The Sun.
London, England, 1832-07-23 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

" How long will the Belgic farce continue to
be enacted?" is a question which every man
asks his neighbour in the street ; and it causes us
pain to say, that the answer usually given implies
some impressions with regard to.the British Go-
vernment,*which are any thing bnt flattering to
its members. What, indeed, but the extreme of
imbecility can have suffered the Dutch King to
bully England, France, and Belgium, and retain
to this hour possession of Antwerp, which Lord
Palmerston repeatedly pledged the faith of Eng-
land that the Dutch troops should long sine(
have evacuated ? The King of the Nether
lands, as he is still improperly called, has played
a game the most insulting to this country ; he
shifts and shuffles, and when pushed into a
corner, he defies. The folly of the thing on out
part is, that all the impudence and obstinacy o'
the Dutch has been endured, professedly for the
sake of averting a general but contingent war
Europe ; while every body knows, that if thi-
country and France delay much longer to fulfil
their pledges, and enforce the execution of tin
protocols, the consequence will be a certain and
immediate recourse to hostilities between Kings
William and Leopold, the latter of whom has
much to complain of, and has indeed been
shamefully ill-used. We trust that some honest
Member of Parliament will demand some infor-
mation upon this most important question, and
let England know what she has to expect.
Since these observations were written we have
heard, from good authority, that the Conference
have agreed upon certain new propositions for
tics settlement of this question. The following
is, we understand, the substance of the new
scheme, which is to make its appearance in a
67th protocol, that was drawn up by the Con-
ference after two days' discussion, and signed
on the 13th instant. The 67th protocol com-
mences by declaring that the Plenipotentiaries
have taken into consideration the new proposi-
tions made on the part of the Cabinet of the
Ildgue by the Dutch Plenipotentiaries. It goes
en to express the satisfaction of the Conferenct
at finding that these propositions exhibit, by the
concessions they make on the teiritorial ques-
tion, a willingness on the part of the King of
the Netherlands to come to an arrangement ;
but declares that, nevertheless, those proposi-
tiers appear to the Plenipotentiaries of the Five
Courts to be inadmissible. Yet, continues the
protocol, the Plenipotentiaries of the Five
Courts,--taking into their consideration the
manifest tendency of the King of the Nether-
lands; to make sacrifices for the security of the peace
of Europe, as well as the just observations which
are made on other points by the Dutch Pleni-
potentiaries,—express their willingness to elnmge
some points in the annex E to the 65th pro-
tocol. This annex, our readers will recollect,
contains the project of a treaty between the
K ing of Holland and the five -Powers, for tht
dissolution of the union between Holland and
Belgium. It has already been printed. Afte
some more formal and prefatory matter, the pro-
tocol proceeds to develop the new scheme of
the Plenipotentiaries of the. Five Courts, in tin
form of a treaty, which consists of the twenty-
four articles of the treaty of the I.5Lh of Novern•
her, 1831, accompanied by four explanatory
article', which are to the following effect :

Article 1. The evacuation of the-territories,
cities, towns, and places, which change domina-
tion, shall be terminated within 15 cloys after
the exchange of the ratifications of the prese►,t
treaty, conformably to general usage. The re-
spective troops on evacuating the territories and
places which they now occupy, shall carry with
them the objects belonging to the state which
they serve, excepting all such as form part of the
military dotation of the said places.
Article 2. The two States shall delegate corn-
missioners, who are to meet at Aix-la-Chapelle.
to negotiate and concAude there an arrangement,
by mutual agreement, according to the recipro-
cal convenience of the two States, relative to
the execution of the articles 9 and 12 of
the present transaction, the execution of the said
articles, 9 and 12, remaining suspended until
the conclusion of the negotiation. All the mo-
difications or changes which the said Commis-
sioners shall agree to effect in the 9th and 12th
articles above mentioned, shall have in the eyes
of Aus!ria, France, Great Britain, Prussia, ano
Russia, the same force and value as if they were
comprised in the present transaction. Never-
theless, it is understood that the two patties
shall regard as definitively adopted, the principle,
in compliance to which the dispositions of the
articles 108 to 117 inclusive of the general act
of the Congress of Vienna, relative to the free
navigation of the navigablerivers, shall be applied
to the non-navigable rivers, which separate or
traverse at the same time the Dutch and Belgian
territory, and that provisionally the navigation
shall be subject to the tariffs of the Convention
for the Rhine, signed at Mentz, on the 31st
of March, 1831.
Article 3. If the Dutch and Belgian Com-
missioners, who are to meet at Utrecht, can
come to an understanding on the means of capi-
talizing, at a moderate rate, after the reciprocal
convenience of the two countries, the annual
nun of 8,400,000 florins, P. 8., with which
Belgium is charged, the arrangements so agreed
to shall have, in the eyes of the Courts of Aus-
tria, &c., the same force and value, &c.
Article 4. In case any doubt shall arise on
the execution and sense of the 24 articles of the
15th of November, 1831, Holland and Bel-
gium shall refer thereon to the explanations
contained in the memorial of the Conference
dated the 4th of January, 1832.—Times.

The ominous decree of the German Diet is
founded on principles which have long been pub-
licly declared by those Statesmen who have at
present the ear of the great Sovereigns. The Mi-
nister for Foreign affairs of Prussia, M. Ancil-
lon, is unquestionably an able man. But he
has a strong leaning against what are called
liberal opinions. In a volume published by him
in 1825, on the spirit of political constitutions,
be declares himself strongly against that part of
the English Constitution which has been pro-
scribed by the Diet. " Whoever has the purse,
be observes, " and can open or shut it, has in
a representative Monarchy great power in his
hands ; for he can always draw more to himself.
If, therefore, the right of taxation be conceded
to a representative assembly, the Monarchy
will soon be turned into a demccracy, if suitable
precautions are not taken. The representatives
have only to avail themselves of a very simple
system of tactis—namely, to connect certain con
ditions with the grant of supplies, and to make
these conditions consist in the acquisition
of new political rights. Thus, with every
grant of supplies, the Crown loses some
right, and some rights are gained by the re-
presentatives of the people. But the most
dangerous affair is the granting the supplies
only for a year, and to lay a early Budget be-
fore the Representatives of the people, in order

to have their votes for the Expenditure and In-
eome. This deprives the Government of secu-
rity, consistency, and independence, especially
its external relations. For, however probable
it may be that the Representatives of the peo-
tile will not stop the whole State machine by re-
fusing the necessary funds, but will grant what
s necessary, still it is possible that they may act
otherwise, and Foreign Powers may avail them-
selves of this circumstance to injure the State,
r at least place it in great jeopardy. England
has never experienced this, and could
Lever experience it, because England is an
island that cannot easily he attacked. But, in
:eneral, no State which adopts such a system,
-an follow it long with impunity. Hence un-
'ertainty in the foreign relations, constant en-
-roaehment on the rights of the Government in
he interior—these are the two flannel and ine-
vitable consequences of a Constitution, on
ehich, in some measure, it is every year dis-
-ussed whether the necessary powers shall or
-hall not be withdrawn from the State." We
sere see that the English Constitution is pre-
eounced fit only for an Island so strong as to
le out of all danger from a foreign enemy. M.
Ancillon, indeed, would have no objection to
diem the Representatives " to make them-
selves acquainted with the public con-
,lition of the finances." He adds, " it
is even very good that they should yearly ex-
uniee the amounts of income and expenditure.
Iti this manner the Government will not be rep-
t!ered too independent, and, on the other hand,
ieitl ter will it be rendered too dependent." But we
annot conceive a state of things more likely to
'ead to abuse: than to free the rulers of the small
States of Germany from all dependence on the
;-epresentatives of the people. Time smallest of
Cie thirty-nine Rulers composing the Federa-
tion, will always he looking to the great States
The Ruler of 100,000 or 200,000 men, who
happens to have a fine taste for music, or to be
devoted to gallantry, may soon ruin his subjects,
by what in a greater Prince would he of little
onsequence. The Ruler of Hesse Darmstadt,
thr instance, was constantly quarreling with his
people about the expenses of his Opera. The
people of . Hesse Cassel felt themselves op-
ercssed by the determination of their Ruler to
keep both a wife and a mistress, and they lately
roe upon him alid compelled him to turn away
he mistress and keep only a wife. These may
he trifles in a great State, but they are not trifles
in a small German principality. Under tile
Constitution of the Empire the Princes were not
l'lowed to put their hands into the pockets of the
people whenever they pleased. The Prussian Mi-
ntster's sentiments on public opinion were declared
,cithout reserve in a volume published in 1828, on
he Reconciling of Extremes in Opinions :"
To censure," says M. Ancillon, "belongs to the
order of the day ; we seldom praise, and still
-o'ido:ner what is praiseworthy, for the censurer
;.cuts always to have a superiority over the cen-
eired ; and praise, as well as admiration, would
in some measure be acknowledging something
-uperior, which vanity is iil not allow. In the
tions, circles, clubs, and places of the kind, opi-
nions are gradually fin-med, which are rapidly
pread, impose on the weak, and produce the
more powerful effect that their power, their ex-
tent, their depth, cannot be accurately calculated
and measured ; this noisy current often deceives
even the most wary and collected as to its pecu-
liar strength. A second cause of the conse-
qnence of public opinion, which borrows much
of its efficacy from the former, but itself lends
still more to it, is to be found in tile progress
of authorship which daily supplies the market
with new wares. In order to obtain more weight,
and a readier entrance for their opinions, writers
in their works always appeal to the public voice,
which, according to them, has impressed on these
doctrines the stamp of universal approbation and
of truth, and public opinion refers to and sup-
ports itself on the writings which supply it with
what it has to say, as if they were in a complete
accordance, and deserved, on that account, the
more credence. The peculiar food of the great
reading world are the Journals of various
descriptions, ephemeral publications and bro-
chures, light works that touch on everything,
and go to the bottom of nothing, but which
stimulate the majority of readers by their petulant,
sneering, or audacious and regardless tone, and
easily inoculate them with the views and ideas which
have an affinity with themselves, and are the easier
comprehended that they are derived from the
surface of objects. In these ephemeral produc-
!ions nothing is spared, all is entered on ; rash
opinions supply the place of deliberate judg-
ment ; they decide on everything—on persons
without knowing them, on facts without having
investigated them, the most complicated relations
of politics without possessing the first elements
of the science, the most difficult problems of Le-
gislation and Administration without giving
themselves even the trouble of attempting to
understand them. Forming a constant opposi-
tion against Governments, the writers attack all
which issues from them, mutilate their acts, or
falsify their views. The good, the suitable, is
passed over in silence, or disfigured ; the bad,
the unsuitable, is pourtrayed in the very black-
est colours. If facts cannot be denied, or if
they afford no food for censure, secret wicked
intentions are invented to blacken rulers ; if their
benevolent spirit is above all suspicion, they
complain of their want of judgment in the
choice of means. If calumny can find no food
in the present, recourse is had to the future,
to blacken them by anticipation. With the
same audacious ignorance, or the same regard-
, lessness, history is arbitrarily fashioned ; true
philosophy is challenged the moment it lays
down positive principles ; religion is injured by
extravagancies of all kinds, either by conceding
too much to reason at the expense of faith, or
too much to faith at the expense of rea-
son. This abuse of authorship and read-
ing, extends to the middle, as well as
the higher class, and contributes the most to
' the creation and diffusion of opinions, which,
corrupt in their germ, become more and more so
in their further development. In the long run,
from this most frequently originates what is
called public opinion, anti we perceive, spare,
and fear in it a power which is composed of
errors, passion's, and crimes of all sorts, but of
which the dominion is not the less all-powerful."
We may see from the above that neither Comm-
, tions nor Journals are in great favour with the Conf-
idential Adviser of the King of Prussia. Prussia
is, however, in a false position. Prussia favours
knowledge, encourages clever men ; Prussia can
only be a power of the first m gnitude by open-
meg a career to talents of every kind. But it is
impossilsle to have the good without the evil
which is connected with it. But Austria is con-
sistent. Austria has always endeavoured to re-
press all intellectual exertion. The greatest
crime in the eyes of the Austrian Government is
talent. Johannes Von Muller, the historian of
Switzerland, whose necessities obliged' him to
accept of an office at Vienna, states, in one of
his Letters, that almost all books which men are

most desirous of reading are prohibited. Mon-
tesquieu, for instance, was prohibited. He
,vas not allowed to proceed with the pub-
lication of his great work, the History of
Switzerland, or his Universal History. In a
letter to his friend Bonstetten, in 1802.
who had reproached trim for not proceeding with
his works, he says, " Where are you living ?
Not in Europe certainly ! Not in a country
in which there are Journals ! Extra anni
rias. You must otherwise have heard
something of what is called censorship here.
You ought in that case to have advised me ii
my fiftieth year to renounce all I possess, and
wander about the world, as M. Gesellius for
merly did, or to reconcile myself to write dif-
ferently from what I think. Would you have
me to dishonour myself? But you will tell
me—write nothing against the laws, religion, or
morals. Very well. But when I relate (His-
tory of Switzerland) how in the fifteenth century
battles were lost and States fell through errors
that are repeated before our eyes—when I show
the foundation of the evils that are now dis-
solving States in matters that are supposed to
have been productive of the opposite—when 1
describe the course that true political wisdom
ought to have held, and a hypocritical pedant
shows a detached passage, which, taken by itself,
may appear to have a meaning different from
the real one, to the Prince, who has no time
himself to read books (and who is surrounded
try ! ! !), what will then happen ?" This slavish
,tale of thttegs is the state to which the rulers of
the Cow insert would reduce the people if they
could do so. Thank God they cannot. Put we
fear, in the attempt to give effect to their views,
they will, in the mean time, inflict unspeakable
calamity on the people ofthe small States of Ger-
many.— Morning Chronicle.
The old adage, that " what is every body s
business is nobody's business," has often been
illustrated in political affairs. In fact, no adage
or theory has ever been more clearly established
in praciice. It is this which gives the man, or
the party, who pursue only their own private in-
terest under the colour of some public pretext, a
perseverance which -does not often distinguish
the man of purer motives, in consequence of the
tendency in human nature to get rid of trouble,
by transferring the business of every body to no-
body, as the adage inculcates or records. The
friends of corruption, having a direct personal
interest in keeping up the system through which
they have been enabled to work their hands into
our pockets—this is what they call working
well—are constantly on the stretch to devise
means for keeping up that system and that work-
manship, while the people, who have a general
interest in putting down both, run a great risk of
neglecting their duty through the want of some
personal or rather selfish pi evocative. It is true
that in strict reasoning every man has a personal
interest in the promotion of good Governmen-,
hut the responsibility of a':ting in conformity
with that interest is divided amongst so many,
drat its force is often compromised, if not lost, in
the universality of its application. Every one
remembers the perseverance attic anti-reform-
ers while the fate of the bill was doubtful. Let that
be areason with every one for watching their per-
severance now that the Bill is formally carried,
for it may yet he substantially defeated. Tie
Con,ervaives, as tlsey call themselves—aird we
have no objection to the name, meaning by it
the.coneer‘a,ives of corruption—have been play-
g a desperate game from the first, and they
seem not at all disposed to change. their plan
with the change in their circumstances. As late
as Friday last an attempt was made in the House
of Lords to throw out the Irish Reform Bill,
but the grand effort seems to he to frustrate Res
foim throughout the whole kingdom, by setting
up the selfish against tie social spirit, by sowing
dissension between interests whose prosperity is
one and the same, and taking every opportu-
nity to prevent the return of confidence and the
resumption of industry, for want of which the
people are now Fuffering to an extent such as was
never before experienced in this country. We
need not look far to discover the motive of the
Conservatives in pursuing a course so desperate.
They are willing to embarrass Ministers and de-
feat Reform, even at the hazard of embroiling
the nation. They care not how, nor froth what
quarter, the storm may blow, as the same storm
that blows the Whigs out must blow the Tories
into office, which is the paramount object of
conservative policy at this moment. We have
called their measures desperate, because they
ran a great risk for a little and a contemptible
purpose. The risk was revolution—the purpose
was place. Like those who fight in the
hope of plunder, they were willing to expose
the country to all the horrors of revolution ra-
ther than give up the prospect of making it pay
the highest price for bad Government. They
would have risked revolution for this ; nay, they
did risk it, and would have persevered, but that
their pride took the alarm at the threatened in-
fusion of a set of honest men into the House of
Lords—which it seems was against the rules of
the hospital—and they determined to preserve
their character by resisting the approach of any
more honesty than they knew what to do with.
Of a piece with this proceeding are their pre-
sent attempts to frustrate the operation of the
Reform Bill. They have an unholy faith in the
folly and depravity of human nature, and, with
that opinion for their guide, they invent all sorts
of falsehood, and hold out all kinds of temp-
tation, to induce the people to desert their own
cause for that of their enemies. But we warn
the people to be true to themselves. If a re-
formed constituency should return a Tory House
of Commons, it will be in vain that an attempt
was made to reclaim and re-establish the liber-
ties of England. In that case it will be mani-
fest that the long reign of corruption has tainted
the heart of the community, that society is rot-
ten to its very core, and that in making an ap-
peal to the intelligence and spirit of the age, our
Ministers have only hit upon a plan for expos-
ing, by a more direct process, its deficiency in
every manly virtue. But we do not despair of
the people. On the contrary, we look back
upon their past . conduct, and recognise in its
boldness - and . decision an earnest oetheir future
energy.—Morning Herald.

COLONEL GREEN.--The Colonel was to
dine with us one day. After waiting for him a long
tone, we sat down to dinner. He arriv,d at the second
course. "It seems, my dear GREEN," said JusroT, " that
your watch is too slow." "Oh ! no ! Geueral," re-
p:ied GREEN. " But as I was passing in the Rue
Vi-
ienne, I had the misfortune to break twelve guineas'
worth of an old woman, and that delayed my arrival."
His carriage had, in fac., thrown down an old woman,
who uttered ouch dreadful yells, that GREEN thought rbe
crust
be seriously injured. He, therefore, got out and
examined her, and finding that she was not much hurt,
gave her some money, and was abort to. proceed ; but she
:rain cried out that sh,e,nwlyasggootin.afg tboydgiei,vihnagd him arrested
her three or
ayt,usko.itb that inin
means serious.
foI
ur
irtievhheeaucn4c oftened nraetr hundred ffirtiaeiiinernh:cl
„aslhi efdno3er
never
rna
rids,
echacirrmdd
rnbetupt!)
from
him and he
Duchess of Gordon--" Oh ! oh ! By G-- old women are
ery dear at Paris ! "—Memoirs of theDucheaa ofAbrantes.

BEDFORD ASSIZES, FRIDAY, JULY 20.

DOE, ON THE DEMISE OF CARPENTER, V. LORD

HOLLAND.

This was an action of ejectment brought by Thos.
David Carpenter, to recover an estate from the
possession of Lord Holland, as heir-at-law to his
sister, the late Mrs. Small. •
The estate, which was worth about 4001, or
500/., had come into Lord Holland's possession by
escheat, he being lord of the manor, and the person
iast seised being supposed to have died without
heirs-at-law. The plaintiff claimed as the eldest
.airviving brother of Mrs.. Small ; an.l to establish
rite relationship it was necessary for him to show
that he was the son of Thomas and Anne Carpen-
ter, the parents of Mrs. Small, by a legal and valid
marriage. The case, tl;e:efore, to be established
by the plaintiff's Counsel turned on the question—
'as the marriage of his father and mother a legal
marriag,? To prove this the register of the marri-
'ge was pet in, which contained an entry of the
marriage of Thomas and Anne Carpenter, on the
sth of April 1787. Proof was also given that be
had introduced the ledy to his family as his wife;
that they bad cohabited together until his death
;n 1798, and had several children. Iles prima
facie case was met on the part of the defendant by
attempting to show that the marriage was con-
tracted under such circumstances as made it per-
fectly illegal and void. This imputation was
zrounded on a previous marriage contracted with
F.l;zabeth Colborne Sandal, in 1779. To prove
this the marriage register was put in, whereby i•
appear, d that Thomas Carpenter had been married
by license to that lady on the 13th of August in
Ihe year before mentioned. The two questions then
arose, was his first marriage a legal one ? and, if so,
was the first wife alive at the time when the second
marriage was contracted ? If both those questions
were affirmed, then Thomas Carpenter, the father of
the plaintiff', had committed bigamy, and the off-
Trieg of his second mart iege, not been born in law-
ful wedlock, could have none of the rights of legiti-
mate children, and, consequently, the plaintiff, as a
frlius nullius, could not be the beir-at•law of his
sister, Mrs. S all.
The Learned JUDGE having placed all the com-
plicated facts of this case before the Jury, left it to
them to say whether, under all the circumstances,
the seemed marriage of Thomas Carpenter, the father
of the plaintiff, was a legal or illegal marriage, as on
'hat depended the question whether the plaintiff was
heir-at-law to his sister, and in that capacity had a
right to her estate, which in default of heirs-at-law
would go to Lord Holland by escheat. Tt.e Jury
retired from the box, and, after about half an hour's
deltbeiation, returned a verdict for the defendant.

OXFORD ASSIZES, JULY 21.

DOE OS TUE DEMISE OF DODGES, ESQ.

V. GREEN, ESQ.

Mr. JERVIS stated, that this was an ejectment
brought by Mr. Charles Wyndham Hodges, for the
recovery of estates in Oxfordshire. The father of
the plaintiff (Mr. Anthony Hodges) had, on the 2d
ref Jun;, 1782, married Miss Anna Sophia Aston,
and the Plaintiff was born on the 8,11 of October,
1792. 1.. August, 1785, Mr. and Mrs. Hodges 11,c1
separated, but there had been no divorce antecedent
to the birth of the plaintiff. The plaintiff was not
the only child cf Mrs. Hodges ; as on the 1t of
:Niue?, 1791, she had had a dauglver, whose name
was Caroline, who was now the wife of the Hon.
Fitzroy Stanhope. Mr. HA,)—s had often visited
his wile when she resided in Clieen-street, and used
to fondle and caress the children. It would he
proved that the plaintiff, in 1813, had obtained a
eddetship in India, and did not return to this country
till 1830, which was the reason that this action had
not been commenced at an earlier period.
The certificate of the plaintiff's hap'ism, describ-
ing him as the son of Mr. and Mrs. Hodges, was
put in.

The Hon. Fitzroy Stanhope said, I married the
sister of the plaintiff; I knew him from a child.
Cross-examined.--I married the plaintiff's sister
,bout 23 years ago : Mr. Wyndham was not at the
marriage, and did not give her any portion; I never
met Mr. Wyndham before my marriage. Mrs.
Hodges hal three children—Mrs. Stanhope, the
plaintiff, and a son, named Henry.
Mrs. Ma y King said—ln 1792, I lived as nur-
sery-maid with Mrs. Hodges, in Charles-street,
Berkeley-square. Her husband was not living with
her; she had then two children, a girl and a boy; the
latter was a month old. I saw Mr. Hodges about
two years afterwards. There were then three
children. The butler was sent for the three chil-
dren, and they were taken to Mr. Hodges.
Mrs. Anna Sophia Hodg( s said—My maiden-name
was Aston. I was married to Mr. Hodges in
1782. We separated in about three years by con-
sent. I went to live at Brussels. I lived there six
or seven years, and on my return went to live in
Lower-Brook-street. That was before my daughter
Caroline was borne. I went to reside at Burnham
in Buckinghamshire, and thence I went to Birstal
in Leicestershire, and afterwards to London. I went
to Charles-street, Berkeley square, and after that
went to Paris, before the birth of my son Charles.
I went to Paris in 1792, early in the spring, I think
in March. I went by way of Abbeville. My mo-
ther was there residing. Her name had been Aston,
and she hal married a second husband of the name
of Tinker. She had a black woman named Gambia.
I was at the Hotel de l'Universite, in Paris. I saw
my husband there soon after my arrival at Paris,
and just before I came away. He knew of my go-
ing there. Ido not recollect seeing him more than
twice. We cohabited while we were in Paris, and
I became enceinte. The plaintiff was born on the
Bth of October 1792. To the best of my belief
Anthony Hodges was the father of the present
plaintiff. Mr. Wyndham was not with me at Paris.
Lord Craven accompanied me part of the way to
Kris. I saw my husband frequently after my re-
turn from Paris, and after the birth of my son
Henry, but we had no cohabitation at that time.
He saw the children and he noticed them.

Cross-examined—Before the separation Mr.
Hodges and I had had differences. 1 left England,
because Mr. Hodges was in debt. Mr. H. was not in
the suite of his late Majesty, when Prince, but I had
a particular intimacy in that quarter. My brother,
Mr. Harvey Aston, advised that I should leave
P.11:-mall, and insisted I should go abroad. He also
insisted that I should return some jewels which his
Bnyal Highness had presented to me, and I did so.
When abroad, I met with Mr. Bouverie, who lived
in the same house with me, as long as he remained in
Brussels. I have reproached my husband for con-
niving at my intimacy with Mr. Bouverie. I became
acquainted with Mr. Walkier, a banker. When the
deed of separation was executed Mr. Hodges left
Brussels. The immediate cause of the separation
was partly caused by my alleged intimacy with Mr.
Walkier. After that, I received Mr. Walkier's
visi.s openly. My intimacy with Mr. Wyndham
commenced after the separation. I complained that
my husband bad contracted a disease, arid urged that
as a ground of resisting a divorce. My daughter
Caroline was born in Grosvenor-place, which was
Mr. Wjndham's house—Birstal being his country-
house. Mr. Hodges commenced a suit for a di-
vorce in 1791. I resisted it. Mr. Wyndham ad-
vised me. l he divorce was not complete till 1795.
I cannot tell in what month I arrived in Paris.
left England when Mr. Wyndham went to New-
market. I was at Abbeville for a few days.
Lqrd Craven went from Abbeville to Paris with me.
He came out in the same packet-boat; he left me
a little before I went to my mother's, and he joined
the again from Abbeville to Paris, and stayed in the
s..me hotel with me all the time, and came back to
England with me. Mr. Wyndham was jealous and
angry, but he did riot make any difficulty about
t .king me back. I think he knew about Loid
Craven before I went back. I don't know how he
knew it. He received me back, and I continued

to live with him from that time to his marriage. A.
Paris I saw my husband at two o'clock in the day,
and at eight in the evening. Al hough there was
a suit depending for a divorce, and I had objected to
toy husband on account of a disease he had contracted,
he cohabited as I hove stated. I had arranged that
Lord Craven should accompany me to Paris. I did not
stay in Paris so late as June. My memory is much
impaired by opium. I heard of an action against
Mr. Wyndham by my husband. Ido not recollect
telling him of a set vent who could prove some-
thing between me and the Prince of Wales. I bad
a servant named Fido. Ido not recollect whether
f aided Mr. Wyndham, it is so long ago. Ever
since the deed of separation my husband and myself
never lived together.
Examined by the Learned BARON—I was living
with Mr. Wyndham before 1 went to Paris. I had
lived with him for two years before, and I ceased
living with him when lie died, which was three
years ago. I ceased to live with him for about a
fortnight, at the time of his marriage. This was
after all the children were born. lam not able to
say who was the father of try daughter Caroline,
nor am I able to say who was the father of my son
Henry; but I was living with Mr. Wyndham when
all the three were born. He slept in the house
when I was at his house, but not when I lived in
Charles-street and Queen-street. Mr. Wyndham
was with me at Kent's-hill, near Eton. Ile used
to sleep there, and used frequently to come to
Charles-street and Queen-street. He used to come
every day, generally, when in town. He used to
see the children. The nursery-maids used to see
M. Wyndham come.
SIR JAMES SCARLETT said that, even upon the
evidence for the plaintiff, it seemed to him that the.
defendant was entitled to a verdict. There was no
legal bar to the plaintiff's claim, as he had gone to
India at the age of twenty, and bad returned at the
age of forty, so that the Statute of Limitations did
not apply ; but still an estate of 3,000/. a-year was
worth attending to, and could he not have sent over
a power of attorney, or could not his mother or real
father have done some hint in the way of claiming
it for hint ? and yet for thirty years nothing had
been done. The whole case rested on the testimony
of Mrs. Hodges, and that lady %sus produced to give
evidence of her own shame. He considered Mrs.
Hodges unworthy of -credit. She lived with Mr.
Wyndham, and yet made an assignation to go to
Paris with Lord Craven, and did go with him. No
one could doubt her acquaintance with Lord Cra-
ven, and yet she would say that she cohabited with
her husband. The Jury, perhaps, did not know this
lady when young. Site was, us he knew, then a
most beautiful woman. She attracted the atten-
tion of the Prince of Wah s; and it becoming a
matter of public scandal, she was taken to Brussels,
where she became connected with Mr. Thuverie and
Mr. Walkier. It was doubtful, from Mr. Hodges'
conduct respecting the Prince, whether he could
have maintained any action against any one, arid
against that illustrious Personage he certaMly could
riot, and the separation therefore took place. I-
was remarkable that during all the years that Mr.
and Mrs. Hodees lived together they had no family,
nd after she was known to be publicly living with
Mr. Wyndham, it was that all her children were
b irn. Mr. Hodges brought an action against Mr.
Wyndham, and it being proved that the Prince of
Wales was in the lodgings of Mi. for
same hours, wirh a great appearance of knowledge
on the part of Mr. H., Lord Kenyon directed Mr.
Hodges to be nonsulted. He would submit, that
as Mrs. Hodges was living with another man, and
her husb ,nd was abroad, it was perfecdy clear that
the plaintiff was the child of Mr. Wyndham, and not
of Mr. Hodges.
Mrs. Sarah Bennett said, I went to Mrs. Hodges
at a house in Grosvenor-place, about a mouth before
Mi-s Caroline was ben'. I did nor know that Mr.
Wyndham was not Mrs. Horiges',husbmd. After
the birth of M as Caroline, Mr. Wyndham and Mrs.
Hodges used to sleep together. I used to take the
child into the bed-room in a morning. Mr. Wynd-
ham would call oat, " Don't bring in the child yet,
I am going to my dressing-room." I have seen him
come back and caress the child. They went to
Le:c-s ershire in the end of 1791 or beginning of
1792. Mts. Hodges was nor well. I suggested 'o
her that she was enciente. She said she hoped not,
as she did not want any more young brats. No other
gentleman visited her there, and if she had beets
marred to Mr. Wyndham, hest conduct was as cor-
rect as it possibly could be. Before she went to
France I am sure she %vas enciente. She wished me
to go with her. I knew she had engaged to go with
Lord Craven, and, us I knew she was enciente, I
was so disgusted I refused to en with her ; and, in
further proof that she was enciente, site asked me to
recommend her a wet-nurse.

'lhe deed of scp:iration of Mr. and Mrs. Hodges,
dated August 8, 1785, was read, by which 5001. a
year was to be paid to Mrs. Hodges for three years
and 6001. a year afterwards, so long as the parties
should live apart.
Mr. Wagstaff, of the Foreign department of the
Post-office, proved the Post-otlice marks on the two
letters of Mr. Hodges, arid stated that both of them
had come from Bordeaux to London.

The letters were read: they were to the Lliow-
ing effect :

" Bordeaux, Nov. 12, 1791.

" Dear Johnson,—l am settled at Bordeaux. I believe
it is at Paris and here, which are the only towns in France,
where a foreigner can pass his time pleasantly.

" My affection for Mrs. Hodges is inconsiderable ; so
your intention to suppress her income does not grieve me ;
hut I shall consider it a fortunate event that she does not
breed, and there will be no more trouble about her.

" For acting I have the best opinion of your judgment.
Remember me to your dear children, whom I love almost
as much as if they were my own.
" I am, dear Sir, yours affoctionately,
" ANTHONY HODGES.
" Chez Preau, Marchand des Mo les, Place de la Comedie."
Addressed to " Mr. Johnson."
" Bordeaux, May 5, 1792.

" Sir,--Mrs. Hodges made acqttaintance with Mr.
Walkier before Mr. Bouverie came to Brussels. Ido not
remember to have left Mr. Walkier and Mrs. Hodges alone
in the drawing-room at five o'clock in the morning, but
a had state of health did cause me to go to bed before
Mrs. Hodges, and I do not know where she went or what
took place. Mr. Walkier did once bring a gold snuff-box
for Mrs. Hodges from Paris. I told her she bad spoken
to me and others reproachfully of him, and I was sur-
prised she took his present, but she replied, he is rich
and generous, and from this I did suppose that money
would purchase her person, and soon after I arrived in
London I heard that Mrs. Hodges was in keeping of Mr.
Walkier. lam going to Paris on the 13th by the dili-
gence. Direct to me at Perigord's, and believe me, truly
and faithfully yours, " ANTHONY HODGES."
Addressed to " Mr. Turman."

Mr. Townsend produced the proceedings rela-
tive to the divorce of Mr. and Mrs. Hodges com-
mencing in 1791, and concluding with a decree of
di
gtvi
innoceil
edct
she
b, dated
eoy4f atmAht eirr.
Mrs. Hodges,
6
yearar
loldoogdrgeFtselrst
tni
t 5. S Ico7ph9wal.rihbi
rhotyt
,ene
t, articlesrthe(hlu27sd were
husband's
nfod.Tune,
The
ar-
ticles were an answer, were read. They stated that
Mrs. Hodges was only fifteen years old when she
married, and that Mr. Hodges associated with fe-
males of improper character, and contracted a dis-
ease, and that a person of very high rank was intro-
duced to her with the consent of her husband ; and
that she might be as near the said person as possible,
p herpersonage
oh
nuas
gb husband nut's
et
do otko lvoidsigti fea rin
every
pall-mall,d
ay, andwh when that hlaitr.t s
H.
used to retire. That the said person came while
cameshed
and p herststairs
r husband utoashfb, ntpkd;e
nr
tssovohcenakrt
eei
dnmi t
the r
t.b theed
room,,
Hodges adt todo rt the person
where
aenn
dl
vie
e
said
-t
andmolts,
tlieret washat hae greatwishe
wished
deb art.e iltihdge
eHs otuos e
goof
aCnodm
bring
with Mrs. Hodges for an hour and a
away,nh
ami
Itehdleeaar
levosinunelgt
half, she being in bed all the time; and that the
person left before Mr. Hodges' return from the
House of Commons.
Mr. JERVIS replied, after which
The Jury, after a short consultation, returned a
verdict for the defendant againat the legitimacy of
the plaintiff.