The Sun.
London, England, 1835-05-21 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

STEWART V. OSBALDESTONE.
This was an action on a promissory note for 2,9601. by
the executors M' e late Samuel Stewart. The defendant's
hand-writing being admitted, Mr. BINGHAM for the de-
fendant, observed that the note was void, it having been
given for a gaming debt. The late Mr. Stewart and the
defendant were at the Doncaster Races in 1832, when a
horse named Fang won the cup, and the defendant lost
several sums in betting against her. Being anxious to run
a horse of his own, named Cybele, against Fang, he pro-
cured a trial between them beforehand, and having ascer-
that Cybele would beat Fang, he proposed a nr:Lch,
which was agreed upon, and on that occasion bed with
Stewart in favour of Cybele, but to his gr•lat surprise he
discove red, a short time before the was to commence,
that one of Sybele's legs was in'ac-h swelled, upon which
he proposed to draw flu! 'oet, but Stewart would not
consent, and consequently he lost it, and gave this note as
a security for it.

Mr. Baron 'k.-;rURNEY was of opinion that there was
no evidener, of this note having been given for a gaming
debt.

Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 2,9601.

MURDER OF A FEMALE.

At 12 o'clock yesterday, Mr. Carter, and a highly re-
spectable Jury, assembled at Mr. Okey's, the Hero of
Waterloo public-house, Waterloo-road, to inquire into the
mysterious death of Francis Newcombe, who was found
dead in a shed in the back premises of the Bull in the Pound
public-house, Broadwall, Lambeth, on Sunday morning.
John Newcombe, whose appearance was that of a labourer,
was living at Herne Bay, and was married to the deceased,
who had frequently expressed a wish to come to London to
visit some friends. About eight weeks ago he consented to
let her come ; she did not say who she was coming to see, or
bow long she intended to remain in London. When she
left Herne Bay she had a sovereign and a half in her pos-
session. The deceased left her home with witness's con-
sent. He did not hear anything of the deceased until about
a fortnight ago, when he received a letter from her without
a date or signature, but he was positive the handwriting was
that of his wife.

The letter was here read. It stated that her health was
better, and she wished to have her child sent up to London,
who was ill, and which she thought she could get cured i■
London ; that if he (the witness) would allow her ss. per
week, for the support of the child, she would maintain it
while she remained in London.

Witness, in continuation, did not answer the letter, in con-
sequence of being ignorant where to direct it.
Mr. Cooke, of Westminster Bridge-road—l am the pa-
rish surgeon, and was called in to examine the body of the
deceased on Sunday. Witness observed a wound upon the
forehead. He had since made a post nzortent examination
of the head, and discovered that the wound on the forehead
had extended into the interior, and had caused a concus-
sion of the brain. There was a quantity of extravasated
blood. In his opinion he had no doubt that the deceased
had been struck upon the forehead by a fist, and that-she
had from the effect of the blow fallen backwards, and had
struck her head against a post or some other hard sub-
stance. The blow produced by the fall must have caused
instant death.

The CORONER—Is there any evidence to show who had
been in the company of the deceased?
The Beadle replied in the affirmative.
Jemima Gilbert, is living at No. 123, Kent-street. The
deceased lodged at my father's house, and went by the name
of Fanny Kempster ; she had been with us about a fort-
night. Had seen her upon one occasion, about twelve
months ago, when she lived in the same house for a short
period ; she was not at that time, or subsequently, visited
by any man. Witness had seen the deceased alive about
half-past nine o'clock on Saturday night last. On the de-
ceased leaving her she said she had an appointment to meet
a person in a coffeeshop in the Borough, and wished witness
to accompany her, but which she declined ; she never saw
the deceased alive afterwards.

Mr. Green, landlord of the George public-house, Kent-
street, stated that the last witness and the deceased were at
the bar of his house on the evening of Saturday, and they
had a pint of beer together.
This statement the female Gilbert most positively denied,
and, in reply to several questions from the Jury, she stated
that the deceased had, in the course of the day, said she
wanted to meet a young man, a painter, who had come
from Herne Bay, and she was very anxious to see him.
Mr. Green—The deceased, when at my home, inquired
of me whether a young man answering the description
given by the last witness had been to my place and inquired
for her, which I answered in the negative.
A great number of questions were put to Mr. Green and
Mrs. Gilbert by the Jury, relative to the latter being in the
company of the deceased, which Mr. Green positively swore
to, while the latter denied it.

The Coroner and Jury observed they bad no doubt that
Gilbert had for some purpose kept back some very material
facts.

John Burkhard—Am a coal-porter ih the employ of
Messrs. Isherman, Norway Wharf, Westminster. About
seven o'clock on Sunday morning I was passing at the back
of the Bull in the Pound. I saw the deceased lying on her
face ; she was quite cold. I instantly gave the alarm, and
the cabman and two policemen came down. The mouth of
the deceased was filled with chaff and straw.
CORONER—Did the chaff appear to you to have been.
forced into the mouth of the deceased ? Witness—l think
she must have drawn it into her mouth while dying.
William Bryant—Am a coal-porter ; on the Sunday
morning he was informed that two men had been seen near
the spot with a female answering the description of the de-
ceased ; they had with them a whit© dog ; he subsequently
went into the Blackfriars-road, and saw two men with a white
dog. They answered the description which he had pre-
viously heard of the two men who had been seen near the
shed. Being struck by their appearance, he was induced to
listen to their conversation, when he heard one of them say,
" All that she talked about was King-street." The other
replied, " No, it was Kent-street." One of the men was
dressed in a fustian shooting-jacket, with kerseymere knee-
breeches, white cotton stockings, and low shoes. The other
had on a flannel jacket. Witness could identify one of the
men, who was a paviour, and had formerly worked for Mr.
Grady, the paviour.

John Bingnell—Am a watchman. About twenty minutes
after two o'clock on Sunday morning he was on duty in
Roupel-street, when he heard a voice like that of a female
exclaiming " Here is a villain, he has got me down, and is
trying to kill me."

By the CORONER—Did you hear any other words ?
Witness—Yes, I heard the same voice say, " Come to me,"
and then in a fainter voice say " Have mercy on me ;" he
heard no more. His reason for not going down the passage
was, in consequence of having repeatedly heard similar ex-
clamations proceed from the spot.
By the CORONER—The cries which he heard came from
the spot where the female was found ; he had no doubt that
she was murdered,
CORONER When you heard the cries why did you not
obtain 'assistance ? Witness—Having often heard cries
eroceeding from the spot I thought nothing of it. Besides,
being very tired, I did not want to have any trouble.
Three other witnesses deposed to having heard the cries
or screams of a female, but it never occurred to either of
them to ascertain the cause.

The CORONER having summed up, the Jury returned a
verdict of " Wilful Murder against some person or re: .--:or5:
unknown."

On the Spilsby-road on Tuesday last a black man
accomplished the novel task of walking backwards five miles
within an hour.—Louth Herald.

INCENDIARY FlRE.—Between 12 and 1 o'clock
on Tuesday night a fire was discovered in a shed adjoining the
workhouse at Sible Hedingham, occasioned, it is supposed,
wilfully. By great exertion the fire was confined to the shed,
which was totally consumed, together with a quantity of
potatoes and coals, and a number of working tools. The
damage will not, it appears, exceed 1001., and the building was
insured—Chelmsford Chromicle.

SUSPECTED INCENDIARY FIRE AT 13 ROMPTON
—About one o'clock yesterday morning the neighbourhood of
Brompton and Little Chelsea was much alarmed by a fire,
which was discovered to have broken out in the back premises
of the Admiral Keppel Inn, on the high road to Fulham. The
alarm was given by a female, who, as she was passing by, dis-
covered the flames issuing from the extensive inclosed skittle-
grounds at the rear of the premises, which, being pitched over,
burnt with great fury. The Kensington parish engine was
speedily brought to the spot, and, although very scantily sup-
plied with water, the destructive element was subdued about
three o'clock, without extending to the front premises, which
are uninjured. The greatest praise is due to the T and V
division of police for their great exertions in extinguishing the
fire, to which the preservation of the premises of Mr. Collins,
adjoining, is mainly to be attributed. The back premises N% er e
only finished about Easter, and it is strongly suspected they
were maliciously set on fire, as previous to going to bed
the waiter had inspected them, when every thing was safe.
Mr. Watts, the' proprietor, who is in the country,. is, we
understand, insured.

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, MAY 21, 1835

- -
Mr. PO ULTE R would so alter hip measure, by adding the
as to keep clear of the Act of Charles the
words "in 5h0.135,"
Second ; and in that case be hoped for the support of the Right
Hon. Baronet.
An HON. MEMBER, whose name we could not ascertain,
could not by any means consider the Sabbath desecrated by
the innocent enjoyments or recreations of the humbler classes
on that day. On the contrary, he was of opinion that the poor
had a right to their Sabbath recreations, and if he supposed
that this Bill was calculated to prevent such recreations he
should certainly oppose it ; but, not believing that it was likely
to have this effect, he would give it his support.
Mr. ROBINSON said the question before the House was,
whether they should or should not go into Committee upon
the Bill. If there were any Gentlemen who entertained doubts
upon the subject, as he confessed he himself did, it was in
their power to reject the Bill upon the third reading.
Mr. HAW ES, in accordance with the suggestion of the
Right Hon. Baronet ( Sir R. Peel), withdrew his amend-
ment t but at the same time expressed his determination

John Russell) Would be ih his place, which, as he said before,
he expected to-morrci*.
Mr. ROBINSON acceded to this r'etinei.‘t;
LORD'S DAY' OBSERVANCE rsiLta

Mr. Porft R presented a petition from the market gar-
deners of Tottenham, against the Sabbath Observance Bill.
Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition from the clergy and
inhabitants of Worcester, in favour of the Bill.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE had a petition to, present from Fins-
bury, praying that certain clauses might be introduced into the
Bill, and that they might be heard by counsel at the bar of
the House in favour of those clauses. The petitioners went
on to state, that having reason to believe that many of the
supporters of the Bill were the very worst observers of the
Sabbath-day—( Great laughter)—and that in the parishes of
St. Westminster,
card-playine• and games of chance—( Renewed
were carried on in the houses of individuals of rank and
fashion, whereby not only the Lord's Day was profaned,
but the servants had a bad example set before them,
and were induced to pursue similar practices--that they dis-
approved of games of chance for money on the Sabbath-day—
( Continued laughter)—and those who would prohibit chuck-
farthing, the petitioners could not help thinking, with the
poor men whose only day of cessation from labour was the Sab-
bath, such men should not be permitted to profane the Lord's-
day with impunity.—('clear, and laughter.) They therefore
prayed there might be introduced into the Bill a strict enact-
ment against the playing of cards and games of chance in private
Houses on the Sabbath-day—(Great laughter)—and they fur-
ther prayed that if the house doubted these statements, they
might be allowed to prove them at the Bar of the House.
Sir A. AGNEW—If the Hon. Member would move for
the introduction of the clauses referred to in the petition, he
would have great pleasure in seconding the motion.—( Great
laughter.)
The petition was then laid on the table.
Mr. F. SHAW presented petitions from Skibbereen and
other places in Ireland, in support of the Sabbath Day Bill.
Several petitions were presented for and against the Bill.
On the motion that the SPEAKER do leave the Chair,
Mr. B. HA WE S would preface the few observations he
had to make by expressing his regret that any petitions
should have been presented to throw over this subject the ap-
pearance of ridicule. He was willing to admit that
that there should be a day set apart for rest, and that encou-
ragement ought to be held out for the due observance of the
Sabbath ; but the Hon. Member for Shaftesbury had objected to
the original Bill of the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Wigton-
shire ( Sir A. Agnew), because he thought its effect would be
to hand over society at large to the tender mercies of infor-
mers. He feared very much that such would be the character of
the present bill, and he regretted that the Hon. Member had ob-
jected to its being referred to a committee upstairs, as he thought
that public discussions upon subjects like the present, by no
means tended to advance the interests of religion. He thought
that a Committee was the proper place for discussing this sub-
ject, as there were already sixteen or seventeen Acts for the Bet-
ter Observance of the Sabbath, all of which bad become obsolete.
He was aware that there was such a feeling abroad upon the
subject in the country, that he knew the time had come when
same measure must be passed upon it, and therefore it was that he
was anxious to know what Was actually necessary to be done,
which could only be known from the enquiries of a Se-
lect Committee. The Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Poul-
ter) said, that he only wished to put -an end to
Sunday trading, but if such was his intention, the words he
used in his Bill went much further, and would put an end to
all travelling on Sunday. If the Honourable Gentleman
was not afraid of an inquiry—if he (Mr. Hawes) had
not read the words aright in the Bill—ang. if it was
not intended to give other persons the opportunity of
reading it in the same spirit, he would at once agree
to its being referred to a Select Committee. If the Hon.
Gentleman would take that step, he, (Mr. H.) would pro-
mise him all the assistance that lay in his power,
but if not he would feel it his duty to give it all the
opposition consistent with the rules of the House. He had
the authority of the Hon. Baronet opposite ( Sir A. Agnew),
and of another great authority, Dr. Pye Smith, for saying
that the lower orders were now in the habit of keeping
the Sabbath much more religiously than in former years ; then,
if such were the case, he would say, allow that feeling to go on,
and he believed it would have a much better effect than the
introduction of any new law on the subject.—( Hear, hear. )
It was upon these grounds that he felt himself called upon to
move that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee.
Mr. POTTER begged to second the motion of his Hon.
Friend the Member for Lambeth. He had repeatedly de-
clared his opinion that any additional legislation to enforce the
better observance of the Sabbath was unnecessary, and instead
of benefitting the cause of religion would seriously injure it.
As the House had, however, sanctioned the Bill of the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman by the second reading, he did not
wish in this stage to throw it out, but let it go to a Com-
mittee. He was aware several Hon. Members had amend-
ments to propose, and he (Mr. Potter) also bad several. Now
these different amendments might cause a great deal of dis-
cussion, and by being settled in a Committee up stairs (if that
was possible) less ridicule would be thrown upon the subject—
( Hear.) The Hon. Baronet, the Member for Wigtonshire,
was opposed to this course, because he thought public discus-
sion was useful, but surely it was disadvantageous that a ques-
tion of this sort should be treated with any want of decorum.
The great error of the Bill, and particularly of the Bills which
had been brought in by the Hon. Baronet during the two last
sessions, was, that they attacked and interfered with the com-
forts and recreations of the working and middle classes, leaving
those of the rich untouched. The Hon. Baronet was desirous
of preventing all travelling on the Sunday, even so far as
Greenwich or Richmond; but why not at once endeavour to
prevent the mails travelling on Sunday ? The innocent and
indispensable recreations of the people he objected to, but
which he (Mr. Potter) contended were essential to their
health • but why not begin with the rich, who were able to de-
fend themselves ? Why, for instance, not close the Zoological-
gardens in the Regent's-park on the Sunday ? Why allow
the gay and splendid equipages to move about in Hyde-park
on Sundays? Why allow the Clubs to be open on a Sunday?
If the Hon. Baronet can restrict the affluent, then, and not till
then, he may fall foul upon the humbler classes.—(Hear.)
Mr. PO ULTER called upon the House to assist him in car-
rying this Bill, which was so far from being objectionable,
that if it was passed, it would be called the " Poor Man's Bill."
If the ordinary traffic of the 'Sunday was suspended, it would
be a great blessing to the working classes.
Mr. HUME said that the interest of many classes would be
endangered by this Bill if it were passed in its present state,
especially the market gardeners. He thought that the merits
of the Bill ought to be discussed in a Committee up stairs, in
order that the views of all parties might be known.
Sir A. AGNEW thought the Bill had much better be
discussed in the House than in a Committee up stairs.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was op-
posed to referring the Bill to a Select Committee up stairs.
The House was then in as good a condition to discuss the
clauses of the Bill as it would be after the proposed reference.
Delay would be the only result of such a proceeding, and as
the House had affirmed the principle of the Bill, it was unne-
cessary to refer it.
Mr. WARBURTON considered that the tendency of this
Bill would be to bring legislation into disrepute, and
consequently the observance of the Sabbath itself.—( Hear,
hear, hear.) He differed from the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, in his argument supporting the motion. He was
convinced that the Bill would become a dead letter,
and he would ask the Honourable Gentleman if the ge-
neral terms in which his Bill was couched would not interfere
with the comforts of the people, and totally prevent them from
enjoying any relaxation on their only leisure day.
Sir ROBERT PE EL said that no man in the House
felt more the importance of observing the Sabbath
than he did, for he was convinced that no (me had a right
to shock the public feeling by violating it--( Hear, hear)—
but he would say he entertained very serious doubts whether
it could be prevented by acceeding to this measure, and
whether it would not be better to trust to the in-
fluence of manners, and thus check by the force
of public opinion any violation of the Sabbath. That
course would be better than to have its observance de-
pendant upon a new law that would be difficult of exe-
cution-_the tendency of which would only be to bring
the law into disrepute, and the sacred object for which that
law would be enacted. From his own judgment, he thought
it would be better to trust to the influence of public opinion,
than to legislate at all upon the subject ; for his own short
experience convinced him that the Sabbath was now
better observed than formerly. If that effect had
taken place, while the laws referring to the Sabbath were per-
mittted to remain in the statute-book as a dead letter, it was
easy to show that that result was owing to the influence of
manners. The enactments, though in force, were not observed,
andthe
disre-
pute,
introducingivonldb e
newtobring measures
legislationonthe subject,into
he was satisfied that one of two alternatives
must be adopted—either leave the law as it is, or sim-
fY ""
• d o cosolidth...; :! ; that
everyone may understand it.—( Cries of " Hear, hear, beu..-)
This Bill assumed that the Act of Charles 11. was in operation,
and the title of this bill was to render that Act more effective.
tendency by
Now the enactments of the bill were totally at variance
with its title.—( Loud cries of Hear, hear.) It selected
one single offence from the Act of Charles the Second's Act,
and rendered it more penal.—( Hear, hear.) He was at
a loss to know how any man could understand what
this Bill really was. They had better have the law as it was,
or else consolidate the whole of the laws into one Act. He
was at first inclined to support the motion for a Committee,
but he thought it better to meet the question fairly, and
defeat it upon principle. He had, however, no objection
to allow the Bill to go into Committee, and make it as per-
fect as possible, and then he would feel himself at liberty to
vote for it or oppose it, as he should think fit.

ADMINISTRATION OF WILLS BILL.

, 0 to take the sense of the House on the bringing up of the
report.
Sir J. CAMPBELL suggested:as the best mode Of pro-
cebi.',l;-;,r.' the repealing of all the Acts at present existing in
relatiorl 10: this subject, and then legislating, de novo, in
one Bill.
'
Mr. OULB URN would vote to. going into a Committee
of the whole House ; and ; doing so it was his desire to re-
move whatever was overstrained or ary in the Bill, but
the cry-
: at the same,timehe was still more desirous toremo:-.F
• ing evils which it was the bhji?et Of the Dill to put down.
The House then resolved itself into (joinftiitttid;
Sir. R. PEEL, observing upon the words in the Bill which
prohibited sale in " open shop" on the Sabbath, asked how
• woull the Hon. Gentleman obviate the objection which lie
(Sir R. Peel) had. before made to that phrase? This, if it
passed, being the last Act upin the subject, would be calcu-
lated to the public, by inducing them iO holletc that
the illegality of the act did not consist in the traffic itself,
hut in the circumstance of its taking pla•,.e in an open shop.
At all events, those inclined to evade the spirit of the law
might open a stall. Then, again, all traffic was not carried
on in shops ; for instance, horses were not sold in shops, and,
therefore, the passage would not be effectual to check the
traffic in horses.
Mr. POULTER regretted that he did not hear these objec-
tions before, and therefore he was not prepared immediately
to meet them. He was, however, desirous of obviating every
fair objection which might be made against the Bill, his only
desire being to endeavour to put down, as much as possible,
traffic on the Sunday.
Mr. HAWE S said that the Bill prevented the sale of whole-
some food, but did not suppress the sale of intoxicating liquors.
He wished to know whether it would prevent the sale of news-
papers on the Sabbath, or if it interfered with travelling upon
that day ?
Mr. POULTER replied that the Bill had no reference to
travelling either by land or water. lie admitted that the sale
of newspapers on the Sunday would come within the scope
of its operation ; but if any Hon. Member chose to make an
exemption in their favour, he was at liberty to introduce a
clause to that effect.
Sir A. AGNEW observed that a majority of the newsven-
ders had already petitioned the House to suppress the Sunday
sale of newspapers.
Mr. O'CONNELL deprecated legislation upon this sub-
ject, and argued that pure and true devotion would flourish
better in the land without the assistance of Acts of Parliament.
Sir H. VERNE Y agreed in the main provisions of the Bill.
Mr. DUNCOMBE thought if coffee-shops were to be in-
cluded in the provisions of the Bill, so should club-shops.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was of opinion that the
Bill ought to be allowed to go through Committee pro forma,
and then they should strive to make it as perfect as possible.
Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE would suggest a clause in favour
of shellfishmen, such as lobstermen, crabmen, &c.—( A laugh.)
Mr. POTTER thought the venders of flour, bread, soda
water, spruce beer, ginger beer, fruit, &c., should be included
in the saving clause.—( A laugh.)
Mr. ROEBUCK would equalize the law, so as to affect
the rich as well as the poor. If public carriages were to be
stopped on a Sunday, so should private vehicles; public car-
riages afforded comfort and means of conveyance to a greater
number of persons than private, and yet employed fewer la-
bourers. If a poor man, pent up all the week, was to be de-
barred from an excursion to the country for his health on a
Sunday in a hired vehicle, why should the rich man, who was
free every day in the week, have a license for driving about on
that day, and keeping a retinue of servants employed about
him and his horses ?—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Roebuck) re-
spected the morals of the poor, and he did not see why ser-
vants, who could not with impunity take a jaunt on a Sunday,
be employed in rubbing down the horses of their masters on
that day ; nor did he see, if the rigid observance of the Sab-
bath were a matter of such imperative duty as to exclude all
kinds of labour, why lordly Bishops should ride to church in
coaches, and compel their servants to work, and violate that
observance.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. G. F. YOUNG called the Hon. Member to order'. If
he were not about to give notice of an amendment he should
not enter into such a discussion.
Mr. ROEBUCK said the Hon. Member (Mr. Young) was
in the habit of lecturing persons. But it would be well if his
reprimands were more guided by judgment and discretion. He
(Mr. Roebuck) would contend that the Bill was a punishment
to the poor, and a perfect indemnity to the rich. If a rich
man gave a dinner to twenty different persons on a Sunday, as
was often the case, all these would have their coachmen, foot- •
men, and grooms employed to attend ;
.see then how many
would be required to violate the Sabbath, in order to minister
to the pleasures of a few. Yet a poor man, who had not a
kitchen fire, or utensils to dress his breakfast or dinner, would
be prevented from going to a coffeeshop or cookshop on that
day to get necessary food.—( Hear, hear.) Last year, when a
similar Bill was before that House, a body of mechanics called
on him, and said they were desirous of being orderly and
hurting nobody, but if the House of Commons passed such a
Bill, and showed such carelessness about their wants and com-
forts, they would declare their feelings by openly breaking the
Sabbath, for they would assemble in a body of 100,000, and go
and take their glass.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. YOUNG denied that he used a dictatorial term to the
Hon. Member, and surely the Hon. Member was not exactly
the person to charge any one with assuming too much, or with
want of judgment, modesty, or discretion.—(Loud cheers
and laughter. )
Mr. EWART said it was objected that the weekly papers
were sold on a Sunday. So they were in Liverpool, and
carried, by the ships that sailed on that day, to all parts
of the world, which could not be the case if the present
Bill passed.
Mr. BULLER said the Hon. Member professed to allow
refreshment ; but the only refreshment he would really allow
was medicine.—( A laugh.) He would not allow work for
gain on Sunday. Now, his Bill would allow the rich to work
for gain on that day; for the rich lawyers might carry on their
chamber practice on that day—( Hear, and laughter)--and
these lawyers might be employed on that day in preparing a
case for prosecuting the poor violators of it. Not only the
lawyers, but the attorneys and their clerks might be safely em-
ployed on that day.—( Hear.) So, then, a poor man was to
be punished for buying and selling a halfpenny-worth of meal
on a Sunday, and the Solicitor or Attorney-General, his at-
torneys, and their clerks might be safely engaged in preparing
a prosecution against him, an occupation that the community
might not think quite so innocent.—( Laughter.)
Mr. O'CONNELL said the great grievance complained of
seemed to be the public scandal of an open violation of the
Sabbath. This reminded him of a story about Charles the
Second. When the Rev. and Learned Doctors charged that
Monarch with certain peccadillos, they said Your Majesty
should have closed the shutters."—(Loud laughter.)
Sir A. AGNEW said the objections to the Bill
-were that

it was too coercive ; now he thOught it did not go far enough,
and was sure the sympathy out of doors was in favour of a
larger measure. —( Renewed laughter.)
Mr. SINCLAIR was sure the religious classes would not be
satisfied with the tone of the present discussion. The Bill
would meet with a different reception if it were submitted to a
different tribunal.

Mr. M'LEAN would be anxious to prevent any flagrant
dereliction of propriety on the Sabbath ; but if the Bible, the
best guide of morals and religion, did not check it, an Act of
Parliament could not.—( Hear.)
Mr. HAVES said a few words, which were inaudible.
Mr. O'CONNELL was much obliged to the Hon. Mem-
ber for reading them a lecture on the deference due by Mem-
bers to the sentiments of their constituencies.—( A laugh.)
He (Mr. O'Connell) had a great respect for the opinion of
his constituents, and that opinion he could tell the House was
entirely against this Bill or any Bill of the kind. The Hon.
Member said that a laugh was an offensive argument, but, in
his opinion, there was a gravity which was a great deal more
offensive than laughter in such matters as these. Tyranny
was always clothed in gravity; the Inquisition itself was grave.
Did the Hon. Gentleman expect that the I-louse of Commons
would ever pass this Bill, or any Bill of the kind? He would
tell the Hon. Gentleman for his satisfaction, that the House
would never do so. A case occurred to him which was re-
cently decided by Lord Jeffrey. It was an action by a barber
against his apprentice, for refusing to shave a customer on
Sunday. The Learred Judge decided that the barber's boy
was justified in refusing to shave on Sunday if he did not
choose to shave, but that the barber himself might shave a cus-
tomer if he pleased—it was his privilege to do so. Now, as the
Hon. Member proposed to do away with all working on a Sun-
day, how would he have dealt with this case ? Either he must
shave himself on Sundays, or, if he would not, or could not, he
must let it grow its length.—( Laughter. )
Mr. JOHNSTONE, as he had been very pointedly alluded
to by the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, thought it
right to offer a few words in explanation of his conduct to his
constituents. An application had certainly been made to him
by his constituents to resign his seat, in consequence of a vote
he had given upon a late occasion. On receipt of this com-
munication he had applied to the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, and to a Noble Lord, a Member of his Majesty's Govern-
ment, for their opinion, whether as a man of honour he was
loilnd to resign his seat, and their opinion was, that he was
not so bound. 1:p:;n. their opinion, and not upon his own in-
dividual opinion, he had continue:l, to hold his seat.

The Chairman then reported progrz:2, and the House
resumed.

On the motion of the Attorney-General the House went
into a Committee on this Bill.

On the 13th clause being moved,
Sir W. FOLLETT moved as an amendment that, instead
of parties being made competent to devise real and chattel
property, equally, at the age of seventeen, as related to real
property they should be incompetent to do so until the age of
twenty-one.
The Attorney-General, Dr. Lushington, and Mr. O'Con-
nell opposed the amendment.
Mr. NI CHOL LS supported it.
Sir G. STRICKLAND thought that personal property,
as regarded wills, should be placed on the same footing as real
property with respect to the age of the party devising it. He
was of opinion that the period of twenty-one years should be the
age fixed at which the power of devise commenced in all cases,
because it was nearer the age of perfect reason than any period
below it, and therefore he should support the amendment of
the Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL supported the amend-
ment. It would put the clause of the Bill in the best condi-

tion of which it was capable, inasmuch as it would distinctly
define the line between both species of property. If the
amendment were adopted one age would be fixed for all pro-
perty, and one line would then serve. As an arbitrary line
should be had recourse to, he would put it to the Committee
whether it was not better that it should be one which all per-
sons understood, which would be the result of fixing the pericd
of full age in this respect at twenty-one. The period of seven-
teen, or any other whatever, would not be so satisfactory to the

community at large as that of twenty-one, for the reason tea`
none was so thoroughly comprehended or so generally diffused
among 0
them. '
M C. FERGUSSON opposed the amendment.
r. e
could percaive no difference between the disposition of pro
perty by will and any species of contract. It was ridiculous
to
to assert that parties under twenty-one were not competent
decide rightly on a testamentary legatee ; every day gale
proofs of the contrary. In point of fact they were fully ea-
pable from reason of appointing their heir. Some of th 1
e moste
absurd wills on record were made by persons of very advan;
.all who were conversent with the subject knew.
age, "
host ever, the pswer of willing away real estates were to be el'
tended to
ing fixed for the disposal of per-
sonalthe period of tirr9r,ty-one 1;...2
could not consent to it. a
.pers,,,, 0, :eventeen he should have no objection to
property, otlierwi!-c he
would be taking away a vested rig-1n:
nresent stood, eat
under the law of personal property as it En:
thb be could not accede to unless the period of disposingmenatl
which parties erki°YeA
estates should be reduced to seventeen. • If the a:nen us,
were adopted by the Committee great hardships would ens_te
For instance, he would suppose the case of an illegitinlaof
child. If the father died before he attained the age
his
°
twenty. one; however inclined he might be to provide fors' n.
offspring the unfortunate child could not inherit, in
I',
quence of his powerlessness to devise any portion of his Pet
sonal property for its maintenance and support. ri that
Mr. LYNCH supported the amendment. He admitte- .0.
it took away a right, but it did so for the purpose of conierribc`:
a general advantage, making the law, what it should ever
uniform. at
Mr. BERNAL supported the amendment. LJnkieg be
the habits of the youth of both sexes in this king decat
ore
would put it to the Committee whether it would not be dire,
consistent with the general welfare of the cominunitY t:e of
strain the power of disposing chattel property until the.aa,,,,as
twentv-one, rather than extend it ? At twenty-one it tees
probable that a great many of the errors of sixteen or seven d s
would be seen and avoided, for two or three years eari.o
od. of
great change in the mind of young people at that pc
life. Every parent and guardian knew that at sevetibtere
their charge was not safe, nor even twenty-one ; but es
there
should be a period to non-age, and as twenty-one Was IL- so
to ripe reason than seventeen, he thought there could nod
hesitation which to choose in the mind of any man who I°eoby
at human nature as it -actually existed. He could not see, ro,
there should be any distinction between personal and rea,`P is
perty in the present state of society. Personal prop then
1835 was quite as valuable as freehold property. BVh,.Yy oath
should it not have equal protection against the errors 0. d
or the efforts of designing individuals ?
Mr. C. BULL ER supported the amendment. , ailed
Sir W. FOLLETT, in reply to the Hon. and -ue" 1119
Member for Kirkcudbright, said that the amendment certa!pia
went to take away a vested right • but then the
ed is
clause, which the Hon. and Learned Member suPPer" eat
opposition to it, was to precisely the same effect. With relsr•
to the age of seventeen, nothing could be urged in its
while
It was entirely unknown to the law of the country,
erring
twenty-one twenty-one was recognised in almost every legal act ref
to person or property. Awent of
Mr. WARBURTON said in adopting the amend
ply of
the Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter he WO ertr'the
opinion that the Committee would be legislating den,,s-,isce
natural feelings of humanity. A case in point would en'ose of
them of the fact. A man might marry under th,e,?atr
twenty-one; he might have children under the age O' •lirise be
one, and he might die under the age of twenty-one. i oro,
to be deprived of the power of bequeathing his persona Joie
perty because he had the misfortune to die before a ,C.,ljogi
age ? To suppose so would be doing a violence to the decide
of human nature. If, however, the Committee should ss the
upon adopting the amendment, and fixing twenty-oneced so
age, he trusted that they would make the case he addtbers
exception to the general rule, and provide for it an
"
of an analagous nature accordingly. f the
Mr. LAW agreed with the principle and tends 0
amendment.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL should oppor
amendment. .

The Committee tiatn divided— 82
For the amendmot
88
For the original clause
--44
Majority
After some further conversation the clause as amende
,
ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr. NICHOLLS moved, as an amendment to the
18th
clause, that the following words be added f:lteenr:rpoft:
will is wholly in the handwriting of the testator,..annrlted,
to apply only to the personalty, it shall be dated and aegis no
the testator in his own handwriting, or if the satn
wholly in the handwriting of the testator."
After a short conversation, in which the Attorney' St'
Dr. Lushington, Mr. C. Fergusson, Mr. O'Conne"
Bernal, and Mr. Hogg took a part,
Mr. NICHOLLS consented to withdraw his amen b the
The clause, with the succeeding clauses, went throt
gill
Committee. We understand the third reading of tu
to be fixed for this day (Wednesday) se'nnight. of the
The House then resolved itself into a Committeero.
whole House upon the Executors and Administrators Pooh,
After several of the clauses had been agreed to, the
man obtained leave to report progress, and to sit aga'n'
SEAMEN ENLISTMENT BILL. gorse°
Sir J. GRAHAM moved the second reading of the '-'
Enlistment Bill. le Douset°
Mr. WALL ACE objected to the whole priouiP--
Bill. He would enter his strongest protest against the 0 the
doing anything that should acknowledge, or even havestae°
,
appearance of acknowledging, that impressment s
had ever been lawful in England.—( Hear.) Wu"
Mr. BUCKINGHAM had intended to divide theft:ood
on the present stage of the Bill, but having been in jibe
that it would be more in conformity with the usages coin'
House to divide it upon the motion for going int° °gill•
mittee, he would not oppose the second reading of the 0010
Mr. HUTT expressed his opposition to the princiPles
of
Bill. c• iPie
Dr. BOWRING was strongly opposed to the Prin
the Bill. 0461
Mr. YOUNG thought that if the Bill were to proeocti
upon, at least the Bill for the protection of mertilnin 5
ought to proceed with it, pari passu. nlittee
The Bill was then read a second time, and the -°lll
appointed for Monday se'nnight. tiele'
The Roman Catholic Marriage Bill was read a sec°
and ordered to be committed on Wednesday next.
EXEMPTION FROM TOLL. „ff
Mr. BYNG moved the second reading of the inatitire a if
Exemption Bill.
in
Mr. SPIERS objected to the principle of the e the
"-
it were to be made applicable to Scotland, he should -1
it be read that day six months. was
fo
An HON. MEMBER, whose name we could not learn'd.
opiriion that the Bill would not be unpopular in Seestiall the
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL did not object 0 prix
principle of the Bill, for in his opinion the Bill had ,
ciple at all. • to 11°
Mr. BYNG had not introduced any new Bill, f°rfor Oftcli
knowledge manure had been allowed to pass toll free
years, and all that had lent money to turnpike trusteetbst
lent it upon the principle of the Bill. The fact Os to el
had just been discovered that by the existing law, 041 wool'
single word " only " being in the Act of Parliamentti,lact beer:
be possible to make manure liable to tolls, though it 'i,js tba
exempt from it for so many years. It was to obviate t
the present Bill was introduced. stit
Captain AL SAGER thought that the farmers n''lloo-
ciently protected by the enormous weights they Were -
to pass through the toll gates. d to he
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered

committed on Monday next.
SUPPLY. f SuPPI/'
The House having resolved itself into a Committee nci- for the
8,000,0001. were voted from the Consolidated en"
service of Great Britain and Ireland. '
The House having resumed, ab°"ll
Mr. E WART obtained leave to bring in a Bill Couple
capital punishment in certain cases, and also to allow
to priso;Nrs. 001 for
' Mr. P. O a
TEWART obtained leave to bring in
the better regulation of salmon fisheries in Scotland. .
rege betty
Mr. HAWES 6.1.
better
uation of puo-!zses-
itained leave to bring in a Bill forth
Mrl. CRIPPSbI obtainet2
.
leaveatondbroifngth
in tt
office
of
OCoroners. . a Ice"
nd
n the motion of Mr. WALLACE_ certain retto..o
ordered of fees connected with the Courts in Scotla
Adjourned at Half-past Twelve o'clock,
_...............__________
_ ---
eoceilla fno cir
tthhoecoo
regulation of Coroners' Court:
BIRTHS. of 35°°.
On the 19th inst., at Kilburn, Mrs John D. Dici.'n'on, of Lito
On the 19th inst., the lady of Francis. Sampson, 1-I`l.' f the
Argyll-street, Regent-street, of a son. a, °f
On the 15th inst., at Frindey, near Bagshot, the la i
.......
Hon. Colonel Alexander Murray, of a daughter.
_.....--------

-----
MARRIE WOO
On the 19th inst., at Edgbaston, Warwickshire, fr •,`""icliyabetil
Wynne Willson, of Cambridge Heath, Hackney, to Miss
of
Beman, of the former place. third 511
On the 19th inst., at Carshalton, Surrey, Charles, to i‘ste'
Thomas Begge, Esq., of Bcddington, in the same county,
eldest daughter of John Scovell, Esq., of Carshalton. rvviiii3o
On the 4th inst., in Lisbon, Arthur Hickling, son °' e Wsit•
Ivens, :Esq., of St Michael's, to Elizabeth, eldestdaughter 0,
J
Shelton Burnett, Esq., of the former place. - gr. ' e,l
On the 20th inst., at Trinity Church, Sloane-street, ' , soott
.Maguire, of Cadogan-placc, to Maria, youngest daughter of
Sotheby Esq of Whitehead's-grove, Chelsea.
7 • ,

DIED.
Oa the 17th inst.., Mr. Edmund Turrell, of Clarendon-greet'
Clarendon-square. gas gir
On the 12th inst., at Bath, aged '2B, Thereza Eliza, onlY
ter of the Rev. Henry Breretoii. pull-
Lately, in his native Island (Antigua), the yon. J.:4'llw or
combe Taylor, Chief Baron of the Exchequer, and late SPe--t of
the House of Assembly there ; and for many Tars an inhaNtan
the Mall, Clifton. • a eat'
At Hayfield, Aaron Ashton, aged 104. He was born in oom
V' Ne
tage on the estate of Aspenshaw, the residence of G. V; erjester
Esq., near Hayfield, Derby. He recollected going to Alel3f9ct be
of of
with his father in 1745 to see the rebel army. At the age
enlisted, and was a soldier for '2B years, and a the Ps, ,„hieh
Bunker's Hill he received a wound from the same alrb,,POotbs
wounded Major Shuttleworth of Hathersage. Within aka m"„joyect
of his death, this old patriarch continued to walk about e")3 is
good health and all his faculties nearly to the last ;
humble circumstances, was perfectly contented. ....- Paul"
On the 25th ult., at Challoch, near Stranraer, DP'
Ritchie, sen., in his 85th year. 1., liar.
On the 2d inst., at AlstOnfield Workhouse, aged 102,, ./9.-11
rison, formerly of Offcote and Underwood, Derby5hiti......:.....re-
.L,...., _ .. -00; -
aiid th9a.g
.A

of 14

London : Printed and Published by URDO YO .
112, Strand, at The Sun Office, No.M 112, Strand, al
of Middlesex.