The Sun.
London, England, 1832-09-08 00:00:00

SPIRIT 01: THE PUBLIC JOURNALS!:

ALD 13AILEY.7(TH/S DAY.)

OLD CO URT.

John Wilson, aged 20, a waterman, and George
Towers, aged 30, a sweep, were indicted for assaulting
John Paget, and stealing from his person a watch.
It appeared that on the day laid in the indictment the
prosecutor, a young man recently from the country, was
accosted in the street by the prisoner Wilson, who asked
him what part of the country he came from, and he re-
plied, from Devizes. Wilson immediately said he came
from the same place, and invited the prosecutor to go to a
public-house, where he would meet with several of his
countrymen. The prosecutor went with him, and in the
public-house they wet a woman and several other persons,
including the other prisoner Towers. There they pre-
vailed upon him to toss several times for liquor ; as a
matter of course, he lost each time. Thinking he was
in bad company and being cheated, he wished to leave
the house, but the prisoners and the others prevented
him, by sitting on each side of him, and on his
expressing his determinatio❑ to leave, one of the men
charged him with having cheated them, and Towers struck
him a blow on the side of the head. He was then hustled
by the party of his watch, and the whole party left the
house. He gave information to the police, who succeeded
in apprehending the prisoners.
The Jury found the prisoners Guilty.
James Wyatt, a young man of very respectable appear-
ance, was indicted for stealing a gelding, a saddle, and
bridle, the property of Mr. Samuel Daniels, a farmer, of
Holy Court Farm, ❑ear Witney, in Oxfordshire.
Mr. CLARKSON stated the case for the prosecution.
The prosecutor stated he had an aunt living at Witney,
in Oxfordshire, and he used to put his horse up there when
he went to Witney market. On the 19th July, on put-
ting his horse up there, he saw the prisoner, who was
lodging at his aunt's. He asked witness if he would sell
his horse, and he said he did not how. On the 24th he
came to witness's house and saw the horse, but nothing
was done. On the 31st he came again and asked to try
the horse. Witness allowed him to try the horse,
on condition of his not going too far. Witness
walked with him (the prisoner riding) for about
half a mile, when the prisoner proposed to ride
as far as the village of Falder, which was then about a
wile distant, and witness allowed him. The prisoner then
walked the horse out of witness's sight. This was about
half-past 5 in the afternoon, and from that time witness
never saw the prisoner nor the horse until the 11 th of
August at Tottenham.

Mr. Bowis, landlord of the Black Boy, Tottenham,
stated that about 2 o'clock on Saturday the 4th of August
the prisoner rode on horseback into witness's yard, and
asked for accommodation for himself and horse, and also

the charge for keeping his horse six days, and witness said
125., which sum was agreed upon. Prisoner asked wit-
nes's opinion of the horse, and whether it was worth 201.
Witness said it was worth from that to 251. The prisoner
asked if witness would buy him, and witness replied, he
was not in want of such a horse, but asked what was the
lowest sum be would take, He said the lowest he woul
take would be under 14/. The son of a neighbour named
Dorkins came into the yard, and witness recommended the
prisoner to him. The prisoner remained at witness's
house until Monday night, when the constable took him
into custody.
J. Foster, a constable, apprehended the prisoner at
the Black Boy, in consequence of information he received.
The prisoner at first did not know witness was a constable,
and treated bins as a horse dealer. Witness talked to him
about the purchase of the horse, which the prisoner said
was too big for him, and he wanted to part with it.
Witness went to the stable to look at it, and asked him
the price ; he said 25/. Witness said the price did not
suit him, and that his price would be about 141. (knowing
that he had offered the horse previously for that sum.)
The prisoner said he had had the horse ever since he was
two years old, and that he would go quietly in harness.
Witness, and his companion Fowler, a constable, afterwards
took the prisoner into custody, on suspicion of stealing the
horse. On searching the prisoner there was only a shil-
ling in money found on him.
Mr. Bowis, on being recalled, stated that the prisoner,
while he was at the Black Boy, paid for nothing he had.
The officer was recalled, and produced a padlock, several
keys, a silk purse, and several duplicates, which he found
on the prisoner. Two of the duplicates were dated the
2d and 4th of August ; the former for a coat, waistcoat, and
trowsers, pawned in Oxford•street, and the other for seven
razors, pawned in Bishopsgate-street.
John Fowler, a constable, corroborated the preceding
witness's testimony. On the road from the magistrate's

house., after his committal, the prisoner said,—." Well, I
am very glad I am nabbed for this, or it might have been
worse ; shall I he hanged for it?"
The prosecutor identified the horse, saddle, and bridle
as his property.
. .

The prisoner stated, in his defence, that it was his in-
tention to have sent the bridle and saddle, and the price of
the horse, back to the prosecutor.
Mr. Baro❑ BAYLEY having summed up the evidence,
said the point for the consideration of the jury was, whether
when the prisoner obtained possession of the horse, it was
his intention to convert it to his own use, and, in forming
their judgment, they should inquire whether the prisoner
bad any possible means of paying for it.
The jury found the prisoner Guilty.

Joseph Ramon de Sustacha, a captain of a Spanish
ship, aged 43, was indicted for maliciously cutting Wil-
liam Palmer, with intent to do him some bodily harm.
William Palmer stated, that on the 9th July he was
master of the sloop Deborah, lying abreast of Union
Stairs, alongside the ship Thetis, from which he was
taking linseed to put on board the Deborah. A Spanish
vessel was lying inside the Thetis. At low water the
Spanish vessel touched the Deborah, and at flood tide the
Spanish vessel came up to the quarter of the Deborah.
Witness, on looking over the Deborah's quarter, saw no
fender down, and he put one down; the top part of
the fender touched the paint work of the Spanish
ship. The prisoner was on board the Spanish ship,
and appeared to be the master or mate. When
witness put the fender down, four or five of
the prisoner's people came on board of the De-
borah. Witness, not knowing what they were going to
do, put his hand on the lashing of the fender, and said the
lashing and the fender were his. The prisoner spoke to
the men from his own ship, but not in English. None
of the prisoner's people spoke in English. He spoke to
one of his people, who brought a hatchet, which the priso-
ner took, reached over the bulwarks, and struck once at
the fender. Witness put a handspike on the fender to
prevent the lashings being cut. The prisoner then drew
back two or three feet, and with both hands holding the
handle of the hatchet, aimed a blow at witness's head.
Witness, seeing the blow coining, stooped to avoid the
blow, putting his band on his head, and the blow took
effect and wounded witness in the back part of the head,
which was directly covered with blood. Witness had
not spoken at all to the prisoner,
Cross-examined by Mr. ADOLPH U s—Witness was
about three feet from the fender when the blow was given.
Did not know that the prisoner's ship had been newly
painted, and that witness's fender injured the paint. Di-
rectly after receiving the wound witness went to Mr.
Barry's counting-house, but never offered if be were paid
21. he would go no farther in the matter. Witness's hat was
cut through, hut he bad not brought it to produce in
Court. Witness's mate was witness to the transaction ;
but he had not brought him forward.
William Thompson, a seaman on board the Deborah,
gave similar testimony.
Mt. Robert Bowie, a medical gentleman, stated that he
examined the wound on the prosecutor's head, and found it
only a cut or incision in the skin, and not very serious.
Cross.examined—The blow could not have been given
with much violence.
Josheph Butler, a Custom-house officer stated that be
was on board the Thetis. Saw the prisoner aim the blow
with the hatchet ; but did not see it alight on the prose-
cutor's head. He could not say whether the blow was
aimed at the prosecutor or at the lashing of the fender.
John Patmore, a Custom-house officer, was on board
the prisoner's ship, and saw the prisoner strike one blow
with the hatchet with both hands, but could not tell at
what he aimed, and directly afterwards he heard the pro-
secutor cry out, " You have cut my head."
The prisoner, through the medium of an interpreter,
said he was perfectly innocent, and had brought witnesses
to prove it.

The prisoner's mate deposed, that when the prosecutor
put the fen.ler over his ship, it came in contact with the
newly-painted work of the Spanish ship, upon which the
prisoner, by signs and in broken English, intimated to him
to take away the fender, which he refused to do; the pri-
shoi:eiwarta,hen called for an axe to cut the lashing, but the
prosecutor leaning over the vessel, the prisoner laid the
axe on his own bulwarks, and the prosecutor, in raising
came in contact with the edge of the axe. The
prisoner, as captain of the vessel, was, a mild and humane
man to his crew. The prisoner made no blow at all at
the prosecutor with the axe. The witness swore positively
that the prisoner did not strike a blow at anything with
the axe in both hands, but held the axe, and threatened
to cut the lashings if the fender were not lowered.
Another witness corroborated the preceding testimony.
154 r. Justice PATTESON here put it to the Jury, whether
they wished the case to proceed further, as from the na-
ture of the wound it was not very probable that the blow

could have bean atmed with any great vloietlea ; and In.
deed the more probable case wa•, that the wound was
caused by accident, and that the object of the prisoner was
not to do any bodily harm to the proaecutorp but to cut
away the I telling of the fender.
The Jury found tbe prisoner Not Guilty. _

Mr. ADOLPHUS thought it right to observe, that the
prisoner 'appeared to lake his trial under recognizances,
having been discharged by Habeas Corpus, and that there
were no less than 26 witnesses in attendance to give him
a character (str.onz whom au the Spanish Consul) for
integrity and humanity.
The prisoner, on leaving the dock, was warmly congra-
tulated by a numbs r of respectable gentlemen who knew him.

We have repeatedly mentioned that the expi-
ration of the Bank Charter, and the question of
its renewal, would involve an examination of
the whole subject of our currency. It is on this
account that the discussion has become of more
importance at the present moment than at former
periods, when no idea was entertained of alter-
ing the privileges of the institution, and when
the whole negotiation between the public and
its directors, related to the extent of the bonus
to be granted on renewal. It was not then sup•
posed possible that the nation could dispense
with the services of an establishment which had
existed nearly from the time of the revolution—
and if it was to be preserved, it was supposed
impossible that it could exist without the enjoy-
ment of those exclusive rights which had been
conferred on its infancy, and which had been
continued, as necessary, in every stage of mature
existence. So far from acting like the Govern-
ment of the United States of America, in con-
sidering age as any objection to a renewal of the
charter, and therefore abolishing a flourishing
and useful concern, as they did in 1811, and
threaten to do at the present moment (with a
still more prosperous institution, which originated
in 1816), our former Administrations pleaded
antiquity in favour of stability, and if' they got a
small loan for less interest, or without any in-
terest, they were satisfied to grant a lease of
twenty years more, to the liberal Bank of
England. It must be admitted, in their
favour, that, before the year 1797,—the year
of the Restriction Act,—there was less
necessity for requiring a change, and less ground
for demanding an inquiry. The Bank before
that time had acted in its proper capacity of a
Bank : it had issued its notes as " promises to
pay," and not as payment ; it was not yet con-
verted into the King's Mint, nor had the grow-
ing excess of business in the country, and the
instability of the country banks, as regulated by
its restrictions on their partnerships, developed
the full mischiefs of its monopoly. But when
we speak of the present opportunity as one
which calls for, or admits, the consideration of
the whole question of our currency, we must
never for a moment be understood as insinuating
that the Bank Committee or Parliament are
required to re-open or reconsider the settlement
of 1819. Indeed, in the report of the com-
mittee we are glad to see that little inquiry took
place on that part of the subject, and that no
alteration of our monetary system is likely to he
promoted by any evidence which was adduced.
We allude entirely therefore to the system of
banking, and the employment of paper credit on

its present footing, arid ;sith its present liabilities.
That, however, is a very wide field. The in-
quiry, as regards the Bank of England, involves
the questions-1. Whether, if its charter is to
be renewed at all, the establishment shall con-
tinue as heretofore to be the sole bawl: of issue

in the metropolis, and for a large circle round
it. 2. Whether, if continued in the pos-
session of this privilege, it shall still he al-
lowed to pursue its private business, and be-
placed under no control except that of its own
private interests. 3. Whether, if Government
either establishes a national bank for the exclusive
management of the currency, independent of the
Bank of England, or permits several j,)int stock
banks to be formed, the present Bank shall con-
tinue to be the Government Paymaster, and to
enjoy the emoluments thence derived. 4.Whether
the Bank of England, and all other banks of is.
sue in the kingdom, should not be required to
insert the state of their affairs at intervals in the
Gazette, or to render a knowledge of them in
some other way accessible to the public by quarterly
or monthly reports. And 5. Whether all the
country banks, like the Bank of England, should
not be obliged to invest capital to the amount of
their issues in the public funds or in Exchequer
Bills. All these topics are adverted to in diffe-
, rent parts of the voluminous evidence taken by
the Committee. There is scarcely one unpre-
judiced or disinterested witness who approves of
the present or late management of the Bank in
respect to the currency, or who does not give,
in referring to its constitution and practice, the
strongest reasons for distrusting its discreet or
skilful exercise of such a power. In the evi-
deuce of Mr. Easthope, inserted yesterday, he
is quite, explicit in showing that the interest
or the views of the Directors, as bankers, are
often opposed to their interest or discretion as
issuers of notes, or superintendents of a paper
Mint for the supply of the nation with money.
The following extract will sufficiently explain the
opinion of this witness, which is confirmed by
that of several others :
" What is your opinion respecting the expedient of re-
newing the charter of the Bank of England with its pre-
sent exclusive pi ivileges ?—My opinion is decidedly against
the exclusive privileges of the Bank of England.
" What is your reason for that opinion ?-1 conceive
that they are injurious to the public interest, on princip'e
as well as in practice; on principle, because I conceive
that the principle which would he safest to the public in-
terest would comprise small profits, but the system of the
Bank is to make large profits,—and in order to secure
that, they appear to me to have lost sight of tie principles
necessary for the public safety. This i 3 strongly illus-
trated in their practices, particularly in 1825, and also, I
believe, subsequently. Previous to the year 1825, the
issues of the Bank were very large, unnecessarily and in-,
jutiously so, and then suddenly contracted in a way to be
ruinously destructive.
" Then it is your opinion that the Batik has been more
guided with a view of securing large profits than with a
view of doing what would be best for the public interest?
—I think that must be manifest from the circumstance
of the Bank being choked up with securities that cannot
be made available to them in case' of necessity. Same of
the great evils that have happened have arisen from the
Bank being thus ohoked up with a species of security,
which, if there was a necessity of availing itself of, it
could not do, and the attempt to do so is necessarily
ruinous to individuals, and destructive of public interests."
The Honourable Gentleman afterwards makes
a very valuable suggestion, as a guide to the 13ank
for contracting their issues before they are warn-
ed of the necessity of doing so by the export of
their treasure ; but this suggestion, like others,
m
bound to the
o:pdraice"iiaolyyr s
tootno
those 10e onk
obwowo•tilitlyl d
interests,o bfeth et
of the public
as a secondary consideration. In fact, the duties
hi
rropi,rvi
of the Directors are often incompatible and con-.
tradictory as regulators of the national currency
and agents for their own corporation. In their'
capacity as finance ministers, their object should
be to prevent all fluctuation in the value of mo-
ney, and to make that their sole business and
study,—in their capacity as bankers, their object
is to make as much profit as possible, consistently
with their final security. In their character as
managers for their own establishment, they are
bound to resist the Minister of the day when he
asks for any accommodations which might en-
danger their stability,—in their relation to the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, as hankers to the
State, they must not be prevailed upon by his
Arguments or his menaces to yield to his de-
mands. Had the Bank of England been of a less
equivocal character in 1797, would it have been
brought to the brink of insokancy, and have
precipitated the nation on a course of ruin by
the influence of Mr. Pitt ? Tbcy are told oc-

e 4.4-•
casionallyi tirat They must' support public credit,'
add hence they acquite the assurance that they',
are public, but irresponsible, agents, while they
are serving their private interests. Even Mr.
Glyn admits that " there has been occasionally
an anxiety to increase the issues of Bank-notes,
which probably may have occasioned these fluc-
tuations, with a corresponding desire existing,
on the part of the country bankers at the same
time." The same witness allows that we have
no security against the return of the panic of
1825 by the continuance of the existing system,
as the following question and answer will show :
You have said that the system of the Bank, and of
banking generally, does not requite any very material al-
teration ; do you conceive that we are at any time safe
from a recurrence of the events of 1825, when it is noto-
rious that the Bank was very nearly drained of cash ?—I
am not aware of the possibility of framing any check upon
the management of the Bank, so as to prevent altogether
the chance of its recurrence ; much must always depend
upon the management of the Bank, as must be the case
with any other public bodies in whose hands the govern-
ment of the circulation remains."
The currency of the country banks is said by
Mr. Glyn to have improved since the sufferings
and alarms of the period alluded to, but the cur-
tailment of the Bank monopoly—so unwillingly
conceded by the Directors in 1826—which per-
mits banks on more stable principles to be
formed beyond a circle of 65 miles round the
metropolis, has not produced the effect that was
expected. The cause of this fact deserves in-
quiry on the present occasion, and we have no
doubt that the remedy will be found easy. In
the mean time it will be seen, that it is not found
in the establishment of branches of the Bank
itself, from which Lord Liverpool anticipated so
great advantages, and which the Directors, no
doubt, considered a counteraction of their former
concession. This dog-in-the-manger scheme ap-
pears not to have succeeded, as will be observed
on a reference to the table which we have pub-
lished of their numbers and extent of business.
It is almost needless to remark, that the sole
object of these branches is to facilitate provincial
business connected with the capital, and that
they are therefore established at the chief seats
of our manufactures and trade, where local banks,
of solid credit, would have existed long ago
had there erection not been prevented by the
monopoly of Threadneedle-street for the last 130
years. They only now consist of eleven, and
their discounts in 1830 did not exceed 700,0001.
with an expense of management greater than the
interest of their discounts. Last year their
amount of business rose to 1,718,000/. ; but
we are not assured of its continuance. The
greatest part of this business appears to be trans-
acted at Liverpool and Birmingham—in the
former of which places Bank of England notes
have always been the exclusive circulation, and
where, therefore, for the purposes of currency, a
branch-bank was not necessary. It would be
easy to prove, were this the occasion, that the
establishment of these branches can never answer
all the purposes of local banks, holding out an
equal security to the public by their amount of
capital and their mode of management. 'Their
manner of doing business as a mere agency for
the parent concern,— their perpetual reference to
a higher authority,—their multiplied restraints
from home,—and their sensibility to every change
in the bullion and money-market, which the
Bank is bound to watch, must prevent them
from acting with the liberality and freedom of
independent local establishments. Their busi-
ness, therefore, small as it is, can only be secured
by the remains of the Bank monopoly, and can-
not be expected to survive the abolition or neces-
sary modifications of the charter.—Times.

The evidence of Mr. Rothschild before the
Bank Committee will naturally be read with much
interest. No man has had more experience than
Mr. Rothschild in all that concerns the business
of exchanges. His facts are valuable, but his
opinions must often be received with many grains
of allowance. Mr. Rothschild seems to think
that when the exchanges were 32 per cent.
against this country, there was no depre-