The Sun.
London, England, 1834-09-27 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The " Grand Dinner of the Conservatives at Can-
terbury, to commemorate his Majesty's declaration in
favour of the Church," took place as was announced
on Thursday last, and a report of the proceedings at it
will be found in another column. The Conservatives
on this occasion met to commemorate a declaration
which never could have been made. His Majesty,
under the constitution, can change his Ministers, but
he can only act through his Ministers. To say then,
that his Majesty made a declaration to the Bishops
directly at variance with the principles avowed and
acted on by his Ministers, is to libel his Majesty, by
holding him up to the nation as capable of doing that
which no honest man can - do--employing as his
Ministers men whose principles are at variance
with his own. To be consistent, the Conserva-
tives ought to pretend that his Majesty is in a
state of duresse ; and they ought to call on the
Holy Alliance to relieve him by an army of the
faith, as Ferdinand was relived at Cadiz. His
Majesty may or not be a free agent ; but if he be a
free agent, he cannot have made any declaration such
as that attributed to him by the Conservatives, and yet
have confided the administration of affairs to the
Whigs. In justice to his Majesty, we are bound to
consider the Conservatives calumniators ; and if any
Prelate chose to report that his Majesty made the de-
claration in question, that Prelate is a foul libeller of
his Sovereign, by attributing to him conduct which
implies a want of both honesty and courage. In re-
turn for the services rendered by Lord Winchilsea in
Ireland, Lord Roden appeared as a porformer at the
Canterbury dinner. He told a doleful tale of the suf-
ferings of the Protestants in Ireland. It was but the
other day that, at the great Protestant meeting at
Dublin, the order was given for assembling the Pro-
testants in large masses, with arms, to overawe the
Government ; but this attempt to bully having failed,
recourse is now had to whining. Lord Roden
said, " When lie saw his fellow Protestants
abused ; when he saw them obliged by the op-
pression of the Romish priesthood to emigrate to
foreign countries, he confessed his heart sunk within
him ; and it was with pleasure, therefore, that he had
acceded to the invitation so kindly given him to attend
this meeting, as it afforded him an opportunity to speak
to them of the sufferings of the Protestants of Ire-
land—(Hear, hear !)" Of course the commission
and the government system of education came in for a
due share of vituperation. The dinner upon the whole,
however, was tolerably decorous. The Earl of Win-
chilsea, if he be correctly reported, played the part of
Cassandra, with regard to the House of Peers :
" The House of Peers, he granted, was placed in a
perilous,situation ; but they were determined notwith-
standing, in defiance of those perils, and in defence of
their constitution, to do their duty—(Loud cheers).
They might fall—and would fall, he would -say, in
that defence—(Renewed cheers)." What ! cheering
when the fall of the House of Peers is thus prophe-
sied ! Sir Edward Knatchbull made a sort of trimming
speech—but the state of the constituencies offered a
solution of this. A Conservative dinner in Kent is a
very different affair from an Orange meeting in Ireland.
The Rev. Marcus Beresford, at the Cavan meeting,
made some startling statements :
" I will tell the Government (he says), what they must
know, that the Popish population are arming to a man ;
that not a reaper goes to the English harvest but brings
back arms from Birmingham or Liverpool ; scarce a trader
goes to Dublin or Newry, but executes a commission for a
friend in bringing back a gun.—( Hear.) There are tens of
hundreds of stands of unregistered arms in this country."
It used to be said of the Roman Catholics that they
complained of persecution, whenever they were not
allowed to persecute others. -"The Irish Orangemen,
who call themselves Protestants, have something of
the same notion of persecution. Protestant grievances
means with them that they cannot longer oppress the
Catholics with impunity:—
" If I am asked (says the Rev. Marcus Beresford), to point
out the source of our grievances, I point to the fatal measure
which gave Roman Catholics the elective franchise ; and from
that, as from a poisoned fountain, I can trace all the woes of
the Protestants of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) But to pass on
to later events—the emancipation measure, given under any
circumstances, but given as it was, a concession extorted by
violence, threats, and all but rebellion, from timid expedi-
ency, it could not but dishearten every loyal man, and give
lightning wings to sedition and disaffection, and put the lives
and properties of Protestants in imminent peril.—( Hear.)
Then came the Education Bill, by which God's word became
excluded from the schools supported by the taxes paid by the
Protestants of England : and, so far as man could do it, the
blessed light of gospel truth became excluded from the rising
generation of Ireland, and those high hopes of moral advance-
ment, which the perusal of the Scriptures by tens of thousands
of our Roman Catholic brethren raised in our hearts, were at
once dashed to the ground."—( Hear.)
The English of this is, that the Catholics ought
for ever to have been lorded over by the Orangemen—
and Protestant tenets ought to have been forced on
Catholic children. There is nothing wrong in making
Catholics pay a Protestant clergy ; but to support
schools which have not proselytism to Protestantism
for object, out of the taxes, is monstrous injustice.
The Orangemen may whine in England and rave in
Ireland—but the people of England will not less sup-
port an honest Government determined to act on the
broad principles of justice without reference to sects.
We have been too long taxed to keep the people of
Ireland in a condition of debasement for the sake of
their Orange oppressors. This system was at an end,
as is well observed by the Rev. Marcus Beresford,
when the rights of the Catholics were conceded
by the Duke of Wellington. From that source
all that has since taken place naturally flowed ;
and from that source must flow the complete
equality of the Catholics in every sense, or the
separation of the two kingdoms. Every year the
Catholics find themselves stronger ; and the Orange-
men must make up their minds to renounce with a
good grace what they cannot longer maintain. The
ascendancy is gone for ever. We will conclude our
observations with the following quotation from a letter
from Mr. Cobbett to John Marshall, a labourer on his
farm in Surrey, in the Register of this day, in which
he describes the impressions made on him in his visit
to Dublin :

" I have this morning seen more than one thousand of
working persons, men and women, boys and girls, all the
clothes upon the bodies of all of whom were not worth so
much as the smock-frock that you go to work in; and you
have a wife and eight children, seven of whom are too young
to go to work. I have seen the food, and the cooking of
the food, in a large house, where food is prepared for a
part of these wretched people. Cast-iron coppers, three
or four times as big as our largest brewing-coppers, are
employed to boil oatmeal (that is, ground oats) in water,
or butter-milk, or skim-milk ; and this is the food given to
these poor creatures. The white cabbages, the barley-meal,
the pot fat, the when, and the butter-milk, which George
boils daily for our little pigs and their mothers, is a dish,
to obtain a mouthful of which thousands of these peo-
ple would go on their knees. Marshall, you know how I
scolded Tom Denman, and little Barratt, And your own son
Dick, on the Saturday before I came away, for not sweeping
the sleeping place of the yard-hogs out clean, and what a
strict charge I gave George to fling out the old bed, and to
give them a bed of fresh straw every Saturday. Oh, how
happy would thousands upon thousands in this city be, if they
could be lodged in a place like that roughest hog-bed I this
morning saw a widow woman and her four children, in the
spot where they had slept ; on their bed, in short. George
remembers my looking over at the sows and their sucking pigs
—.and at the two youngest calves, just before I came away ; and
that I told him to keep them in that nice condition all the time that
I should be away. Now, Marshall, this poor widow, and her little
children, werelying upon a quantity of straw, not a twentieth part
so great as that allotted to one of the sows and her pigs ;
and if I--on my return—were to see, as I am sure I shall
not, the straw of the calves as dirty, and so broken, as that
upon which this widow and her children were lying, I
should drive George out of the house, as a slovenly
and cruel fellow. And this, you will observe, is the case of
thousands upon thousands of persons ; it is the case of whole
streets as long as the main streets of Guildford and Farnham.
Your pig-sty and Turvill's pig-sty, and the sties of other la-
bouring men, are made by yourselves, with posts and poles and
rods and heath, and your supply of straw is very scanty, and
compels you to resort to fern and dead grass from the common
but, and now mind what I say, I saw Turvill's pig-sty the day
before I came off, and I solemnly declare, in the face of Eng-
land and of Ireland, that Turvill's two hogs were better lodged,
and far better fed, and far more clean in their skins, than are
thousands upon thousands of the human beings in this city ;
which, as to streets, squares, and buildings, is as fine a city as
almost any in the world 1"
These are the fruits of governing through an ascen-
dancy. These are the fruits of establishing a Pro-
testant Church for a Catholic population, and making
laws to enable the few to trample on the many.—
Morning Chronicle.

The Lord Chancellor and Lord Durham do not
seem to stable their horses well together—at least, they
do not draw well in harness. One pulls one way, and

the other another way ; and though we believe these
Noblemen to be equally anxious for popularity, it is
quite clear that while they choose different, and even
opposite directions, we cannot congratulate both as
having taken the right road. The observations of
Lord Durham, at the late Edinburgh dinner, fairly
enough contrasted their views as to the general policy
which they would respectively recommend to Parlia-
ment for its adoption :
" My Noble and-Learned Friend (said Lord Durham) has
been pleased to give some advice, which, doubtless, be deems
very sound to some classes of persons, who evince too strong
a desire to get rid of ancient abuses, and a fretful impatience
in awaiting the remedies of them. Now I frankly confess
that I am one of those persons who see with regret every hour
which passes over the existence of recognized and unreformed
abuses."
That the Lord Chancellor meant to point at Lord
Durham and his party there is not much doubt; and
as little, we should think, that the Noble and Learned
Lord, who formerly took the lead in correcting every
abuse, has now been outstripped by others, and that lie
who was but a short time since the propelling power of
the machine, is now anxious to put on the drag. Whe-
ther this is a prudent step we will not stay to inquire ;
but we think it apparent that his Lordship is not so
well disposed to enter boldly into questions of reform,
or to throw himself as fearlessly as formerly on the
opinion of the country. For the sake of conciliating
enemies, whom nothing on earth (as Lord Durham ob-
served) can conciliate, we fear his Lordship has been
inclined to clip and mutulate principles which should
be held inviolable. With what success this attempt
has been attended—without meaning to depreciate
Lord Brougham's power of conciliation, though we do
not suspest that his talent lies in that way—we shall
leave the public to decide. We would merely observe
that to deliberate to the fullest extent we do not ob-
ject ; but that far too much remains to be done for the
country to allow Ministers to rest on their oars, and that
although the people are satisfied with the measure of
Reform granted to them, they are now most anxiously
awaiting the promised fruits of that measure. And we
give them credit for sufficient good sense not to expect to
reap all the benefits in one summer; but that they will
be satisfied to allow any harvest to pass without some
produce we do not think ;—as to there being any abate-
ment in their desire for the correction of abuses, or
any reaction on the subject of Reform, as soon would
we believe " pronos relabi posse rivos et Tiberim re-
verti." The fact is, and the Lord Chancellor we
should think knows it as well as any man, that to
stand still, or even to move lazily, will mit be endured
in the present temper and with the present capabilities
and wants of the country. Even in Scotland, where
the Noble Lord has experienced so gratifying a re-
ception, we suspect that he will find anything but a
response to his newly-adopted project of " the snail's
gallop" in legislation. Our Correspondent at Glasgow
writes thus of the state of the public feeling there :
" The state of public feeling in this part of Scotland is de-
cidedly opposed to the stand-still policy of the Lord Chan-
cellor; and there are several great questions about which the
Scotch threaten to try the pulse of the Parliament in the next
Session, and without much delay. There is a strong feeling
in favour of triennial Parliaments and vote by ballot; and ex-
tension of the suffrage would also be a popular measure here.
The opinion in favour of triennial Parliaments especially is
very general and decided."
As the Lord Chancellor and Lord Durham are at
issue on the question of quick or slow progress in the
march of improvement, it would appear, if the above
statement be correct, that public opinion north of the
Tweed is not preparod to go along with the former,
and we venture to think that in the south he will find
as little disposition to support him in a theory which,
whether just or not in itself, is at all events incon-
sistent in him.—Morning Herald.
We devote a considerable portion of our space this
day to the proceedings of two most interesting
and important meetings, those of Conservatives of
Kent and of the Protestants of Cavan. It is unne-
cessary that we should detain our readers from the
perusal of the admirable speeches delivered at both by
any attempt at analysis or commentary, for, in the pre-
sent circumstances of the empire, we are persuaded
that every word of the reports will be eagerly perused
by all classes of our readers, and we feel that any re-
marks of ours would be more likely to weaken than to
enforce the impression they are so well calculated to
produce. The Protestant spirit in Ireland is effectually
roused by the sense of actual oppression, and the
visible approach of a crisis, upon the issue of which
the preservation or destruction of the Protestant
Church, the reinforcement or the dissolution of the
connection between Ireland and Great Britain, must
wholly depend. And it is satisfactory to per-
ceive in the great Kentisl!_Meeting an unequivocal
indication that the feelings which pervade . the
Protestant people of Ireland, and the efforts which
they must inspire, will not be defrauded of any
portion of that encouragement and aid which the sym-
pathy of British talent, patriotism, courage, and virtue
can yield them. The Meeting at Canterbury and that
at Cavan were stimulated by the same feelings, and
had one common object in view. But it is impossible
not to remark that the topics which predominated in
the several addresses delivered at each were to a con-
siderable extent dissimilar. The King's declaration to
the Bishops of his conscientious and unalterable reso-
lution to maintain the rights and integrity of the
Church—the hopes, the confidence, the exultation
which this spirited and well-timed declaration is so
well calculated to inspire—imparted to the Kentish
Meeting its tone and character. A less cheering but
not less invigorating influence pervaded the minds and
suggested the language
of their afflicted and perse-
cuted brethren, the Protestants of Cavan. It was for
the latter to speak of the persecution, the oppression,
the robbery; the insults, to which they see the
Protestant Church of Ireland and her Clergy daily
exposed. It was for them to describe as they per-
petually witness the most venerable, virtuous, and
faithful Ministers of the Church reduced to beggary
and destitution in consequence of the protection of the
laws having been withheld from them by his Majesty's
vernment. It was their duty to pourtray, as they
had experienced, the insufferable tyranny of demagogue
ascendancy and of priestly dominion. It was theirs to
speak of zealous and discreet magistrates degraded and
denounced by the authority of the English Govern-
ment, for no other crime than the warmth of their
attachment to the laws, the constitution, the religion,
the cause of England—of an ExecutH'e impotent or
conniving, while the law is habitually neglected and
derided by a large proportion of the people—of home
and altar, of property and life, utterly- unprotected—of
the deepest injuries and the most galling insults that
men were ever called upon to endure in any community
calling itself civilized. Such were the topics which
forced themselves upon the attention of the Cavan
Meeting. The distinction between the meeting at
Canterbury and that at Cavan is, indeed, broad and
palpable : the former celebrated the pious declaration
of the King of England—the latter rehearsed and
denounced the conduct of his Ministers.—Morning
Post.

We have received a great number of letters respect-
ing a case which, arising out of the new Poor Law
Bill, came recently before the magistrates at Ilford, in
Essex. The case, as reported, is this :—A young man
named James Wheeler, whose settlement was in the
parish of Layton, was apprenticed about six years
ago by the parish officers of Layton to one William
Gardener, at that time a fisherman at Barking. Wheeler
lived with his master until about 18 months ago, when
the master, becoming embarrassed, sold off all he had,
and entered into the service himself. Wheeler was in
consequence thrown on the parish of Barking, and the
overseers of that parish sought to get rid of him, and
remove him to his own parish of Layton. They, there-
fore, applied to the magistrates for an order of removal,
and the vestry-clerk of the parish read to the magis-
trates the following clause (the 67th) of the Poor Laws'
Act, upon which the application was grounded :
" And be it further enacted, that from and after the
passing of this Act no settlement shall be acquired by
being apprenticed in the sea service, or to a house-
holder exercising the trade of th'e seas, as a fisherman
or otherwise, nor by any person now being such an
apprentice, in respect of such apprenticeship." The
magistrates' clerk, Mr. Cherry, was of opinion that
this clause of the Act did not apply to the case before
the Bench. The Chairman, Mr. Hall Dare, after
calling the attention of the Bench to the vast import-
ance of this case to the parish of Barking, and to all
other parishes which number many fishermen among

their inhabitants, said that he bad not supposed
there could have arisen any difference of opinion upon
the subject. He , had taken it for granted that the
magistrates would make the order of removal as a mat-
ter of course ; but after the opinion expressed by Mr.
Cherry, he had altered his own. After some discus-
sion, the magistrates retired to a private room, where,
upon consultation, they resolved not to make the
order of removal. The Chairman, however, in corn •
municating this resolution to the parties, recommended
the parish officers to draw up a ease for the opinion of
some high legal authority on the point. Some of our
correspondents who have called our attention to this
case, desire to know if the decision of the Magistrates
be right, while others take it for granted that it is
wrong • but all of them dwell upon the declaration of
,
the parish officers, that there are 600 apprentices in
the same condition with this pauper, and consequently
urge the extreme importance of the case. For our own
parts, we concur in the first judgment of Mr. Hall
Dare, and we should very much like to know how the
Magistrates' clerk gets over these words of the clause,
," nor by any person now being such an apprentice ?"
We have no doubt that whatever and how many soever
legal authorities may be consulted on the point, their
opinions will concur and be against the Magistrates, de-
claring that the Magistrates ought to have made, not re-
fused, the order of removal. The clause under which
the application was made is a very remarkable one, and
has been repeatedly mentioned as . the only clause
of the Act which may deprive a party of a settlement
already gained, as it clearly does in this instance. We
-shall not on this, occasion discuss the policy or the im-
policy of the enactment, but we must be permitted to
remark that the case in question affords another (proof
of the declaration we so often made while this new
Act was under discussion in Parliament—namely, that
the persons most interested in it had not the most re-
mote notion of the nature of the alterations it made
in the existing law. It was only • yesterday that we
quoted from a Sheffield paper the following para-
graph :—" A few days ago the subject of the Poor
Laws' Amendment Act was accidentally introduced at
a market table in this town, when there was only one
out of a dozen farmers who had heard anything about
it, and he confessed his entire ignorance of its details.
Some of them, ere long, will feel its blessings !" And
yet we are told that the bill had been received with
almost unanimous approbation by the people, and be-
fore its operation has yet well commenced, we are as-
sured that it is working wonders. We shall see.
Times.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, SEPT. 26.

(Before Mr. Commissioner FANE.)
IN RE JAMES SMITH'S BANKRUPTCY.

The bankrupt in this case was a stock-broker, and a
meeting of his creditors was held to-day for the proof of
debts. The final examination of the bankrupt was also
fixed for this day, but he has not surrendered.
Application was made on behalf of the Rev. Mr. Scott,
to prove a debt under the following circumstances :—The
Rev. Gentleman forwarded to the bankrupt some time
since a sum of money amounting to upwards of 1,8001.,
for the purpose of its being invested in Danish And Russian
securities. The bankrupt sent, in return, an account which
led the Rev. Mr. Scott to suppose that the money had
been invested according to his directions ; but subsequently
to the bankruptcy, it was discovered that this was not the
case, and that the money had been applied to the private
purposes of the bankrupt. The solicitor for Mr. Scott
now applied to prove for the principal money sent to be
invested, as well as for 1441., being the amount of profit
which would have accrued to the Rev. Gentleman by the
advance that had occurred in the value of the securities be-
tween the times when the stock was said to have been pur-
chased and the date of the bankruptcy.
The COMMISSIONER asked upon what principle the rev.
gentleman could claim the 1441., which it was stated was
the increase in the value of the stock by an advance in the
prices.

The Solicitor considered his client clearly entitled to the
amount. It was however brought before the Court for its
decision. His client had received a letter, in which it was
stated that the money had been laid out as directed. His
client was entitled therefore to the difference in the value
of the stock. The letter in question was in the bankrupt's
handwriting.
The COMMISSIONER remarked, that the stock might
have been resold by the bankrupt previously to the bank-
ruptcy. He rather inclined to the opinion that there ex-
isted a right of proof for the sum of 144/., as well as for the
1,800/. There was, he recollected, a case decided which
was in principle similar to the present—he referred to that
of " Latham and Parry." He thought there could be no
objection to allow proof to be made for the whole sum.
The proof was accordingly made for 1,8001. and 1441.
An application was made for a private meeting in order
to examine Mr,Kinnear, relative to a proof made on behalf
of Kinnear and Co., the object of which was to set aside
the proof.
The COMMISSIONER said that unless the examination had
reference to the due administration of the estate of the
bankrupt, the application could not be granted.
The applicant stated that the object being to strike off
from the proceeding the debt proved, was, he submitted,
strictly conneeted with the due administration of the estate.
It appeared on inquiry that the Solicitor to the fiat was
Solicitor to the petitioning creditor, the assignee, and to
Messrs. Kinnear and Co., when
The COMMISSIONER said that, under such circumstances,
it was not likely that the Solicitors to the fiat and to
Messrs. Kinnear would be very active in aiding the appli-
cant. He said this not in disrespect of the Solicitors to
these parties, but from a knowledge of human nature. As
the banking firm of Messrs. Glyn and Co. were large
creditors, he thought the applicant should have an inter-
view with them upon the subject, and they, as well as the
official assignee (Mr. Edwards), being disinterested parties,
would take the proper measures to investigate the circum-
stances.

The amount of debts already proved is 7,911/. The
total amount of debts and liabilities against the bankrupt
is 29,5001. The assets are extremely small.

COURT OF REQUESTS, SEPT. 26.

A " PINT" OF LAW.
John Jenkins, a dingy complexioned member of the ho-
nourable fraternity of costermongers, was summoned by
Thomas Little, a chandler shop-keeper in Haydon-alley,
for the sum of 395. 11 d., being, as per bill, the amount of
divers half and whole quarterns, red herrings, snuff, long
sixes, small beer, and other necessaries, furnished to his
wife, Mary Jenkins.
The defendant, a short, knock-knee'd little man, with a
cast of countenance very much resembling a bull terrier,
took his place at the bar with all the confidence of a barris-
ter of thirty years' standing, and pulling out a pile of dirty
paper, prepared to take voluminous notes of the matter in
issue.

The plaintiff swore to the debt, and proved it in the
usual form, averring that he trusted Mrs. Jenkins with the
various articles recited in the bill, knowing her to be a mar-
ried woman, and believing that her husband was responsible
for the amount.

" Afore I raises my pint of law to this here haction (said
the defendant) I vonts to ax von simple kvesthun of the
prosecutor. Now, on your hoath, didn't I sarve you with
this here werry indentical notice ?"

The defendant hereupon handed in a slip of paper con-
taining the following words :

" Not Ice is heaiby giving that John Jenkins, of No. 9,
Haydon-alley, has diworced his wife, Mary Jenkins, and he
wont be anserable not for nothink, as she gets tick for at
any previous timeA—Given under My hand and seal,
Witness, Robt. Stubbs. " JOHN JENKINs."
The plaintiff denied that he had been served with any
notice of that kind whatever.

The defendant then, casting an important look about
him, prepared for his defence, elbowing the spectators right
and left, from the front of the bar, and putting himself in the
attitude most favourable for oratorical display :
" Ladies and Gemmen, and your honourable Lordship,"
he began, " the kvestshun for this here Court to decide is,
vether a man wot has been legal diworced from his vife and
wot has settled on her a seperate hindependance of six shil-
ling a week is liable in the arms of the law for votever parti-
cles she may gammon the flats out on."

COMMISSIONER—" Do you mean to say that you have
procured a legal divorce from your wife ?" " Vy, yes,"
continued the defendant ; " vot I calls legal, for its werry
true as I hav'n't got no divorce out of Doctor Commonses
Classical Court, cause that ere's only for people wots gentle-
folks, but I get harticles of seperation reglar signed and vit-
nessed, and afterwards I sends round notices vere I gets
my gin and vere I gets my little bit of wittles, that nobody
wor'nt to give my vife no tick vithout she brought the
ready money. Now I git a case in pint to show at no
human being can't be liable for nothink, if they cotches
their vives in sitch a similar sitivation as I catched Bill
Jackson with mine."

" Well, Mr. Jenkins," said the COMMISSIONER, who
appeared diverted with the defendant's mode of de-
fence, " perhaps you will show us your case in pbint."
" Here it is," replied the defendant, handing in an old
greasy newspaper. " In that there you'll see, as Jack
Hollis, my mate, had a law-suit afore Sir Richard Birnie,
at Bow-street, 'cause he vould'nt maintain his vile whom

•
'he Cr,tehed a bed with a gentleman vot sold vort'er creases.
S;7e Richard granted him the victory 'cause he said as how
nn man wornt hobligated to support his vife ven she's lost
her wertue ; but if she vos in vont of a common necessary,
she must go to the parish and get perwided."
" Can you show the Court," inquired the COMMISSIONER,
that the plaintiff knew your wife was separated from you ?"
" Yes, I can," rejoined the defendant, " for she lived next
door to him, with her pal, and vent by another name ; and,
more than that ere, Mister Little vouldn't have come down
en me for this here, hadn't Bill Jackson bolted away last
veek."

The COMMISSIONER, having expressed himself more sa•
tisfied with the last fact than with the defendant's specia
pleading, nonsuited the plaintiff.