The Sun.
London, England, 1832-01-11 00:00:00

CERTIFICATES, JAN. 31.

J. Palmer, Wells, innholder—S. Hall, Duke-street, West
Smithfield, brazier—.T. Elder, Oxford street, horse-dealer—W.
Coates, St. Martin's.lane, woollen-draper—R. Foulerton, Bow_
lane, warehouseman—J. Cheesernan' Reading, Berkshire, baker
—J. Bennell, Kennington-lane, boarding-house-keeper—W. Ma-
son, Margaret street, Cavendish-square, axle-tree manufacturer
—W. Battams, Hardingstone, Northamptonshire, grazier—J.
and T. Barston, Grantham, Lincolnshire, ironmongers—R.
Greenough, Manchester, manufacturer—T. Shephard, Upper
Marylebone-street, victualler—T. Hartwell, Derby, silk throwster.

PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.
F. Mullings and W. Ashforth, Birmingham, pearl-ornament-
makers—J. Sim and J. B. Hodson, Liverpool, hide-merchants—
J. and J. Worthy, Exeter, inerchants—J. Shepherd and H.
Holland, Exeter, wine.merchants—W. Knight and C. Norton,
New Sarum, Wiltshire, cabinet-makers—W. Watson and Co.,
Leeds, dyers—H. Hole and C. Ross, Barnstaple, Devonshire,
lime-burners—M. Bischoff and F. Lineau, Dock-street, Rose-
mary-lane, sugar-refiners—J. Jefferson and C 0.., Fetter-lane,
goldsmiths—W. H. Blackmore and C. Nichols, Chenies-street,
Tottenham-court-road, painters—J. and E. Blundell, Liverpool,
tobacco-manufacturers--J. Largie and Co., Liverpool, commis-
sion-merchants—J. Gummersall and Co., Dudley-hill, Bradford,
Yorkshire, card-makers—A. Knowles and Co., coal merchants, so
far as
sack-mak regards J. Hudson Carroll and F.
Bacon andJ. Grayston, Rood-land,
E. G. Brown, Great Winchester-
streets, merchants—J. M. Cottle and R. Jones, Leamington
Priors, Warwickshire, surgeons—W. Ogden and S. Wallwork,
Heywood, Lancashire, cotton-spinners—lt. J. Bridges and J. J.
Frankis, Bristol, attorneys—W. Bacon and J. Barnett, Tetbury,
Gloucestershire, attorneys-at-law—J. and C. Butterworth, Roch-
dale, woolstaplers—E. and S. Briggs, Gould-square, Crtstched-
friars' merchants—lt. Ward and H. Humphreys, Woolmore-
street, Poplar, bricklayers.

My Lord BROUGHAM, allow me most re-
spectfully, but most sincerely and earnestly, to address
myself to you. Do you think you are serving the cause
of humanity, and liberty, and civilization, if, after you
have taught men, by means of your schoolmaster, the
value of knowledge and of freedom, you allow your dis-
ciples to be crushed by the brute force of savage and igno-
rant Governments ? Take the cases of Poland and of
Italy. Go no further. The young men in Poland have
encouraged your schoolmaster have read your primer—
have studied your tracts—know all about your London
University, arid your Society of Useful Knowledge—and
theTyhbless.
desireey approvethat theand samelove you
ings may be secured to Poland. Now, my Lord, they ask
yfonruraiLl
yanmicaisiteavteiadnonSec,hoaonlds.
you simply to assure to them their national independence.
If they may make use of their own language, and have a
national existence, they ask for no more. Russia opposes
this, because the Russian Government loves slavery and
despotism. Great Britain and France should insist on
this independence, and should refuse to allow the Autocrat
to carry into effect his cruel and wicked threats of exter-
mination. Just the same observations will apply to Italy.
They have heard of your Mechanics' Institute at Bologna,
and have read your speeches and your essays ; or, at least,
extracts from them. They want freedom and civilization
in Bologna, and they have risen en masse to defend their
principles and sacrifice their lives, if but thereby they can
purchase liberty ; and they would have obtained it—nay,
they did so—but that Austria invaded Italy, came with
superior brute forces, and directed the cannon ball against
the schoolmaster and the Mechanics' Institute. And
should France and Great Britain permit this? Are Rus-
sia, Prussia, and Austria, to be united against the progress
of knowledge, freedom, and religion—and are the two
most powerful and most liberal countries in Europe to re-
main unassociated, and, therefore, unable to make one
great, common, and vast effort in favour of civilization !
My Lord, you must answer this question to yourself—to
your country—to civilization—to the world—to poste-
rity—and, above all, to God ! Our talents, whatever
they may he, are lent and nut given. Some can produce
but little. Where little is given little will be required.
But from him who bath much, why much will be ex-
pected.—O, P. Q., Morning Chronicle.

COURT-MARTIAL ON COL. BRERRTON•

(From the Times.)
BRISTOL, TUESDAY,J4N. 10.

,
At ten o'clock precisely the officers composing this Court-
martial took their seats.

Colonel Brereton was then informed that the Court was
waiting, on which he immediately came in, attended as yes-
terday by an officer. The names of the members having been
called over,

Mr. Serjeant Ludlow was then cross-examined—Question.
When you asked Colonel Brereton if he had any instructions
to prevent his acting under the Magistrates' orders, did he not
offer to obey any explicit orders which they would give ?—An-
swer. The only answer I recollect Colonel Brereton to have
given was in the words I stated yesterday—that he was ready to
obey the Magistrate's orders ; and I wish to add, that in the
course of the evening Lieutenant-Colonel Brereton frequently
said he was ready to obey the orders of the Magistrate, but at
the same time he generally or always accompanied that with dis-
couraging the use of force.

Did not Colonel Brereton repeatedly request the Magistrates
to give explicit orders as the extent to which they required him
to use force ?—I have no other recollection, than that upon
some discussion taking place about firing, I think Colonel Brere.
ton one or twice said, " If I am to fire, I must have an ex.
plicit order."

Did not the Magistrates consult about giving explicit or-
ders as to the force to be used, and did they not avoid giving
any explicit orders ?—I am not aware of any regular consul-
tation, but there was from time to time conversation be-
tween the Magistrates, myself, and Colonel Brereton, with
respect to the state of the tumult, and the measures neces_
sary to quell it. I am not aware that any explicit order-
was given in the course of that evening to fire in my pre-
sence. Colonel Brereton was, in the course of the evening,
frequently informed by the Magistrates of their desire to have
the city restored to a state of quiet, and they looked to him to
effect that object.

(The prosecutor here stated that he admitted that the pri-
soner did, at a protracted period of the evening, receive from
the Magistrates a sanction not to fire.)
Did not the Magistrates consult about taking on them-
selves the responsibility of ordering more force to be used,
and did they not decline to take on themselves that respon-
sibility ?--I am not aware of their having had any further
consultation than that which I have mentioned, nor am I
aware of their having declined to take any responsibility on
themselves.

Did not the rioters cease from all acts of violence, except
occasionally throwing stones, after the arrival of the military,
on the 2t)th of October ?—They abstained from battering the
doors and windows of the Mansion house, which they were en-
gaged in doing when the military arrived. The acts of violence
to which I am able to speak are the breaking of the windows,
which happened from time to time, and the wounding of sol-
diers and constables, whom I saw brought in subsequently to
the arrival of the military.
The cross-examination here terminated.