidered there was no sufficient proof of his having been
concerned in the outrage, and which want of proof was
increased by the fact of your petitioner having been
taken into custody and identified, as the fact was, by
mistake, as Lord Waldegrave, although his Lordship
was present at the time ; but your petitioner felt that it
was more respectful to the justice of the country and
more consistent with the character of a gentleman to ,
admit such participation as he really had had in an affair
where an injury had been sustained by a fellow-creature,
and for this reason he insisted on withdrawing the plea
which his attorney had caused in a formal manner to be
pleaded to the indictment, in the hope that by represent-
ing to the Court how far your petitioner was really im-
plicated, it would have had due weight ; and with that
view your petitioner made an affidavit of the facts to be
laid before the Court, but he did not feel at liberty, nor
did he think it necessary, to disclose the names of the
gentlemen who were his companions, and for that rea-
son, namely, omitting to disclose the names of his com-
panions, it was, as your petitioner understood, that no
distinction was made in the sentence passed upon your
petitioner and his co-defendant, the Earl of Waldegrave.
That your petitioner most deeply and sincerely re-
grets the injury that was sustained by the said Charles
John Wheatley ; and although it was not inflicted by
your petitioner, or in his presence, or with his privity,
yet, as he had been originally one of the party front
whom the injuries were received, your petitioner would
very willingly have contributed, as far as in him lay, to
have made ample compensation ; but the whole matter
was left by your petitioner in the hands of the legal ad-
visers of Lord Waldegrave, to take such steps as they
should think prudent, your petitioner on his part not
having employed any separate solicitor.
That your petitioner is the more anxious to have the
above facts investigated, as although he will not and
has not for a moment denied the extent of his share in
the unfortunate transaction, yet he at present stands in
the eyes of his relations and friends a person guilty of
the whole facts alleged against the most guilty parties
by the prosecutor and his witnesses ; and for these
reasons, and the hope that some commutation of punish-
ment may take place, your petitioner humbly prays for a
further and fuller inquiry, by which it can be made
clearly to appear who were the guilty perpetrators of an
offence for which your petitioner is now suffering.—And
your petitioner shall ever pray.

REGISTRATION OF VOTERS.-.

VERY IMPORTANT.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.
SlR—Pray remind those who are about to make ob-
jections to parties on the list of Freemen of Cities and
Boroughs of the very important provision in the 33d
Section of the Reform Act, 2 Will. IV., c. 45, which
enacts, " That every,
.freeman or liveryman shall for ever
erase to enjoy the right of voting if his name shall have
been omitted for two successive years from the Register of
oters."

This is indeed important ; but has not been sufficiently
attended to.
Mind ; if a freeman be two successive years off the
Register he can never legally be put on again, nor ever
after be entitled to vote as a freeman.
Let the Reformers look well to this point ; the free-
men have been their worst enemies.
I am, Sir, yours, &c.
R. W. D.

Ilfracombe, Aug. 14, 1841

NEW WORK EDITED EY Boz—. We are re-
quested to state that Mr. Colburn, of Great Marlborough-
street, has this day published the following new works
of fiction, which can now be had at all the- libraries •
I. The Pie Nic Papers, by various hands, edited by
Charles Dickens, Esq. (Boz),
3 vols. with
2 Tom Bow-
ling, numerous
illustrations by George Cruikshank, &C.
ling, a Tale of the Sea, by Captain Frederick Chamier,
3 vols. 3. James Hatfield and the Beauty of
Buttermere, a Story of Real Life, by Edmund Corring-
ton. Esq. , 3 vols, with illustrations by R. Cruikshank.
" The majority of novel readers (observes the Literary
Gazette) will be gratified by a perusal of these volumes,
which take a place between Eugene Aram and Jack
Sheppard."
THE IRON WAR STEAMER PHLEGETI{ON
—We perceive, by the Calcutta papers, brought by the
India mail, that this vessel, which was built by Mr.
John Laird, of North Birkenhead, for the East India
Company, has arrived at that port. She is about 500
tons measurement, armed with two 32-pounders and
other small guns, and is exactly the same size and model
as the former iron war-steamer, the Nemesis. She was
to sail for China about the middle of June, to join the
expedition. It was reported in the Bombay papers that
two armed iron steamers, the Ariadne and Medusa, both
built by Mr. Laird, each carrying two 26-pounders,
would be ordered to China : they would make an effec
tive flotilla of four powerful iron armed steamers at-
tached to the expedition ; and, from the services ren
dered by the Nemesis, are likely to prove a great acqui-
sition. The following extract of a letter, dated Cal-
cutta, June 5, gives an account of the Phlegethon
" I am too full of business to write at length just now ;
but you will be delighted to hear we arrived at this
place on the 22d of last month, as sound in hull,
boilers, and engines, as when we left England. We have
had some severe trials, and a large share of stormy bad
weather. The Phlegethon, in bad weather, has sur-
passed my most sanguine expectations, and having gone
over 17,157 miles without straining a rivet, will, I con-
sider, carry out the principle that these sort of vessels
can navigate in security between England and India."—
Liverpool-Albion.