The Sun.
London, England, 1844-09-04 00:00:00

NO PUFF NOR IMPOSITION.

SPENCE R'S CELEBRATE I) CHINESE
LIQUID HAIR I)YE.
The thousands of individuals who have had the pleasure of using
Spencer's Chinese Liquid I lair Dye, pronounce it to be the only Dye
extant which will effectually change, in a few minutes, red or grey
hair to a dark brown or black, and it can be proved incontestibly
that it is the safest dye in its use that ever was prepared. Red or
grey hair, whiskers, eyebrows, moustaches, &c., arc changed without
trouble, by simply using a comb wetted with the liquid; erie applied
tion will produce a pleasing and a permanent change. The colour
it imparts to the hair can never be discovered to have been et_
fected by dye, it being so perfectly natural, and n.ither washing, per-
spiration, or anything will in the least fade or affect the colour pro.
duced. Hundreds of ladies who wore false hair, because their own
became grey, wear new their own. Also, thousands of gentlemen
who had grey or red whiskers, t hick was a great di,figurement, have
become quite dark from the use of SPENCER'S CHINESE LI-
QUID 11 AIR DYE. Any lady or gentleman may dye their hair
with ease and seeresy in a few minutes. Price Is. 6d., Gs., and lOs
per bottle.
robe had of the sole Proprietors, 29, Nottingham-place, Fieldgate-
street, Whitechapel.road, London; also of Mr. Johnstone, 68, Corn
hill; Butler, 4, Cheapside; Prout, 229, Strand; Sanger, 150, Ds-
ford-street ; Barclay, 95, Farringdon-street; Atkinson. :M, Old Bond..
street; Edwards, fa, SL Paul's Churchyard ; Connell, Camberwell-
green ; Rennaby, Brothers, 10, Westmorcland.buitdings, Aldersgate-
street ; !to, Milsom-street, Lath; Elmore, 31, Bull-street,
Birmingham ; Shirley, 40, George-street. Hastings ; and of m,st
Perfumers and Medicine Vendors in Town and Country. Sent to
any part of the kingdom, by sending a remittance post-paid.
Please to ask for .•,..,pencer and Co.'s Chinese Liquid Hair Dye.
Merchants and Captains will receive a liberal allowance for eipor-
tation, a:-.d observe that the hoprietor's address is on the wrapper.

JOSEPH WOODIIEAD and JOHN WOODHEAD, ,
worsted stuff manutacturers, Bradford, Yorkshire,
Sept. 13 and Oct, 11, at eleven, at the Leeds District
con rt • V roomno nfliei9l • aqtif.,,,,,, T ~,,I, • ('11.•••
and CO. Botitorel-row, London • Wavill, Halifax.
HENRY HALL, cattle dealer, Suaalesmouth, North-
umberland, Sept. 12, at twelve, and Oct. 10, at two, at
the Newcastle-upon-Tyne District Court. Wakley,
official assignee, Newcastle-upon-Tyne ; Bell and Co.,
Bow Church-yard, London ; Carrick and Lee, Bramp-
ton • Bates and Dees, Neweastle•upon-Tyne.
ROBERT KINDER MANN, wine merchant, King-
ston-upon-Hull, Sept. 18, and Oct. 4; at eleven, at the
Leeds District Court. Hope, official assignee, Leeds ;
Ti:son and Co., London ; Wells, Hull ; Horsfall and
Harrison, Leeds.
SECOND NOTICES.
11. Bull, farmer, Westbury, Wiltshire, Sept. 11, at
clever, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Belcher, official
assignee.
W. A. Lamprell, licensed victualler, Coggeshall, Essex,
Sept. 10, at eleven, at the Court of Bankrupcy. Pennell,
official assignee.
G. W. A. llarvey, Cadogan-street, Chelsea, Sept. 10,
at three, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Belcher, official
assignee.
G. Butler, carpenter, Witham, Essex, Sept. 10, at
half past two, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell,
official assignee.
J. Chatwin, cabinet-maker, New Weston-street, Ber-
mondsey, Sept. 10, at eleven, at the Court of Bank-
ruptey. Belcher, official assignee.
M. T. Knevitt, excise officer, Forston-street, Middle-
sex, Sept. 11, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy.
Pennell, official assignee.
T. Mitchell, blacksmith, Leeds, Sept. 6, at eleven, at
the Leeds District Court.
- J. Pontey, nurseryman, Huddersfield, Sept. 6, at ele-
ven, at the Leeds District Court.
G. Reynolds, blacksmith, Blacktoft, Yorkshire, Sept.
6, at eleven, at the Leeds District Curt.:- :-.-
J. Battes, jun., cabinet=maker, Jamaica-terraee,..ton-'
mcrcial-road East, Sept. 9, at eleven, at the Court of
Bankruptcy. Pennell, offiCial assignee.
D. Spinal), M.D., Howard-street, Strand, Sept. 9, at
eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Belcher, official
assignee.
T. Friend, cabinet-maker, Canterbury, Sept. 9, at
eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official
assignee.
J. Suckling, tailor, Stebbing, Essex, Sept. 9, at eleven,
at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee.
. G. Willoughby, plumber, St. Alban's, Sept. 9, at
eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official
assignee.
T. Fancy, licensed victualler, Bear-yard, Lincoln's
Inn-fields, Sept. 9, at eleven, at the court of Bank-
ruptcy. Alsager, official assignee.
J. Scarlett, labourer, High-street, Poplar, Sept. 9, at
eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official
assignee.
E. J. Holden, plumber, Stepney, Sept. 9, at eleven, at
the Court of Bankruptcy. Belcher, official assignee.
DIVIDENDS.
T. Wileman, hosier, Earl Shilton,Leicestershire, Sept.
26, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court—J.
Dowle, wine merchant, Chestow, Monmouthshire, Sept.
27, at twelve, at the Bristol District Court—R. Davies,
grocer, Abercarne, Monmouthshire, Sept. 27, at eleven,
at the Bristol District Court—A. Gordon, W. Cart-
wright, and J. Blackett, machine makers, Manchester,
Sept. 27, at twelve, at the Manchester District Court—
J. Dean,.cot.ton spinner, Habergham Eaves, Lancashire,
Sept. 25, at twelve, at the Manchester District Court—
I. Parsonage, paper hanger, Birmingham, Sept. 28, at
eleven, at the Birmingham District Court.
CERTIFICATES to be granted, unless cause be shown
to the contrary, on the day herein-mentioned.
J. Holland, diaper, Buxted, Sussex, Sept. 26—R. S.
Saxby, wine merchant, Old Fish-street, City, Sept. 26
W. Toft, alkali manufacturer, Wakefield, Yorkshire,
Oct. 4—J. Dyson, scythe manufacturer, Sheffield, Sept.
27—T. W. Green, .bookseller, Leeds, Sept. 27—J. A.
Forrest, glass merchant, Liverpool, Sept. 26 LA. Wat-
son, ship broker, Liverpool, Sept. 25—J. Fairfield, corn
merchant, Tranmere, Cheshire, Sept. 26—Z. Bond, brick
maker, Manchester, Sept 27—J. Boyle, corn dealer,
Manchester, Sept. 26—T. Wolfenden and J. Prestwich,
cotton spinners, Oldham, Lancashire, Sept. 27—J. Car-
ruthers, linen draper, Blackburn, Lancashire, Sept. 27
H. Griffiths, innkeeper, Chelford, Cheshire, Sept. 24
T. Westren, maltster, Brushford, Devonshire, Sept. 24
W. Rogers, draper. Newport., Monmouthshire, Sept: 24
—E. Rayner. merchant, Sheffield, Sept. 24—T. Kearsley
and I'. Watt, bone merchants, Runcorn, Cheshire, Sept. 24,
PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.
11. Lewis and .1. Grand, accountants, Coleman•street—
G. Cassura and P. Rave, jewellers, Kingswinford, Staf-
fordshire--M. Morrison and IV. Evans, coal merchants,
Newport, Monmouthshire—R. Bowman and W. New-
ton, tailors, Northallerton, Yorkshire—R. Carr, J. Net-
tleton, and B. Terry, attorneys, Wakefield (so far as re-
gards B. Terry)—R. Pearson and J. Jennings, grocers,
Liverpool—T. E. and E. Cavil, ironmongers, Leighton
Buzz ted, .13edfordshi,:p—G. Hadfield and J. Bewley,
jun., varnish manufacturers, Scacombe, Cheshire—H.
Jones and J. King, gas-meter manufacturers, West-
street, Smithfield,—p. C. Gray and P. Brendon, surgeons,
Highgate--T. II Riddle, H. Riddle, and J. M. Young,
fire back manufacturer 3, Ncath, Glamorganshire—R. A.
Parker, F. L. Field, and A. Field, merchants, Birming-
ham (so fat' as regards R. A. Parker)—J. Salmon and
H. Crockford, miners, Cardiganshire—Dewhurst, Hart-
ley, and Co., lime burners, Clitheroe, Lancashire—(so
far as regards W. Cockshott, T. Dewhurst, and J. Hart-
-1?,y)—II. T. Jenkins and W. Hart, watch fuzee chain
manufacturer s, Christchurch, Sou tharnp ton.—J. Jackson,
T. Armstrong, and IL Woffindin, corn factors, Leeds—

most THE DAILY PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
CHRONICLE.-1110 opinions of the English
judges were delivered yesterday in the House of
Lords upon the eleven questions which had been re-
ferred to them for consideration,
_in the case of the
Queen v. O'Connell. The House ordered the opi-
nions to be printed, and adjourned over the further
consideration of the case itself to Wednesday morn-
ing, when the final judgment will be delivered. As
the principles involved in the discussion are of as
much importance as even the consequences which
may follow from the final decision of this extraordi-
nary case, we shall take the liberty of adverting to
the opinions which have been pronounced, with all
the respect which is due to the moral, intellectual,
and professional excellence of the judges of this coun-
try, but with the freedom and-fulness which are jus-
tified by the almost unparalleled importance and sin-
gularity of the transaction itself. IVe shall confine
ourselves to a single point upon the present occasion.
Amongst the arguments addressed to the House of
Lords upon the part of the defendants, it was said
that, as there were some bad counts in the indictment ;
as the defendants had been found guilty upon each ; as
the judgment was general, and the quantum of punish-
ment a matter in the discretion of the judges, it was to
be presumed that a part, at least, of the punishment
must have been awarded upon the bad counts, and
that as it was impossible to ascertain how much had
been, as the whole may have been, so awarded, the
defendants may in fact have been punished for that
which was, in law, no offence. This argument was
adopted by Mr. Justice Coltman and Mr. Baron
Parke, who, upon this part of the case, have ex-
pressed their opinions to be for the reversal of the
Judgment of the Court below. The other six Judges
who attended the House of Lords upon the argu-
ment, have declared, on the other hand, that they will
presume that the Irish Court of Queen's Bench must
have awarded the whole of the punishment upon the
good counts, and none of it upon the bad, inasmuch
as that Court must be presumed to know what counts
of the indictment are bad and what counts are good.
The English judges having made this presumption
in favour of the infallibility of the legal perspicacity
of their brothers in Ireland, proceed to decide
unanimously that the sixth and seventh counts of the
present indictment are " so bad, that if the indict-
ment consisted of those counts alone, it would be im-
possible to give any judgment against the defendants
upon the verdict." We entreat the most particular
attention of the reader to what we are next going to
state. The Court of Queen's Bench in Ireland was
moved to arrest the judgment, upon the ground that
the 6th and 7th counts, as well indeed as all the other
counts in the indictment, were bad. But the Court
refused the application upon the ground, to use the
language of one of themselves, " that the sixth and
seventh counts were unexceptionable." The counts
in question are declared by the Irish judges to be
" unexceptionably good." The same counts are de-
clared by the English judges to be incurably bad ;
and the English judges haying so expressly decided,
presume that the Irish judges, who, in the case ac-
tually under consideration, have declared bad counts
to be good, invariably know the difference between
good counts, and bad! Never in all time was a
presumption more totally annihilated by contradictory
facts ! In delivering judgment upon the motion in
arrest of judgment, Mr. Justice Perrin expressly de-
clared that he concurred in refusing the motion, upon
the ground that the " 6th and 7th counts were unex-
ceptionable." Mr. Justice Crampton thought it un-
necessary to enter into the merits of the first five
counts, upon thesround that the 6th and 7th were
form," whilst the Lord Chief Justice declared every
count of the indictment to be good and sufficient in
law, and " particularly the sixth, seventh, and re-
maining ones." Those counts upon which the Court
in Ireland mainly relied in support of the judgment,
are now expressly and unanimously declared by the
English judges to be illegal and invalid; whilst the
same judges declare that the Irish judges, who have
absolutely, deliberately, and repeatedly, come to a
wrong conclusion upon this point in this very.case,
must be presumed to be infallible upon such a point in
and this presumption of general infallibi-
mseade the ground for supporting the Irish
judgmentl argument by which the same
infallibi-
lityyevery Is
ca
in an
judgment is proved to be wrong, whilst it is presumed
to be right. In a view to the practical consequences,
of logical inconsistency, or as the assumption of a state
more important than as an exhibition
cot hat. isaseff.paoii
affairs
thi
ne i s
opposition to the indubitable facts of the
English judges take for granted, as the
6th and 7th counts are had, that the Irish judges did
not award any part of the punishment in reference
to those counts. Now, the part of the charge exclu-
sively contained in those counts, is that of creating
intimidation by the exhibition of great physical force.
In reference to this matter, Chief Justice Penne-
father, in refusing the motion in arrest of judgment,
observed, " Take any one count of the remaining
sot," (after the sth) " in these counts" (the 6th and
7th &c.), " those dangerous offences are set out in
e‘dvalysee
n which,o
Why the judgment should be arrested."
taints,. The jury have awarded upon each of them,
an
in my opinion, requires no further cer-
Mr. ..justice Burton, in delivering the final ftidg-
ment of the Court, declared _that the " main offence
imputed to the traversors was that they had conspired
to procure the repeal of the union by intimidation to
be produced by the exhibition of great physical force."
From these statements it appears incontrovertible
that in fixing the quantum of the punishment, the
Court of Queen's Bench not only had regard to the
offence which was charged in the 6th and 7th counts,
but that the punishment was " mainly" inflicted in
reference to the , offence charged in those counts,
which counts are now declared by the English judges
to be so deficient in the necessary elements of legality,
that if they stood alone upon the record, no judgment
could be given against the defendants. Such is the
extraordinary position in which the case and the
parties
a replacedby
only one part of the decision of
yesterday.
HERALD.—Yesterday, the House of Lords re-
assembled to receive the answers of the judges to the
questions proposed to them in the writ-of-error cases
of " The Queen v. Gray," and " The Queen v.
O'Connell and others." Eight of the judges appeared
in person, and the answer of a ninth, Mr. Justice
Coleridge, absent from indisposition, was delivered by
Chief Justice Tindal. In the case of " The
Queen v. Gray," all the judges present, except Mr.
Baron Parke dissentient, agreed to reverse the judg-
ment of the Court below. In the case of "The
Queen v. O'Connell and others,"
six of the judges
present, and Mr. Jnstice Coleridge, agreed to Irish affirm
the judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench.
Baron Parke and Mr. Justice Coltman • dissentient,
but upon grounds purely technical. The proper
time to consider the opinions of the judges, and the
arguments by which these opinions are
supported, will have arrived after the
house
shall have pronounced its judg-
e severallylab elaborate te
of a
Lrgourd s
ment. At present, however, it may be allowed
to us to observe—First, that' the judges are all,
without exception, unanimous in pronouncing the
repeal conspiracy illegal, criminal, deserving of
punishment, and in the case sufficiently proved. Se-
condly, all the judges, without exception, treat as
idle and invalid those objections to the construction
of
much
he jury which which have been made the ground of so
complaint in the Irish Courts, in the
press, and in Parliament. Thirdly, not one of the
objections to which the answers of the judges allow
any weight, much or little, was raised in the Court
811 escaped the sagacity of Mr. O'Con-
nell below. They
whatever, therefore, their value, it
himself and of his nine learned and experienced
advocates ; and
is plain that they were the reverse of obvious—a full
justification of the Irish Court—and ground for a
strong presumption that they are to be ascribed solely
to the difference of practice in the two countries.
TIM ES.—A considerable majority of the• English
judges have answered the questions propounded by
the House of Lords by affirming the validity of the
verdict and the judgment in the case of " The Queen
v. O'Connell." These opinions, we suppose, may be
considered as the groundwork of the judgment of the
Lords on the Writ of Error, and we may anticipate
that the supreme tribunal of appeal will pronounce
against the reversal of the judgment of the Court
, below. We do not of course profess to foretell the
effect which this announcement will produce upon
Irish minds. The moral obliquity of vision with
which everything English is regarded will doubtless
Pervert a judicial. decision, founded ..on legal argu-

merits and irrespective of all but legal considerations,
into the expression of a political prejudice and Saxon
hostility. The Nation and its gentle brethren of the
Repeal press will doubtless tell the Irish people, end the
mass of the Irish people will believe it when they are
told, that the English judges are animated with a
profound hatred of Ireland, and that their refusal to
reverse the proceedings of the Queen's Bench in
Dublin is the result of deliberate malignity and na-
tional injustice ! And the fact that no other result
was anticipated after the arguments of the traversers'
counsel had been heard and replied to, will be tor-
tured into a sign of extreme unfairness, bigotry, and
wrong. But we trust that there are persons even in
the Repeal party who will look with a calmer eye
upon the proceedings in the House of Lords, end will
acknowledge the patient attention and lawyer-like
consideration which the case of the traversers has
received from the English judges, both during the
progress of the trial and since its conclusion. That
the judges are not unanimous proves, what it would
be superfluous to prove in England—that party feel-
ing has nothing to do with the formation of a judicial
inference on a question of law; while the high autho-
rity which the eminence and learning of Mr. Baron
Parke give to every sentence he utters on points of
law, makes us more strongly appreciate the value of
the numerical majority by whom his opinions are
overruled. At the same time we are rejoiced to see
that the Irish Court of Queen's Bench has been saved
from the odium and the disgrace of having sentenced
several persons to a gaol on a conviction generally
condemned by sound lawyers for looseness and infor-
mality. The case was fully and ably argued at the
bar of the House; and yesterday the judges entered
into its technical merits with a minuteness, a particu-
larity, and also a certain degree of disagreement upon
peculiar points of objection, which, taken together,
must preclude the suspicion of apathy or antipathy—
of bigotry or impatience on their part. Supposing,
then, that the House of Lords will square their judg•
ment by these judicial opinions, the traversers will
abide in prison till the expiration of the period for
which they were sentenced, unless the Crown be
pleased to exercise its prerogative in their behalf by
curtailing the duration of their confinement. On
this subject we have already expressed our opi-
nion, and we confess that, having seen the
majesty of the law vindicated, we should have
no objection to seeing its severity relaxed against
those who, while they are suffering its penal-
ties, reject the proffer of mercy with all the
pertinacity of voluntary but ostentatious martyrdom.
O'Connell and his parasites are in gaol ; and this is
a strong prima facie evidence of defeat. When a
man is sent to gaol, his opponents may fairly be said
to have the upper hand. A prison is a hard test of
the vitality of a party. O'Connell is in this predi-
cament ; he has been check-mated at the game of
agitation. His imprisonment has been a moral vic-
tory on the part of Government. It has shown a
determined and successful resolution not to tamper
with men leagued to dissolve the integrity of the
empire. So far it has evinced the courage and con-
stitutional principles of an English Cabinet, bound to
support the union between the two countries. But,
this object attained, it is a matter worthy of consi-
deration, how far it is expedient to continue the pu-
nishment of a man who knows full well that the
sympathies of a people with its demagogues are most
keenly roused by the severity, as they are most effec-
tively allayed by the indifference, of Courts and
Ministries; and who, if released from his present
situation, would be reduced to the alternative of un-
popular tranquillity, or unmeaning, because fore-
warned, agitation. We do not, indeed, think that
the pacification of Ireland will absolutely turn upon
any conduct of the Government towards the tra-
versers, or upon any other measure ; but we think
it generally politic to be generous and forgiving,
when generosity and forgiveness can be exercised
without present loss or future compromise.
GLOBE.—The questions propounded by the Hous
of Lords, in the case of the Queen v. O'Connell and
others, and referred to the Learned Judges for their
opinion, were yesterday answered. A majority of the
Judges agree in opinion that the verdict and judg•
ment are valid ; and, as a necessary consequence, the
the Learned Judges to the several questions were
ordered to be printed ; and the judgment of
the House of Lords will be formally pronounced
by the Lord Chancellor to-morrow. Although
the verdict and judgment are thus vir-
tually affirmed, by the agreement in opinion of a
majority of the Learned Judges that they are valid ;
there exists a difference of opinion respecting the va-
lidity of the judgment. Two of the Learned Judges,
Mr. Justice Coltman and Mr. Baron Parke, have de-

livered an opinion that the judgment of the Court of
Queen's Bench (Dublin) ought to be reversed; while
the whole of the Judges agree in opinion that the 6th
and 7th counts of the indictment are bad; and that the
conviction and judgment upon them ought not to be
sustained. The Times is " rejoiced to see that
the Irish Court of Queen's Bench has been
saved from the odium and the disgrace of
having sentenced several persons to a gaol on a
conviction generally condemned by sound law-
yers for looseness and informality." We cannot sym-
pathise with our Contemporary in the satisfaction,
rising to extacy, on the escape of the Irish Court of
Queen's Bench from the consequences of a reversal of
its judgment, because we do not see that it has esta-
blished a claim to the profound legal discrimination
which is affirmed in its behalf. The Judges of
England unanimously decide, that " the sixth and
seventh counts of the present indictment are so bad,
that if the indictment consisted'of those cohntS'alone,

judgment,
it would be impossible to give any judgment against
d
irvt er_sy(cl
lec!,peu, defendants
,thet sai
nu
Judgespo
to upon
;it hi
teo
favtrehrree: ct. 4 .'
Irishi uponnoftQueen's
e fu these
ei
'the application; by deciding, in the words- of one of
these legal
.luminaries, that " the sixth and seventh
counts of the indictment were unexceptionable." These,
counts, unanimously declared "bad" by the unani-
mous voice of the English Judges, were those which,
par excellence, the Irish Judges referred to as the pillar
-and ground of the judgment they delivered against
the motion in arrest of judgment ! Mr. Justice
Perrin expressly declared that he concurred in re-
fusing the motion, upon the ground that the " sixth
and seventh counts were unexceptionable." Mr. Jus-
tice Crampton thought it unnecessary to enter into
the merits of the first five counts, upon the ground
that the sixth and seventh were "len), good -and
sufficient in substance and in form.' The Lord
Chief Justice declared every count of the indict-
ment to be good and sufficient in law, " particu-
larly the sixth, seventh, and remaining ones." Out of
this contrariety of opinion between the judgment of
the Irish Court of Queen's Bench and the English
Judges, on whose answers to the questions sub-.
mitted to them the House of Lords will decide the
appeal of the convicted parties, arise the principal
questions. Whether, as there were some bad counts
in the indictment—as the defendants had been
found guilty upon each—and as the judgment
was general, and the quantum of punishment a
matter in the discretion of the Judges, a part,
at least, of the punishment was not awarded upon
the bad counts. And, as it was impossible to as•
certain how much had been, as. the whole might
have been, so awarded, the defendants were not,
in fact, punished for what was, in law, no offence ?
These questions appear to have pressed on the minds
of the Learned Judges Coltman and Parke, and con-
ducted them to the conclusion, that the verdict and
judgment - could not be sustained, and therefore ought
to be reversed. To presume that the Irish Court of
Queen's Bench must have awarded the whole of the
punishment upon the good counts, and none of it upon
the bad, may be law, but will scarcely be concurred
in by public opinion as founded on substantial justice.
Mr. Baron Parke's observations arc especially worthy
of consideration. They are founded on the principles
of " substantial justice ;" to secure which, the law it-
self, as a system, is supposed to exist ; and failing to
secure which, it is worse that worthless. They derive
additional force from the acknowledged high character
of the Learned Judge by whom they were delivered, who
stands second to none of his Learned Brethren in those
attainments for which the English Judges are distin-
guished. And, influenced by the reasons which he as-
signed, and sustained by an argument distinguished for
clearness, and convincing from its extraordinary legal
ability, the learned Baron " felt himself compelkd to
give an opinion contrary to the majority of his
Learned Brethren." The House of Lords
course, feel itself called upon to pronounce a judg-
ment in accordance with the opinions of the majority
of the learned judges, and maintain the verdict and
judgment of the Court below. Another question—
:Ind one on which we will not now enters—is, What
course will Sir Robert Peel advise his Royal Mistress
to adopt, under all the circumstances of this extra-
ordinary case ?
ST AND All D . —The proceedings against the Irish
repeal conspirators, which have so much occupied
public attention now for almost eleven
months, ap-
proach their close. Yesterday the judges, to the
number of nine, delivered their answers to the ques-