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

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, DECEAn3 ER 7, 1841.

S PHUT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
GLOBE.—The position in his Lordship's
letter which has roused the ire of the Times, is,
that if the people of England be but united, the
question of free-trade will eventually triumph ;
in fact,, that the downfal of monarchy is at hand;
that prohibitory duties will share the fate of reli-
gious disqualifications, negro slavery, and other
works of darkness. His Lordship proceeded to
illustrate and strengthen the opinion expressed in
the encouraging form ofassurance to the Plymouth
addressers, by a reference to facts with which
they, and all, are well acquainted :--" The men "
(Wellington and Peel) " who surrendered what
they deemed the external bulwarks of the. Church
and the Constitution to the menaces of the Ro-
man Catholic Association of Ireland, will be sure
to yield the fortress of commercial restriction
when they shall be summoned to do so by the
peaceful but powerful voice of the people of
England and Scotland." Now what is there in
this either false or foolish ? Did not pub-
lic opinion compel the Duke of Welling-
ton and Sir Robert Peel to abandon their
antagonistical position to repeal the laws
which imposed religious restrictions on Ro-
man Catholics and other classes of Dis-
senters from the National Church? What
does the Times find in this part of his Lordship's
letter to assail with either ridicule or reasoning?
Was Catholic Emancipation the fruit of con-
viction in those statesmen of injustice to the
Roman Catholics, too long excluded from the
privileges and immunities of freemen by the
penal laws in force against them, or was it wrested
from their fears? In other words, was Catholic
Emancipation a sacrifice to expediency, or a spon-
taneous emanation of political justice? If of the
former, it was public opinion which strengthened
the demands of the clainiants, without which
they would have still urged their demands in
vain; if of the latter, the Duke and Sir Robert
Peel would not have ventured to introduce the
measure. In either case, public opinion, which
the Times with more boldness than honesty ven-
tures to despise, effected that great national mea-
sure. The same may be said of the repeal of the
Corporation and Test Acts, which excluded Pro-
testant Dissenters from municipal and other posts
on account of their relious opinions. The slave-
trade, and at length slavery in the British Colonies,
fell before the same resistless energy-. When
the abolition of those inhuman practices was first
proposed in Parliament, the project was regarded
as chimerical, and its advocates were scouted as
fools and madmen. Let any one compare the
commencement of those struggles which finally
issued in triumph, to which Lord J. Russell al-
luded as ministering hope to the advocates of free-
trade principles, the fewness of the numbers and,
with few exceptions, the destitution of rank and
influence among those who identified them-
selves with their cause; with the host of
doors ready to pour in their petitions into
both Houses of the Legislature so soon as
Parliament shall assemble, urging the adoption
of those principles upon the Legislature ; thus
giving real power to the more than 260 advocates
of free-trade within the walls of the House of
Commons, ready by their speeches and votes to
enforce upon the Legislature the claims of the
people. And then let the Times rail, and the Tories
snarl, at the statesman who has predicted that Sir
Robert Peel must either yield to, or fall before,
public opinion, thus combined to demand a repeal
of the prohibitory duties upon corn, and other ar-
ticles of general consumption. The foundation on
which Lord John Russell rests his predictions of
a final and early triumph of the cause on which he
and his colleagues staked their existence as a
Government, and which with them sustained a
temporary defeat by the combination of those
classes which imagine their interests are bound
up with monopoly—that foundation remains un-
shaken. Neither fraud nor force can prevail to
overthrow it. Lord John Russell's reputation
and reasoning are equally beyond the reach of
those who would gladly diminish the influence
of both.
STANDARD.—When Sir Robert Peel was
driven from office by "the appropriation clause"
Ministers of April, 1833, the nation acknow-
ledged the merits of the retiring Minister by
thousands of addresses, bearing more than
one million! of signatures, presented within
a week, or at most within a fortnight,
of the announcement of the Right Ho-
nourable Baronet's resignation. These ad-
dresses, so prompt, so numerous, and so nu-
merously signed, came from all classes and
descriptions of the people, without any other
distinction than that the addressers were all
intelligent and all respectable. The Whig-
Radical Cabinet has now been three months
expecting and canvassing the condolence of the
people ; and with what result? Just two ad
dresses : one fr, m certain persons (who call them-
selves a meeting) at Plymouth, directed to Lord
J. Russell; the second, which appears for the first
time this morning in the columns of the Morning
Chronicle, is from the town council of Bridg-
north, and addressed to Lord Palmerston—sug-
gested, too, as is confessed, by the fact that the
Noble Lord happened to be in the neighbour-
hood. As to Lord Melbourne, Lord Normsiihyt
and the rest, they are as wholly forgotten as if
they never had been born, or never made any
more serious claims upon public notice than
" Whistle for it" and " Matilda." The neglected
Ministers have, however, this consolation,
that if they have bad no addresses to parade,
they have escaped the necessity of showing them-
selves in answers. How ninth reason Lord John
seen
and the self-
erston can be ,
Russell has to complain of such a forced exhi-
ebxitiiloensu, the
re
extractedpub l public has
ft ernL
alreadyerd
Palmerston
scarcely less afflicting.
.COURIER.—There is but little, as all who
read it will readily admit, in. Lord J. Russell's
curt reply to the Plymouth deputation, either
to invite or justify a second notice of its
meagre contents; yet the peculiarly artful
assumptions, adopted evidently with the view
of e
ep
as )ullie mind.with erroneous
o andss i
inferences
to the cause, or coml.&
n r
nation ofcauscs, that has planed " a new Ministry
in power" (the words are well chosen, for the
late Ministry, though in place, was not in power);
and the vivid eagerness with which these have
been grasped at and expanded into long and
laboured tirades against the principles, political
and fiscal, of the present Government, render a
recurrence to the subject a matter of duty, how
unpleasant soever it may be. We may at once
state, that the direct and sole purpose of that
cunningly contrived document was, to convey
an impression that the Whig Government had
endured martyrdom in the cause of free trade,
and that to its devotedness to that principle
was solely ascribable its downfitl in July last.
" We have (boldly vaunts the ex-Colonial Secre-
tary) ruined ourselves in endeavouring to relieve
the country; consider and admire (he virtually
adds) the fervency of that patriotism, and the emi-
nence of that disinterestedness which prompted
us, her Majesty's chosen Ministers, to peril, nay,
of our own free-will and accord to sacrifice, our
places, our salaries, our consistency, our all, in the
glorious cause of fiscal reform." Now, to us, the
challenging of the nation's gratitude and confi-
dence on the grounds here specified appears the
very height of daring effrontery. The Whig Cabi-
net had been known by friends and foes to be in
a ricketty, declining condition, long anterior
to its final annihilation. The cause which
operated to weaken its strength, and da-
mage its character in and out of Parliament
it is not necessary for us either to examine orspe-
cify. It is sufficient for the purpose of our present
argument, to know that immediately preceding the
session oflB4l, the belief was generally entertained
that the Ministry would find it impossible, even as
the House of Commons was then constituted, to
struggle through half the session; that belief was
strengthened into conviction by the simultaneous
and significant defeats their party sustained at the
various isolated elections which immediately fol-
lowed the meeting of Parliament. The conscious-
ness that "we cannot be worse off," is always a
great temptation in the way of the weak and the
selfish. It induced the -Whig Ministry to in-
cline a favourable ear to the evil prompters
of the " league," and to adventure the course
which precipitated, not caused, its ruin. Thus
we have seen that the " endeavours " of
which Lord John Russell so thrasonically boasts,
were not made to relieve the country, but to prop
up the Ministry ; and that they proceeded, not
from an anxiety to case the country of any por-
tion of its burdens, or trade of any of its restric-
tions, but simply and solely from a desire to pro-
long or renew the tenure of their own official
existence.

ONE DAY LATER from AMERICA.
LIVERPOOL, SUNDAY.
The packet ship Sheffield, Captain Allan, ar.
rived here late last night from New York,
whence she sailed on the evening of the 16th
ult. By her we have a New York paper one
day later than those received by the Britannia
on Wednesday last. It contains no news of im-
portance. The New York Money Market on
the 15th is described as having been animated,
and the prices of Stock generally are said to
have been firm. The rates of Exchange on Eng-
land stood at 9 to 10 per cent. premium, with
but little doing.

Despatches from the Governors of the Mauritius, and
the Cape of Good Mope were received yesterday at the
Cplonial-office.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
ROLLS' COURT, Dec. G.
ALLINGTON V. PAINE.

The Court was occupied nearly the whole day with
this suit, which was instituted to recover the sum of 1501.
alleged to have been accidentally omitted in an account
that had been settled. It appeared from the evidence
that on the Ist of January, 1829, the defendant was in-
debted to a gentleman named Williamson in the sum of
1,0001., which was secured by mortgage, and that on the
same day Mr. Williamson advanced to the defendant a
further sum of 3001., for which on the 28th of May fol-
lowing the defendant executed a further charge on the
mortgaged estate for the sum of 3501. In the month of
September, defendant being desirous of a further ad-
vance of money, applied to Mr. Peppercorne, who was
the Solicitor both of himself and Mr. Williamson, to
raise for him the sum of 2001, which Mr. Peppercorne
did ; the sum of 601., one portion of it, being pro-
cured from Mr. Williamson, and the remainder
from a friend of Mr. Peppercorne, and in the
month of May following the defendant, as was admitted
by the answer, received a check for the sum of 1501. from
Mr, Williamson. Mr. Williamson having died, and
appointed the plaintiff his executor, an account was set-
tled between Mr. Peppercorne and the defendant, by
which it appeared that there was a sum of 2001. due
to Mr. Williamson from defendant for principal money,
and interest computed from the 7th of September, 1829
to the 2d of June, 1831, that being the time up to which
the account was made. On the other side of the account
was a memorandum by defendant, " Cash from Mr.
Williamson, Sept. 10, 200/." The account being thus
settled, nothing more transpired between the parties on
this business until seven or eight years afterwards, when
defendant received a letter from Mr. Peppercorne, inform-
ing him that he had found by Mr. Williamson's banking
account that a sum of 1501. was paid to defendant on
the 20th May, 1830, and that, as he was unable to ac-
count for it, he should be obliged to the defendant to
look through his accounts, and afford him some informa-
tion on the subject. To this letter defendant replied that
he had examined all his papers, and found that he had
received no money either from Mr. Williamson or Mr.
Peppercorne in the month of May 1830. Some further
correspondence took place on the subject, in which de-
fendant asserted that if he had received the money in ques-
tion at all, he had only done so as part of the 2001. pro-
cured for him by Mr. Peppercorne, and which had been
included in the settled account. Under these circum-
stances the bill was filed by the plaintiff on the 18th April,
1839, to which an answer was put in to the effect above
stated. There was no evidence on the subject given by
Mr. Peppercorne.
Mr. Pemberton and Mr. Milne having appeared for
the plaintiff, and Mr. Kindersley and Mr. Purvis for the
defendant,

The MASTER of the RoLLs said the evidence that should
have been adduced in this case had not beep brought
forward. Taking the account signed by the parties, and
connecting it with the correspondence, there was a prima
facie case that the sum of 2001., of which at first only 60/.
had keen paid by Mr. Williamson, had by subseqent ar-
rangement been paid out of money belonging to that
gentleman ; but it was very possible that might admit of
explanation. He thought that Mr. Peppercorne ought
to have been examined ; and he should, therefore, refer
the case back for further inquiry.

INSOLVENT COURT, Dec. 7.
IN RE MATTER OF T. GUY.

The insolvent in this case had been a farmer, in Suf.
folk, and subsequently became the proprietor of a Club-
house in St. James's-street.

He was opposed by Mr. Nicholls, on behalf of Mrs.
Broadwood, one of the well-known firm of Broadwood
and Co., pianoforte-makers. He was supported by Messrs.
Cooke and Woodruffe.

Mr. Nicifora.s applied to the Court with respect to a
number of documents held by a man of the name of
Nias, touching certain annuities, at one time in the pos-
session of the insolvent, and stated as worth 18,0001.,
which Mr. Nias alleged he had a lien upon, owing to
some purchases which had been effected.
Mr. Commissioner LAW said he was sure all those
documents now in Mr. Nias's hands, and which were not
legally necessary for him to hold as security, would be
available to the creditors.

Mr. Nias having expressed his concurrence with the
Learned Commissioner's assertion, the case was adjourned.

CENTRAL CIUMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.

STEAM-BOAT ROBBERY. —George Dixon, aged 22,
was indicted for committing a robbery, with violence, on
William Drake, and stealing one bottle-flask and one
handkerchief, value Bs., his property on the Adelphi
Pier. The prisoner pleaded not guilty.
Mr. CLARKSON (with whom was Mr. DOANE) having
stated the case for the prosecution, called
William Drake—l ant a coal-merchant, Ping at
Bloomsbury. On the 26th I went with my brother -and
a party to Gravesend, in the Bachelor steamer. The
prisoner was on board, coming back from Gravesend.
The boat had been engaged by a friend of mine.
I assisted him in collecting the money for the
refreshments served on board. My attention was called
to" The prisoner at the bar. We arrived at the Adelphi-
stairs a little after seven o'clock. I was among the last
who landed. I had a Mackintosh, in the pocket of which
I had a silk handkerchief and a flask. I had given over
the money I had collected, about 21, to my friend, before
I landed. As soon as I landed I was attacked by the
prisoner and others he struck me about the head, and
then I felt his -hand'ih my Mackintosh pocket. I said
"'Scotty, *hat are you about ; I know you." I was
then knocked down and kicked. My brother, who
was with me was .alsO ill-used. I have never recovered
my flask or handkerchief. One side of my Mackintosh
was cut off. The pocket was cut away.
•Cross-examined by Mr. PAYNE—TIIO boat was hired
to take down a party to see a prize-fight. It was hired
by Mr. Banks, who keeps the Hare and Hounds at
Buckeridge-street, St. Giles. Lynch and Pitman were
of ourparty. I saw no dispute between Lynch or Pitman
and the prisoner. I have occasionally gone to prize-fights.
(Mr. Payne here put in the deposition of the witness at
Bow-street, and i% was read by the Clerk of the Arraigns,
from which it appeared that the prisoner had been called
Scotty frequently during the course of the voyage, and had
attempted to rob the prosecutor in the cabin on the voy-
age up. Nothing appeared in the deposition as to the
witnesa's collecting money.)
lle-examined--I was in the after cabin when he at-
tempted to rob me the first time. I had been collecting
money before the prisoner and his friends surrounded
me, and attempted to put their hands into my pockets.
It Was then I heard the prisoner called Scotty by his
companions.
Joseph Drake,
..brother of the prosecutor, was with
•

him at the time of the robbery, and corroborated s.
testimony. Witness swore distinctly to the prisoner.
Witness, was also knocked down himself, and robbed of a
handkerchief and a pair of gloves.
Cross-examined—Heard of a row between Lynch and
the prisoner, but did not see it.
Henry Sure, porter, at the Waterman's Adelphi-pier,
remembered the night in question. He heard the cry
of murder and went to see what was the matter, he saw
one man dowe and several others kicking him; he heard
the man who was down call out "Scotty, don't murder
me," and " Scotty I know you." Saw a person very
much like. the prisoner there. The more the man who
was down cried, the more they beat him.
Cross-examined—Was not examined before the Magis-
trate, although he was at Bow-street.
.Reuben Warren, master of the Waterman steamer,
was going along the Adelphi pier on the night in ques-
tion when the passengers landed from the Bachelor.
Heard a man say, " I don't want any of this Seotty," and
saw the man who said so knocked down And ill-used.
He with several others went on the pier to his assist-
ance, and the person ran away, being the man there.
James Tidmarsh, 51 M.—l received instructions to
apprehend Scotty, and in consequence I apprehended
the prisoner at a public-house in St. George's market.
I told him I wanted him for robbing and ill-using a
person named Drake. He said he knew nothing about it.
On his road to the station-house he said, " I did not
expect this from these people." I received the Mackintosh
produced from another policeman of the E division. He
is not here.
Cross-examined—l was not examined before the Ma-
gistrate.

—W. Drake recalled—l gave the Mackintosh to a police.
man of the E division. It is in the same state now that

- -
it was immediately after the robbery.
Mr. PAYNE having addressed the Jury for the prisoner,
called the following witnesses :
Thomas Smallwood, law stationer, Denzil-street, was
on board the Bachelor on her return from Gravesend, but
did not belong to the party of the prisoner or that
of the prosecutor. On the voyage up a quarrel arose
between Lynch and the prisoner. Lynch struck the pri-
soner. The prosecutor and his brother were both pre-
sent, and must have seen it. I know Lynch to be an
intimate friend of the prosecutor. Pitman is another
of 'his friends. Pitman said to me in the hearing of the
prosecutor, that he did not care for Scotty and his mob,
for his mob was larger than Scotty's, and could lick the
lot of them. Prosecutor was selling brandy out of a
dark green bottle flask all day. Witness went ashore at
Blackwell.
Cross-examined by Mr. DOANE—I have lived in Den-
zil-street seven months. I have three clerks. I know
Jem Burns, the pugilist. Igo. to Banks' occasionally,
to the ladies' harmonious club.
The RECORDER—Do not let all St. Giles's loose upon
us—do not go more into this than you can help.
Mr. DoAmE—Did you not hear Lynch accuse the
prisoner, as one of the swell mob, with attempting to
pick his pocket ?

Witne;S—On my oath he did not. I never saw Lynch
struck. Jerry Bryant wanted to fight, and the Captain
said he would put the steam off if there was any fighting.
I have known the prisoner for two years.
Re-examined—l know Lynch ; he is in the same
line of business as the prosecutor ; he keeps a
coal-shed ' and chops wood—that is what he means
by being a coal-merchant and a timber-merchant.
Mrs. Harrison was with last witness on the occasion in
question, and saw a person strike the prisoner. Knows
none of the parties. Landed at the Adelphi• pier. There
was a great rush to get ashore. Saw the prisoner pass
in the crowd ; they were all drunk. Two or three per-
sons were With him. Witness, Cousins, and Floyd went
up the steps together. Prisoner was about thirty yards
before them. 'Witness and his friends went away directly
as fast as they could. Saw the prisoner afterwards in
the Strand going towards Charing-cross, about 300
yards from the pier. That was a quarter of an hour
after the first time witness saw him. Witness had lost
sight of him in the meantime.
James Cousins was with last witness. Saw prisoner
leave the boat, and saw him two or three times before ho
got into the Strand. Heard no disturbance.
Cross-examined by Mr. DOANE—I was with Harrison
all the time. I was never charged with any offence.
By the COURT—I have seen the prisoner occasionally
at sporting-houses.