The Sun.
London, England, 1835-10-13 00:00:00

British nation, and the flag of his country, neither
TUrk nor Russian would have dared to insult him. On
his former mission he was received at the Russian
Court with overwhelming proofs of that cheap civility
which crafty politicians have always at command ; but
as to the objects of his mission, whether it related to
Belgium or-Poland, or both, he was sent empty handed
home. The Belgian question is still unsettled, and
from that tithe unhappy Poland was treated with
more merciless rigour than ever. It appears that
Lord Durham, at an entertainment, toasted the
Turkish Navy, as our Correspondent has stated.
He made a speech on the occasion, in which he
alluded, we think very maladroitly, to the " untoward
event" at Navarino, expressing a hope that when the
English and Turkish fleet fought again, it would be
on the same side, against their common foes. On this
subject the Standard makes the following just obser-
vations :—" This is precious foolery ; who are the
common foes to Turkey and England to whom Lord
Durham alludes ? Well does he know, but dares not
tell. All the civilities and soft speeches to -finks and
Russians did not procure for his Excellency a passage
of the Bosphorus in a vessel of war. He sailed on
the 15th in the Pluto, and,as a parting compliment to
show-who are masters in the Straits, and who are not,
a Russian vessel anchored off Bujukdere, saluted the
Pluto while passing, and the Pluto having no guns
on board, the Barham acted as her proxy in returning
the salute. How the Turkish Pachas, who (per Rus-
sian order, no doubt) declined offering any mark of
attention to the British Ambassador,must have sneered

at this petty compromise." Well might they sneer
when the representative of British Majesty, and the
countryman of Blake and Nelson acted so pusillani-
Mous a part.—Morning Herald.
.There is a homely but expressive pro Verb, which
describes the_ Saucepan calling the kettle black. It
does not appear whether the aforesaid saucepan was,
at the -time of its objurgation, many shades lighter
than its compeer ; but We ,presunie that this compara-
tive less degree of sootiness must have been the case
to.- haVb furnished some handle for the unmingled
blackness of the censure ; at .all. events, it is fair to
presnme that the saucepan was not quite so black as
the 'kettle it impugned. A Conservative print yester-
day morning, however, quite upsets this reason-
able view of the matter ; for it not only calls the
kettle black, in the case of Mr. O'Connell, but ex-
hibits at the same time an unparalleled concentra-
tion and depth of sootiness in its own columns. In
the same breath, and in the same article, wherein it
accuses him of using language which would dis-
grace a " a drunken fish fag," it pours out upon its
victim a torrent of vituperation, with which no cess-
pool or kennel in Dyot-street -or Billingsgate, if
emptied at once of all their unsavoury contents, could
pretend to-vie. To show that we have not overstated
the case, we will merely cull the flowers of objurgatory
rhetoric of yesterday morning from the Conservative
print to which we refer. We will take them in rota-
tion—" Rancorous • foul-mouthed ruffian "—" prac-
tised blackguard"—" brazen bully"—" coarse brute"
—n savage '—" loathsome and licentious-blackguard"
—" libel upon humanity"—" curse and shame of Ire-
land." Now we put it to our reasonable readers
whethei the use of this language is the way to
prose any obnoxious individual " foul-mouthed," or
whether it is likely to produce any other effect
than to prove the writer himself to be " foul-
.mouthed." We began with an adage, and may con-
tinue in the same strain. There is an Italian proverb
which says, Chi sputa al vento, si sputa
.sul memo;
he who spits
.at the wind, &c., &c. We apprehend
the effect of an article like that in question is pretty
much the same as that described in the Italian'pro-
verb : the sputatore or disputer gets all the benefit of
his labour of love for his pains. But seriously, we ask, -
is- this the language of educated tentlemen which
the leaders of the press ought to maintain ? Is
this the way to raise the character, or augment the in-
fluence of the press ? Is this, in short, the way to
effect the purpose which the writer has in view ?
Ceitainly not. Language such as this, we repeat,
would whitewash the darkest character, -and enlist the
popular sympathy on the side of the worst. It is,
moreover, the admitted language of factious and
beaten aignment ; for it is aninference no less-conimon
than true, that the party which first loses his temper
is the , humiliated or .the' vanquished party. It is not
the language •of gentlemen—that is equally certain.
Is it the language of tlie. Christian religion ? We
hfave that to the High Church evening colleague of
'the Conservative morning print to which we refer, re-
minding him of the scriptural passage which forbids
the use of any vituperation even to the blackest of black
characters. "Evew Michael, the Archangel," says
die authority we refet • to, " when.. contending with
.Satan, refused to bring against him a railing accusa-
tion."_ This is the spirit of the Christian religion,
and this is the spirit which ought to actuate gentle-
men and men of education.—Morning Advertiser.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HOUSE.

Yesterday the case in-which the Belfast merchants, who
were plundered some time ago by a swindler named Simeon
Josephs alias George Frederick Hamilton, of muslin and
other goods, to the amount of between 4,000/. and 5,000/.,
came on before the Loan MAYOR.

The goods in question had been seized under a search-
warrant granted by the Lord Mayor, and considerable de-
lay has been occasioned on the question of restitution of the
property, by the complicated nature of the evidence.
Mr. C. Phillips on behalf of the respectable inhabitants
of Belfast, applied in the first place for a warrant against
a person who had represented himself as a Mr. George
'Frederick Hamilton, and in the next for the restitution of
a large quantity of goods, obtained by fraud, and by means
of the most nefarious conspiracy. In May Hamilton ar-
rived at Belfast, and contrived to get acquainted with a
person named Bryson, whom he made an instrument, but
an unconscious one, of a moat flagitious system of rob-
bery. By Bryson Hamilton was introduced to Mr. Bell,
of whoms he took a counting-house, and to whom he
represerrted himself to be a partner in the house of Mali-
sius Schnieder and Co. of Hamburg. Business transactions
commenced, and Hamilton having paid ready' money in his
first dealings, obtained the confidence of that gentleman and
o"thers in the town, and finally decamped after having got
piissession of nearly 5,000/. worth of goods, for whic he
gilt bills accepted by him in the name of Malisius Schneider
• •uact Co , a firm which never existel' Mr. Phillips said it
F ,
was quite unnecessary for him to state that these acts upon
"the part of Hamilton were acts of forgery as completely as
if he had accepted bills in the name of an existing esta-
blishment.

Mr. William Bell, a Quaker, and partner with his uncle
in Belfast, stated that Bryson, who was respectable, but
had been unfortunate, introduced to him in May last Hamil-
_ton, who took a counting-house of him at 71. a year, and fixed
up a board over it with the names " Malisius Schneider and
C 0.," in which firm, resident in Hamburg, Hamilton said he
was a partner. Several money dealings took place between
them at first, but afterwards Hamilton• said that his remit-
tances were sometimes delayed a few days, and his bills were
taken. Hamilton told witness that the principal market of
the house was the fairs of the Continent, where they disposed
of large quantities at a great profit. The goods were all
packed for the foreign market. Witness saw Hamilton write
on the bill of 21 days for 1201., produced, the name of the
firm of " Malisius Schneider and C 0.," as acceptors. It
became due September 1, in Belfast. Having every reason
to believe that Hamilton was a swindler, he went, depu-
ted by tie other persons who had been losers, in search of
the goods. He found that they had been sent from
Belfast to the House of Rotter and Co., in. Mersey-street,
Liverpool, a shabby, ruined-looking plaee, with " James
Rotter and Co." over the door. He could not find Rotter,
but he had ascertained that Rotter had taken the place
about the time that Hamilton arrived at Belfast, and had
disappeared from Liverpool at the time that. Hamilton left
Belfast. He found that the goods had been drawn to dif-
ferent stores by different carters, and that no single carter
had carried two loads. Rotter was called " the little Jew
fellow" in the place, and was considered with suspicion. At
last witness traced the goods to. Mr. Woolf's warehouse,
where, on mentioning the business he was upon, a person
who was with Mr. Woolf started up, and ran out, saying,
" Mr. Woolf, I'll see you presently." That person he be-
lieved to be the brother, who was intimate with Hamilton
at Belfast. Witness saw his goods and those of the other
merchants in Woolfe's warehouse. At the suggestion of
Daniel and John Forrester, the officers, he noticed the par-
ticular marks on the cases. A week afterwards he saw
the same cases at the warehouse of a person named
Hort, but there were no marks upon them. The marks
had evidently been planed off. Witness and the offi-
cers took away some of the goods from Woolf's ware-
house, but left behind from 1,500/. to 2,000/. worth.
Upon the arrival of Mr. Stuart another of the losers,
witness went again ,to Mr. Woolf's warehouse, but not