The Sun.
London, England, 1834-01-31 00:00:00

FASHIONABLE INTELLIGENCE.

ARRIVALS.
Mr. and Mrs. Lei h, at the Sackville Hotel, Sackville-
atr eet, from Bath; Mgajor and Mrs. Hall and family, at ditto,
from itall; the Rev. H. Mayers, at ditto, from Brighton ; Mr.
and Mrs. J.
--nlea O'Brien, at ditto, from Suffolk; Miss West,
in Upper Grosvenor-street, from the Old Steine, Brighton.
L
on aoviLord and DEPARTURES. ad Albert Conyng h , from Hamilton-place,
. J . Denison, c cim p at Denbies, Dorking ;
Sir Josias Rowley, Bart., for Po.rtsmo.uth ; the Earl ;of Sand-
wich, from Mount-street, for Brighton ; the Countess of West-
Moreland, from Mivart's
—l3'el, Lower Brook street, for the
Continent ; W. L. Gihnour, Esq.,
from Hill street, for Melton
Mowbray ; Lord Forester, from Charles-street, for ditto ; Miss
Courtesy;
Boyle, from Berkeley
street, for Burghley House ;
the Earl and Countess of Wilton, from Heaton Park, for ditto ;
Capt. Alves, from the Sackville
Sackville-street, to
tdinburgh ; Mr. and Mrs. Fox and family, from ditto, for
Denbigh.

ARRIVALS AT BATH.
Admirals Sir C. Boyle and Sir J. Slade, Lord G. tennox,
Ladies L., H., and E. Waldegrave, and Hoy Lord
Gen. KU.
bo,..urne, Baron Ompteda, Cols. Gibson and De la Motte, Majors
Aing,ton, Mackey, and Wallis; Capts. Thewles, Clement, John-
sone, Peachey, Routledge, Dennis, Erskyn, and Colley ; Revds.
toulton, Jeff, King, Lewis, Luce, Merest, Peacock,
Richard_
tort, Taylor, Turner, Armitage; Mr. and Mrs. Jackson, Parker,
Abraham, Holford, Lyons, Blathwayt, Chippingdale, Clarke,
Collett, Dewdney, Kerby, Kay, Peake, Sawyer, Springfield,
Tale, Wellford, Williamson, Young, Gallop and family; Messrs.
°rearms, Poole, Welch, Quantock, Kidd, William, Wilson,
Choice, Vincent, Sturgess, Dashall, Nixon, Simpson, Farrer,
might, Buller, M.P., Delaneash, Lax, Morrison, Prendergast,
'teurbridge, Steart, Throgmorton, Vowles, Wathen, Allison,
tearcroft, Clare, Davidson, Gabriel, Hardy, Manners, Nadler,
Stockport, Upton, Wiltshire, Bethel!, Chichester, M.P., Luxton,
.natchbull, Mitchell, Bowdler, Caldwell and family, Denby;
Mesdames
"; Wells, Portman, Jeffries, Wollaston, Quantock, Ar-
-Lage; Misses Jones, Moore.

MADNESS AND DEATH FROM JOINING
?int TRADES' UNION.-Last night at inquest was held ro the City Compter, Giltspur-street, on the body of P.
Moore, aged fifty, a painter and glazier. William Bar-
ay, of Barlett's-buildings, Fetter-lane, Holborn, said
the deceased had, for sixteen years carried on business as
a Painter in St. Clement Danes but he some time since
jnlet with misfortunes, and was reduced to work as a
ourneyman for Mr. Dickens, of Marlborough-street. For
the last few Weeks he had been out of employment, but he
did not want for anything. He became very excited in
consequence of joining the Trades' Unions, and evinced
eYroPtonts of insanity. On Monday week he broke all
his little furniture,
and. left his home. The deceased was
found running in Holborn, and screaming out some
political opinions. He was taken to the Compter,
Where it appeared that he was raving mad. Mr.
M'Murdo, the surgeon, ordered him under restraint.
He went on very well till Wednesday, when he sunk
rapidly and died in the evening.—James Heaviside, a re-
lation, stated that the deceased, being an influential man
among the trade, had, a few weeks back, been prevailed
°Poll to join the Trades' Union, and he was accordingly
mHe arls a " Grand Brother" with much pomp and ceremony.
aPpeared afterwards to labour under much excitement,
end his conduct, which was heretofore peaceable, became
'try much altered and violent. He took a conspicuous
Part in all questions relating to politics, and seemed alto-
gether completely changed, and so much did the Union
absorb his whole thoughts and attention, that he neglected
t° look out for employment, and frequently declared that
be would live up on bread and water to support the Union.
He had not seen him for some days previous to his death.
,Jur"--Are you of opinion that the Union turned his
°rain, then ? Witness—Decidedly lam ; I have not the
least doubt of it. Juror Was he a sober man ? Wit
ness—He was before he joined the Union, but afterwards
he took to thinking. Verdict—Died by the Visitation of
God.
THE HIGH TIDE.—.The inhabitants of the
houses on the banks of the river were, during the whole
lo' yesterday, actively engaged in clearing their cellars and
ower premises of the water which had flowed into them ;
and the streets near the waterside were rendered almost
HnPlalable for foot passengers, in consequence of the large
qunntities of water discharged,*by means of pumps, from
every house into the streets. The tide of Wednesday
evening was only nine inches lower than that of the
srtorning, and another high tide was anticipated yesterday ;
but, fortunately for the residents along shore, the wind
again shifted to the south-west, and kept the tide from
rising above its usual height. The marshes on the Kent
and Essex shores are overflowed, and will be some time
before the lands are cleared of the water. A very curious
circumstance happened on Wednesday morning. Two
stacks of reeds, in a field on the Kent shore, near Wool-
wich, were carried away by the flood, and actually floated
to the Essex shore. On the tide receding, both stacks
Were left on the bank near Barking Creek, and the
owner had the trouble of reconveying them across the
river to his own field. We understand that a public meet-
ing will be called by some influential individual to relieve
the poor families on the banks of the river, who have
suffered by the extraordinary high tide.
AMERICAN SLAVE TRADE.--We record
the fact with deep regret, that the Legislature of Loui
ana has repealed the laws of the prohibiting th
troduction of slaves within roseate'bodae We e must
confess that we can perceive but little difference betweenm
the African slave trade and that carried on between the
shores of the Chesapeake and the Delta of the Missisippi.
The principle is the same, with the only difference that,
in the former traffic, the free are stolen and sold into
slavery, while in the latter the slave is transferred from a
comparatively mild to a worse state of bondage. But in
both, the holiest ties of family and relationship are brutally
torn asunder. A fearful responsibility rests upon this
nation, in regard to slavery ; and that responsi..
bility must be shared between the slave dealers and those
at the north who are aiding them by opposing the only
rational and practical scheme of eradicating the evil,
with-
out entailing upon the country a far greater calamity than
that Which ezists.—Poulson's American Advertiser,
Jan. 8.
h ROBBERIES.--Ott Thursday evening, about
-,'lf-Past 6, as Mr. William Hurst was returning home
about
Leeds to Gomersal, he was stopped by five men,
"",°l4 100 yards past the Waggon and Horses Inn, and
!°°bed of his poeket-book, containing three bills, amount
'2°,15 to 430/., of the following description, viz. :—One for
hitte°4, drawn by Messrs. Stephen Mitchell and Son, on
r
1001". Glyn, the bankers, at two months ; another fo
ja—
tin._ by ores Allport on Messrs. Esdaile, bankers, at
pay': months: and a third for 1301., on Messrs. Smith,
at tw' and Co., bankers, by Tbotnas Nelson and Co.,
names
Months. Also a gold patent lever watch, makers'
goidel," Anderson and Co., London, No. 623;" with
T cuaira and key, having "W. H." engraved on it.
went.. .
the
pa:cella:leas reward is offered for the apprehension of
tart "---On Saturday were stolen from IS, Albemarle-
, ati 4 silver table-spoons, 2 dessert-spoons, and 5 taUe-
tli The
ntre crest a ducal coronet, with a tree growing in
the er.ree e of it, and a cross-cutfsaw through the trunk of
, with the word " Through" on the saw. The
party of Sir John Hamilton,--police Gazette.

LITERATURE.

EDTVARDS' BOTANIC 4L REGISTER,
OR ORNAMENTAL FLOWER GARDEN AND SHRUBBERY.

Continued by Dr. LINDLEY.
No. XII. OF V 01.,. 6.—New SERIES.

The number before us completes the sixth
volume of this work, since Professor Lindley
has conducted it, and teems with beautiful rari-
ties. The three following will be appreciated
by Botanical readers :—" Clustered Calanthe"
(Calanthe Densiflara), " Loy Oncidium"
(Oncidium Altissimum), and " Powdered He-
liconia" (Heliconia Pulverulenta). This last
is presented by Sir A. Hume, at whose esta-
blishment it flowered. All the Plaintain tribe
is remarkable either for the beauty, or size, or
singularity of their foliage ; but this, although
inferior to many in the magnitude of is parts,
yields to none in beauty. It is impossible to
imagine any thing more delicate than the blue
bloom which thickly covers the underside of the
leaves, or more brilliant than the vivid scarlet of
the flower leaves or spathes ; among which
nestle, as it were, a few bright-green flowers.
The following will receive, perhaps, more gene-
ral attention :—The Quince-leaved Wayfaring-
tree (Virburnum Cotinifoliutn), a hardy shrub,
native of British India, very similar in appear-
ance to the English Wayfaring-tree, that unless
the flowers were seen, one would feel persuaded
it was a mere variety; the flowers are much
larger, more coloured with pink, and neither
flat nor slightly bell-shaped, but of a distinct
funnel-shaped figure. According to Mr. Royle,
this plant is common in the Himalayas, at eleva-
tions of from 5,000 to 7,000 feet, in 30. N. lat.,
and is called by the hill people Juwa ; its fruit
is occasionally eaten by them. Smooth-branched
Scottia, a new species of the rara genus Scottia,
from New Holland, will prove an ornamental
addition to the English Greenhouse, as will also
Slender-stemmed Nierembergia* (Nierembergia
filicaulis), a new species of this genus, of grace-
ful growth, pretty, easily multiplied by cuttings,
and requiring but a moderate degree of protec-
tion in winter.

o I. E. Nierernberg, a Spanish Jesuit, to whom this
genus has been dedicated, is said to have written a Na-
tural History, in sixteen books, of which nothing is now
remembered.

RELIGIOUS ESTABLISHMENTS OF THE

ANCIENT ROMANS.

We are too little acquainted with the sacred
poetry of the Romans to undertake to show, by a
comparison of them with Grecian hymns and the
oldest lyrical poetry, that religion had been from the
earliest times a political machine, for the skilful use
of which the few families to whom the care of the
state was committed had formed a firm union.
We shall, therefore, only briefly remark, that the
whole affairs of religion stood under the direc-
tion of the practical understanding ; and that,
though it is true that entrance was thus effectually
barred against priestcraft, yet, on the other hand,
science and imagination could not, as amongst the
Greeks, employ the popular persuasion, in order to
raise even common souls above daily life and its oc-
cupations. An Aristocratical College, which filled
up its own Members, and consisted of four Members
and a President (pontifex maxims), all of them
men who occupied, and had long occupied, public
offices, presided over all ceremonies. At a later
period, indeed, four plebeians were added ; but
these were all chosen from amongst men who, as
senators, had already entered the body of nobility.
It was not till a very late period (u. c. 649) that
the people acquired a share in the election. All
the other priesthoods were subordinate to this col-
lege, which depended on the senate and the people.
Every ceremony, even the fearful devotion, de-
pended on formulas, of which, like those of the
English courts of justice, the observance was en-
forced with minute accuracy. Thus, a state order
regulated every banquet and sacrifice; music and
dancing were prescribed with equal precision as the
formulas of prayer. Here it may well be imagined
that no room was left for poetry, still less for devo-
tional songs or sacred dramas. This college of the
superior priests was flanked by that of the augurs,
who were neither priests nor jugglers, but States-
men, whose age and consideration in the State
maintained the old superstition, and made use of it
for the advantage of the Government. No myste-
ries, no rites for the excitement of the fancy, not
even for the subterranean powers—for the solem-
nities of the Bona Dea were merely a female festi-
val. Even the business of the vestals did not rest
on secret tradition, or on legendary tales, which
had been solemnized by popular songs. The priests
of particular deities were, indeed, fettered by cer-
tain rules; but even the three of the fifteen priests
held in highest respect, those of Jupiter, Mars, and
Romulus, were in public offices, and their influence
was more properly secular than spiritual. We
could easily demonstrate in a similar manner of
the so called Salii, of the Epulorts and Curions,
that they were restricted to definite, merely out-
ward forms, and subordinate to the senate and the
people; by consequence, that they were civil of-
ficers, destined to reinforce the popular morals
through superstition, feasts, and offerings, or to
guide them by these-means in the direction desired
by the civil authorities. No new ceremony, no
temple, no altar, festival, or solemnity could be
introduced without sanction of the senate and con-
sent of the tribunes.—Lardner's Cabinet Cyclopw.
dia : History of Rome.

On Saturday morning, at a quarter before
eight o'clock, whilst Colonel St. Clair was in bed, at his
residence at No. 6, Rue Neuve Monthabor, he heard the
door of his sitting room open, and some one enter, whom
he conceived to be the servant, cowing to make his fire ;
for about ten minutes he was employed walking about,
and handling several articles on the table and drawers.
At last he put his bead into the Colonel's bed-room door,
and the latter seeing a strange face eyeing the apartment,
Sprang up and seized the intruder. 1-1 e told a story of
being a ciirn-doctor, sent to attend a gentleman in the
house ; but the name he gave was false, as there was no
sOclr person. It was then found that he neither knew
tinarrie of the street, nor the number of the house, in
whithe was trying his adventures, and therefore was
given into the custody of the police.—Paris Paper.
During the thunder-storm on the night of
Friday se nnight the electric fluid penetrated the chimney
of the house owfell:ler. Watkin Watkins, at Glanrhyd, while
12 persons
were, by the violence round the fire. The company
but
erof the shock, thrown about the room
in all directions,
able ortunately no serious injury ensued,
though consider
Wasdamaget was done to the house. The
top of the chimney
down ; in one room the
mantelpiece was knocked thrown
nobf its place, and thrown
forward on a bed; in anothert,waa
joint half the paper and a
great deal of the plaster of the were rubbed off; the
clock-case and the windows of the
besides several minor losses.
bar were broken, and
2-1, panes of glass were broken,
—llereford Journal.
OXFORD, JAN. 29.—At a meeting of con-
vacation holden this day, which was very
ittended, his Grace the Duke of Wellington
mously elected Chancellor of the University, in the room ani-
of Lord Grenville, deceased. The utmost enthusiasm
prevailed prevailed among all parties. The Duke, according to the
etiquette observed on such occasions, was of course absent.
The attempt to get up an opposition was a complete
failure. The installation of the new Chancellor will not,
it is believed, take place until next June, when there will
be a grand commemoration, and it is expected to be the
&mist splendid ceremony, ever known on any similar
occasion.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JAN. 30.

THE KING V. GRANT AND OTHERS.

The defendants, Patrick Grant, John Bell, and
J. Ager, the proprietors and printer of the True
Sun newspaper, who had been convicted at the
sittings after last term of a libel upon Mr. Alderman
Winchester and Mr. Briggs, an attorney, came up
to receive the judgment of the Court.
The transactions out of which this prosecution
arose have been so often and so fully before our
readers, that it may be sufficient to state, that Mr.
Winchester having been appointed one of the as-
signees, and Mr. Briggs the solicitor, under Mr.
Grant's commission of bankrupt, they were charged
in a pamphlet, and afterwards in various articles in
the True Sun with gross misconduct in the manage-
ment of the affairs, and particularly with fraud and
falsehood, in disposing of Mr. Grant's three-fourth
shares of The Sun to Mr. Murdo Young at a very
inadequate price, and refusing the offer of 13,0001.
made by a Mr. Lomax and the defendant Mr. Bell.
It was alleged that they had acted from corrupt
motives, in order to obtain the property for Mr.
Young, and that Mr. Grant had been totally de-
prived of all benefit from the capital he had embarked
in establishing The Sun, and the creditors had not
received any dividend from the estate.
It will he recollected that in the present term a
motion was made by Mr. Kelly, of which we gave
a full report at the time, for a new trial, on the
ground that the Lord Chief Justice had excluded cer-
tain evidence at the trial which was necessary to
make out the averment in the information, that the
libel was published of and concerning the transac-
tions alluded to. The Court on the occasion re-
fused the application, on the pound, that although
the evidence might have been admissible if it had
been offered with a view to prove or disprove that
particular averment, yet as the object in going into
such an inquiry was substantially to put in issue the
the truth of the libels, it had been properly exclu-
ded by the Learned Judge at the trial.
Mr. KELLY now stated, that as he had under-
stood the decision of the Court to have proceeded
upon the ground that the evidence had not been
offered with a view to inform the jury of the nature
of the transactions, from which they might judge
whether the libels related to those transactions or
not, he was now furnished with the affidavit of two
persons, and also with the notes of a short-hand
writer, which confirmed his (Mr. Kelly's) recollec-
tion that he had distinctly put it upon that ground
at the trial, and he trusted, as the judgment of the
Court had proceeded upon a misapprehension in
point of fact, that the defendants would not now be
precluded from taking the objection, for it was clear
that evidence which might have had more or less
effect upon the minds of the jury had been rejected,
and that in a criminal case in whieh he had never
known a new trial refused under such circumstances.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said he had a distinct
recollection of what passed at the trial, and he should
not allow his statement to be contradicted by that
of any other person. He stated at the time the
rule was applied for, that if the evidence had been
offered with a view bona fide to prove or disprove
the necessary averment in the information, he
should not have rejected it, but he was quite sure
that no gentleman at the bar could get up and state
that that was the object; on the contrary, it was
quite plain that the intention was to enter into a
general inquiry as to the truth of the charges against
the prosecutors, which could not be allowed by
law; and unless the rest of the Court entertained a
different opinion, be would not permit any affidavits
to be read on such a subject.
Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE and Mr. Justice TAUN-
ToN expressed their concurrence in the opinion of
the Lord Chief Justice.

On the part of the defendants affidavits were then
put in of Mr. Thornton, the co-assignee, and of
Messrs. Hill and Logan, two of the other principal
creditors, stating that they were extremely dissatis-
fied with the conduct of Messrs. Winchester and
Briggs in managing the affairs under the commis-
sion, and particularly in their refusal to accept the
offer of Messrs. Bell and Lomax, which they consi-
dered was bona
_fide and for the benefit of the
estate. Mr. Morphet, the solicitor of Mr. Lomax,
also made an affidavit, stating that that gentleman
was possessed of property more than sufficient to
pay 13,0001. at the time he made the offer.
An affidavit of Mr. Grant was also read, stating
the various transactions which took place under the
commission, and that he had been reduced from
affluence to a state of penury from what he consi-
dered to be the misconduct of the prosecutors in the
disposal of his property.
Affidavits in behalf of the prosecution, were then
read.

Murdo Young, of the Strand, in the county of Mid-
dlesex, part proprietor of the newspaper, called The Sun,
states, that having been advised by his counsel, Sir Ed-
ward Burtenshaw Sugden, to refrain from noticing the
libels hereinafter mentioned, pending the proceedings
adopted by this deponent in the Court of Chancery, touch-
ing the said newspaper, he, deponent, did not interfere,
or take any proceedings himself in this Honourable Court,
or assist by his affidavit in the application of Henry Win-
chester, Esq., and Thomas Briggs, against Patrick Grant,
John Bell, and John Ager, respecting such libels, con-
tained in a certain pamphlet and a newspaper, called the
True Sun, printed and published by some or one of
them ; but deponent saith, that having been present in
this Court on the 28th of May, 1831, and heard the
observations of counsel respecting his not making any such
affidavit, he, deponent, upon his oath, now saith, that he
had not any knowledge of, or ever saw, the said Thomas
Briggs, until after the commission of bankruptcy issued
against the said Patrick Grant, nor has he now, or ever
had, any intimacy or friendship with the said Thomas
Briggs; and that he never had any collusion with the
said Thomas Briggs, or with the said Henry Winchester,
in the issuing of the said commission of bankruptcy, or
to defeat the interest of the creditors under the same.
That his offers to purchase the three-fourth parts or shares
of and in the said newspaper, have been bona fide, and
without fraud or collusion with the said Henry
Winchester and Thomas Briggs, or either of them, or
any other person or persons whomsoever ; and that
it is the firm belief of deponent, that his said offers
have been the only real and bona fide offers to
purchase the same ; and that the several offers to purchase
such shares by other persons were only intended to mis-
lead and impose upon the assignees of the said bankrupt.
That his only knowledge of the said Henry Winchester
arises from his having been a large creditor of the said
Patrick Grant's previous to deponent becoming the co-
partner of the said Patrick Grant in the said newspaper ;
and that he has not any intimacy or friendship with him
whatever ; and that neither the said Henry Winchester,
or the said Thomas Briggs, is interested, or expects to be
interested, directly or indirectly, in any manner what,o-
ever, either with deponent, or with any other person or
persons, for or on his behalf in the said newspaper, or
in any other manner to secure the purchase of the
said shares and interest of the said !bankrupt in the said
Sux newspaper, with a view to assist deponent, or to
defraud the creditors of the said Patrick Grant, or with
any corrupt view or motive whatever. That long pre-
vious to the issuing of the said commission of bankruptcy
the difficulties of the said Patrick Grant became so great,
that he, deponent, was under the necessity of communica-
ting the same to the said Henry Sykes Thornton, the co-
assignee of the said bankrupt, who has for many years
been, and is a very particular personal friend of the
said bankrupt ; and deponent received from the said
Henry Sykes Thornton a letter in the words and figures
following :

"' Birchin-lane, July 17, 1829.
" ' Dear Sir,—l have heard from Mr. Charles Grant
on the subject of Mr. P. Grant's affairs, and he tells me
that he and his brother have come to the determination of
leaving things to take their own course. As we cannot
get the deed signed, it is impossible for Mr. Winchester
and me to act under it, and I have, therefore, told Mr.
Bartrum that I see no alternative but a commiss•on of
bankruptcy. Ido not intend to stir in the business
myself, and I mention the circumstance in order to put
you on your guard, and that you may see Mr. Bartrutn,
and confer with him in what manner a bankruptcy may
take place with the least injury to the property of The
Sun newspaper.
" ' Believe me, yours truly,

"‘ H. S. THORNTON.'

Addressed to 'M. Young, Esq., 11
--" Teat he has at all times used his utmost exertions to
promote the interest of the said Patrick Grant and his said
assignees in the said Sun newspaper, without favour to

himself beyond the rights and interests he has in the
same. That at the meeting which took place at the
counting-house of the said Henry Sykes Thornton, in
Bircbin_laee, on Thursday, the 17th of March, 1831, the
said three-fourth shares of and in the said Sun newspa-
per were agreed to be sold by the said Henry Winchester
end H. S. Thornton to deponent for the sum of 9,0001.,
in which was to be included a balance of 4,0001. and up-
wards, due to deponent in respect of the said partnership,
and exclusive of a sum of 2,0001. and upwards, in respect
of liabilities of the said partnership, if upon investigation
of the said accounts by persons to be appointed for that
purpose, the said debts and liabilities should amount
to those sums ; but, should the same exceed those
sums, then that deponent should in any event pay
the full sum of 5,0001. for the same ; but that if
they did not amount to the sums of money before
stated, he deponent, was to ply the excess. That
at suet] meeting on the 17th of March aforesaid, the
:aid Thomas Briggs was directed by the said Henry
Winchester and Henry Sykes Thornton to prepare a proper
agreement for carrying the same into effect, and an ap-
pointment was made to meet on Saturday, the 19th of
March following, to execute the same, and which the said
H. Winchester and H. S. Thornton agreed to do, provided
in the mean time no better offer should be made by any
other pers,n ; and deponent Faith, that he did accordingly
attend on the Saturday following, being the said 19th of
March, at the counting-house of the said Henry Sykes
Thornton, at Birchin-lane aforesaid, for the purpose of
carrying into effect the said agreement for the said pur-
chase. That no concealment whatever was made of the
terms or conditions thereof to any person or persons whom-
soever, but, on the contrary thereof, the principle of such
conditional agreement, that the same was agreed to be sold
to this deponent, provided no better offer was then and
there made, was avowed and openly acted upon. That
the said Thomas Briggs did not, at such meeting, make
any offer of 5001, or any other sum, for and on account
of this deponent, otherwise than he might have repeated
any offer that had been previously made to that effect by
deponent to the assignees. That in his judgment and be•
lief, the sum of 5,0001., which, in any event, he had
agreed to pay, exclusive of the sum of 4,0001. and upwards
due to deponent, in respect of the said partnership, and
the sum of 2,0001. and upwards in respect of liabilities of
the said partnership, was a better offer than any that has
yet been made for the purchase of said shares in the said
Sun newspaper. That on the 30th of December, 1831,
he received from the said Patrick Grant a letter, in the
words and figures hereinafter next mentioned, and to which
he replied as is also hereinafter mentioned, that is to say—
" 30th Dec.,1831.
" Sir,—Having at length obtained my certificate, I
am strongly urged to adopt measures of a decisive cha-
racter, which may, or may not, benefit me and my cre-
ditors, but must inevitably affect your interest. Before,
however, acceding to the suggestions of friends upon the
subjec,, I have no objection to meet you.
" Understanding that you are confined to the house, I
will call at The Sun office, if you will name an hour.

" ' Ynur obedient servant,
" PATRICK GRANT.
" Private and immediate—M. Young, Esq., Sun office.'
" Sun office, 31st Dec. 1831.
" ' Sir,—l have to acknowledge the receipt of your
letter yesterday. I should be sorry to interfere with your
acceding to any suggestions of your friends, for adopting
any measures that may benefit yourself or your creditors,
although (you state) they must inevitably affect my interests.
" ' If you have any communication to make, and will
send it through my solicitor, it will receive due attention.
Yours obediently,
" P. Grant, Esq.' " 'M. YOUNG.'
" That from his refusal again to unite with the said
Patrick Grant in the concerns of the said Sun newspaper,
he believes the hostility of the said Patrick Grant arose
and has continued towards deponent ; and that the said
Pat,ick Grant has united himself with the said John Bell
for the purpose of injuring deponent in his char..cter and
interest. That lie has reason to believe that the hostility
of the eaid John Bell arose in consequence of deponent
having refused to employ the said John Bell in the con-
cerns of the said newspaper, when he tendered his services
to deponent in the words and figures following :
" ' Saturday Evening, Spectator-office,
No. 4, Wellington-street, Strand.

" ' Sir,—As I understand that you are about to be-
come proprietor of The Sun, I beg to offer you my ser-
vices to write leading articles for that paper.
" I have for eight months past been one of the prin-
cipal contributors to the Spectator; I have had charge of
the political department, have furnished leading articles
and collective wisticm,' besides papers on political eco-
nomy, and others on topics of general interest- The reply
to the Standard in this week's number is mine, and the
notice of Mr. Sadler's law of population,' in the number
of last week. It will give me pleasure, however, to submit
to your notice the whole series of papers which I have
written for the Spectator.
" From some statements which have lately been made
to me, I have reasons to believe that you, Sir, and I have
been labouring under mutual misapprehensions as to the
nature of the arrangements which Mr. Grant contemplated
when he engaged me to write for The Sun; I should be
glad, therefore, at any time when you shall be at leisure,
to talk the matter over with you.—l have the honour to
be, Sir, your obedient servant,

"4 (Private.) " ' JOHN BELL.'
444 -- Young, Esq.'
" That the said John Bell is not, as deponent believes,
a person of any property, or had the means of becoming
the purchaser of the said three-fourth shares of the said
Sun newspaper, for deponent caith that the said John Bell
was only, up to the period of his uniting with the said
Patrick Grant, an occasional writer in the Court Journal,
and other papers of that description. That the said Henry
Sykes Thornton has repeatedly declared that he would
never consent to the sale of 'the said three-fourth shares of
the said newspaper to deponent at any price wha'ever, and
that he did not care whether he ever got any dividend
upon his debt, provided deponent was not the purchaser
thereof. That the hostility of the said H. S. Thornton
has arisen towards deponent from his refusal again to unite
his interests in the said newspaper with the said Patrick
Grant. That Mr. Bartrum is, and always has been, the
solicitor for deponent, and that he has never employed any
other solicitor since he was connected with the said news-
paper; and that the said Mr. Bartrum attended the said
meeting, on the 19th March, 1831, as his said solicitor,
and that the deponent, never directly or indirectly, em-
ployed the said Thomas Briggs as his solicitor, or other-
wise, concerning the same, or in any other matter what-
ever."

AFFIDAVIT AS TO THE AGREEMENT AND
MR. SEARLE.

" Thomas Briggs, of Lincoln's Inn-fields, county of
Middles'ex, Gent., saith, that having read the affidavit of
Samuel Searle, of Fetter-lane, in the city of London,
Gent., made and filed in the matter of this information,
and wherein the said S. Searle deposed that the agreement
therein mentioned was subsequently returned to the said
S. Searle by the deponent, without any note or comment
whatever, and wherein the said S. Searle positively denies
that deponent did make any such objections as had been
stat d by deponent in his said affidavit, upon which leave
to file this information was granted; and as evidence
thereof the said S. Searle annexed to his said affidavit a
copy of an agreement which be alleged had been so for-
warded to, and subsequently returned by, deponent to hint
as aforesaid, he, deponent, saith, that he called upon the
said S. Searle, and represented to him the mistake he had
made in such affidavit, and showed him the said copy of
agreement with the said objections so made therein, and
as it stated in the affidavit so made by deponent, and
the said S. Searle was thereupon convinced of the un-
truth of the allegation so made by him, and wrote and
sent to deponent the following letter thereon, that is to say,
" The King v. Grant.—Sir,—Having made two
copies of the agreement in question, one for you and the
other for Messrs. Alliston and Co., Mr. Thornton's Soli-
citors, I have reason to believe that the one annexed to
my affidavit in the above, was returned me by Messrs.
Alliston and Co., and not by you. I regret that the error
shoal have arisen, but having written you the 31st March
to return me the draft, and finding it indorsed, returned
by you on that day, will, I trust, after such a lapse of
time, account for my falling into the error. I have handed
Mr. Grant's Attorney a copy of this letter.
" I remain yowl obediently,
" S. SEARLE.
" Fetter-lane, Fleet-street, 30th May, 1832.'
"ro Mr. Briggs.'
6"rhat the said objections so made by deponent to the
said agreement have been subsequently decided to be legal
and proper objections, and the opinion of deponent thereon
confirmed by the decision of the Right Hon. the Lord
High Chancellor, in the suit instituted against the said
assignees by the said Murdo Young, who, by the decree
made and pronounced in that suit, directed that the pur-
chaser of the said shares in the said newspaper should take
and hold the same in like manner as the said Pattie];
Grant had held them under his deed of copartnership with
the said Murdo Young. And deponent saith, that if t
advice of deponent to the said assignees to sell the ail
shares to the said Murdo Young, pursuant to the ,aid
agreement he bad prepared, had been carried into effect,
we estate of the said Patrick Grant would have bee❑
henefitted to the extent of 5,0001., which, by the refusal
of the said H. S. Thornton to do, has been wholly lost to

the said estate ; and the said H. Winchester and also de
ponent were ready and willing to have sold the said shares
of the said newspaper to the said John Bell and James S.
Lomax, until it was di.covered that they were not persons
of respectable character or of responsibility sufficient to
complete the said purchase."

AFFIDAVITS AS TO CHARACTER OF LOMAX

AND SUTTON.

" James Lucett, of Harleston-terrace, Albany-road, in
the county of Surrey, Gent., saith, that he is well ac-
quainted with and personally knows James Samuel
Lomax, the person who made and filed an affidavit in the
matter of this information on or about the 3d day of Mac,
1832, and who is in such affidavit described as late of
Brompton Villa, in the county of Middlesex, but then of
Jermyn-street, St. James's, in the said county, Esquire ;
and has been informed and believes that he is a person of
low extraction and character ; and bath been informed by
him that he was some few years back either master or
assistant to his father, as master of the Racquet-ground in
the Fleet Prison—a situation which is allowed by the
Warden to be filled by such persons only as are prisoners
there, and in the most reduced circumstances ; and that
the said James Samuel Lomax at,erwards, and in the
month of March, in the year 1831, lodged at deponent's
house, called Brompton Villa, in the county of Middlesex
aforesaid ; and during his residence at this deponent's said
villa was visited by one Samuel Sutton, the person who
also made and filed an affidavit in the matter of this in-
formation on or about the 22d of May, 1832, and who
is therein described as of Curzon-street, May-fair ; and
deponent having been informed and believing the said
Samuel Sutton to have been the keeper and proprietor of
a common gaming-house in Jermyn-street aforesaid, and
to have been tried in this Honourable Court and con-
victed of fraud and conspiracy, and afterwards imprisoned
for that crime, he, deponent, objected to the said Samuel
Sutton visiting the said James Samuel Lomax at depo-
nent's said villa at Brampton aforesaid, and afterwards fre-
quently informed him of the character of the said Samuel
Sutton, and represented to him that he was a disgraceful
acquaintance for him to a,sociate with ; but that the said
Samuel Sutton having obtained an improper influence
over the said James Samuel Lomax, they both afterwards,
as deponent bath been informed and believes, joined in low
gambling transactions, and frequented the gaming booths
at different fairs and races, and led a most disgracefnl and
degrading course of life, and the said James Samuel Lomax
having insisted upon continuing his connection with the
said Samuel Sutton, and also endeavoured to introduce
low and improper characters into this deponent's said villa,
deponent was compelled to, and accordingly did, give him
notice to quit the same, which he thereupon did some
short time prior to making his said affidavit filed in this
matter. That he attended the trial of this information
for the purpose of giving evidence of the above fact, but
was not examined to prove the same."
" Phineas Davis, of Red Lion-square, in the county of
Middlesex, Sheriff's Officer, saith that he knows James
Samuel Lomax, the person who made and filed an affidavit
in the matter of this information, on or about the 3d day
of May, 1832, and who is, in such affidavit, described as
late of Brompton Villa, in the county of Middlesex, but
then of Jermyn-street, St. James's, in the said county,
Esq. ; and also knows, and is well acquainted with, said
Samuel Sutton, the person who also made and filed an
affidavit, in the matter of this inftrmation, on or about
the 22d day of May, aforesaid, and who is therein described
as of Curzon•street, May-fair; and deponent saith that
the said James Samuel Lomax and Samuel Sutton were
the associates of persons of known bad character; and
that, from his knowledge of them, the said James Samuel
Lorna: and Samuel Sutton, and their connections, he does
not believe that either of them, the said James Samuel
Lomax and Samuel Sutton, were persons of responsibility,
or are such as he would take for bail. That he has been
informed by the said Samuel Sutton, that he was con-
nected with, or concerned with, other persons, in the
keeping of a common gambling-house, in Piccadilly, and
deponent has heard and believes that he, the said Samuel
Sutton, has been tried in this Honourable Court, and con-
victed of fraud and conspiracy, and afterwards imprisoned
for that offence."

" Philip Cotton, clerk to Messrs. Praeds and Co., of
Fleet-street, London, bankers, saith, that James Samuel
Lonaax. late of Brompton Villa, in the county of Middlesex,
and of Jermyn-street, St. James's, in the said county, kept
an account with the said Messrs. Praeds and Company, as
his bankers, from the month of July, 1828, to the month
of June, 1t,31 ; and that the amount of moneys which
passed through the hands of the said Messrs. Praeds and
Co., during that period, was of small amount, and that
particularly from the Ist day of January to the 17th day
of June, in the year 1831, the tots' amount of moneys
which passed through the hands of the said Messrs Praeds
and Co., on account of the said James Samuel Lomax, was
only 1161. 7s. 15,1„ ; and that the said banking account of the
said James Samuel Lomax was closed with them on the
said 17th day of June, 1831. That the opinion of the
credit of the said James Samuel Lomax was such, that if
any draft had been presented for payment without having
effects, they would not have paid the same. That he
attended the trial of this information for the purpose of
giving evidence of the above facts, but was not examined
to prove the same."
Mr. HUMFREY and Mr. KELLY addressed the
Court on behalf of Mr. Grant and Mr. Ager, and
after remarking upon the hardship of the evidence
alluded to having been excluded at the trial, they
entered at some length into the facts stated in the
affidavits, and contended that although Mr. Grant
had used intemperate and unjustifiable language with
respect to the prosecutors, he had received what he
considered a sufficient provocation from them, and
although he might be mistaken in the motives he
attributed to those gentlemen, it was too true that
he had suffered the deepest injury, and that might
be considered sufficient punishment for the offence
of which lie had been convicted.
The defendant Bell then addressed the Court at
considerable length, and urged very strongly the
oppressive nature of the present law of libel. He
stated that himself and Mr. Grant regretted that
they had been led to use language which was intem-
perate and indefensible, but they still felt that the
conduct of the prosecutors had been so injurious to
them that they could not retract the substance of
their charges against them.

Sir JAMES SCARLETT, on the part of the prose-
cution, observed upon the hardship to which per-
sons were subjected when they came with the
highest characters to claim their Lordships' protec-
tion from a series of the most violent and unpro-
voked attacks upon their reputations. In this case,
as in many others, the defendants, who had been
convicted of the grossest libels, had assumed the
tone of complainants, and persevered to the last in
reiterating their charges, although they had been
disproved upon oath, and the great subject of com-
plaint, the sale of the paper to Mr. Young, had
been the subject of litigation in the Court of Chan-
cery, where it had been approved, and his right
of pre-eniption established by the judgment
of the Lord Chancellor. These defendants,
however, who felt themselves personally ag-
grieved in the transactions, had thought proper to
charge all the parties opposed to them with the
grossest misconduct, and had even attacked the
late Lord Tenterden for the decision he had given;
and he (Sir J. Scarlett) supposed that their Lord-
ships would be subjected to the same sort of treat
ment for the judgment they were about to pro-
nounce. He trusted, however, that no terrors of
what these defendants might say in their newspaper
would prevent their Lordships from passing such a
sentence as would prevent the publication by them
of similar libels in future.

Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE, after commenting on
the intemperate language of the libels, and stating
the general nature of the transaction, said that the
sentence of the Court was, that the defendants
Grant and Bell be imprisoned for six months, and
the defendant Ager one month, in the custody of
the Marshal of the Marshalsea.