The Sun.
London, England, 1841-07-12 00:00:00

er, because he has another kind of remedy in his eye,
speaks with a sort of exultation of these disturbed relations.
True, it is so, he exclaims ; and then he insinuates that there
is good hope of such disturbance eontiruing. " Well !" he
says, "but what if the disturbed relations of these countries
with us and with each other should not mend? What if they
should continue? What if they should even increase ?" Why,
is not the answer manifest, that if they do, the Government
under which such things happen must be either very unfortu-
nate or very unskilful. Alight we not fairly expect from a
Minister, when admitting this case of disturbed rela-
tions, some sort of explanation or apology? Lord
Morpeth thinks of no such thing. He only remembers that
this state of difficulty may offer some sort of apology for the
desperate expedients to which his Administration has resorted,
and therefore with shamelesss pride he actually magnifies the
danger. He exults in the mischief, because it seems to him
to afford a kind of excuse for the extravagant experiments
upon the agriculture and commerce of the country to which
Ministers have been driven ! Can anything he conceived
more puerile, or more unworthy of a person professing to have
a mind capable of assisting in the affairs of Government?
GLOBE.—Sir R. Peel first entered the lists as the "child
and champion "of Oxford churchmanship. The Church
is infinitely respectable ; but High Church championship
is a bad role in politics. The effect of its first assumption
has stuck to Sir R. Peel through his whole public life.
He started as a sort of political agent of clerical
bigotry ; when clerical bigotry was more powerful
than, happily, it has been since. Sir Robert Peel
never was a bigot, but an organ of bigotry. That
was the original sin of his entrance on public life,
and has ever since occasioned the falseness and im-
becility of his position. There was a time at
which he might have cut the High Church connexion
with advantage ; and that was the time when he chose,
instead to cut Canning, and the Liberal Tories.
Sir Robert Peel is ever plausible ; and Canning,
if we remember, admitted that he alone, of the Tory
seceders, was justified in leaving his side. But mark
the sequel. The plausible plea of consistent intolerance
—an intolerance of position—not of conscience or cha-
racter—that plea of consistency Sir Robert Peel was com-
pelled to abandon, within a short subsequent period—was
compelled to let himself be dragged, as a captive, in the
triumph of Liberal principles, when a little more clear-
sightedness—a little less perpetual plausibility, and
consistent egotism—we may add, t, little less jealousy
of superior genius, which eclipsed his own—would
have prompted Peel to take the right and states-
manlike, instead of he plausible and seemingly con-
sistent part in 1827—and would have placed him, the
year afterwards, at the head of the strongest party in
the country, which might have governeol, in all pro-
bability, for many years—which might have made
Emancipation gracious, Reform gradual, and Trade
free. Such was the brilliant succession Peel might have
gathered from Canning and Huakisson. Such were the
wreaths he might have transferred, while fresh, to his
brow. What was wanting ? A clear eye for the
future—a " genial current of the soul," unfrozen by
perpetual dwelling on the Sir Robert Peel or Mr. Peel,
of the present, and the past. The Mirror of Podia-
?neat will be as fatal to Sir Robert Peel as the mirror of
the pool to Narcissus ; Hansard and Barrow will have to
answer for the sure process of his " painless extinction."
STANDARD.—At this time of day a statesman
would be held criminal, or at least foolish, for refusing
to tolie)or 'to retain the office which parliamentary ma-
jorities insisted that he should occupy, merely because
he could not carry on the Government in accordance
with his own vieWs. The system of divided Cabinets, now
some forty years old, is one proof of this. Whether it
be ever possible to substitute a more rigid for this
lax rule, no one can at present guess. We hope, how-
ever, that the good time may come. In the interval,
hoWever, we have it completely in our power to prevent
the ill consequences of such a loose system. If we enable
the Minister of our choice to carry on the Government
in accordance with those principles of his which have
led us to prefer him, he can have no temptation or ex-
cuse to deviate from the strictest rule in morals. Let
us give our Ministers a great majority, and we establish
our principles as well as our party. One of our friendly
monitors reminds us of the ill consequences of the fatal
blunder in 1829. We can be hardly suspected of a wish
to extenuate those ill consequences, or to palliate the
error that produced them ; it is, on the other hand, to
obviate the possible recurrence of such consequences
that we wish now to expose their parent error, and to
obviate a repetition of it. The original cause of the
unhappy mistake in 1829 was the divided Cabinet—
its immediate cause the elections of 1826. These
elections had, as regards Ministeral manage-
ment been confided by Lord Liverpool to Mr. Canning.
Mr. Canning was a pro-Romanist, and in the manage-
ment of the elections of 1826 the Protestant principle
was for the first time forgotten ; the Parliament elected
in 1826 was thus a pro-Romanist Parliament, but it was
a Parliament which the Duke of Wellington and Sir
Robert Peel could not constitutionally dissolve in 1829,
for it had been elected under their own colleagues in
the Government, and was not three years old. It
was this Parliament which forced the fatal Roman-
ist Bill, the Ministers were its (in our opinion)
unwise, but certainly unselfish instruments. They
saw that the existence of such a Parliament insured
the passing of the bill sooner or later, and they devoted
themselves to make the best terms that could be made.
If we wanted the strongest possible illustration of the
necessity of doing everything at the elections " while
it is yet day," to secure the ascendancy of our principles,
independently of all reliance upon statesmen, we should
instance this very case of the connection between the
election of 1826 and the bill of 1829.

upon corn or Corn-laws. The following statement of foreign
loans contracted or mainly issued here does not profess to re•
present more than approximative quantities, as of course it
would be almost impossible to calculate or procure the informa-
tion as to the correct and net amount of the loans realised and
exported in money or otherwise ; although, whether remitted
in hard cash, in bills, in arms and stores, or in other commo-
dities, can snake no difference in the estimate of real values,
since if exported in the shape of stores it is clear the value is
the same as if in metals, as but for such arrangement the com-
modities would still have commanded money in return, and
must therefore be counted as hard money exported. It may be
remarked also that this list of foreign loans does not include
the many millions of capital embarked in foreign enterprises,
or borrowed expressly for them, such as Maine and Danube
and United States railways, canals, &c., nor the millionsmore
similarly sunk in colonial agricultural undertakings, and the
foundation of new colonies. Thus loans were raised in,
1830 for Prussia to the amount of

1831 for Holland .... ..... ....

500,000

for Portugal
1832 for id. ... .. ........... ... ...... .. ......

for Russia
1833 for id. ........... ••..
for Greece
for Portugal
1834 for id.

6,000,000
3,000,000
2,300,000
2,000,000
6,000,0:',0

for Spain
1836 for Portugal
1837 for Holland, part of one loan of 169,000,000
of flo.ins, say about one-third
To which add two-thirds of the State and Corpo
ration loans of the different States of the Anicri-

can Union, contracted in the 10 years from 1830
to 1840, and in the whole amounting to
215,000,000 of dol'ars, say about 29,000,000

£64,900,000
The prodigious amount set down for the States of the FeJeral
Union is irrespective of 150,000,000 of dollars subscribed
mostly in shares in the banking capital invested there, no in-
considerable proportion of which was raised or subscribed
here. Taking the net proceeds of these loans one with an-
other at the round sum of 50,0001., metallic money, or va-
lues equal, was exported from the country at the rate per
annum of 5,000,0001., or seven times the amount ex-
ported within the same period in payment of foreign
corn. In fact, however,. moderately estimating the quantities
of gold and silver abstracted from circulation and stock
here during the same period of ten years, for foreign and
'colonial banking, railroad and other speculations, with the sums
raised for promoting emigration or carried away by emigrants,
it is within compass to say that the whole amount of money
capital, foreign loans inclusive, thus absorbed, cannot probably
have been less than one hundred millions sterling. or at the
rate of ten millions per annum. The export of gold for corn in
face of such a tremendous and continuous egress of bullion and
specie is comparatively unimportant by comparison, and but
for following on the heels of or contemporaneously with the
larger exports, could neither have deranged the circulation or
inconvenienced the Bank or the country. The corn demand
came, which is all that can truly be said, at the precise mo-
ment to exemplify the old saw, that it is the last feather which
breaks the horse's back.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY, July 10.
CITY IMPROVEMENTS.-JUDGMENT.

UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD V. LORD MAYOR AND BURGESSES
OF THE CITY OF LONDON.

This was an appeal from a decision of the Vice-
Chancellor. A motion was made before his Honour last
Wednesday, on behalf of the University of Oxford, for
a special injunction to restrain the Corporation of the
City of London from taking down certain houses situate
in Lad-lane under the provisions of an Act of Parlia-
ment passed in the 2d and 3d of Victoria, for improving
the approaches to London-bridge. The houses were
underleased to Mr. Norris at a considerable rental.
Four years of the term wera unexpired, and the Corpo-
ration of London, who had very extensive compulsory
powers under the Act for the improvement of that part
of the City, had determined upon widening Lad-lane,
and throwing into the street several feet of the site on
which the two houses in question stood. They intended
to take a slice off, beginning with a foot and a half, and
ending with seventeen feet in thickness. The Univer-
sity of Oxford, who are the owners of these houses, in-
sisted that the Corporation of London had only power
under the Act to take so much of the property as should
be required for the purposes of the improvement, and
not to retain the remainder. The Vice-Chancellor ex-
pressed his opinion that the City of London was not ex-
ceeding its authority. The Act of Parliament was in-
tended to confer a power of improving that part of Lon-
don, which would also include the building of suitable
houses along the new street. His Honour thought it a
mere speculative motion, and refused it with costs.
Sir C. WETHERELL and Mr. CALVERT were heard in
support of the appeal, and Mr. K. BRUCE, Mr. WIGRAM,
and Mr. WOOD, on the other side.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, after going through the dif-
ferent sections of the Act which related to the case, said
that power was given to the Coiporation of London to
widen the street, by taking down houses and buildings ;
that if it had been the intention to permit parts of houses
to be taken down, the Act would have stated " so much"
of any houses and buildings. It had been said that
other sections alluded to the removing of portions of
buildings, but the only part of the Act which did so was
the 18th section, that provided for the taking of a por-
tion of any property where both parties agreed to such
an arrangement. Clearly there was no part of the Act
which expressly provided for a case like the present,
that of a party being ownh of the property wishing to
prevent the Corporation from taking the whole they
might require for improvements. If, therefore, the Act
gave the Corporation power to act as they intended to
do, the only question was, whether there was any inten-
tion on the part of the Corporation to make an improper
use of those powers. His Lordship was of opinion, th 4
if any such case had been made out, it was in the power
of the Court to prevent such powers being unfairly exer-
cised. It would be necessary to make out a very storng
case to call for the interference of the Court. The duty
of the Corporation under this Act was to improve the
town by making a new street, and not only to make a
passage through some dilapidated buildings. It was
impossible to say here that the Corporation had not
acted with discretion ; the application must, therefore,
be refused with costs, and his Honour the Vice-Chan-
cellor's decision confirmed.

COURlER—Ministers have experienced the fate of
those who aim at success by dishonest means and con-
tradictory pretences ; their appeal to the cities and
towns was founded on " cheap bread and free trade
clamours," while in their addresses to the counties (the
new rejected addresses) they laboured to prove that their
proposition with regard to the fixed duty on corn was
based on the principle of protection, and would, there-
fore, cause no sensible reduction in its price, nor be at-
tended with any results prejudicial to British agricul-
ture. To the towns the Ministerial policy was vehe-
mently recommended, as embodying and recognising the
principles of free trade ; while to the counties it was re-
presented as one of protection ; but, in reality, it was
neither ; for while it embraced all the evils of the one,
it carefully excluded all the advantages of the other.
The framing of such a contrivance displays the most
perverse ingenuity. Were it proposed to its authors to
concoct a scheme that would deeply, nay, irreparably in-
jure the farmer, without in the slightest possible degree
benefiting the manufacturer, the trader, or the artisan, the
adoption of a fixed duty of eight shillings on foreign
corn would answer all the conditions of the problem,
and, consequently, be its exact solution ; for, while in
years of abundance and low prices it would expose Bri-
tish agriculturists to the hardship and injustice of unfair
competition with foreign growers in years of scarcity and
high prices, it would aggravate the distresses of the ope-
ratives, by compelling them to pay a higher price for
their bread than they would have to do under the present
system. Thus the ruin of the farmer would be unac-
companied by any compensating advantage to the manu-
facturing operative. Were we not then justified in de-
signating such an arrangement as the result of the most
perverse ingenuity ? And such .being its real nature and
character, it does not surprise us to find that it has
been so ignominiously scouted by the intelligence and
spirit of the country, or that its authors have called down
upon their own heads the most signal disgrace and
punishment that could befal public men. The Whig
prints obscurely hint at the possibility of another disso-
lution taking place within the next year—verily, we
believe, their adventurous patrons have suffered too
deeply from the effects of the one they have recently re-
sorted to, to hazard the chances of another as long as
they can avoid. The rejection of upwards of forty of
their crack men is not likely to tempt them, even had
they power, into a repetition of so hopeless and despe-
rate a game.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, July 10.
DEROSSI V. POLHILL.

This was an action of contract.

Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD and Mr. SWANN appeared for
the plaintiff ; Mr. PLATT and Mr. HOGGINS for the
defendant.

The plaintiff was a native of Germany, where he had
acquired considerable reputation as a musician. The
defendant, Captain Polhill, was Member for Bedford,
and the contracts upon which this action was brought
were entered into as long ago as February, 1833, when
the defendant was lessee and principal manager of the
affairs of Drury-lane Theatre. The contracts were
signed by Alfred Bunn, as the agent of the defendant;
and the subject-matter of them was the formation of a
German Opera Company to perform at Drury-lane
Theatre. The plaintiff undertook to collect the com-
pany of Dusseldorf, and to bring them over to this coun-
try so as to perform on a certain day, the defendant
agreeing to pay their expenses out and home, certain
salaries for their services, which were to last nine
weeks, and also to pay the expenses of salary of the
plaintiff, in the capacity of manager of the corps.
The plaintiff was the person who was to re-
ceive all the money on behalf of the company which he
engaged, and the present action was brought by him to
recover about 605/. 18s., the balance remaining due to him
on account of the travelling and other expenses, as well as
the salaries of the German company which played at
Drury-lane Theatre in June, 1833. The plaintiff's bill
of particulars contained different items, and the Lord
Chief Justice, at the commencement of this trial, sug-
gested that the most convenient course apparently would
be to refer to some gentleman who could go through the
account out of Court. That suggestion was at first re-
sisted, but when the cause had proceeded a short time
longer, the plaintiff's counsel intimated his readiness to
acquiesce in the proposal. A verdict was accordingly
taken for the plaintiff; subject to a reference.

MONEY MARKET and CITY NEWS.

FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OF SATURDAY.

TlMES.—Every additional facility that can be gained for
our correspondence with India is of such great importance to
the commercial world, that the merchants in the City are con-
stantly paving attention to every defect in the present system,
and anxious to suggest or listen to improvements. The last
arrival from India came in time to give them every facility in
answering their letter,, and, as we have already observed, gave
the greatest satisfaction in London ; but at the same time the
early departure from Bombay, which caused this convenience,
was attended with inconvenience to the merchants in India,
who were delayed front writing their answers, just in the
same manner as the merchants in London have been de..
layed on ordinary occasions. In suggestions for im-
provement, therefore, care must be taken that while one party
is accommodated it shall not be at the expense of another.
Lane persons, who are well acquainted with the working of
the system, have offered a suggestion which is worthy of atten-
tion. They estimate that the overland mail may generally be
expected by the 6th or 7th of every month, and that, there-
fore, the desired object may be effected by deferring the de-
parture via Marseilles to that period, without making any alte-
ration in the time of 'departure from Bombay.- That those
who prefer the more economical transmission by the'Falmotith
route may share in the advantage to be derived from the alte,
ration, it is proposed that the departure from that port shall
take place on the Ist of each month, instead of the 31st of the
month preceding, so that no unnecessary delay would be created
by the stoppage of the vessel at Malta.
CHRONICLE.—By official Parliamentary returns it ap-
pears that the total quantity of foreign and colonial wheat and
wheat flour imported from January, 1840, to April, 1841
(both inclusive), amounted to 2,621,366 quarters, of which
2,525,589 quarters were entered for home consumption. The
total amount of duty received on the above wheat and wheat
flour was 1,009,0251. We beg the monopolists to observe that
the amount of duty received on the above quantity of foreign
wheat entered for home consumption is equal in round num-
bers to a fixed duty of 83. per quarter on the whole, precisely
the Ministerial measure, which they represent to the farmers
as being ruinous to their interests. This fact is admitted by
the monopolists, and they now gravely ask whether " it is to
be supposed that Sir Robert Peel was really serious in his op.
position to something equivalent to a fixed duty of Bs. per
quarter? " This augurs well, and is too important an indica-
tion of public opinion not to demand the special attention of
the supporters of her Majesty's Government.
HERALD.—So much has been said in public speeches,
and more still in writing about the drainage of the precious
metals caused by the present Corn-laws and imports of corn
paid for in hard cash during times of scarcity, with the peril-
ous position to which as confidently assumed, the Bank of
England has been reduced, or liable to be, in consequence,
that it may be worth while to inquire whether there he any
sufficient foundation for the argument taken for granted, and
the fact charged to the extent, or any thing like the extent
alleged. It is generally asserted by those most given to en-
large in free and easy fluency about exports of gold and Bank
embarrassments with entire independence or of reference to all'
those attendant circumstances by which the question must
really be examined and decided, that bullion to the amount of
i
about 7,000,000/. was exported in payment of corn from 1839
to 1840, the effect of which was to bring the Bank
one
othbt
theoafppaearsstotopphaagyee ocfrosspseedciethepamyminednsts.c;f
No
t
single vergednithese
logicians that other and larger exports of the precious metals,
and for far other purposes, were going on simultaneously with
those for corn, or had been going on for years previously, but
for which, considerable as was the outlay required for bread
stuffs, the amount would have been easily supplied, and The
export scarcely felt as an inconvenience. Take for example
the foreign loans negotiated wholly, or for the greatest part, in
this country, beginning with MO, and it will be seen at once
how small a portioß of the drain of gold is in ()flint chargeable

STOREY V. Moom:s.

This was an action of trespass for assault and false
imprisonment.

kr. Sergeant BO3IPAS and Mr. CRAMBEnS appeared
for the plaintiff, Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD and another
gentleman for the defendant.

- It appeared that the defendant kept a ham-shop in
Farringdon-street, and that on the evening of Saturday,
May 22, the plaintiff went there to buy four or five.
pounds of ham ; that-he was served by the defendant
himself, and that he inquired of the defendant whether
he could send it home for him. Whereupon, according
to the statement of the plaintiff's witnesses, the de-
fendant threw down the ham in a passion on the coun-
ter, and said, " When you come out again, you had better
bring your servant with you." The plaintiff replied, "Don't
blackguard me." Upon which the defendant, coming.
from behind his counter, said in a loud and threatening tone
—" Blackguard you ! what do you mean by that ? You
call me a blackguard do you ? I'll give you in charge." The
plaintiff said—" I don't call you a blackguard ;" . however
the defendant followed him over the threshold of the
shop into the street, where a crowd of persons
had assembled, and, taking hold of: him by the
arm, called to his shepman to fetch a constable. 'When
one came he gave the plaintiff in charge for calling him
a blackguard, and the plaintiff was taken to the police
station-house and there discharged. The case set up by
the defendant was, that he civilly told the plaintiff that
he could not send home the ham he was so busy ; where-
upon the plaintiff had abused him and made a distur-
bance in his shop. He requested him to go out, and upon
the plaintiff's refusal to do so, gave him in charge fur
creating a disturbance at his door.
The defendant's case rested principally on the testi-
mony of his head shopman, who created a good deal of
amusement by the manner in which he "puffed" his
master, and the extent of his master's business. He
said that his master always took so much pains to oblige
his customers—his civility made him beloved by all who
knew him. On a Saturday night he (the witness) had
hundreds . of customers to serve ; and on this occasion
the disturbance lasted for ten minutes or a quarter of an
hour, in which time he would probably have taken 10/.
or 201.

The Jury, however, stopped the Learned Counsel for
the plaintiff in his reply, and found a verdict for the.
plaintiff.—Damages 251.

CITY POLICE COMMITTEE.

Mr. ',Francis, the proprietor of the Adelaide Tavern,
London4iridge, appeared, on Saturday, upon two sum-
monses, for permitting persons to be drinking in the tap-
rOotti of his •house, they not being travellers or yaf.;-
setigerA;idnring the hours of divine service.
Fblide Ciinstable Russell stated that on Sunday at 10
mbluieS past .11 dclock, he saw several persons go into
the tap of the hotel. He went into the tap-room and
saw three persons there ; . two were ticket porters, and
the other a woman, and they had a glass of gin and a
pot of beer before them.
Alderman Sir C. MARsuALL—This is a very different
ease to what,was repre:Anitecl hi me by Mr. Francis. He
said the persons were foreigners, who •bad just landed
from the steam boat.

.

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDA Y, JULY 12 18-11.

Mr. Francis said he was very sorry for what had hap-
pened, but he was told the persons were masons just
come to London. Two boats had arrived, and some of
'the passengeofivould. go to the hotel, and others to the
,tap, so that it.33'.difficult to tell who were the real pa*:
sengers, 'and 'consequently who to admit.
Sir. C. MARSHALL—Ticket porters certainly had no
right to be there.
Inspector Brake said twenty people had been seen to
come out. on one Sunday, and he had consequently sent
two men in plain clothes.
Sir C. MARSHALL—If foreigners arrive they ought to
have refreshment if they require it, but every one was
not to be admitted into the house.

The second summons was then gone into previous to
the decision of the Court.

Constable Lambell stated that he and another consta-
ble went to the same house at half-past eleven, dressed in
private clothes. Three men and a woman were there, who
had a pot of beer before them. They (the constables) had
two pints of ale and a glass of gin-and-water.—(A laugh.)
Alderman LAINSON—That was a good start for a Sun-
day morning.—(Laughter.)
Witness continued, and said that several persons came
in before they left, which was at one o'clock. They
wanted to leave before, but the .man whom they supposed
to be the landlord would not let them out, saying the
b—y police were looking out.
Alderman LAINSON—Was that Mr. Francis ? Wit-
ness—No.

Alderman LAINSON—Then why not summon the land-
lord of the tap ? Inspector—He has no license, and we
do not know who he is.

Mr. Francis said he was very indignant at hearing of
such conduct on the part of the person engaged in the
tap, but he would take care instantly to discharge him.
Inspector Brake—The publicans in the neighbourhood
am, continually complaining of the serious loss they suffer
in this way.
Alderman KELLY'said he had no doubt this would
have gone on with impunity but for the vigilance of the
officers.

Mr. Francis observed that he gave the strictest injunc-
tions to his servants to use the utmost caution before
they admitted any one.
Alderman. KELLY—T h e full penalty is V: in this case.
Alderman LAINSON—We may treat it, I think, as me
offence.

Alderman KELLY—WeII, we shall fine you 405., but
remember, it will be 51. next time. _

The penalty was immediately paid.

MANSION-HOUSE.

A Frenchman, of very gentlemanly appearance, named
Jule Le Beaurne, was charged with smuggling. The So-
licitor for. the Revenue attended for the prosecution, and
a Solicitor attended-for the prisoner, who, it was stated,.
did not understand a word of the Engliandanguage. • -
Robert M'Donald, a revenue officer, .statedthatronthe
15th of June, being on board the .Magnet' steam.veksel
from Boulogne, which was lying at London'-bridge wharf,
about ten or eleven o'clock in the morning, he observed
the-defendant with something bulky about .hith„ and
asked him what he had. The defendant declared he had
nothing. Witness then touched defendant's side, re-
marking.that there was something in that spot. "Oh,"
said he, " that's merely a little thing I have for a lady,"
and witness then proceeded to search him, convinced
that he had a stock upon his person. Between his shirt
and flannel waistcoat was stiehed in with much care and
skill, a remnant of black silk and his person was com-
pletely surrounded with innumerable pieces of narrow
French rihand, not a yard of any of which had paid duty.
The defendant, when he found that he was to be
searched, said that what 'he had about him was not for
himself but for a gentleman residing. at Brompten.
The defendant's attorney having ordered all the other,
witnesses out of Court, asked whether the defendant ad-
dressed witness in the English language ?
Witness.—Certainly he did, and he anzavered me in
English.
The defendant's attorney.—Did not the defendant say
upon being asked Whether he had not something about
his person, " I haVe got anything," meaning thereby
that he had something ?
Witness.—No suCh`thing. He wholly denied that he
had anything at all about him. He handed me the
three ribands, which he said he had for the ladies, but
the rest we cut from different parts of his person.
The defendant's attorney said he was instructed that
his client, who was a most respectable person, and not
all acquainted-with smuggling, did, upon being asked
whether he had anything. about him, willingly, and
without hesitation, declare that he had, and that they
belonged to another person. He trusted the Court would
take into consideration his client's want of knowledge
of the language, and the fact that he readily admitted
the possession of the articles.
The Solicitor for the Revenue submitted that the de-
fendant must have known that he was smuggling, for the
contraband articles were wrapped round his body and
closely corded.
The LORD' MAYOR said that, as to the prisoner's
knowledge that he was smuggling, and smuggling by
wholesale too, there could be no doubt.
The defendant's solicitor then . submitted that the
condemnation of the prisoner should only apply, as far
as the fine was concerned, to the quantity of silk found
secreted upon him, and that no penalty should be in-
flicted for that which he carried openly.
The Magistrates condemned the silk and ribands as a
matter of course, and inflicted half of the full penalty for
the offence—viz. 9/. Bs., and costs.
George Jenkins was charged with having stolen silk of
the value of 25/. from Messrs. John and Frederick Cow-
per, of St. Paul's Church-yard.. •
Mr. Norris, who is employed in the house of Messrs.
Cowper, stated that the prisoner called in June last, at
half-past eight in the evening, and said he
,wished to
look • at some goods for Messrs. Jones of the City-road,
from whence he came. The prisoner, was sent up stairs,
when he selected two pieces.
• W. Wish, who is also in the employment of the pro-
secutors, stated that he saw the prisoner, whom he had
known at Mr. Jones's in the City-road, where they were
shopmates, in Mr. Cowper's shop, in St. Paul's Church-
yard, selecting the goods, and asked him with whom he
was, to which he replied that he was again at Mr.
Jones's.

11. Dix stated that it was his duty to measure the
goods at Messrs. Cowpers' and Co., and he measured out
silk to the amount of, 25/..for the prisoner, who told.
him it was for Mr: Jones, and they were entered ac-
cordingly.
Mr. Enoch Jones, of the City-road, stated that the
prisoner had lived in his employment from October,
1839, to October, 1840, but had never been employed
by him since ; neither had witness ever sent the prisoner
for the goods in question.
The prisoner said that he was an innocent men. It
was true he had ordered the two pieces ; but, instead of
taking them away, he liad left them on the premises
with the intention of paying for them and taking them
away, but he had never called. There was, he knew,
an old prejudice existing against him. He had been
transported for seven years some time ago, and he had
served out the whole of his time in Bermuda, sod came
home completely reformed. Those who knew the fad,
however, entertained a spleen towards him, and he suf-
fered, in consequence, from the suspicions of his enemies.
Alderman Wilson—l suppose you liked the seven
years' transportation so well that you were resolved to
have fourteen or fifteen more ? Prisoner—No ; I as-
sure you, Sir, I did not like it at all ; but I haVe suf-
fered the punishment, and I am, I declare, thoroughly
reformed.—The prisoner was remanded.