The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-08 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
STANDARD.—The proceedings of the houses
of Parliament, last night, were various and interest-
ing ; but they run to too great a length, and branch
into too great a number of different subjects, to allow
that in the crowded state of our columns we can even
enumerate the several topics referred to. In the
House of Commons Sir James Graham introduced a
Bill for the Regulation of Factories. It seems to be
a copy of the Bill of last session, omitting the
education clauses; the subject of education being, as
the Right Hon. the Home Secretary observed, assigned
to the generous rivalry of Churchmen and Dis-
senters, while the Bill will secure time for the
children to be educated. We are not afraid of the
result of the competition proposed, and we certainly
prefer leaving the matter open, to the recognition of
any special right to educate on the part of Dissenters.
" Laissez faire" and the Church will do her duty,
as has been already proved in this particular case.
As to the still remaining provisions of the Bill, it is
well to imitate Lord Ashley in withholding our
opinions upon them, until the exact terms of them
shall be in the hands of the public. Mr. Sharman
Crawford made the motion, in a long and not very
brilliant, but temperate speech. Sir Robert Peel re-
plied at some length, and with much pleasantry, re-
citing a page or two of the huge dictionary of
grievances compiled by the patriots of the last ten or
twenty years, the whole of which dictionary must,
as he showed, be gone through, according to the terms
of Mr. Sharman Crawford's motion, before a shilling
could be provided for the public service. It is re-
markable that Mr. Sharman Crawford, as well as his
supporters, Messrs. Hume, Williams, &c., all agreed
in very heartily abusing the reformed Parliament, and
in placing far above it in the scale of merit the
unreformed House of Commons —so faithfully
has been verified Sir Robert Peel's prediction,
that the time would come when he should have to de-
fend the Reform Bill of 1832 against the Reformers
themselves. The reproach of persons like Mr. Shar-
man Crawford, Mr. Hume, Mr. Williams, &c.,
however, proves nothing against the Reform Bill ; it
merely shows that there are men so perverse that no-
thing will content them. The fate of Mr Crawford's
motion has been seen—it had 22 supporters.
GLOBE.—The pressure upon our columns compels
us to allude with great brevity to Mr. O'Connell's
address to the jury, which we have, of course, re-
ported at considerable length. Mr. O'Connell's cha-
racteristic, as a public speaker, consists in his marked
adaptation of the topics and style of his speeches to
the position and taste of the persons whom he
addresses. This admitted excellence in an orator
was especially prominent throughout the ad-
dress to which we allude. Without losing sight,
for one moment, of the position in which he stood,
but preserving throughout the entire speech the most
marked respect both for the Court and jury, Mr.
O'Connell maintained his legal right to do
what he had done in pursuit of the object he
sought to secure ; and justified that object (the
repeal of the legislative union of the two coun-
tries), by a historical survey of the imperfect fulfil-
ment of the engagements entered into with Ireland
as the bases of the union. The great merit of O'Con -
nell's speech in the Dublin Court of Queen's Bench,
on Monday, in our view, is the complete abandon-
ment of personal considerations by which it is
marked, and the strong case it makes out in vin
dication of the Repeal Association, on the grounds
we have stated. This case it becomes the Govern-
ment to answer—not by seeking to " put down
repeal," by the incarceration of O'Connell and
the leaders of the movement; but by applying them-
selves to the improvement of the country, and by re-
lieving the great mass of its population from the
misery which presses upon them. This, and this
alone, will " put down" agitation. This would re •
concile the people of Ireland to a union which, if
properly carried out, would be a source of prosperity,
and a bond of civil and social strength to both
countries.

kay, ordinary is 2id to is 3d, and llyStin commbn is 10d to
2s. Pouchotig at 5d to lid for low to good quality. Fine
green Tea would find purchasers, but the supply is still
scanty.
RI :31, BRANDY AND HoLLANDs.—Jamaica Rum, fine qua-
lity of high flavour and strength at 4s to ss, good 36 per cent
over 3s 6(1, 33 over good middling 3s 4d, and middling 3s to
3s 2d per gallon. Demerara 28 per cent over fetched 2s Bd,
good and fine strong 2s 1011 to 3s. Leeward Island is 10d
to is lid proof. Calcutta Rum at Is 7d proof with certificate.
Brandy at advanced rates; Cognac, best brands of the vin-
tage of 1838 has been selling—hhds at 5s 10d, puns 5s 8d ;
ditto 1839, hhds 5s 7d, puns 5s 5d ; ditto 1840, hhds 5s sd,
puns 5s 3d; ditto 1841, hhds 5s 3d, puns 58 Id; ditto 1842,
hhds 5s 2d, puns ss, and inf to mid marks 3s to 4s 6d per gal-
lon. Geneva shipping sort at is 10d, and fine pale for
home consumption 2s 4d to 3s per gallon. Corn Spirits
are 10s to lOs 2d for English, lOs to lOs 2d for Scotch and
Irish, and 12s 6d to 13s per gallon for Malt Spirit. To-day
Calcutta Rum, at is 7d per gallon, proof.
RlCE.—Patna Rice at 13s to 17s, and Carolina at 21s to 268
per cwt. This afternoon Madras sold at 8s 6d to 9s for low
white dusty. Bengal fetched lOs 9d for middling, and Ils for
good middling white.
INDIGO.—A good desire has been manifested on the part of
the home trade to purchase East India Indigo at last quar-
terly sales' rates for middling to good descriptions, but all the
low qualities have brought an advance of 2d per lb. Spanish
has been in fair request, and prices arc looking up.
Oms.—Olive, 461 to 461 lOs for Gallipoli, 421 to 431 for Spa-
nish, and 41l to 411 lOs per tun for Barbary. Linseed Oil
27s to 27s 3d per cwt on the spot. Rape Oil, pale at 36s to
36s 6d, and brown 35s to 35s 6d per cwt. Cocoa Nut Oil,
fine at 32s to 335 per cwt. Patin, prime at 28s to 29s per cwt.
Cod Oil 321 lOs to 331 per tun. Seal, 351 for pale, 321 lOs for
Straw, 291 to 301 lOs for Brown ; Southern at 341 to 36115 s
for good to fine, and Newfoundland Whale 301 to 341 per tun.
Sperm Oil firmer, 721 per tun for British, and American 701
per tun ; American Lard Oil 421 to 421 lOs per tun.
TALLOW.—On the spot P.Y. Candle at 41s per cwt for
first quality ; for delivery in the last three months of the
year at 41s 9d to 42s per cwt. Town Tallow at 42s to 42s 6d
per cwt, nett cash. North American Tallow 35s 3d to
406 6d, Italian 39s to 40s 9d, South American 34s 6d to 41s,
East India 41s 3d to 42s 6d, New South Wales 38s 6d to
41s 6d, tine St. Petersburgh Town Melted taken in at 41s 3d,
second sort Yellow Candle 39s 6(1 to 398 9d, and North
American Lard at 34s 9d to 36s per cwt. To-day the market
was firm for Russian Tallow at 41s on the spot.

PRICES OF SHAIMS
N CANALS, RAILWAYS, BANKS, ASSURANCE
AND OTHER COMPANIES' STOCK.

ELONDON, TUESDAY, FEB. 6.

THE CIRCUITS.
lIOME CIRCUIT.

(Before Lord DE;Cm&N and Mr. Baron ALDERSON.)
Hertfordshire—llertford, Wednesday, Feb. 28.
Essex—Chelmsford, Monday, March 4.
Kent—Maidstone, Monday, March 11.
Sussex—Lewes, Monday, March 18.
Surrey—Kingston, Monday, March 25.
MIDLAND CIRCUIT.
(Before the Right Hon. Sir N. C. TINDAL, KW., Chief
Justice of the Common Pleas, and Sir JOHN GURNEY,
Knt., one of the Barons of the Exchequer.)
Northampton —Monday, March 4.
Oakham—Friday, March 8.
Lincoln and City—Saturday, March 9.
Nottingham and Town—Friday, March 15.
Derby—Tuesday, March 19.
Leicester and Borough—Friday, March 22.
Warwickshire, Coventry Division—Thursday, March 28.
Warwick Division—'Saturday, March 30.
SOUTH WALES.
(Before Mr. Justice WILLIAms and Mr. Baron MAULE.)
Glamorganshire—SWansea, Thursday, Feb. 29.
Pembrokeshire, Town and County—Haverfordwest, Sa-

turday, March 9.
Cardiganshire—Cardigan, Thursday, March 14.
Carmarthenshire, and County of the Borough—Carmar.
then, Saturday, March 11.
Brecknockshire—Brecon, Saturday, March 23.
Radnorshire—Presteign, Thursday, March 28.
Cheshire—Chester, Saturday, March 30.

TUESDAY NIGHT'S GAZETTE,
DIVIDENDS.

H. Molyneux, watch maker, Lombard-street, Feb. 27, at
half-past twelve, at the Court f Bankruptcy, Rasinghall-street.
W. C. Thornton, machine maker, Birstall, Yorkshire, March
2, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court—J. M. Knight,
grocer, Rugby, Warwickshire, Feb. 29, at half-past eleven,
at the Birmingham District Court—W. Atherton, flint glass
manufacturer, Manchetter, Feb. 29, at twelve, at the Man-
chester District Court—J. Raleigh, T. Goode, and W. Hol.•
land, merchants, Manchester, Feb. 28, at twelve, at the Man-
chester District Court—W. Rabey, leather seller, Redruth,
Cornwall, Feb. 29, at one, at the Exeter District Court—J.
Gage, carpenter, Delverton, Somersetshire, Feb. 29, at half-
past twelve, at the Exeter District Court—H. Lane, inn-
keeper, Derby, Feb. 28, at eleven, at the Birmingham District
Court.

CERTIFICATES to be granted, unless cause be shown to the
contrary, on the day herein-mentioned.
B. Reynolds, silk printer, Mitcham, Surrey, Feb. 27—R.
Parker, linen draper, Deptford-row, Rotherhithe, Feb. 27—J.
Smith, carpenter, Darenth, Kent, Feb. 27—S. Wesley, baker,
Long Buckby, Northamptonshire, Feb. 27—J. Atkins, tobac-
conist, Shoreditch, Feb. 29—T. Gore, baker, Broadstairs,
Kent, Feb. 28—M. Allen, apothecary, Waltham Holz Cross,
Kent, Feb. 27—T. Kimber, farmer, North Cerney, Glouces-
tershire, Feb. 29—J. Whitley, surgeon, Liverpool, Feb. 29
J. Cornish, painter, Bridport, Dorsetshire, Feb. 28—M. Had-
ley, chemist, Walsall, Staffordshire, Feb. Lawrence,
spirit merchant, Birmingham, March 2—J. Smalley, corn
miller, Chorley,: Lanca,hire, Feb. 29—R. Hale, bookseller,
Margate, Feb. 27—J. Tregaskes, victualler, Bristol, Feb. 27
C. Dawson, fruiterer, North-row, Covent-garden, Feb. 27—F.
Jenkyns and J. H. Hardyman, merchants, Love-lane, East-
cheap, Feb. 27—T. and W. Withell, ship builders, Padstow,
Cornwall, Feb. 27—G. J. Pouchee, stationer, Oxford-street,
Feb. 27—C. F. Dewson, victualler, Birmingham, Feb. 27.
PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.

W. U. Crocker and H. James, linen drapers, Bath—W. T.
Yale and P. Hannuic, preserved provision manufacturers,
Wilson-street, Finsbury. square—J. Cordy and F. Wright,
wine merchants, Brighton—T. R. Wilson, W, Wilson, G.
Dixon, and J. Wooler, mercers, Stockton, Durham—J.
Spencer and E. Wood, contractors, Goswell- street—F. T.
Gell and J. Hayes,attorneys, Carlton-ohambers, Regent-street
—B. Blott and G. Perry, butchers, High-street, Shoreditch—
R. Russell and J. Lamb, lace dealers, Oxford-street—W. C.
and F. Plant ,hatters, East Rettord, Nottinghamshire—J. and
H. Smith, silk manufacturers, Steward-street, Spitalfields—T.
and J. Crook, linen drapers, Cannon-street-road, St. George's
—Chattaway, Ashwin, Russell, and Ce., wine merchants,
Stratford-upon-Avon (so far as regards J. Russell, jun.—J.
and T. Kidney, drapers, Portsea, Hampshire—H. Rice and C.
Cowdery, attorneys-pa-law, Newport, Isle of Wight—G.
Thornton, H. Peck, and J. Young, slaters, Hull—E. Blacker
and A. Chamberlain, brewers, Midsomer Norton, Somerset-
shire—J. A. and H. J. Lee, brick makers, Northfleet, Kent
—R. Overton and• R. Marshall, hosiery manufacturers, Lei-
cester—H. Graves and J. Warmsley, printsellers, Pall-mall—
G. W. Umpleby and W. Palmer, woollen drapers, Holborn-
hill—T. Bogue and T. Purves, drapers, Berwick-upon-Tweed
—J. Chap and C. Josset, professors of dancing, Liverpool—J.
Owen and J. Titterton, attorneys-at-law, Liverpool—C. Be-
dells and A. Turner, fancy hosiery manufacturers, Leicester—
J. S. Ellis and D. Gideon, slopsellers, Union-row, Tower-hill
—J. E. H. Kampf and J. H. Hornfeck, tailors, South Al-
bany-street, Grosvenor-square—W. and J. Sutcliffe, worsted
spinners, North Brierley, Yorkshire—J. S. Holmes and J. G.
Hutchinson, ship brokers, Liverpool—J. Strong and T. Hall,
Upper Thamzs-street—T. and W. Boyne, tobacco manufac-
turers, Leeds—G. H. Heron and E. Benham, merchants, Ux-
bridge—C. L. Mendez and H. Season, merchants, Liverpool
and Maranham.

SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS.
ROBERT PRATT M'BRAIR and DAVID JOHN-
STONE, ship owners, Glasgow, Feb. 9 and March 1, at two,
at Mein and Johnstone's, Glasgow.
ALEXANDER OPPENHEIM, looking-glass manufac-
turer, Edinburgh, Feb. 9 and March 1, at two, at the Old
Signet-hall, Edinburgh.
ROBERT KERR, tanner, Thornhill, Dumfriesshire, Feb.
13 and March 2, at one, at K. M'Kinnel's, innkeeper, Thornhill.
GEORGE FREDERICK ROBERTSON, merchant,
Glasgow, Feb. 13 and March 12, at twelve, at Melvin's Coffee-
house, Greenock. --
JAMES WILSON, baker, Glasgow, Feb. 12 and March
4, at twelve, at Kerrs and Anderson's, Glasgow.
COLIN M'ALPINE, ship smith, Glasgow, Feb. 12 and
March 4, at two, at the chambers of Monci is and Paterson,
Glasgow.
JAMES HOWIE, horse dealer, Craigie, Feb. 12 and March
4, at twelve, at the George Hotel, Kilmarnock.

MARKET INTELLIGENCE.
(From the London New Price Current of Feb. 6.)
SUGAR.—To-day West India. Sugar of good and tine yellow
and strong grey descriptions met with free purchasers, and
the rates paid, were, in all cases, 6d above those of Friday ;
all other kinds met with a good demand at full, and in some
instances at better prices ; Barbadoes, fine yellow fetched
68s 6d to 70s, good 65s to 665, and mid 63s 6d to 64s 6d per
cwt.
REFINED.—To-day the home trade were large purchasers
of refined goods, and nearly cleared the market at higher
prices, standard lumps fetching 76s 6d, and brown lumps 75s
per cwt. In Bastards large sales have been made at 48s to
60s. Pieces made from brown Bengal Sugar sold at 71s for
fine white, 69s for fine yellow, and 63s per cwt for fair.
Bonded crushed Sugar was taken sparingly, and 25s 6d is the
general value of the best.
MACRITIUS.—The demand has been brisk for bright yellow
and strong refining qualities, which in some cases have
brought rather higher prices ; inferior and brown kinds have
met with attention, and previous rates paid.
EAST INDIA.—This afternoon Bengal Sugar was in excel-
lent
demand, and 775 bags at auction were -sold at still' prices,
fine white fetched 69s to 70s 6d, good 68s to 695, damp 67s
to 68s 6d, washed 64s to 67s 6d, low greyish soft yellow
56s 6d to 575, damp 55s to 565. 497 bags of Madras, duty
paid, fetched the full value, good yellow 60s to 61s, mid 57s
to 58s, low 55s 5d to 565, brown 545, and washed 56s 6d
per cwt. _ _

TFIE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 8, 1844.

LAW INTELLIGEt*Ct:

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Feb. 6.

(Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Westminster, before Mr. Jus-
tice WILLIAms and a Special Jury.)
EXTRAORDINARY CASE.
THE QUEEN U. KING AND OTHERS.
Mr. Humfrey, Mr. M. Chambers, and Mr. E. Janes
conducted the case for the prosecution ; and Mr. Melly
and Mr. V. Lee appeared for the defendant King, and
Mr. Godson and Mr. Pashley for the defendants Mrs. and
Miss Birch ; the other defendant, Mr.' Phillips did not
appear.
From the statement of the Learned Counsel it ap-
peared that this was an indictment against four persons,
William Henry King, Emily Ann Birch, Augusta Ann
Birch, and Dorcas Phillips, for having combined and
conspired together to defraud certain tradesmen of large
quantities of goods which had been sent into the house
of Emily Ann Birch. This charge was brought
against the defendants for having endeavoured to
procure from different tradesmen goods to a very
enormous amount, but which were not to he paid
for. Mrs. Emily Birch was the widow of a person
who had been a coach-maker in Great Queen-street. He
died in 1836, and after his death his widow kept a lodg-
ing-house in Bedford-place. From 1836, down to 1841,
she had been supporting herself by this lodging-house.
In 1841 she found she was unable longer to maintain
herself by those means. The defendant William
Henry King was an attorney, who, in 1830, had resided
in Bedford-place, but had been sold up, and, in 1831, he.
went to live ,at Clapham, where he remained till 1838,
keeping a small establishment, but during the whole of
that time he was in the most abject difficulties ; execu-
tion upon execution was put into his house, and he had
been in the habit of pawning his goods and clothes, for
the purpose of buying bread for his family. In 1838
he left Clapham, and came with his family to reside at
his chambers in Verulam-buildings, .being then in a
very distressed state. King had been acquainted with
Mr. and Mrs. Birch during the lifetime of the former,
and, in 1838, Mrs. Birch had lent King about 2001. A
person had for some time lodged with Mrs. Birch, but
he died in 1836, and then the intimacy between Mrs.
Birch and King was renewed, and from letters which
had passed between them, it was evident that that inti-
macy was of a very affectionate nature. In 1839 both
these parties appeared to have been in the most abject
state of poverty. The defendant Augusta Ann Birch
was the sister of the late Mr. Birch, and resided with
his widow. In July or August, 1840, a scheme was
formed between these parties which, but for very for-
tunate circumstances, would have succeeded to an enor-
mous extent. Mrs. Birch and King were endeavouring
to see by what means they could raise money. Mrs.
Birch had carried on her business in a respectable man-
ner, and the intention was to get together as large a
quantity of every description of goods as they could, to
order them in the name of Mrs. Birch, to be sent to her
house, and to name a distant day for payment, which day
was in the early part of April ; but a few days before this
day of payment arrived King was to put an execution
into her house for an alleged debt due to him, and take
away all the goods. This plan was matured ; Mrs. Birch
went to different tradesmen in the months of November
and December, 1840, and January and February, 1841,
and ordered goods of the most expensive description,
consisting of plate, jewellery, wine, upholstery, two
pianofortes (at 150 guineas each), amounting altogether
to 3,600/. King was present during the time the
greater portion of the goods was delivered, but at that
time King went by the name of Wolfe, at Mrs. Birch's
house. He was there day after day and night after
night. At the latter end of February two executions
were put into Mrs. Birch's house, one at the suit of King,
for 2,1851., and the other at the suit of the other de-
fendant, Dorcas Phillips, for upwards of 5001. They
found these executions were not sufficient to cover so

by Mrs. Birch, ande
A rKfi
rfinougt,
m and
othfeb theaco bankruptcy
ort
v
large a quantity of goods, and therefore very many ar-
ticles of plate and jewellery were handed over to King
ssa nao
ksf fir
c then
u
e rtse 1,
suedvN ve
were
ar
on apretended loan, and the premises were then deserted
oleuftt, i
anupd o
as s sessi os
enu.
sent to the premises. The property was sold for
2,4991., but the amount had been retained. It would
appear that a few days before all this the parties
were employed in burning and destroying all letters and
papers belonging to Mrs. Birch, and very many were
torn and given to the servant to be burnt in the oven.
It turned out, however, that they were not absolutely,
distroyed, but different parts had since been put toge-
ther and proved to be letters which had been written by
King to Mrs. Birch. Inquiries were then made, and it
was discovered that, on the 19th of February, King and
Mrs. Birch had gone to Reading, where she took lodg-
ings, desiring them to be ready on the Ist of March,
and large quantities of goods were racked up and sent
down to Reading. After the fiat King was summoned
before the Commissioners, to be examined touching his
debt, and he stated that it arose from various sums he
had lent Mrs. Birch; that he had commenced these loans
as early as 1836; and he gave dates and terms, and
among others he fixed upon the 25th of April, 1838,
when he said he had lent her 185/. Now, the pieces of
letters in King's writing, which had been found in the
oven, showed that, at that time King was writing to
Mrs. Birch expressing his regret that he could not repay
her the sum her husband had lent him, and adding, that
there was then an execution in his chambers for 33/. ;
but it would be shown, that from 1836 to 1841, King
had been constantly sued by various persons, that there
had been many executions out against him, and that he
was, in truth, in very great difficulties, and it was, there-
fore, impossible that amen so situated could have been ad-
vancing money to Mrs. Birch. The parties interested
had, therefore, thought it right to adopt the present pro-
ceedings, in order that the offenders should not go un-
punished.
The examination of the defendant King as given be-
fore the Commissioners of Bankruptcy, under the fiat
against Mrs. Birch, was put in, and in that he stated,
that in August, 1836, he lent Mrs. Birch SJOI. ; that he
afterwards lent her different sums of money, and that
in September, 1839, they balanced accounts, and there
was then due to him 1,5721., for which, on the 14th of
September, 1839, she gave him her promissory note.
On the 29th of September, 1841, she had a further sum
of 501. On the 12th of October, 1841, she had a sum
of 1001., and on the 21st of October, 1841, he lent her
230/., and he swore that his claim altogether amounted to
upwards of 2,1001.
An immense pile of writs and executions against
King between 1836 and 1841 was put in and read. One
of them was upon a bill for 3501., accepted by Mr. Peter
Borthwick, for whom King had been solicitor at his
election, and the attorney stated that he had sued Mr.
Borthwick, but not being able to get anything from him,
he had sued King as the drawer of the bill. In cross-
examination the attorney stated that King had lent
money on the reversionary interest of a person.
The servants of King were called, who stated that he
could not pay them their wages.
Servants who had lived with Mrs. Birch before the
summer of 1841 stated, that the house was very mode-
rately, furnished. Mrs. Birch, in August, 1841, said she
couldnot remain there much longer, but she did not wish
it known in the neighbourhood. Miss Birch acted as
housekeeper or upper servant. She assisted in making
the beds. One of these servants went there in October,
1841, and remained till March, 1142. If wine was
wanted by any of the lodgers a bottle was fetched from
an hotel in the neighbourhood. King was there, but he
said his name was Mr. Wolfe. In the beginning of
February, 1842, Mrs. Birch told the servants they were
not to call him Mr. Wolfe any longer, but Mr.
King, her attorney. King frequently took his meals
there. Some time before Mrs. Birch left the house Mr.
King, Mrs. Birch, Miss Birch, and Mrs. Phillips were
frequently engaged destroying papers. They burnt
some, and others they gave to the servants to light the
fires with ; some of these were put into the oven. At
the latter end of October a great quantity of furniture,
plate, wine, and other things, was brought to Mrs. Birch's
house, and this continued till the middle of February.
On the evening before King's and Phillips's executions
were put in those parties came and dined and drank tea
with Mrs. Birch ; they drank wine together, and seemod
on rery good terms. Mrs. Birch told the servants, if any
one asked them anything, they were not to know. Early
in February Mrs. and Miss Birch 'packed up a good
many things in boxes, and sent them away in a van.
Mrs. Stevens proved that Mrs. Birch came to her
house at Reading in February, 1842, and took lodgings
in her house, which she said she would require on the
3d of March. A gentleman accompanied her. She said
she should send some boxes before she came; and after
this eleven boxes came. Mrs. Birch came to the apart-
ments on the 3d of March.

It was proved that Mrs. Birch had ordered goods and
received them of the following tradesmen :-Messrs.
Wilkinson, upholsterers, Ludgate-hill, for very expensive
articles, 1641. 7s. 10d.; Simmonds, silversmith, for silver
articles, 291.-she had ordered 701 worth ; she paid a
trifling bill when she ordered these things ; Messrs.
Seddon, upholsterers, 252/. 135.-amongst these items
were five pairs of window curtains, 1201. • Holding, up-
holsterer, in Fleet-street, 1331. ss. d.; Bailey and Jack-
son, upholsterers, Bond-street, 991. 1 ls.-very handsome
and expensive articles; Messrs. Gillon, upholsterers, 771.
7s. 6d. for carpets-she had given orders for card tables,
which were suitable only for a mansion of great import-
ance ; the order would have amounted to between 3001.
and 400/. ; Messrs. Latworth, for carpets, 811. ; Messrs.
Bailey, ironmongers, 60/. 17s. 9d. ; Geeks, ironmonger,
221. lls. ld. ; Spencer, wine-merchant, 137/. Bs. ; Field,
Wardell, and Co., wine-merchants, 71/. 4s. 6d.--cham-
pagne, old port, gold sherry, East India Madeira-she said
she should pay the first week in April, as she had money to
receive at that;time ; Plaskett, wine-merchant, 61/. 18s. ;
John White, wine merchant, 281.-she paid a small bill,
and ordered the other wine, for which she said she would
pay in April; she had extended the order very consider -
ably, but it was not executed ; Alsop, glass and china-
man, 176/. ls.-very expensive glass and china articles-
she said she should be receiving her dividends, and would
then pay-one table set was 381., a cut lustre, 401. ;
Phillips, chinaman, 42/. Bs. ; Cooper, looking-glass-
maker, 38/. 10s. ; Brooker, looking-glass-maker,
48/. 19s. 6d.; Churton, bookseller, 481. 13s. for books ;
they were to be paid for in February; Dickenson, linen-
draper, 901.-she paid a bill of 281. when she gave this
order; Messrs. Broadwood, for a piano, 162/. 155.-she
said she was in a hurry for it ; Messrs. Stoddart, for a
pianoforte, 781. 15s. • Mr. Newman, optician, a teles-
cope, &c., 24/. ; Messrs. Payne, dockmakers, black
marble clock, 26. 55.; gilt clock, 16/., and an eight-day
clock, 16/. ; Davey, watchmaker, a gold watch, &c.,
20/. 1 ls. 6d.-this watch, and other articles of the value
of 124/., were received from King's clerk; Messrs. Town
and Emmanuel, fancy articles, 180/.
All these articles were furnished between October,
1841, and March, 1842.
The case was adjourned till to-morrow morning, the
Learned Judge stating that nine hours were quite suffi-
cient for the labour of Judge, jury, or counsel.
61 witnesses were examined during the day.
WEDNESDAY, FEB. 7. _

The examination of witnesses was resumed this morn-
ing, and some other tradesmen who had furnished goods

were called. Messrs. Dollond, opticians, fit. Paul's
Chtirchyard, for a pair of the best globes, a first-rate
opera glass, a microscope, &c., the bill amounting to
between 301. and 401. ; Smaller; Strand, silversmith,
1051. 9s. ; Perry, Oxford street, silversnlithi 961. 165.;
Braithwaite, silversmith, 2201. 2s. 6d.-53L paid on the
24th of February, 1842, by a 501. note, traced to King ;
Lambert and Rawlings, silversmiths, 1671. 7s.
Several of the tradesmen stated that Mrs. Birch came
in a carriage and ordered the goods, and in many in-
stances she was a perfect stranger to them, but in others
she had small accounts of a few shillings or pounds for
trifling articles.
Many of the papers found in the oven, when
put together, formed letters in the handwriting of
King, addressed to Mrs. Birch as " Dearest Emily,"
and speaking of his extreme poverty. Some of
them were draughts of letters to tradesmen
in his writing, the copies of which were sent to the
tradesmen in the handwriting of Mrs. Birch, and some
of them were lists of articles to be had from different
tradesmen, in King's writing. Not a shilling had been
paid for any of these goods. In one instithee _Mrs. Birch
called upon a silversmith and ordered a quantity of
plate, but she wanted credit ; the tradesman said he
would give credit upon having a rArence ; she then re-
ferred him to a person, stating he was her attorney ;
but the tradesman refused to give credit upon this refe-
rence, as he said her attorney would be sure to give
her a good character, and, in fact, he did not like at-
torneys.
Proof was then given of the seizure of the goods on the
Ist of March, under two executions, one at the suit of
H. W. H. King, for 2,1531., and the other at the suit. of
Dorcas Phillips, for 520/. Mrs. Birch was present when
the levy was made ; she was laid up with the gout at the
time. The goods were very splendid • they were sold
under the seizure, on the 9th, 10th, and 11th of March,
for 2,499/. 16s. 1 fd. The plate alone sold for 7001. or
800 L The whole amount was afterwards paid into the
Court of Queen's Bench and Common Plea,, upon inter-
pleader rules, the assignees having prevented Mr. King
from receiving any part of the money.
This was the case for the prosecution.
The Learned JUDGE asked the Counsel for the prose-
cution if they thought there was evidence to go to the
jury against Miss Birch ?
Mr. HUMFREY thought there was ; and the case pro-
ceeded against all the partirs.
Mr. KELLY then addressed the jury on behalf of the
defendant King. He would freely admit that there was
much to blame, much to condemn, perhaps more to sus-
pect, as regarded the conduct of more than one of the
parties. Some parts of their conduct, he would admit,
it was utterly impossible to justify. If by law one or
more of the defendants had committed any offence, he
hoped he should satisfy them that it was not the offence
chargedin this indictment. He implored them, by all that
was sacred, not to allow any sentiments of disappro-
bation, however justly called forth in their minds, to
lead them away for a moment from the discharge of
the simple and plain duty they had to perform, which
was, to determine, not whether these parties had done
right or done wrong, but, looking at the nature of the
charge, were any two of them guilty upon that charge?
He admitted that King, at the time when he first bore a
part in these transactions, did undoubtedly press forward
with undue eagerness to obtain a preference in his own
favour before the other just creditors of Mrs. Birch; but
if the fiat against her was valid, he would not obtain a
shilling under that execution.
Mr. GODSON addressed the jury on behalf of the two
female defendants, and submitted to them that there
was no evidence of a conspiracy having been entered
into between these parties.
Mr. Justice WILLIAMS then summed
.up the case to

the jury, leaving it to the jury to say which, if any, of
the defendants they considered to be guilty.
The jury retired for a short time, and then returned
a verdict of Guilty on the first count against King and
Emily Ann Birch (Mrs. Birch), and Not Guilty as re-
garded Miss Birch. The jury also wished to express
their astonishment at the want of caution in the parties
who had trusted Mrs. Birch, and they also hoped the
length of time Mrs. Birch had already been in prison
(nine months) would be taken into consideration.
Mrs. Birch was then brought forward and placed on
the floor of the Court to receive judgment. King was
called, but did not appear.
Mr. G ODSON did not object to sentence being passed, so
that it did not prejudice his motion next term in arrest
of judgment, as he should submit that the first count
was bad in law.
Mr. Justice WILLIAMS said he certainly should pass
judgment at once; he did not mean to discourage Mr.
Godson in his application, but he had no doubt.
The Learned. JUDGE then proceeded—Emily Ann
Birch, the length of time you have been in prison, to
which the jury have adverted, is not overlooked by me,
nor am I insensible to the time of life at which you have
arrived, and of the punishment imprisonment must of
necessity be to a person of your years; but when I bear
in mind the nature of the evidence adduced on the pre-
sent
occasion, unexampled by anything in the history of
this country in the shape, on the one hand, of deception,
anti, on the other, of persevering imposition,—when
bear in mind the extent to which different honest men
have been plundered of their goods, and that this scheme
of which the jury have convicted you—a scheme which
for a time had existed, and which was nearly successful
to the extent to which it was carried,—notwithstanding
the circumstances to which I have alluded—your
age and infirmities—it is impossible to pass it without a
sentence of considerable severity ; indeed, it would be
trifling with the public interest if, when a case is
brought home to the delinquents charged with an offence
of this kind, the arm of justice did not interpose to the
utmost for the protection of the property of the subjects
of the realm. It seems that King does not appear to

receive sentence, and I firmly believe that although you
appear universally to have given the orders, yet I can-
not but suppose, from the intimacy which it is evident
existed between you and that defendant, that he was
probably the principal conspirer and contriver. It is
necessary therefore in his case, though absent, that
sentence should be passed to mark the opinion enter-
tained of his conduct and of the transaction that affects
him. With respect to him, the sentence of the Court is
that he be imprisoned in the Queen's Prison for
eighteen calendar months ; and deeming you to be
second in the transaction, though chiefly appearing, the
sentence is that you be imprisoned in the Queen's Prison
for nine calendar months.

ARCHES' COU.111; Feb. 7.

THE OFFICE OF THE JUDGE PROMOTED BY TITCHMARSH

AGAINST CHAPMAN.

This was a cause, which in its preliminary stages has
been several times noticed, in which proceedings have
been instituted, under the Church Discipline Act,
against a clergyman (the Rev. William Herbert Chap-
man, Rector of Basingbourn, in the province of Ely) for
refusing to bury the corpse of a parishioner (the infant
daughter of a member of a congregation of Independents),
without sufficient cause for such refusal. The defen-
dant at first appeared under protest to the Court's juris-
diction, on the ground that the time limited by the Act
had run out ; but this protest was overruled, and an
application to a Court of law for a prohibition failed.
The articles were subsequently brought in and admitted,
and an allegation was now offered defensive to the
articles, which pleaded the law and a justification upon
the facts. As this, in point of form, was only a question
as to the admissibility of a plea ex parte,—though the
decision of this question may possibly decide the case,—
and as the argument on the part of the defendant in
support of the allegation was only part heard, we shall
at present restrict our report to a statement of the
nature of the defence set up by the defendant's counsel.
After the QUEEN'S ADVOCATE and Dr. ADDAMS, 011
behalf of the promoter, had argued against the admissi-
bility of the allegation, principally on the ground that
the question had been already decided in the case of
" Kemp v. Wickes," and " Mastin v. Escott"—the latter
decision having been affirmed by the Judicial Com.
mittee on appeal—
Dr. PHILLIMORE, for the Rev. Mr. Chapman, observed
that this was a proceeding pro salute animm, under the
68th canon, by a person whom he maintained to be,
according to the law and language of the Church, and
in the sense of the Church, a schismatic or heretic. He
did not deny, after the decision in " Mastin v. Escott,"
the validity of lay-baptism ; but he set up that this was
a heretical baptism, the effi,et of which was a question
which this Court and the Judicial Committee had
specially reserved. The first point, therefore, was,
whether this baptism was heretical or schismatic ?
secondly, if so, what was the effect of such a baptism ?
And there was a third question, namely, whether a
member of an Independent congregation could proceed,
under the canon, against a clergyman of the Church of
England, to punish him pro salute animae ? The
Learned Advocate then proceeded to show what was
heresy, defining a heretic " one whose opinions were
opposite to those of the Established Church," and a
schismatic, " one who separated himself from the true
Church ;" and he cited the Statutes 1 Elizabeth, c. 1, 29
Car. 11., the Councils of Constantinople and of Chal-
cedon. The effect of heretical baptism he showed from
St. Augustin, and that it required something to be done
before a person so baptised could be admitted into the
bosom of the Church.
Sir H. J. FUST—Do you mean to contend that hereti-
cal baptism is no baptism at all ?
Dr. l'imumoaE—No ,• it is good after certain cere-
monies are performed. The ceremony of baptism is not
required to be performed over again. There are defi-
ciencies in the performance of the rite which must be
supplied. Here is a heretic putting forward a canon of
the Church against a clergyman pro salute animm. We
do not, interfere with the civil rights of the party ; this
is no question as to a civil right, but as to a spiritual
right. Ido not say that the party is not a Christian.
TheCounT—Then she is entitled to Christian burial.
Dr. PHILLIMORE—CertainIy, in their own cemetery.
The COURT—Then it is compulsory on such persons to
provide cemeteries for themselves?
Dr. PHILLIMORE-My argument is, that you cannot
permit a heretic or schismatic to put in motion a canon
of the Church for punishing a clergyman for the good of
his soul.
The CounT—ls this child a heretic ?

Dr. PinurszottE—Yes, in one sense.
The COURT—I can understand why a child who has
not been baptised at all should not have burial ; but I
cannot understand how a child should be refused burial
because it is a heretic.
Dr. PHILLIMORE—The child was baptised in heresy
and schism.
The COURT—The canon excepts such as have been
denounced excommunicate majore excommunications
for some grievous and notorious crime." Has this child
been so denounced ? You do not distinguish betwe n
e
the effect of heresy and schism on the party adminis-
tering the rite and on the party to whom the rite is ad-
ministered.
Dr. Pnimastonu—The part deceased is excluded
y
from a spiritualm right bys o the fault of her parents.
The arguent standver till next Court day.

The Hon. Manners Sutton had an interview with L,
W.harncliffe yeatertley at the Cotincil-office. • -