The Sun.
London, England, 1833-04-22 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF-THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The motion of Mr. M. Attwood for an in-
qu;ry into the causes of the existing distress, or
rather for a change in the currency of the coun-
try, to which our own observations, and the in
definite curiosity of the public, have perhaps lent
a greater importance than the number of his sup-
porters, or the strength of their arguments, would
warrant, certainly comes on in the House of
Commons to-night. In the course of last week,
and on various former occasions, we have so
loudly denounced, and so fully demonstrated, the
miird folly and mischief of attempting again to
unsettle our monetary system, and to reconduct
us into the perilous paths of financial and com-
mercial revolution, that we feel it would be sti-
peifluous now to enter on the subject. Those
who have read with attention, and have tho-
rougliy comprehended, our previous reasonings,
will require no further arguments to resist any
attempt that may be made to-night to influence
their judgments through the medium of their
feelings. We anticipate, with certainty, that a
melancholy and appalli, g picture will bp drawn
of the " difficulties, embarrimments, and distress
of the country;" and, if it were_ the fashion to
make prophetic speeches for Members of Parlia-
ment, we might prevent the pleasure of surprise,
by presenting a perfect programme of the dis-
courses of the currency revolutionists. We know
that proof will be adduced or offered that' all the
great interests of the country are in a state ofsuf-
fering, denominated by some " excruciating, in-
tolerable, or fatal," and by others described in less
alarming characters; .that our manufactures, our
agriculture, and our trade, will be said to display
equally, in their shrunk and withered features and
dimensions, the influence of some blasting
pestilence—and that pestilence has been " Peel's
Bill." We know that a list of " prices current"
will be brought forward to prove that ever since
the fatal' period—the currency Hegira of 1819
—the money value of all commodities has been
progressively declining; that taxes and all fixed
pecuniary payments or obligations have been be-
coming proportionally oppressive—that industry
is discouraged or ruined ; that the labourer can
no longer find adequate wages, nor the employer
of labour adequate profit, from the diminished
value of the articles, which they produce, or the
want of a market for their disposal ; that our
fields are uncultivated, our rents unpaid, our
shipping rotting in our harbours, and our fac-
tories either standing still or obliged to commit
infant sacrifices by excessive working, owing to
the scarcity of money. Then we shall . hear of
the number of bushels of wheat which, at the
war prices, would pay the dividends of the na-
tional creditors, and of the increased quantity
required for the same purpose at present. All
this will end in an assurance that the one-pound
note, and, if need be, a batik restriction, is a sure
talisman to banish existing distress, and to restore
instant prosperity, by raising prices, by low-
ering the burden of taxation, and putting
money into the pockets of every industrious man
who will stretch out his hand to receive it.
Now, although we have no room to traverse
again the course of argument by which we have
before put down such absurdities, we beg to ask
the currency politicians a few plain questions.
the answer to which will probably stop them in
their headlong career. 1. As they can at pre-
sent issue as many notes above 5/. as they please,
liable to their repayment in specie on demand,
and as they are only restrained from the use of
what they would reckon a perfect currency by
being prohibited from issuing 1/. notes to
supersede the use of gold, do they propose by
demanding the latter privilege to supply by small
paper only the part of the circulation now filled
by sovereigns, without increasing the general
amount of the currency ? If this be their object,
it is plain, on their own hypothesis, that they
could not alter prices or reduce the burden of
taxation. They would have the same quantity
of money, though of a cheaper material, and
that money would bear the same relation to the
amount of transactions which it is employed to
perform or the prices of commodities for which
it is exchanged. The only difference would
be, that the interest of the gold now employed
in circulation would be saved, and that that
interest would go into the pockets of the bankers
who supplied notes for its substitute. This,
therefore, cannot be the sole or avowed object of
our currency politicians, though among them are
to be found all the country bankers, who would
pocket the large sum of interest (say a million
a-year) to which we have alluded. 2. Then,
do they intend that their 1/. notes shall be an
. addition to the currency, and that they shall in-
crease its general aggregate beyond its present
amount? The gold, of course, in this case wily
disappear as well as on the former hypothesis ;
but a greater quantity of 1/. notes will be into o-
duced than the amount of sovereigns which have
been banished. In this case, no doubt, prices
will be raised, and money obligations will he
altered in proportion to the contemplated excess
of currency above its present rate ; but what then
becomes of all the protestations of our currency
philosophers against any intended depreciation ?
We do not, say they, wish to depreciate the
currency, God forbid ! We do not desire to
take one step on the road to assignats. We
only desire relief by an additional issue of
small paper." Now, if anything is demonstrable
by human reason,—if there be any truth in the
plainest principles of arithmetic,—an addition to
the quantity of currency, commodities
.remaining
the same, must lower or depreciate its value as
regards those commodities. The two. ideas of
an increased abundance and a depreciated value
of money are as necessarily connected as' those
-of any cause or effect in the univet se. Will ans
advocate fora change of our monetary system be
hardy enough to deny this truth, or rather this
truism ? We speak not now of a commutation
of gold into rags, but of more rags than we bad
gold. 3. If depreciation, then, is intended, 07
• must be the result of the proposed
change, we ask what class of people it
can benefit except the class of debtors,
or those who owe money, and who can thus
discharge the same nominal amount of debt with
a smeller real amount of property ? This being
undeniable, and, in fact, admitted by every
• person who understands the meaning of the
terms, would it not be better to fix upon a cer-
tain rate per cent., by which all existing debts
and dividends sould be reduced, instead of

forcing the whole currency of the country to
effect, by a roundabout method, such an object
Suppose JO, 15, or 20 per cent. were to be
deducted from their payment from public and
private debts, mortgages, or dividends, woulu
not the reduction go as far as our currency poli.
cians intend to carry their depreciation ? The
.fundholder would then only receive 16s. or 18s.
for the pound in receiving the interest on his
stock, and all other pecuniary obligations would
be discharged in the same proportion. There can
be no- doubt that such a project would be a rob-
bery ; but it would be a bold, open, undisguised,
and definite robbery, the amount of which could

he estimated—the In)ustice of which could be
limited—a robbery which, from its flagrant na-
ture, could never be drawn into a precedent, and
which, from its isolated character, would lead to
no future convulsion in our currency. The
.zupporters of depreciation mean, of course, to
do the same thing, hut through a plan which
will unsettle all the relations of society, and
place us again in the circle of indefinite mone-
tary revolutions. Such are a few points on which
the Members of the Honourable House ought to
reflect IxfOre they give their vote to-night. If they
support the motion of Mr. Attwood, they in
fact declare that they desire a depreciation of our
currency—i hat they are willing again to unsettle all
contracts, and bring hack the reign of fraudulent
speculations, Bank restrictions, and panics, for
the intermediate purpose of discharging their
mortgages, defraying their debts, or paying the
national creditor with a smaller amount of pro-
perty. The Ministers should not meet such a
motion with the order of the day. They should
call, from the great majority by which they will
he supported, for such a strong expression of
opinion as will satisfy the country that no change
is to be permitted either in our standard of value
or in the present composition of our currency,—
that the reign of currency quacks is at an end,—
d that, if we long deviated from the path of
sound policy and integrity in the management of
our monetary system, we are resolved never again
to run the same hazards or to perpetrate the
same injusiice. If, after settling this great point.
a committee should still be demanded to inquire
into " the distresses of the country," we are con-
fident that the honest patriotic majority,. who
support our monetary standard will see that
such an alteration of the motion is a mere trap,
baited with national sufferings, to catch those
votes which could not be caught by the currency
juggle. They will see, and their constituents
will acknowledge, that a committee called for by
such a party, and meeting under such auspices,
will be nothing else titan a board of inquiry into
the efficacy of country 1/. notes, under whatever
pretext it may be obtained. Let us, then, hope
that the Government will display its vigour, and
Parliament its courageous wisdom in resisting
the party of currency agitators, whose exertions,
if successful, would be much more fatal to the
peace and resources of this great country than
those of the more noisy faction in Ireland, which
the Irish Coercion Bill was enacted to suppress.
Times.

We are under little apprehension as to the
result of the motion of Mr. M. Attwood this
day. We are quite aware that it would be very
convenient to many debtors in England to rid
themselves of their obligations by paying 15s.
or less in the pound. But even of those to
whom such a result would be convenient, we
trust there are few so shameless as to aid in pro-
ducing it. The evil effected by appreciation
would not be remedied by depreciation. The
sufferers, in consequence of the improvement in
in the currency, would not be the gainers by the
depreciation, but another class, while the suf.-
.erers by it would not be the gainers from the
,ormer change. It is quite true that we all of
us greatly under-rated the effects which would be
produced by the return to gold payments; but
are we to undertake the herculean task of open-
ing up all transactions from the Bank restriction
down to the present period, for nothing short of
this would be necessary ? Plain English, in
speaking of matters of this kind, is best. The
effects of Mr. Peel's Bill were not anticipated,
and the ignorance of Parliament forms its ex-
cuse. But to .depreciate the currency with a
knowledge of the effects to be produced, would
be downright robbery. We have better thoughts
of Parliament than to suppose for a moment that
any such violation of the principles of justice can
be contemplated. Once set the example of spo-
liation, and where will it end ?—Morn. Chron.
The Budget opened by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer in the first reformed Parliament af-
fords no real relief to the over-taxed industry of
the nation, nor has it, like Pandora's box, hope
at the bottom. We are now in the eighteenth
year of a general peace—(for Lord Palmerston
denies that the seizure of Dutch vessels, and
the slaughter of Antwerp, were warlike pro-
ceedings), and in this, the eighteenth year of a
general peace, what prospect is there afforded to
the country, by its liberal financiers, of a sub-
stantial alleviation of its intolerable burdens ?
None whatever. The \v hips, who, when out
of office, used to ascribe tie prodigal expendi-
ure of the State to the corruption and cupidity
of their political rivals, and threw unsparing
sarcasm and ridicule upon Castlereagh for
taunting the people with "an ignorant impa-
tience of taxation "—those very Whigs now dis-
cover that the pension list is sacred to charity ;
sinecures are honourable rewards for merit ;
extravagant salaries to public functionaries are
only a just liberality ; and a mountain of taxes,
which press the giant energies of the country to
the earth, is a weight which the people ought
to bear, if not with satisfaction, at least
with patience, looking on the whole arrange-
ment of those taxes and their pressure upon
the productive industry as the contrivance
of financial wisdom, which the rash hand of
innovation ought not to disturb. Yet we are of
opinion that it any additional argument were re-
quired beyond those already advanced for con-
ceding Mr. M. Attwood's motion, which was
postponed to this day, for an inquiry into the
causes of the distress of the country and the
mode of remedying it, it is the Chancellor's
budget. W hat is afforded to the country by
that financial plan in the way of a remission of
taxation it is a mockery to call relief. When the
commerce of the country langui4ies—when its
manufactures cost humanity a dreadiul price in
the sufferings of the multitudes of infant slaves,
whose " cheap labour" is to countervail the
effects of heavy taxation—when the farmers pay
their rents and taxes out of their capital, and
their poor rates rise as their prices decline—
when a dense and destitute peasantry look with
evil eye on the abundance that mocks their
misery, and are almost in a state of servile war
—when these and other calamities indicate the
rapid decline of England's prosperity, it is quite
burlesque to talk of affording the country relief
by the repeal of such taxes as those upon tiles
and taxed carts! We should like to know what
quantity of tiles and taxed-carts we export, and
now tar the remission of taxation on them will
enable us to turn to our advantage the losing
game of " free trade." But the Chancellor of
the Exchequer says, I have relieved the cotton
manufacture by taking off' a portion of the duty
on the raw material. It is true a portion of that
most injurious tax is to be taken off; but it is only
the additional portion, which with extraordinary
tatuity the Noble Lord laid upon the raw ma-
terial since he came into office. An advocate
for .• free trade," like the sagacious Mr. Poulett
Thomson, he oppressed the English manufac-
urer with legislative burdens while he was taking
Away from him legislative protection. As to the
duty upon soap, that tax upon the cleanliness,

and, consequently, upon the health of the poor,
his Lordship could only make up his mind to
reduce it by one-half, which leaves the expen-
sive machinery for its collection still in existence
to swallow up a considerable part of the produce
of the other half. Indeed, the only items of
our manufactures which he relieves altogether
from taxation, are the tiles and taxed carts. Even
in the article of the advertisement duty, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, while affording
some relief to the public, complicates the subject
so as with a very moderate remission of duty to
create the greatest possible quantity of trouble.
If he had remitted a portion of the tax upon all
advertisements, having under a certain number
of lines, the rate of duty to be paid could be
easily ascertained ; but not so when the amount
of duty to be paid depends upon whether the
advertisement has been inserted for the first, se-
cond, or third time, which must increase very
much the labour of clerks both at newspaper
offices and at the Stamp office. There is no more
certain characteristic of a financier of small talents
than a love of complexity. He thinks that in pro-
portion as his plans are difficult they will be thought
to be ingenious. But as to the as essed taxes,
has he not given substantial relief On thAt point?
Let the public answer that question. The Lon-
don electors who voted "fur Sir John Key and
the repeal of the assessed taxes," will hardly con-
sider that taking off the tax upon the windows
of shops, and show-rooms, and warehouses, is
an equivalent for what Sir John undertook to
procure for them when he volunteered to become

ilie champion of the " total repeal." His speech
and votes in favour of martial law, and of almost
every Ministerial measure, have not 'raised him
in the opinion of his constituents, to whom he
liberally pledged himself; and if he does not
now come forward and thoroughly redeem his

pledge as to the assessed taxes, we imagine that
few will envy him his reception at the hustings
of another election. We may say again that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer's budget is the
strongest argument that can be adduced in sup-
port of Mr. Attwood's motion, which, we trust,
he will not allow Government to induce him
to postpone any longer. The distress of the
country is, unhappily, too manifest in every
quarter to allow the hardiest sycophants of Go-
vernment to dispute its existence. As the finan-
cial plans of Ministers offer no relief, it becomes
more necessary than ever to inquire into
that distress, and ascertain what other mode
there is of relieving it. Constituents will in-
quire hereafter what the votes of their repre-
sentatives were on this question. It will afford
another trial of the character of a reformed Par-
liament.—Mornin€, Herald.

It will be seen from the proceedings of the
House of Commons last night, that Mr. Attwood,
as we had anticipated, having given way, Lord
Althorp was enabled to bring forward his long-
looked-for financial statement for the year. Upon
this statement there will be as many opinions out of
doors as there are taxes to be reduced, and persons
on whom they press with more er less severity. In
the House, it appears to have been, on the whole,
received with considerable satisfaction ; but we
question greatly whether the public voice will re-
spond to that of the Reformed House of Commons
—riot because the Budget is a bad Budget—not
because the taxes to be reduced, or abolished, are

not taxes which ought to have been both reduced
and abJlished—but because the scheme betrays no
vigour of intellect, and, with two exceptions, will
not very greatly benefit any class of the community.
The proposed reduction of taxation is as follows, and
after having stated it, we shall take the liberty of
giving our opinion of each, as they occur in order.
1. Tiles—whole duty 37,000

Marine Insurance—estimated diminution lOO,OOO
Advertisements—ditto

4. Assessed Taxes—Reduction of House and Window

Duty on Shops
5. Cotton—Reduction of additional duty imposed in 1631 300,000
6 Soap— (half present duty)

593,000

1,349,000
Estimated return on Soap

Probable loss to revenue 1,056,000
Surplus for year ending 1834

Estimated surplus after the above reductions

516,000

The abolition of the duty on tiles, amounting to
only 37,0001., is a thing not to be spoken of seriously
—its very nonentity is an argument against it, and
the only wonder is, how it should have been permit-
ted to find a place in the book of the tax-gatherer.
It has all the features of a bad tax, and is justly sent
to sleep with other oonentities of financial creation,
of which no one would have thought but one who
was driven by actual necessity, or sheer stupidity, to
its imposition. The tax on Marine Insurances
has proved itself to be a most unjust and
impolitic tax, and it is now reduced, because
its enormity has driven the owners of vessels
to effect their insurances elsewhere than in
this country, and the tax had, in consequence, failed
to be as productive as it had formerly been. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer has shewn his good
sense in this reduction, and the shipping interest will
no doubt be proportionably grateful ; but we think
the reduction might have gone much farther, and
proved thereby more beneficial to the public as
well as to the revenue. Thirdly, the proposed re-
duction of the duty on advertisements will unquess
' tionably prove a great benefit to the public in various
ways; but the plan wants simplicity, and we fear,
will give rise to more trouble and annoyance be-
tween the newspapers and the Stamp-office than is
required, either for the accommodation of the public
or the benefit of the revenue. A great boon is un-
questionably given to the proprietors of newspapers
in the proposed maintenance of the same scale of
duty on all advertisements, u heftier they be long
or short; but an injustice is thereby done to the
public, and it appears to us, besides, that there
exists neither propriety or necessity for re-
duc►ng the duty in proportion as advertise-
mews are repeated. We put it, in fact, to
Lord Aithorp, as a matter of conscience, whether
it would not have been better to have adhered
to his original plan of imposing a' duty of one
shilling on small, and of one shilling and sixpence on
long, advertisements, than to have adopted that
which he has now announced? We doubt not,
however, that the scheme will be modified.
Fourthly, the Assessed Taxes—and here there is
oo virtual relief, although nearly a quarter of a mil-
lion is set down for reduction. A port►on of the
duties on houses and windows, having shops or
warehouses attached to them, is proposed to be re•
duced along with some stoatl items belonging to the
head of assessed taxes, which ought never to have
found their way into the statute book; but what
will be the relief to the public ? None, literally none,
compared with what it had a right to expect. On 1)
think of 244,0001. being spread over the whole mass
of shopkeepers in the United !Kingdom, and what is
the benefit to each from the reduction to be made
to them? We answer again, nothing—literally
nothing 1 It will not be felt in the reduction of the
price of any one article sold to the public; nor will
it even tend to enrich the shopkeeper, which would
form some apology for it at the expense of the
public. We hesitate nut, in consequence, to pro-
nounce this as the least useful of all the proposeu
reductions, as well as the least popular. Why not
'educe the window duty or the house duty entirely,
instead of Proposing aieduction which is fettered w itti
all ti,e expense of collection, and affords no substan-
tial relief ? The public must be again on the alert,
and press upon Lord Althorp the propriety of alter-
ing this part, at least, of his financial ►cheme. The
reduaion of the additional duty imposed on raw
cotton in 1831 is judicious, and the observations of
Lord Althorp upon this subject, entitled to every
credit. The tax, however, ought never to have been

Imposed. we earns now to the last attlolo of all.
the reduction of the duty on Soap , and here there
is no ground for cavil. The reduction will greatly
benefit the public, as well as tend to put down
smuggling in the article, which has been carried to
a great extent. The total of the abolitions and re-
ductions amounts to upwards of a million; and far
be it from us to say that the articles to which they
apply, have not been selected with the most heart-
felt desire to afford relief where relief appeared to
be most wanted ; but we must observe, at the same
time, that the Budget, as a whole, has two, if not
three, capital and unpardonable faults—first, it does
not carry reduction far enough, as, for instance, in
the duties on newspapers, where it might have been
carried both with benefit to the public and to the
Revenue—and, secondly, in the matter of the
assessed taxes, it pretends to give a relief
which will not be felt by the public, and which
nevertheless deprives the revenue of nearly a quarter
of a million. We might add a third, and an equally
egregious blemish, in the Budget, and that is, that
a surplus of upwards of half a million is expected
to accrue from the remaining taxes, after the above
reductions; and why ? We ask again, why?
Would it not he much better, as well as more con-
sonant to the principles professed by Lord Althorp,
to have reduced taxes—the assessed taxes for
example—to this amount, than to have had it
lying dormant in the Exchequer; for as to a reduc-
tion of the national debt, the thing is utterly ridi-
culous—a humbug—a fraud-- an imposition on
public credulity ? Before concluding, it is but just
that we should do justice to his Majesty's Ministers,
as well as to the public and to our own feelings.
They have nobly implemented their pledges of re-
duction, as the official statements in another column
will satisfactorily show—they pledge themselves to
pursue the same course in future; and if their plans
of finance have not met with our approbation, and
do not meet with that of the puhlic, we are con-
fident that the fault rests, not with their inclination,
but with their fears of the result upon the revenue.
The public will, in consequence, judge charitably
of their short-comings ; while we feel assured, at
the same time, that it will lay such a case before

them, in the matter of the assessed taxes, as to
induce them to adopt a much larger measure of re-
duction. We shall return to the subject on Mon-
day.—Morning Advertiser.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer last night
brought forward his financial statement for the year,
from which it appeared that tbere is a surplus of re-
venue sufficient to admit of a reduction of taxes to
the extent of 1,349,0001.; but to admit of this re-
duction only upon the condition, which is so plainly
implied in the statement of the Noble Lord that
he did not think it necessary to mention it, that the
National Debt shall remain at its present amount,
without any attempt whatever on the part of Go-
vernment to diminish it. We are strongly of opi-
nion that the application of the surplus revenue
which the Chancellor of the Exchequer calculates
upon during the next year to the redemption of a
portion of the national debt, and the support of
public confidence and credit, would have done more
to relieve the existing pressure upon the country,
than the repeal of an equal amount of taxes, how-
ever judiciously selected. The process of reducing
taxes has now been carried on with considerable vi-
gour for several years, to the impoverishment, and as
it now appears, finally to the extinction of the sinking
fund; yet he must be a bold man who would under-

take to say that by this process the general condi-
Aon of the country has been sensibly improved. It
is probdble that the result would have been more

favourable to the immediate prosperity of the
country, and certain that it would have been more
conducive to its permanent strength, character, and
security, had reductions of the national debt been
effected to an amount equ3l to that of the taxes
thus abolished or mitigated. The latter operation
is, however, more immediately conducive to the
popularity of the Ministers of the day; and it can
excite no surprise that when the popularity of Mi-
nisters is at stake the permanent welfare and prospe-
rity of the country should be overlooked. We
cannot compliment the Chancellor of the Exchequer
upon the acuteness or penetration with which he
has selected the taxes for reduction, or concur

with him in the expectation that the relief
thus afforded will be much felt or highly valued
by the community at large. The relief afforded
by these remissions is of a nature in every in-
stance, with the exception of those of the taxes
upon soap and raw cotton, to benefit, not the
general body, but merely particu'ar classes of the
people. Who will benefit by the remission of the

duty on tiles to the amount of 37,0004 ? Those
only who have occasion to build new houses or to
new roof their present dwellings. The only way,
indeed, in which it is possible that the repeal of a
tax upon materials employed in building should ope-
. .

rate extensively as a relief would be by diminishing
the rental and the value of the houses that are

already built. The amount of the tax is plainly
much too small for so large a consequence to ensue
from its repeal; and, if this effect could be produced

by it, the a- dvantagewould be conferred upon a very

extensive division-of society at the expense, not of
the Exchequer, but of another division of society
one degree less extensive. How few men again,
compared with the great bulk of society, have

ever occasion in the whole course of their lives
to pay for a newspaper advertisement ; how
much fewer have any inducement to pay for the
insertion of the :same advertisement a second time;
how much fewer still to advertise the same matter
more than twice ? The sphere of relief in this case
is very narrow to begin with, and as the relief
grows more sensible the elide of its operation con-
tracts. It is foolish thus to give away money from
the Exchequer for the benefit of a few. Would it
not have been much better to take off at once the
whole duty upon soap, leaving the other taxes in-
cluded in this budget of relief as they are ? Little
direct benefit can indeed accrue to the country from
these abatements of taxation; and, implying, as they
do, a total abandonment on the part of the Govern-
ment of the Conservative policy of reducing in time
of peace the debt contracted during war, they can
scarcely fail to diminish public confidence, and thus,
by patalising enterprise and withdrawing employ-
ment from labour, they will probably inflict in-
directly upon the community an injury more than
tquivatent to any positive advantage they can be
supposed to confer.—Morning Post.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, APRIL 20.

PEARY V. FLEMING.

Mr. GODSON moved for a rule to show cause why
a verdict with 1001. damages should not be entered
'or the plaintiff in this cause, which was tried at
Guildhall, before Lord Lyndhurst, at the sittings
,tier last Hilary term, when a verdict was found for
the defendant. The motion was made with leave of
the Noble Lord. It was an action to recover back the
Amount of a deposit made on the purchase of a pub-
iic-house.---Rule Nisi granted.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, APRIL 20,

:MEYER AND ANOTHER V. HOLMES.

This was an action brought by the plaintiffs, who
are merchants at Birmingham, against the defendant,
4 retired coach-maker, to recover the amount of two
bills of exchange, one for 5001. and the other lot
3004 The cause wa, tried at the London sitting,
after last Michaelmas term, before Mr. Justice
Gazelee, when it appeared that a person named
Pearsall, who was married to the defendant's augh-
ter, had been agent for the plaintiffs, and as such
had become indebted to them. The 3001. bill was
admitted to have been given by the defendant on
account of, and as security for, Pearsall, aml there-
fore there was no dispute as to their right to recover
for the amount of that; but it was contended that
the 5001. bill was a direct accommodation or loan
from the defendant to the plaintiffs. On this point
here was a great deal of documentary and other
evidence, and the jury decided that the defendant
was not liable for it, and therefore only returned a

millet far ths plaintiff far ti-ttl aresunt df the
3001. hill.

Mr. Sergeant SPANKIE last term obtained, on be-
half of the plaintiffi, a rule to show cause why the
verdict should not be set aside and a new trial had,
on affidavits stating that the line of defence set up
by the defendant came upon the plaintiffs by surprise
Mr. Sergeant JONES to-day showed cause against
the rule.

The COURT thought, without pronouncing any
opinion on the case, that the plaintiffs were en-
titled to have it further investigated, upon their
paying the costs of the former trial.

CONSISTORY COURT, APRIL 20.

BAGSTER, FALSELY CALLED NEWTON, BY HER COM-

MITTEE, AGAINST NEWTON.

This was a suit of nullity of marriage promoted
under the direction of the Court of Chancery, by
Rosa Matilda Mary Bagster (acting by her mother),
against Raymond Darcy Newton, falsely calling
himself the husband of Miss Bagster, by reason of
her ►►nsoundness of mind at the time of his pre-
tended marriage, and by reason of fraud and circum-
vention practised against Miss Bagster by Mr. New-
ton and his family.
The libel consisted of 48 articles, detailing the
facts and circumstances which came out in the course
of the inquiry under the writ de lunatico inquirendo,
and which must still be fresh in the recollect►on of
the public, relating to the conduct and character of
Miss Bagster prior to the alleged marriage, and to
the marriage itself, which took place at Springfield,
or Gretna-green, on the 22d of April, 1832. An
appearance had been given by Mr. Newton at the
commencement of the su't, but he had given in no
plea, nor had he administered any interrogatories to
the witnesses (in number 34), nor did he appear
now either personally or by counsel.
The KING'S-ADVOCATE, on behalf of Miss
Bagster, contended that the evidence plainly showed
that the elopement was the result of a conspiracy on
the part of the Newton family, and prayed the
Court to pronounce the marriage null and void ab
initio ; but, he further observed, the Court, with
such full and clear evidence of fraud and circumven-

tion, would not do justice unless it condemned Mr.
Raymond Darcy Newton in the costs.

br. ADDAMS- followed on the same side.

Dr. LusHINGToN was clearly of opinion that the
marriage was null and void, and it was only neces-
sary for him to say a few words on the question of
costs. The Learned Judge thought it was impos-
sible for one instant to doutt that the rule of con-
demning in costs ought to apply to such a case as
this ; and he only regretted that conduct of this
kind could-be visited by this Court with no heavier
punishment.
Marriage pronounced null and void, with costs
against the defendant.
It is remarkable that exactly one year has elapsed
between the elopement and the sentence of nullity.

COURT OF EXCISE, APRIL 20.

SEIZURE OF AN ILLEGAL GLASS FACTORY.-EXTEN•

SIVE FRAUD ON THE REVENUE.
THE KING V. WILLIAM CANE.

The defendant was charged upon an excise in-
formation for bring unlawfully in possession of and
conducting a private and illicit factory for the ma-
nufacture of glass,—the penalty 1001.
.. .—....

Mr. MAYow, the Crown solicitor, called William
Burgess and other excise officers, from whose evi-
dence it appeared they went to a house in High-
street, Mile-End, New-town. Two of them effected
an entrance at the back by passing through the ad-
joining house, whilst the other kept watch at the
front door, and heard a sudden noise as of men
men rushing away. In the premises they found 671 b.
of manufactured glass, a press-mould fur making it (in
a hot state, having evidently been recently used), and
the usual materials for the manufacture, all of which
they seized. The defendant was taken into custody
in the house, not having been able to make his
escape, and was conveyed before a Magistrate, by
whom he was convicted in the usual penalty of 301,
which being unable to pay, he was sent to prison for
three months.

The glass mould was here produced and corre-
sponded ‘Aith the manufactured..glass.
The COURT condemned the goods seized, but re-
mitted the penalty of 1001., us the defendant had
suffered imprisonment.