The Sun.
London, England, 1848-03-29 00:00:00

Sll Ng MARCH 29, 1848.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
WESTERN CIRCUIT.—Exeter, March 27.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron PLATT and a
Special Jury from the City.)
THE BISHOP OF EXETER AND THE " WESTERN TIMES."
REGINA V. LATIDIER.—LIBEL.
This case, which has excited the greatest interest,
and has been postponed for two assizes, came on for
trial this morning. The court and the passages were
crowded throughout the trial.
Thomas Latimer, the editor of the Western Times,
a newspaper widely circulated in the county of Devon
and the west of England, was charged by the indictment
with having published a false, scandalous, malicious, and
defamatory libel against the Bishop, calling him a
brawler and a consecrated and careless perverter of
truth. To this the defendant pleaded not guilty, and a
justification under the 6 and 7 Vic , c. 96, sec. 6, and
that it was for the public benefit.
Mr. CROWDER, in opening the case, said that the
Bishop of Exeter complained of a libel charging him
with having uttered a gross and deliberate falsehood in
a matter connected with his church government, and in
the discharge of his parliamentary duties in the
House of Lords. He therefore appealed to the
laws of his country for protection. He then
stated the facts of the case as follows :—ln the year
1832 the Duke of Somerset, who was the owner of the
manor of Bridgetown, and the patron of the living of
Berry Pomeroy, had built, for the use of his tenants, a
church at Bridgetown. The Duke met the Bishop of
Exeter in the summer of 1632, and expressed a desire to
have the church consecrated. The Bishop inspected the
building, and expressed himself perfectly satisfied with
its appearance, and understood from the Duke of Somer-
set that it had been built for the purpose of being used
for worship according to the rites and ceremonies of the
Church of England. Some conversation took place as to
the mode in Which the consecration could be obtained.
The Bishop of Exeter informed him of the course which
ought to be pursued, in order that the Duke might re-
tain the patronage—namely, that it should be endowed;
and something was said as to the amount of endowment.
Subsequently a correspondence took place between Mr.
Maberly, the agent of the Duke, and Mr. Barnes,
the secretary of the Bishop, the object a
which was to ascertain the proper mode
obtaining consecrationa so as to secure to tri
Duke of Somerset the exclusive right of nominating t e '
officiating minister. During this correspondence it was
understood by the Bishop that the chapel should be ex-
clusively applied to the worship according to the rites of
the Church of England, and that although it was n t
then required that the church should be immediate
consecrated before service should be performed, it w s
distinctly understood that the church should be ult
mately consecrated, and upon this understanding
license was granted by the:Bishop tolperform divine ser-
vice until consecration should take place. The Rev. Mr.
Edwards was the vicar of the parish at that time, and the
rectorial tithes being in the Duke of Somerset it was
necessary that the incumbent should nominate the indi-
vidual before the Bishop could grant a license. The in-
cumbent accordingly nominated the Rev. Mr. Shore, a
minister of the Church of England, and a license was
granted. In 1836 Mr. Brown became the incumbent of
the parish, and under him also Mr. Shore continued to
officiate in Bridgetown Chapel. In 1843 Mr. Cozens be-
came the incumbent, and in consequence of some sup
posed difference with Mr. Shore with respect to hii
doctrine being the proper doctrine of the Church of
England, Mr. Cozens deemed that Mr. Shore was
not a fit and proper person to be nominated and to
preach in Bridgetown. Mr. Shore applied to Mr. Co-
zens, but ho refused to nominate him, and the Bishop
was, therefore, bound to refuse any new license, and he
revoked the license that had been granted ; and in the
early part of the year 1844, in consequence of this, Mr:
Shore declared himself to be a Protestant dissenting,
minister, and for the purpose of continuing the service
in the chapel of Bridgetown, in February, 1844, the'
chapel was registered by the Duke of Somerset, as al
place for the performance of dissenting worship in that.
district, under an Act of Parliament authorising that
proceeding. Mr. Shore continued to officiate as thel
minister, and in so doing was brought before the Court!
of Arches, and condemned. He subsequently ap-'
plied to the Court of Queen's Bench for a pro-
hibition, but failed; and then he presented a peti-
tion to the House of Lords, which was laid be-
fore the House by Lord Brougham. Having pre-
sented the petition, Lord Brougham made some obser-
vations in the House of Lords, and in consequence of
these observations the Bishop of Exeter conceived it to
be his duty to make a statement, in the course of which
he said that he had originally granted a license to Mr.
Shore upon receiving the assurance of the Duke of
Somerset —first, that he would endow the chapel refer-
red to; and secondly, that the building should only be
used for divine worship according to the rites and cere-
monies of the Church of England. He (the Bishop) was
grieved to say that.his Grace had departed from both
engagemenls, and that subsequently, when the rector
ho had succeeded to the rectory of Berry Pomeroy,
refusal to nominate Mr. Shore, he (the Bishop) had re-
voked the license, and that Mr. Shore continuing to
officiate in the chapel, afterwards registered as a dissent-
ing chapel, he thought it necessary to proceed against
him for this breach of ecclesiastical discipline. This
having taken place in the Rouse of Lords a short time
afterwards, Lord Seymour, son of the Duke of Somer-
set, and a Member for Totnes, called a meeting
of his constituents for the purpose of adverting to cer-
tain misstatements that had been made in the ]louse of
Lords respecting the Duke of Somerset ; at that meet-
ing Lord Seymour addressed there, and in the course of
his remarks charged the Bishop of Exeter with having
uttered a deliberate falsehood in the statement he had
made in the ]louse of Lords. This speech was after-
wards inserted in the newspaper, of which the defendant
is the editor (the Western Times), and upon which the
editor commented. The comment of the editor upon
that speech was the subject of the present indictment.
This indictment against Mr. Latimer was preferred in-
stead of an action against Lord Seymour, because the
speech of Lord Seymour, not imputing any crime to the
Right Rev. Prelate, and not being written, could not be
made the subjuctlof an action against Lord Seymour, but
when printed and commented upon by Mr. Latimer
in his newspaper, it gave the Bishop the opportunity
of commencing these proceedings, which he did at the
earliest possible period, and which, by reason of the
illness of the Duke of Somerset on one occasion, and the
pressure of business at the assizes ou a second occasion,
has been postponed for the last two assizes. Mr. Crow-
der said that he might content himself with simply
putting in the paper containing the libel, and so leave
Mr. Latimer to produce the correspondence relative to
the chapel at Bridgetown, which has been the cause of
the observations containing this libel, and thus he might
again have an opportunity of addressing them, but he
was instructed by the Right Rev. Prelate to lay before
the Court all the correspondence, and to state every-
thing which induced the Bishop of Exeter to act as he
had done in reference to the chapel at Bridgetown, and
for which he had been so libelled and held up to public
slander and ridicule, by a coarsely abusive, scurrilous,
and scandalous attack upon him by Mr. Thomas Lati-
mer, in his newspaper, which circulated extensively in
the diocese of Exeter.
The Bishop of Exeter was then called and examined,
supporting all that had been stated by Mr. Crowder.
On his cross-examination he admitted having made the
speech alluded to, although he stated that he had not
used the word imputed to him in the paper. He thought
he had said " violated" in reference to the Duke of
Somerset; he also stated that Mr. Brown had exchanged
with Mr. Cozens, and that when the latter gentleman
came to the living he had a conversation with hiss, and
particularly cautioned him in strong terms in relation to
his duty with regard to that part of the parish over
which Mr. Shore exercised Isis influence, namely Bridge-
town. He did not give him instructions not to appoint
Mr. Shore ; he had no difference with Mr. Shore, but
on one occasion he had reproved him in reference to the
part he had taken in the Chudleigh election, in which
the inhabitants have a right to elect the minister. Mr.
Shore having been a candidate with Mr. Palk, and Mr.
Cummings had addressed a circular to the electors resign-
ing in favour of Mr. Palk. He reproved him, think-
ing it a most indecent thing to treat an election of that
kind in the same way as an election for a municipal
officer, or for a Member of Parliament. There had also
been a disgraceful canvass carried on ; he did not make
a claim to the presentation of Chudleigh, although he
was advised to do so, conceiving that it had lapsed to the
see by reason of non-presentation. He had particularly
cautioned Mr. Cozens with regard to Bridgetown, and
probably advised him to make inquiry as to Mr. Shore.
lie had not given the same warning to Mr. Brown,
although he had continually seen him from time to time.
The time that he had given the caution was after the
Chudleigh election. He was appointed Bishop in 1831,
and the first debate in which he took part was relating
to tithes.
Mr. Cocxnunn, for the defence, was about to examine
his Lordship as to certain statements which he had made
in the House of Lords in 1831, and in consequence of
which Lord Grey bad accused him of misstating the cir-
cumstances, and that the Bishop had thereupon con-
fessed himself to be in the wrong, when
Mr. CROWDER objected to this mode of examination,
as the question turned entirely upon the correspondence
and the documents connected with it.
Mr. COCKBURN said that as the real question at issue
was between the Duke of Somerset and the Bishop of
Exeter, it would be for the
guilty
of misstating
connected with the case; and ho was, therefore, desirous
of showing that the Bishop of Exeter had on many oc-
casions made statements which he had afterwards been
compelled to withdraw ; whereas, in no one instance
could it be alleged that the Duke of Somerset had been
guilty of similar conduct, and that it was open for him
to prove the want of credibility in the Bishop of Exeter
by these means.
Mr. Baron PLATT thought that such evidence was
inadmissible; that the whole issue depended upon the
correspondence and the documents connected therewith.
Tho correspondence between the parties was then put
in. There were several letters from Mr. Maberly, the
agent for the Duke of Somerset, and Mr. Barnes, the
Bishop's secretary, in which the matter was treated as a
negotiation to obtain consecration, and not merely to
obtain a license for a proprietary chapel. After several
letters, the following was addressed by Mr. Maberly to
Mr. Barnes:—

ON THE CONCEALED CAUSE THAT PREYS ON THB
HEALTH AND SHORTENS THE DURATION OF HUMAN
LIFE.
ILLUSTRATED WITH NUMEROUS COLOURED ENRAVINGS,
Just Published, in a Sealed Envelope, price 2i. G
6d., or tree
by post. 3s. 6d.
CONTROUL OF THE PASSIONS : a Popular
Inquiry into the Concealed Cause of its premature Decline,
with Instructions for its Complete Restoration. Addressed to those
suffering from the destructive consequences of excessive indulgence,
terminating in Mental and Nervous Debility, Local or Constitutional
Weakness, Indigestion , and Consumption. Including a comprehen-
sive Dissertation on MARRIAOS, In and Celibacy.
Illustrated with Coloured Engravings, explanatory of the various
Cases, &c.
By C. J. LUCAS and Co., Consulting Surgeons, No. 60, Newman.
street, Oxford-street, London.
Member of the London College of Medicine, &c. &e,
CONTENTS OF TILE WORK,
Chap. I.—Bodily and Mental Exhaustion indnced by inordinate
ndulgence of the Passions, illustrated with Coloured Engravings.
Chap. 2.—lianeful Results of a Secret Vice on the Mind aid Body,
evidenced in the production of Consumption, Epilepsy, and other
convulsive diseases, Insanity, Idiocy, moping Melancholy, Indiges-
tion, `stricture, Impotence, and Sterility, with Observations en the
Duties of Married Life, and on the unhappiness canoed by Unfruitful
Unions. Chap. 3.—Debility and Exhaustion of the principal Vital
Functions, the nature and treatment of Impotence and Sterility, and
the imperfect performance of the Marital act, caused byt he practice
of self-indulgence. Chap. 4norrhcea, its symptoms, complica-
tions and treatment, Gleet, Stricture, and disease •f the Prostate.
Chap. s.—Syphilis, and its attendant maladies and treatment. Cuses,
and concluding observations, Plates, &c.
Sold by Brittain , 54, Paternoster-row ; Gordm 140, Leadenhall-
street ; Hannay and Co., 63. Oxford-street; Sanger, 150, Oxford-
Birmt ; Mansell, 115, Fleet-street, Lor.don ; 'Mahal, 78, High-street,
ingham; Whitmore, 119, Market-street, Manchester ; Howell,
54, Church-street, L.verpool ; Heath, 1, Broad.street, Bristol ; Ro-
binson, 11, Greenside-strt, Westmorland ; Love, b, Nelson
-street,
Glaskow ; Powell, 10, -street, ; Lad all
Booksellers.
Persons desirous of obtaining the above work, and not wishing to
ap to a bookseller for the same, may, to insure secrecy,
liprecly t from the Authors, by enclosing 3s. 64., or Postage Stamps.have it
Messrs. Tawas and Co. are to be consnited frsom Ton till Two, and
!nom Five till Eight in the evening, at their residence, No. 60,
Newman-street, Oxford -street, London,
.and country patients may
be successfully treated, on minutely describing their case, and enclos-
ng the usual fee of U. for advice.

Illustrated by 2G ,Anatomical Coloured Engravings on Steel.
ON PHYSICAL DISQUALICATIONS, GENERATIVE INCAPA-
CITY, AND IMPEDIMENTS TO MARRIAGE,
New Edition, enlarged to 196 pages. Just published, price 2s. 6d., or
by post, direct from the Establishment, 3s. 641. in postage stamps,
1-IHE SILENT FRIEND, a Medical Work on
J., the infirmities and decay of the generative system, from ex-
cessive indulgence, infection, and the inordinate use of mercury,
with remarks on Marriage, and the means of obviating certain dis-
qualifications. Illustrated by 26 Coloured Engravings. Ey It. and
L. PERRY and CO., 19, Berners-street, Oxford-street, London.
Published by the Authors : sold by Strange, 21, Paternoster-row ;
Hannay, 63, and Sanger, 150, Oxford-street ; Starie, 23, Titekborne-
street, Haymarket ; and Gordon, 146, Leadenhall-street.
Parr I. treats of the anatomy and physiology of the re-productive
organs, and is illustrated by Six Coloured Engravings.
PART 11. treats of the consequences resulting from excessive indul-
gence, and their lamentable effects on the system, producing mental
and bodily weakness, nervous excitement, and generative incapacity.
It is illustrated by Three Explanatory Engravings.
Pear 111. treats of the diseases resulting from infection, either in
the primary or secondary form, and contains explicit directions for
their treatment. The consequences of early neglect and of the abuse
of mercury, ace also clearly pointed out. This section is illustrated
by Seventeen Coloured Engravings.
PART IV. treats of the Prevention o ]Disease by a simple ap-
plication, by which the danger of infection is obviated. Its action
is simple but sure. It acts witk the virus chemically, and destroys
its power on the system. This important part of the Work should
be read by every Toang Man entering into life.
PART T. is devoted to the consideration of marriage, and its
duties. The causes of unproductive union are also considered, and
the whole subject critically and philosophically inquired into.
TRECOIDIAL BALM OF STILIACIIM If exclusively employed in treat-
ing nervous and sexual debility, impotence, Sze., II s and 33,. per
bottle. The Concentrated Detersive Essence, an anti-syphilitic
remedy, for purifying the blood in cases of infection, secondary symp-
toms, eruptions, and the abuse of mercury, Ils. and 335. per bottle.
Perry's Purifying Specific Pills, 2s. dd., 4s. Gd , and I Is. per box, a
certain remedy in gonorrheea,glect, strictures, and chrenie inflamma-
tion of the bladder. Consultation fee. If by letter, If. 5/. Packets
with advice tobe had at the Establishment only, by which the fee,
11., is saved. Attendance daily at 19, Berners-street, from Eleven
till Two. suid Five to Eight . on Sundays from Eleven to One

The Nottingham trade continues depressed. The
cut-up hose branch of the hosiery department is in a
very feverish and disturbed state, one of the principal
manufacturers having given notice of his intention of
reducing the wages twopence per dozen. The silk
glove trade keeps in an amended state, when compared
to what it was a few months since ; but we have heard
of journeymen being wholly out of work, which was not
the case some weeks ago. The cotton glove trade,
though somewhat depressed, is in a tolerable condition
to what it was last summer.—Nottingham Review.
[ADVERTISEMENT.]—Wounds in the Leg that had
been bad for years, cured by Holloway's Ointment and
Pills.—Mr. W. Durling, of Stirkoke by Wick, had
suffered very severely for a long time with deep wounds
in his leg, and in his endeavours to get them healed he
obtained the advice of many eminent surgeons, and
tried almost every remedy, yet all failed to effect a cure,
until he used Holloway's Ointment and Pills ; these in-
valuable medicines alone healed his leg in a few weeks,
and now it is as sound as even—Holloway's Ointment is
a cafe and certain cure for old wounds, burns, scalds,
tumours, chilblains, and unnatural swellings.—sold by
all druggists, and at Professor Holloway's establish-
ment, 244, Strand, London.
Her.msnALE,lllAßcii 20.—Several days since, as
a gentleman was driving down the strath of Kildonan,
his attention was attracted by the piercing cries of a
young child, which appeared to proceed from a rocky
cliff, and on looking up, he saw an eagle sitting on the
ledge of a projecting crag, busily employed in tearing
off the clothes off the infant. He immediately scrambled
up the hill, and rescued it (more dead than alive) from
the talons of the ferocious bird. He then conveyed the
child in his gig to the first cottage on the roadside,when
it was discovered to belong to a shepherd who resided
) some six miles further up the glon.—Ross-shire Adver-
tiser.

"Bedford-row, London, Sept. 12, 1832. the Bishop of Exeter upon the Duke of Somerset wta
" Sir,—l begin to apprehend that the mutual object of the most uncalled for and unprovoked that he ever re-
the Duke of Somerset and the Bishop of Exeter will not membered; he stated that the object of the Duke of
be attainable but through the medium of the Church Somerset undoubtedly was that the chapel should be
Building Commissioners. It will require some conside- endowed and consecrated,
but in the meanwhile it
ration to determine what proposition to lay before them should be licensed for the performance of divine
on the subject. It may also turn out that the Duke's worship, according to the rites and ceremonies of the
apprehension of its being secessary to let a twelvemonth Church of En land
so deprived Mr. Shore and his family of
but that when the Bishop revoked
,
go round is well founded; and this would be so much the license and
waste time, for the chapel is ready. At the same time the means of existence, the Duke thought the act of
also that it might assist the Duke in determining, defini- the Bishop so tyrannical and unjust that he caused the
Lively what he may be inclined to do relative to endow- place to he registered as a dissenting chapel according
went, &c., if an experiment could be first made how the to the Act, and allowed Mr. Shore still to officiate as the
chapel is likely to answer. Under these considerations minister, conducting the worship, as it had always been
of the Church of
I should beg to suggest that it would be better to request carriedland, and to the on, according to the
satisfaction rites
every one who had
of the Bishop, in the first instance, the license as if it
Eng of
were a proprietary chapel only, which need not by any been in the habit of attending the chapel.
means imply thereby that the idea of endowment and Mr. Baron PLATT then summed up, and told the jury
consecration is abandoned. The opening of the chapel that there were two questions for their consideration—
in this way will, in the course of a few months, probably Ist, Whether the defendant had published the libel
wa ims
-
enable the Duke to judge what might be the best ar- puted to him; and,
2y, whether the matter
rangement to propose for the ultimate adjustment.—l libellous. That after they had heard the law upon the
am, &c., "JOSEPH DiABERLY." subject laid down by him, it would still be for them to
Mr. Barnes wrote in reply— decide upon the question of fact, whether the matter
" Sir,—l have taken the earliest opportunity of lay- was or was not libellous. The defendant had pleaded
ing 'befcre the Bishop your letter of the 12th. The that he was not guilty, which was the first issue,
Bishop desires me to say that the Duke of Somerset, and also thatihe was justified in uttering the libel,
having stated his wish and purpose to endow the chapel, because it was true, and the publication of it was
and to convey the same for consecration, the Bishop will for the public benefit. It would therefore be
license the chapel till that purpose can be conveniently for the jury to decide whether or not the Duke of So-
carried into effect. The Bishop has further directed me naerset had entered into the engagement contended for
art of the Bishop of Exeter, that he would for
the issuing any previous commission of inquiry. It is
ever seta
according to the rites and ceremonies
only necessary, therefore, that the Duke should sign a of divine service
petition to grant a license, and I will draw the form and of the Church of England, and had accepted the license
send . For this purpose you will be goodnished,
upon that undertaking; or whether, as contended for by
enough to direct a plan of the chapel to be furnished, the defendant, he had accepted the license as an ordinary
license granted to a proprietary chapel, in which case it
showing the ground plan and scaling, &c., and be good
enough to give me the most concise statement Possible would be cite legal that the Duke should afterwards
as to the title that the Duke has, as tenant in fee, or of divert it to any secular purpose that he might think
what other estate.—l am, &c., proper. The Learned Judge said that there did not
"RALPH BARNES." seem to be any question as to the first issue, because the
To that letter Mr. Maberly wrote. the following reply, publication of the libel was admitted; and if they should
and upon this letter the question turns, as contended by
be of opinion on the second issue that the Duke of
the defendant.—Somerset had broken his engagement with regard to the
"Bedford-'
row, Sept. 22. chapel at Bridgetown, in that case, as the Bishop would
"Sir,—l beg to acknowledge the receipt of your favour, have uttered that which was perfectly true in the House
.which, with your request of a plan, &c,, I will immedi- of, Lords, the justification of the libel would fail, and it
ately communicate to his Grace, and I doubt not I shall would. be their duty to find a verdict for the Crown upon
be commissioned to return his Grace's thanks to the that issue.
Bishop and yourself for your obliging attention. I The jury retired for upwards of an hour, and when
write, however, in consequence of some expressions in they returned into court gave their verdict for the Crown
your letter, and to prevent all possibility of any future upon the first issue, and for the defendant upon the
misunderstanding, unlikely as it may be to arise. I second issue; this is equivalent to a verdict for the de-
think that the communication of the Bishop's consent to fendant upon the whole indictment. The verdict was
you, that, if nn- received with shouts of applause, and spread through
license is accompanied by words from
qualified and unexplained, would amount to an implied the city like wildfire. Very shortly afterwards a pro-
engagement on the part of the Duke, at all events, and cession was formed, which proceeded through the city
with a band and flags.
under any circumstances, and with whatever inconve-
nience attended, still peremptorily to endow and convey
the chapel for consecration. As the Duke is a man
who would be scrupulous to the letter in the perform-
ance of every iota of what he could be considered, either
directly or by implication, to have engaged for, it
becomes the more necessary for me to take care that
his Grace does not lay himself under any obligation
caleulated, by any possibility, to bring him into a
dilemma. It is his Grace's most serious and deter-
mined intention and wish to do his best, through
the medium of the Church Commissioners or otherwise,
to procure the consecration of this chapel, and to make
for it a permanent regular endowment of proper amount.
With the expression of this intention the Bishop will, I
doubt not, knowing his Grace's attachment to the Estab-
lishment, feel) satisfied and rest content. But it is pos-
sible that there may be impediments, unlooked-for
requisitions, objections made, interference with pa-
tronage, or the like, that may make it unadvisable, in
the view of his Grace, or of any reasonable man, to
proceed to the conveyance and consecration, and may
rather induce his Grace to wish to wait till some further
Legislative regulations afford better facilities, and remove
difficulties that may in the present state of the law exist.
I should, therefore,: claim for his Grace a discretion in
these matters beyond what your words convey. That
the Bishop is content that the Duke should have this I
do not doubt, nor do I think that you meant to imply to
the con trary ; but if you read again your words I
think you will find that the qualification is necessary
which I have here taken the liberty to make. I will
send you the plan, &c., as soon as I shall receive it, and
shall be obliged by the form of the petition you propose
to send me.—l am, &c., "JOSEPH MABERLY."
To this the following was in answer, :
" Exeter, Sept. 25, 1832.
" Sir,—l have consulted the Bishop upon your letter
of the 22d. The Bishop's authority, as stated in your
letter of the 12th, was founded correctly, his Lordship
thinks, on the previous communication; but the Bishop
on perusing your letter, authorises me to say that he is
content: to license the building on the declaration therein
contained. I shall be glad to give every dispatch to the
business on your furnishing me with the matter men-
tioned in your former
SlRletter. m, &c.,
ALPH BARNES."
In accordance with the practice, therefore, a petition was
filled up and signed by the Duke, stating that he had
built a place of worship, and was desirous of having a
license, at the same tine agreeing to devote the chapel
for ever for the performance of service according to the
rites and ceremonies of the Church of England. This
was a formal petition, and the license was granted in the
terms of the petition. These letters and the petition
were put in on the part of the prosecution, to show that
the Duke of Somerset had broken his engagement to keep
the chapel for ever for divine service according to the
rites of the Church of England, in allowing it to be re-
gistered for Dissenting worship.
The article in the newspaper was also put in and read
as follows. It was inserted in the Western Times of
July 25, 1846 :
" Bismor PIIILLPOTTII AND TiLE DUKE OF SOMER.-
SET.—If there are in existence any two individuals
totally opposite to each other in all the great and dis-
tinctive peculiarities and traits of human nature, most
assuredly we may say as much of the two distinguished
personages whose names head this article. The Bishop
is an adroit man, knowing rather than intelligent, and
cunning rather than clever. Everlastingly in hot water,
but never clean withal. Some characters are celebrated
for their freedom from stain and reproach ; no matter
who may be their assailants, there is an innate purity in
their composition which bids defiance to the shafts of
calumny and the assaults of envy. Others there are, on
the contrary, whose reputation is of that description,
that anything whatever said to their disparagement is
sure to gain credence. Our Bishop's character is one of
this description. He is so notorious as a brawler, that any
story respecting his rule and discipline provided it de not
contain the imputation of any of the milder:virtues, is re-
ceived without question, and circulated from mouth to
mouth as gospel. This is a melancholy statement, but,
alas! a true one! asld that is why we say he is not
clever, for no man can be at all times and under all pos-
sible circumstances in the wrong—and yet no
,one ever
believes the Bishop to be in the right. Take the last
case which we have to record—his reply to Mr. Shore's
petition, presented by Lord Brougham, and which is so
forcibly exposed by Lord Seymour in our paper of this
week. Lord Brougham gave the Bishop an opportunity
of knowing, beforehand, the contents of the petition.
He had plenty of time to refer to facts, in order to for-
tify himself with a true answer. But, unfortunately, he
goes quite the other way, and his reply is so directly the
opposite of the truth, that he stands branded as a conse-
crated, careless perverter of facts, and one who does no
credit to the mitre, which he is paid 2001. a week, or
thereabout, to wear. This view of the case before us is
not ours—it is not even Lord Seymour's; but it is the
constrained conclusion drawn from the Bishop's
reported statement in the House of Lords, and
the contrary statement in the Bishop's secretary's
letter, which is quoted by Lord Seymour, and
given at length in the report of his speech. We started
with the idea of drawing a contrast between his Grace
of Somerset and the old gentleman in question—(indeed,
he is always an old gentleman in question, because no
one ever takes for granted all he says)—but we shall
not pursue it, because the statement of the names con-
tains the whole of the parallel. The Duke's word was
never questioned, and we shall not do that estimable
nobleman the disservice of even stating the fact, neces-
sary to be stated where any word of Bishop Phillpotts' is
in dispute. We almost regret that his Grace's son,
Lord Seymour, has felt it necessary to waste so much
virtuous indignation upon the old gentleman. It is
throwing away a good commodity. The censure which
would touch a right-minded man to the quick, glides off
from his impenetrable mind, even as water rolls down a
dock's back. There is no harm in stating any particular
fact illustrative of his nature, because we have other
bishops coming after him, and we want posterity to
understand the sort of man that is not very con-
venient to society, nor creditable to the Church, to have
for a bishop • but words of censure or blame should
never be applied to the old gentleman, because he is
what he is, and at seventy years of age we do not look
for violent reformations of character, save on the death.
bed. If, therefore, we must draw atteution to the adroit
attempt to pledge his Grace impliedly to an endowment,
it is not because we wish to reprehend the old gentle-
man, but because we desire to point out something essen-
tially Phillpottic. The Noble Lord will, we trust, par-
don the familiarity with which we address him, and over-
look the presumption in which we lay down the law of
the Bishop's nature; but, if we have a weakness, it is
embodied in the belief that we do, in some measure,
comprehend the old gentleman and his psychological
manifestations. We have studied him long, and, we
trust, not altogether in vain. To the remaining portion
of Lord Seymour's address we would wish to direct the
serious attention of our readers, especially to that por-
tion which refers to sugar, in which will be found argu-
ments that supply a manifest deficiency in our own hasty
observations upon this question."
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. COCKBURN addressed the jury on behalf of the
defendant, and said that the real question in this case
was not between Mr. Latimer and our Sovereign Lady
the Queen, but between his grace the Duke of Somerset
and the Bishop of Exeter. It appeared that the Bishop
of Exeter had made certain observations respecting a
transaction, charging the Duke of Somerset with having
violated his engagement. This had been repelled by the
Duke as being false; and Mr. Latimer, having supported
the view taken by the Duke of Somerset, and commented
in his paper upon the transaction, had brought upon him-
self the present prosecution. Re said that thci attack of

SOUTH LANCASHIRE.
NISI PRIUS COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron ROLFE.)
ZOWKEIt v. DROWNHILI.—ILLEGAL DETENTION OF A

DEED.
The plaintiff in this case was one of the trustees of
the Prince's Tavern Building Society, in existence in
Manchester from 1837 to 1843, and the defendant was a
gentleman residing in the same town. In October, 1837,
one Obadiah Makin was the proprietor of three shares in
this club, and in the autumn of that year became pos-
sessed of a loan of 3601. from the society, to which he
became entitled. He gave as security for this the deed
of a parcel of land, which he had purchased. The deed
was executed on the 29th of September, 1837, and on
the 27th of October, in the same year, was duly assigned
to the society. On the 17th of July, 1838, he borrowed
a further sum of 120/., by way of further charge upon
it, making 4801. in all. In 1843, when the club closed, the
deed was found to be gone, and subsequently traced to
the possession of the defendant, who refused to give it
up, claiming upon it a lien, for a debt due to him by,
Makin. After the assignment made on the 27th of Oc-
tober, 18:7, it was maintained that Makin had no legal
power whatever over the deed. The defence was that
two deeds had been drawn, but the fact was not estab-
lished; and a verdict was returned for the plaintiff—
Damages 5001., to be reduced to 40s. when the deed
should be given up.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
Henry Parker, a young man of destitute and very dis-
sipated appearance, was brought before Mr. Bingham
for final examination, charged with having stabbed a
young woman, named Eliza Burgess, and her mother,
Mary Ritchie, with a shoemaker's knife, with intent to
do them some grievous bodily harm.
The prisoner made no defence;and was fully committed.
Mr. Mahon, solicitor, Carey-street, sent a letter to the
magistrates, announcing that Andrew Macklew, Esq., of
Twickenham, and of the Albany, had left a legacy of
20/. to be placed in the pooil-box of the court for the
relief of deserving indigence.
WORSHIP-STREET.
A flashily dressed young man, who gave the name of
John Still, but who is known to the officers by another
appellation, was brought up before Mr. Ilammill, on the
threefold charge of uttering counterfeit coin, stealing a
victorine, and violently assaulting an inspector of polies
and two constables.
Inspector Pascoe, of the N:division, stated that at three
o'clock on Monday morning the prisoner was brought to
the Robert-street station-house, upon a charge of taking
a victorine from the person of a young woman, and
while witness was entering the particulars in the charge-
sheet the prisoner commenced an attack upon him, and
made such a determined attempt to escape from the two
officers who had him in custody, that in the course of the
contest which ensued, lasting upwards of a quarter of an
hour, the witness and constables were severely handled,
and one of them had his coat nearly torn to pieces on his
back. With the assistance of other officers the pri-
soner was ultimately overpowered and secured with
handcuffs, when on their searching him the object of his
violent resistance was rendered manifest by the discovery
of a counterfeit crown-piece in one of his pockets,
another of which base coins it was afterwards found had
been uttered a short time before at a shop in the neigh-
bourhood.
A young woman named Taylor, serving at a tobacco-
nist's in Eagle-street, City-road, attended and produced
the second crown piece, which she identified the prisoner
as having passed at her shop in payment for a small
quantity of cigars, receiving 4s. 61. in change, and said
the coin appeared to be so genuine, that it was not till
a considerable time afterwards it was discovered to be
spurious.
The prisoner was recognised by Alderman, the gaoler,
as the associate of a gang of notorious " smashers," and
as having been in custody before for a similar offence
and another charge ; for the latter of which he was
afterwards convicted, and sentenced to six months'
imprisonment.
The case of uttering was so clearly established, that
it was not thought necessary to proceed with the other
less serious charges, and the prisoner, who declined
offering any defence, was fully committed to Nowgate
for trial.

CLERKEIVWELL.
A gentleman, who gave his name Lockstone, a half-pay
officer, applied to Mr. Combo for his advice and assist-
ance under the following circumstances:—
Applicant said, that at the commencement of the pre-
sent month he saw an advertisement in the Times news-
paper, stating that respectable parties who wished to
increase their income would be employed as collectors
for orders and money, and by applying by letter to
"B. C.," No. 61, Charlotte-street, Caledonian-road,
Islington, every information would be afforded. Appli-
, cant was induced to make application by letter, when he
received an answer by return of post, requesting him to
call at the address mentioned in the advertisement,
where he was introduced to a person who represented
himself as Mr. W. Campbell, the manager of the
Mechanics and General Coal Club Company, newly
started, capital 20,0001., in sharps of 11., deposit Is. per

share.
The printed prospectus was handed to the applicant,
which set forth that the company was established to
supply the best coals at 225. per ton, in quantities of half
a ton and upwards, for payments weekly, or otherwise;
the directors, Colonel' T. Wood, Colonel H. Camp-
bell, Mr. D. Alton, Colonel P. Campbell, Mr. J.
Stockton, Major Joyce, Mr. T. Stanley, Mr. C.
Campbell, and manager Mr. W. Campbell, 61, Char-
lotte-street, Caledonian-road, Islington, the office of the
company; bankers, the National Land Bank; solicitor,
B. Briggs, Esq., Westminster-road; secretary pro tem.,
Mr. Zwoart." Applicant said the office had a business-
like appearance; several persons were acting as clerks;
and after having the objects of the company explained
to him, and being informed that the sub-collectors would
realise 41. per week, and that arrangements had been
made to engage a considerable number of collectors and
sub- collectors, applicant agreed to become a collec-
lector, when it was stated that it would be necessary for
every collector to take 40 shares at Is. each, which he
readily assented to, and paid the money, and his appoint-
ment was made out, in which it was specified that he
was to pay the further sum of 61. on or before the -
next, or, in case of default, the sum of Is. per share, as
beforementioned, for the 40 shares was to be forfeited,
and the applicant was to receive 801. per annum payable
out of the profits of the company when the district of
the collector was filled up. The prospectus spoke
most flatteringly as to the prospects of e comp th an,
aA applicant was engaged for a particular district, and
he was to solicit orders; and engage sub-collectors,
who were to take three shares each, at Is. per share,
and to receive 151. per annum. lie went on actively
with his appointed duties, collected numerous orders,
and engaged several sub-collectors, pursuant to the terms
of his agreement and the prospectus, up to Monday
evening last, when he proceeded to the office of tho
company and discovered that the place was closed, and
all the parties had bolted and had never since made
their appearance, and the bubble had exploded. The
place was besieged by duped and disappointed collectors
and tradesmen who had been swindled, and although
every possible inquiry had been made, no tidings what-
ever could be traced of the manager or his colleagues.
Mr. Lockstone said that numerous parties in the
country had applied for shares in the company, and he
had no doubt that the projectors and those at the bottom
of the affair had realised considerable property through
their ingenuity.
Mr. (MOE; after listening attentively to the applicant,