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

HATTON-GARDEN.

DARING ROBBERIES AND ATTEMPTED MURDER.—Yester-
day John White and James Harrison, athletic ruffianly-look-
ing fellows, were brought from Islington station-house, in the
custody of Collier, 94, Russell, 221, and several other officers
of N division, charged by Mr. J. Watson, builder, of Windsor-
street, and Mr. R. Williams, carpenter, of Ironmonger-street,
St. Luke's, with having been concerned with others in assault-
ing them and robbing them.
The prosecutors were dreadfully bruised about the head and
body, and were in a very weakly state.
The magistrates fined each of the prisoners 5/. ; and, in
default of payment, to be committed to the House of Correction
and hard labour for two months.

THE NEW VENETIAN ROMANCE. " THE CON-
smAcy."—Fact and fiction are in this work so agreeably in-
terwoven, that it is difficult to say where history ends, and the
pure creations of the accomplished author's genius begin.
The subject is the celebrated conspiracy, in which the Spanish
Ambassador, the Viceroy of Naples, and other important per-
sonages, were the master-minds which shook Venice to its
centre. The reader is conveyed almost insensibly to the wild
shores of the Adriatic, and " the cloud-capped towers and
gorgeous palaces" of Venice, with its gliding gondolas and
moonlight lagunes. Nothing can be more attractive than the
story, or more agreeable than the descriptions.
The rough weather experienced in this neighbour-
hood throughout the week, has materially impeded.the progress
of harvest ; and in some instances, where the wheat was cut
immediately before the commencement of the storms, and has
been consequently exposed to all their fury, we fear that
serious damage will be sustained. In the neighbourhood of
Devizes, we hear, that the crops remained uninjured.—Dor-
chester Paper.

Mr. Hume alluded last nigh. L had
appeared in the newspapers, that
__ the prose-
cution instituted against the Brighton- Guardian by the
Sussex magistrates had been defrayed by the Treasury, and
that the magistrates, on commencing the prosecution, had
obtained an assurance from the Government that the costs
should be paid out of the public money. Lord Althorp said
he had not heard of any payment of the kind, nor had he
seen the statement. Mr. Spring Rice said, that when he was
Secretary of the Treasury no such payment was made. We
observe in the Sussex Advertiser a letter, dated Heathfield
Park, 30th of July, signed " Charles Blunt," detailing the
whole affair regarding the prosecution of the Brighton
Guardian, and communicating some very important particu-
lars, which want of space compels us to postpone to a future
day. Mr. C. Blunt, being unable to act to his own satisfac-
tion with gentlemen whose views of justice so essen-
tially differ from his own, has made application to
the Lord Lieutenant respectfully requesting that his name
may be erased from the commission of the peace for the
county of Sussex. Mr. Blunt states that Mr. Mabbott
and another gentleman had two conferences with Lord
Melbourne, then Home Secretary, who declined to make
the prosecution a Government one, but agreed to defray
the reasonable expenses should the Magistrates decide upon
prosecuting, and that on this being communicated to the
committee of Magistrates, Mr. Mabbott received instruc-
tions to return information to the, Home Office, that all the
Magistrates, with the exception ()Lee Mr. Gear, •no
doubt about the jury, and that were all of o ....on
that no opportunity should be lost to suppress the Guardian
newspaper. The charge is distinctly made that the prose-
cution was at the expense of Government ; but the repre-
sentation made to Government was by a self-constituted
Committee, not authorised by the Magistrates—consequently
the representation was false.—Mornin nick.
The Committee of the House of Commons o whom the
case of Mr. Daniel Whittle Harvey was referred, have
reported in favour of that gentleman. Our readers will
find the report in another column. The. Committee have
confined their inquiry to the two cases on which the
Benchers formed their opinion, and attribute the variance
of their conclusions with those of the Benchers to the im-
perfect reports of the trials, and still more to the absence
of all authority to compel the attendance of necessary wit-
nesses, or to enforce the production of essentially important
documents, which defects have in this inquiry been remedied
by the power of the Committee. Mr. Harvey obtained a great
triumph, and he is justified in the warmth he displays on
the subject in his address to the Electors of Colchester,
which our readers will find in one of our advertising co-
lumns. The Committee " express their confident hopes,
that after the examination of the whole of the evidence,
the Benchers will be induced to give Mr. Harvey the full
benefit of the present inquiry." If they do not, the worse
will it be for them ; for they are on their trial, now that Mr.
Harvey's is over. The Benchers may refuse to admit Mr.
Harvey ; but it will be difficult for them to satisfy the
public that they ought to possess irresponsible power, which,
from the very nature of it, must often be abused. In the
case of Mr. Harvey, the Committee observe, justly, that
the consequences to him in the sacrifice of a great space of
valuable time, are irreparable.—Morning Chronicle.
We will not attempt to explain tbat which we acknow-
ledge our inability to comprehend—the conduct of the
House of Lords in reference to the (so called) Poor Laws
Amendment Bill. That the Althorp-loving, dissolution-
fearing majority of the Commons should have passed this
obnoxious and unchristian measure could excite no surprise ;
they did on this as on other occasions, " the work of the
master whom they serve ;" and it would task the ingenuity
of that honest and popular personage to propose any poli-
tical paradox too startling or offensive for the robust faith
and ostrichlike digestion of his omnivorous and obsequious
adherents. From the House of Lords we are accustomed,
and indeed entitled, to expect a loftier and a purer standard
of legislation than is to be looked for from the Whig-whipped .
satellites of Lord Althorp ; and it is with a feeling of surprise,
to be equalled only by our regret, that we have witnessed
the conduct of the Conservative Peers on this important
occasion. That the selfish should be seduced, the timid
alarmed, and the superficial misled by the delusive calcula-
tions and plausible theories of the economists, is natural ;
we can understand while we lament it ; but that the vigo-
rous intellect and practical wisdom of him who already
enjoys by anticipation the immortality of his well-earned
fame should be entangled in the cobweb sophistries of a
Malthus and a Brougham, is that which we cannot under-
stand, and which we will not defend. That the same men
who so lately and so nobly answered the vulgar ribaldry
lavished upon hereditary legislators by throwing out the
Dissenters' University Admission Bill should lend the sanction
of their names to the specious sophisms and spurious
philosophy by which the Poor Laws' Amendment Bill is
upheld must be a source of unqualified regret to every sin-
cere well-wisher of our established institutions. To us it
would appear that the Conservative Peers have acted un-
der some inexplicable delusion in neglecting this opportu-
nity of affording a fresh proof of the value of their legisla-
tive ministration. By interposing their " sevenfold shield"
between the " destructive" majorities of the democratic
branch of the Legislature and their intended victims, their
Lordships would have discharged a constitutional duty ;
would have performed the function peculiarly their own,
that of moderating the one-sided and intemperate le-
gislation of the Lower House ; would have shamed
the calculating humanity of the Whigs ; would have
silenced the obstreperous vituperation of the Radicals ;
and, last not least, would have ensured the humble and
heartfelt gratitude of their less fortunate fellow-creatures.
On this occasion we look with equal sorrow on what the
Peers have done and on what they have left undone. The
Irish Tithe Bill still remains. Let us hope that by reject-
ing that scheme of sacrilege and robbery the Peers will
redeem the forfeited reputation of the Legislature ; that
the Conservative wisdom and integrity of the Upper House
will neutralize the evils arising from the negative modifica-
tions of those qualities so fatally conspicuous in the " de-
structive" majorities of the Lower, and thus vindicate at
once the honour of the British character and the "
ba-
lanced" system of the British Constitution..--Morning
Post.