The Sun.
London, England, 1834-05-08 00:00:00

MARYLEBONE.

Yesterday being the day appointed for the inves-
tigation of an alleged charge against four Unionists,
named John Surrey, "John Dicker, Thomas Dicker,
and Samuel Last, for intimidation, the avenues leading
to the office were crowded to excess by mechanics
belonging to the Trades' Union.
Mr. FLOWER attended on behalf of the defendants.
Mr. Balcombe, the builder, of Upper Berkeley-
street West, Connaught-square, and a Unionist in his
employ named Philip Slade, substantiated the facts
related in our paper of yesterday, which are unne-
cessary to repeat, as they must be fresh in the recol-
lection of our readers. _ _

Slade underwent a severe cross-examination by the
magistrates and the defendants' solicitor, when he ad-
mitted that he had been intimidated by some members
of the " lodge" to which he belonged, and added that
he could not take upon himself to swear whether or
not the defendants were the offenders.

Upon which Mr. HOSKINS, on the part of the ma-
gistrates, remarked, " We are of opinion that no con-
viction can take place in this case, although we are
perfectly satisfied that intimidation has been used, and
great mischief in consequenee ensued. It is, however,
our duty to decide upon the legal evidence before us,
which is not sufficiently strong to procure a conviction ;
the defendants are therefore discharged."

COURT FOR THE RELIEF- OF INSOL.

VENT DEBTORS.

The matters of the Petitions and Schedules of the Prisoners
hereinafter named (the same having been filed in the Court)
are appointed to he heard at the Court-house, in Portugal_
street, Lincoln's Inn fields, on Monday, the lath of May,

1834, at Nine o'clock in the Forenoon.
Collins, S. G., hatter, Pithay, Bristol.
Solomon, T., estate agent, Prince's-row, Pimlico.
Pittman, J. R., coal dealer, Broad-street, Bloomsbury.
White, T., hay-salesman, East-end, Finchley.
May, J., coach-maker, Park-street, Grosvenor-square.
Eastwood, J., lime-merchant, Commercial-road, Lambeth.
Jenkins, W., linendraper, Brentwood, Essex.
Winmill, W., fishmonger, Carnaby-street, Golden-square.
Wilkins, W., victualler, Turner-street, Stepney.
Pettit, J., leather-seller, Milton-street, City.
Newton, A., formerly a student-at-law, in Lincoln's Inn,
of Burley Manor, near Ringwood, Southampton.
Abraham, -S., auctioneer, Bath-buildings, Baldwin-street,

The Stafa, steamer, made the voyage from
Inverness to Glasgow last week in the short space of
38 hours 20 minutes, including stoppages.—lnverness
Courier.

Our readers may recollect the unfortunate
tithe affray at Teharagh, in the county of Limerick,
on Monday, April 28, which was alluded to a few posts
since. Notwithstanding the result of that melancholy
transaction, we are assured that the tithe-holders hive
not paid the Rev. Mr. Locke one shilling since Mr.
Vokes, the police magistrate, left the station. We
have been informed by undoubted authority, that ear-
nest solicitations, legal threats, as well as offers of
considerable abatement, had been tried by Mr. Locke,
ere he resorted to the civil and military power for pro-
tection—that the poor tithe-holders have not for a
series of years been asked to pay any tithe—and that
the greater part of the tithe now sought for is due
under composition, and by civil bills—the solvent far-
mers only have been asked to pay.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, May 7.

Mr. PEASE
_, and brought up from the Commons
a Bill to alter -and amend the former Act relating to the
Grand Junction Railway Company ; also one for main-
taining and improving certain roads in the county of Mont-
gomery ; and another private bill. They were each read
a first time.
Lord ROLLE presented a petition from Tiverton against
(as we understood) the Islington Market Bill. The noble
lord observed that the bill was not yet brought before that
house, but he was sure it would be exceedingly inconve-
nient to persons in the country, and therefore he hoped it
would not pass into a law.
The Duke of BEAUFORT presented a petition from
Monmouth against the New Beer Act.
The Duke of RUTLAND presented two petitions from
parishes in the county of Derby in favour of maintaining
the established church,

Lord DENMAN presented three petitions to the same
effect from the same county:
Lord GOSFORD presented four petitions from parishes
in the county of Suffolk, praying that the grievances un-
der which Dissenters laboured might be removed.
The Duke of CUMBERLAND said as it was now so
late, and the Lord Chancellor had not arrived (Lord
Shaftesbury being on the Woolsack), it would be better to
adjourn. To-inorrow being a holyday their lordships would
have to adjourn until Friday.
Lord PLUNKE I' said that on Friday he. should have
to submit to their lordships a bill relative to the Court of
Chancery in Ireland, and it was necessary that he should
trespass on their lordships' indulgence upon a subject which
was in a considerable degree personal to himself. He
would, however, throw himself on the indulgence of the
house, although he might in some degree be thought to
pursue rather an irregular course. .
Lord ELLENBOROUGH gave notice that he should,
on a future day, move for a return of the amount of the
expense of the attendance of counsel, witnesses, &c., in
the case of the Warwick Borough Bill for this day.
The house then adjourned to Friday.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 7.
The SPEAKER took the chair at twenty minutes past
five o'clock.
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
It was announced by the messengers from the Lords
that their lordships had agreed to the Friars or Folly (Ox-
ford) Bridge Bill, and other private bills.
Mr. C. W. WYNNE presented a petition, signed by
2,500 individuals, both lay and clerical, from Montgomery,
entreating the house to resist all changes in the established
church.
Sir D. K. SANDFORD presented five petitions from
Somersetshire against the General Registry Bill, and one
from the same place for a better observance of the Sabbath.
Mr. CARTWRIGHT presented a petition from North-
ampton, against a Mr. Holesworth ; one from Morpeth,
in favour of the General Registry Bill, and one against
the same by Mr. R. Todd, from the inhabitants of Hud-
dersfield.