The Sun.
London, England, 1823-09-03 00:00:00

DIVIDENDS.

Sept. 25, W. Wilson, Bridgefield, Lancashire, tanner—
Sept. 27, E. Edwards, Conway, Carnarvonshire, merchant—
Sept. 24, K. Kitchen and J. Amery, Liverpool, tailors—Sept.
23, J. and IL Bird, Poultry, jewellers.

CERTIFICATES, SEPT. 23.
S. Scott and J. Smith, Ashford, Kent, grocers—B. Stinson,
Dudley, Worcestershire, grocer—W. Gray, Birmingham, nail.
factor—S. Thorpe and It. Marshall, Nottingham, wharfingers.
PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.
J. and H Q. Winwood, and W. Bond, Bristol, steam-en-
gine-manufacturers—P. Dc Jersey, Guernsey, and N. Lovell,
St. George, Somersetshire, apothecaries—T. Itostron and It.
Booth, Reddish, Lancashire, bleachers—P. Molynettx and C.
J. Devonshire, Green Lettuce-lane, sponge-merchants—J..l.
and W. Quane, Nantwich, Cheshire, common-brewers—C. Cot-
ton and E. Hodson, Stretton, Staffordshire, coal-merchants—
B. Clark and W. Myers, Tooley-street, hop-merchants
J. Stokes and J. P. Walter, Bristol, merchants—lt. Matthews
and M. Palmer, Regent-street, Piccadilly, milliners—J. am
J. Russell, Weilnesbury, Staffordshire, gas-tube-manufacturers
—J. Minet and E. C. Hooton, London and Madeira—lt. Bill
and C.. Strickland, Greek-street; Soho, shoemakers—E. Jones
and T. Lewis, Camden-town, linen-drapers—T. Griffiths and
S. Fox, Manchester, flour-dealers.

MURDER of J. SMITH, Esq. at LEWISHAM.

Yesterday Mr. CortsTAur.}: and Colonel FORE-
MAN, hlagistrates for this division, sat at the Mitre-tavern,
Greenwich. At an early hour the Justice-mom was filled to
excess, and the greatest anxiety prevailed in consequence of a
man named Thomas Timothy bein discovered to be an as-
compilce with Coleman, in the murder of the unfortunate Mr.
Smith, at Lewisham, in December last.
Previous to Coleman's condemnation, he made a confession'
to Colonel FOUEMAN, in the presence of Mr. Bicknell, the
clerk, wherein he stated, that when he left Mrs. Conley's,
st Deptford, where he lodged, he proceeded towards the
house of Air. Smith, where he met his associates, who were six
in number, viz. James and Robert Smith (brothers, the latter
fired the fatal shot) James Webster, a shipwright, John Wood-
cock, a fisherman of Lambeth, and two other fishermen whose
surnames he did not know—but Thomas was the Christian name
of the one, and John of the other, and 'that they lived in Lam-
beth and frequented the same public.bouse there as Woodcock
—that Thomas had lived at the back of the Nelson, In Dept-
ford,' with a girl called black Hannah ; and that it was Thomas
that assisted him in boring the hole in the parlour-shutter of
Mr. Smith's at the moment that Gentleman was shot, and that
the stick that was found in the fore-court of Mr. Smith's house
belonged to Thomas.
After Coleman's execution, it was found that the surname
of Thomas was Timothy, and warrants were forthwith grim ed
and placed in the hands of Farmer, an active constable. Far-
mer was unceasing in his endeavours to arrest him, but could
not gain the slightest trace of him. The prisoner, who is
a dashing young fellow, apparently about twenty-seven
years of age, of very short stature, was, however, brought
before Mr. CONSTABLE,,on Saturday, on a warrant, at the in-
stance of a, female, for an assault, anti then appeared un-
der an assumed name. in tho course of the examination
upon the complaint of the young woman, he was recogniz-
ed to he the very. Thomas Timothy named by Cole-
man in his confession, and when challenged by the Ma,
gistrate its to whether or not his name was Timothy, he re-
luctantly admitted that was'his name. lie WHS. thereupon re-
manded, and was taken to the cage under a strong escort.
etilleatawtheenbruarn,ceadnd
thheinagps.peaArledr.
vYeesrytedrdeitteye.tohe
awnsds
iagiananinedplaatc
Humphries attended as his solicitor. Mrs. Coleman, the
mother of the Unfortunate man
.who suffered the sentence of the
law, attended, and underwent an examination in private. 31r.
Bicknell, solicitor to the Hospital, and clerk to the Magistrates,
took her depositions at Considerable length, which were after-
wards communicated to the priSoner, who loudly asserted
innocence. Ile Was again !emended.

IRISH ASSIZES.

CORK, Atrous'i 18.

IMPORTANT MERCANTILE TRIAL.-MART AND ARTHUR
O'KEEFFE, V. THE LATE FIRM OF MESSRS. STEPHEN

AND JAMES ROCHE.

Mr DEANE GRADY, for.the plaintiffs, stated their case.
This was an lisue directed by the Court of Chancery, under
which the-action was brought .by the plaintiff's against the de-
fendants, for the recovery of the amount of certain bills of ex-
change. It was well known to the Jury, and to the public,
that in consequence of the failure of the Messrs. Roche, the
statute was issued against them, and that, after having gone
through the ordeal, they honourably obtained their certificate;
and though this action was nominally against them, its real object
was to come at a dividend of their effects. The plaintiffs were
driven to try their right to do so in this way, their endeavours
to try on the estate before the Commissioners of Bankrupt in
Cork having been encountered by so many difficulties and
obstacles, as to oblige them to snake an application to the
Lord Chancellor to allow them to conic in and prove their debt.
The motion having been agreed before his Lordship, the result
was an order that the plaintiff's should bring; an action against
the present defendants, who, it was directed by the order,
should not set up their bankruptcy in defence. It was a part
of the same order, that the assignees of the Messrs. Roche
should be at liberty to examine the bankrupts • so that•in fact
it was they who instituted this resistance to die plaintiff's, for
he, Mr. Grady, was persuaded that the Messrs. Roche, if act-
ing for themselves, would not be in Court that day to object
to the just claim of the plaintiffs, or to set up the kind of de-
fence which he understood would be resorted to ; for, strange
as it may appear, one of the grounds was, that some of the
bills were drawn on illegal stamps, respecting which he
should have something to say hereafter. They all knew that
the plaintiff's had dealt largely in bills of exchange, and carried
on business successfully for a long time. Among 'others they
had many dealings with the defendants, who, it would appear
having had occasion for English bills early in the'year 1820,
applied to the plaintiff's; who sold them those who were the
subject of the present action, drawn on a house in London,
With whom they had been in the habit of doing business for a
number of years, anti with whom they had extensive credit.
As payment for these bills, the 'plaintiffs received from the de-
fendants bills also drawn on London, which amounted to 2,012/.
Os. 3d. British, which made a difference, to some small amount,
between those they gave and those they got. The bills thus
given to the defendants by the plaintiffs were all paid, one of
then', after some short delay, having gotten into the hands of
Mr. John Roche, of Dublin ; while the bills which the defend.
ants gave to the plaintiffs were not paid, and remained so to
this day. When these were drawn, tt was subsequently disco-
vered, that instead of calculating the stamp as if the transaction
were of English money, they were as of Irish, and inasmuch as
some of them were so drawn, it was now, it seem ed,to be contended
that it was impossible to recover. That, he admitted, was a
legal objection ; but in consequence of what took place before
the Lord Chincellor„it was one which would not avail, which
ought not to be relied on, and which he hoped the Learned
Counsel at the other side would not embarrass the case with. It
would, in truth, be useless to do so ; for if the plaintiff's got a
verdict upon any 'of the hills to which the objection, on account
of a wrong stamp, did, not, apply, the Lord Chancellor would
not allow the objection to those which were on wrong stamps to
prevail. • When he mentioned the names of the Roches, he
could not avoid doing them the justice to say, that it was con-
sistent with the purity of conduct which they had always evinced,
that they would not set up such a defence as this to which he
had alluded.

The only witness produced in support of this statement was
Mr. Keefle O'Keeffe; when
Mr. O'CoNNELL spoke for the defendants. • He remarked
that Mr. Grady had admitted in his statement they were not
trying an ordinary issue of bills of exchange. This was, in
fact, an issue to satisfy the Chancellor whether the plaintiff:4
were entitled to recover a dividend on these bills ont of the
elects of the bankrupts. The Chancellor sent thiS question to
be tried in form of an action, but the form was immaterial. lie
would prove by evidence not to be controverted, that there was
not a *mule &ma fide transaction, but a mere intercltange of
paper bet Ween insolvent houses—that although their dealings,
previous to March 1020, amounted to 150,000/., there was not
an act of regular business, the entire being calculated and con-
trived by the Oiliceffes to Ifeep up a fictitious credit. The re.
sult of these dealings was, that in alarch, 1020, a sum of 0,0001.„ •
according to Mr. heeffe O'Keeffe's representation, but amount-
ing to 0,0001. in reality, as would be proved by Mr. Roche, was
due to. the bank.

Mr. James Roche, one of the late firm, was examined by
the It Eco RD Eft. Ile proved that 1,000/. was accepted by the
Messrs. Roche as a compensation for 0,0001., and the sum
paid, part in gold, part in notes, and part by a bill on London.
rpt greater 'tart of the debt due from the house of O'Keefe to
the bank appeared in his (Mr. Roche's) private book, a sum
of 1,1001. only appearing to be due on the books of the house' •
and in order to save appearances, he gave Mr. Arthur O'R'eeffe
a sum of 1,100.1. in his private office', with which he went down
to the public office, and paid off the balance which appeared to
he due. In May, 1810, there Avila a temporary demur on the
part of Roberts and Co. to accept the bills drawn by his house,
and this fact was known to the O'Keeffes. In 1816, Mrs.
Vtieeffe passed hills to him to the amount of 5,000/., which
were not paid ; he spoke to her about them, and she said if the
hank-would enable her to take some money in London, she
would get them settled or arranged, Upon this assurance he
gave her a thousand guineas on her 1 0 11, and discounted for
her to the amount of 2,000/„ but the bills were never paid.—
Being asked how he accounted for doing business with her
after this transaction, he said it was with a view to keep up
her credit, and thereby enable her to pay gradually. The debt
of 0,000/. due in March, 1020, he was obliged to compromise
front necessity.
Mr. Justice BURTON summed up the evidence. After al-
luding to the acceptance of the compromise above stated, he
said the former loss would account for Mr. Roche's calling on
the O'Keeffs for bills, of which the four in dispute were some,
which were regularly paid, never having come back to him ;
but what was decisive in the case was, that they now came out
of the plaintiff's hands, showing that they had paid them in
some way or other, which was evidence of so much money had'
and remind from the plaintiffs to the use of the defendants.—
If the Jury saw the case in this light, they ought to find a
verdict for the plaintiffk to the amount of the tour bills. lie
stated that it was probable this trial would not decide the mat-
ter between the o'.Keeffea and the assignees or creditors of the
Roches, but as between the present parties, whom only they
could know, it was quite conclusive.
The Jury then retired, and in a few minutes returned a ver-
via for the plaintiff's for 2,174!. 2s. n

It
was
ex
ectidtrleid:l,:crllcltiilecielN.
A monument has lately iwPtt erected in the
adsnic:vredi
cess.c nil:to:8.
Salisbury Cathedral to the memory of the late Earl of 31A LIKES-
/WRY, by his Lordship's sister, the Hon. KATHERINE tiEn-
TRUDE HORINSON.
Itll
supported an
And dal
It consists of a full length figure (in statuary marble) of the
one of the finest specimens of that universally
deceased, in a. recumbent posture, vesting on an altar tomb,
upon which are his Lordship's arms ; with an inscriptin, enu.
quantities of
snu'ernrattotlitingteltliswiThanZ and eminent
pilasteri ; the whole is in a chaste aOti.ttppropriate Gothic stile.
The like-Ile-Hi of the Earl is most faithful! A 1;
Y -e..neated. .
Since the removal of the restrictions on the
Irish calicoes have been sold both hero and in Manchester.
trade between Great Britain and Ireland, large
l'he trade is very likely to in really
notwithstanding the low
wages paid here, they are greatly lower in Ireland. .1 t seems
probable that, instea«if the too Irish coming here to weave,
and that '
they will :tow obtain work at owe,
_. t their wages will
become somewhat higher... 4 qtavere Chrottie/e.)
. i ..
The 'enters' and dresse rs itt lit power loom
rul
factories have refused to concur in the re t, ations published on
Saturday last, and the worki, ontaining 'about 3,llo'loomß,
continue shut up. The leaders ot!, the combination are likelY
tel do' their followers a great deal of 119ury, Its Li_ A,
nutouers or
weavers have already made tIpPW-` .1C 11S. for their employment.
The number implicated in the catnip do not flinch exceed
340 ; bid they throw idle ail the r ,rl,, and Mbie "gaged,
in the other departments of'thefacZ:..tand the money earned
by the whole amounts to about:lrp:.4 Week, a sUni which it
IS impossible they can long son ' r
s wphout. There iii at `ile.
in the narket, and the • • •
sent a large stock of goods ~,.., Profit. in the
manufacture has not been so..gres, sl.w. -make the present'mor.
page in affair i f 1110111Ctit tO tauluTietors.-01,1d.) . i