The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-25 00:00:00

THE S UN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 25, 1845.

three-fourths of the estimates. The result of these de-
liberations had induced the Committee to express entire.
concurrence in the report of the Committees and that the
reduction in the amount of deposits last session, by the
House of Commons, had given a facility to frauds like those
mentioned in their report. Under all these circumstances,
they had come to the decision not to inquire further into the
Bill, without further directions from the House.
The Earl of BESBOROUGH said the report was a peculiar
one, and be thought it better to give a notice respecting it.
He should therefore move to-morrow that the Bill be no
further proceeded with.
PRIVILEGE.
Lord BROUGHAM said he had now to state, that having
brought forward a statement with regard to the privileges
of the House, that he had seen a statement giving
an explanation with respect to the report of the newspaper in
question, and that their Lordships ought not now to call the
reporter before the House, or proceed against the editor of
that newspaper. The Noble Earl opposite would forgive him
if he said that he never intimated that he wished to do so.
They had had too much experience on matters of that sort, and
he thought it better to leave him (Lord Brougham) as the ag-
grieved party to proceed at law by means of a criminal
information, if he wished to adopt that course. No doubt he
could prosecute; it was no excuse whatever that the matter
occurred in the House of Commons, but he had to state that it
appeared the statement was made and was published in another
newspaper, against which he might proceed, if he pro-
ceeded at all—namely, the Morning Chronicle, as it
had published the same speech in the same words. He
therefore should have proceeded against both, or against
neither. But he had seen a statement in both of these papers
purporting to be this—that the same individual Member of the
other House who was represented to have made this un-
just speech, which no person would pretend to ex-
tenuate—that some- person was made to say in the
same paper, that what he was represented to have said was
under an entire misapprehension of the facts—that he was pot
present in the Select Conimittee of their Lordships' House, as,
not being a member, he could not be, and that he had- been
misled by 'the Information which he had received.—( Heat. )
The same individual had stated that the evidence to which: he
had referred, had rio reference to the evidence of Mr: Parkes,
but to some other 'person, which showed that the "in-
formation this individual received was entirely incorrect,
for there was no other evidence which was not taken'down and
repotted to their Lordships, but that of Mr. Parkes. Now,
the same individual was stated to have said; sled,
he believed, . correctly, that he was exceedingly
sorry that his language had given pain to any persons, bit the
only pain it had given him was being induced to speak upon
and to bring the matter before their Lordships. Well, but he
regretted it, 'and that being the case he (Lord Broughati) was
sure he was anticipating the decision of their Lordships
when he suggested that they should not proceed further with
the matter.—a(lear, hear). It would then still be open for
him to prosecute the publishers of the libel, because it was no
protection forf,them even if the language had been 'spoken
in Parliament. He could not conceive that the House of Corn.
monseholding the doctrine of privilege so high, could have allowed
this speech to have passed unnoticed had they heard it,'but he
was still more surprised at the statement that the House had al-
lowed hours to pass away after reading what appeared in the
newspapers, before anything was said about it. He could not
for his life 'believe for one moment that the statement
made in the newspapers had the least foundatiOit in
truth, namely, that nobody got up to complain 'of 'what had
been printed as having been spoken in their presence—that
nobody got up to complain of the grossest libel that was ever
published having been spoken in the House Of Commons till
late in the day, when the party who uttered it voluntarily got
up' to explain it away. The House ought to have at once, and
he believed they did; on their first meeting, take the matter
into their serious consideration, and he could not conceive it
possible that they could have acted in the way represented by
the newspapers. One of the papers had to-day ventured; to
publish another libel upon him. The Morning Chroniile was
pleased to say this morning that he had rendered a great
service to the public in throwing out the Dublin and
Galway Bill, which he was supposed to have done,
but had acted unfairly in prejudicing the Bill be.
fore acting upon the Committee. Now, there never was
any thiog more gross, nor more slanderous than this, and
he said,it was a most flagrant breach of privilege. He would
not, however, appeal against it, but leave it' in their Lordships'
hands. How eeuld he prejudge the Bill when he was riot a
Membet of the Committee, nor had he ever had any thing to do
with the Bill, further than inquiring into certain allegations
against the promoters; nor, in fact, had it been yet thrown out e'
for it had not been reported on to that effect by the Committee.
He hoped, before he concluded; he might be allowed Or say one
word- upon• the subject of' Members of Parliarnent holding
shares in a railway company, and being allowed to vote for its
Bill. In 1837, he induced their Lordships to adopt a most
ialutary standing order—namely, that no Peer should have
anything to de with a Railway Committee who had any con-
nexion whatever with the railway in question ; and he trusted
the same rule was carried out in the other House of Parliament.
The Earl of WICKLOW remarked that on the former even-
ing he suggested that it would be necessary to take steps to
call the publisher and reporter of the libel to their Lordships'
bar,' but a Noble Duke opposed it, on the ground that them
individeali would have to answer questiOns which might eel-•
minate themselves. No*that was the last object he had in
view. His object was to give the Noble Lord an opportunity of
changing the subject from One of privilege to one of a' cri-
minal character.—The matter then dropped.
RUNCORN AND PRESTON BROOK RAILWAY;
• Lord CA MO YS brought up the report of the Select Com-
mittee on this Bill; who had found that the preamble was not
proved. i
Lord MONTEAGLE would suggest to the Haute that some
steps should lea taken on the subject of swearing witnesses
before railway Committees, instead of the present absurd mode
of swearing witnesses after their testimony was given. '
The Duke of WELLINGTON said that some measure was
in contemplation on the subject.
Lord CAMPBELL said the Commons ought to swear
witnesses before their own Committees. 'Witnesses had there
pledged theraSelites to facts which even under the sanction of
an oath they would be most jealous to revoke.
THE NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.
Lord BROUGHAM moved 'a revolution that an address ~be;
presented to her Majesty, praying that she would he graciously
pleased to give directions that the New Houses of Parliament
might be ready by the heginning of next session. i -
Lord WEI MINCLIFFE opposed the motion. It was quite
clear that though a temporary accommodation might be (iv-
rained, the inconvenience of being surrounded by -worknien
and disturbed by noise would more than counterbalance siey
advantages which the aeceromodation might afford.
Lord Cl MPBELL should support the motion of his Noble
Friend. The fiei,h:ne of the Ileuses of Parliament wouldibe
emtponed to the Greek Kalend..
The Duke of WELLINGTON begged thit their Lordships
would recollect that this was the House of Lords and also e
Chamber of Parliament. There must be a 'cominimication
between the twollouses, and also care must be taken 'that 'no
inconvenience would arise to ber Majesty when Corning t )
open and prorcgue Parliameet.
leird CAMPBELL explained. He 'did not mean that her
Majesty shield he inconvenienced in the slightest degree. .
LOrti SUDELY could not concur" in the proprissy Of the
address. It* would tnaterially interfere with the future er-
ringements of the New Houses.
The-Earl of WICKLOW would give his vote for the ed-
dress of his Noble Friend. If they did not do so, they would
be in that House for the next five years. He hoped his Noble
Friend would persevere in it.
. Lord BROUGHAM saw nothing whatever in the objec-
tions which were against his motion. A great deal had
been said in reference to the inconvenience which the Law
'Lords would sustain by the noise of the masons vvhb would be
at work outside, but they were quite willing to un-
dergo the risk of that noise ; for he was quite
sure that the noise made inside ' would • 'drown all
' other clamour.—( A latigh.). If any inconvenience would arise
to her Majesty in the epehing of Parliament (which God for-
bid), he was quite sure that she would graciously. consent to
open Parliament by 'commission for one year., There was,
however, a most serious question for the Hriuse to consider, and
'unless they adopted the, motion it would not be easy to say,
after the delay that had occurred, when they would get into
the new Houses of Parliament.
The LORD CHANCELLOR then pat the motion, and
declared that the non-contents had it.
Lord BROUGHAM—The non-contents have it?
Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared—
Contents. . 16
Non-contents 4O
Majority against the motion 24
PAUPER LUNATICS BILL.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE moved the second reading of this
Bill. He saids althcugh the Bill had emanated from Lord
Ashley, it had been brought in under, the auspices of the Go..
vernment, .and must be considered as a Government Bill.
Throughoht England there was insufficient. accommodation for
lunatics, and many of. the asylums were crowded to excess.
In a civilised country like this, they ought to remove at least
some of the evils arising from lunatics. That was the object
of the present Bill. Sixty out of every hundred of theselunatics
could be cured, provided their maladies were attrnded to
in time. The others were those who were considered to be in-
curable. He would move the second reading of the Bill.
The Duke, of RICHMOND objected to this Bill, because,
if they passed it in its present shape, they would pass a bad
measure, but if they sent it to a Select Committee they would
pass a better Bill. He had a great suspicion of any Bill that
came before them on the ground of humanity. He should
like to have the: Poor-law Commissioners brought to the bar of
the House,' to tell them .if they had lunatics in their work-
houses. They had no right to have lunatics in their work.,
houses. If a lunatic wished he could leave the house at. three
hours' notice. It was ridiculous to have them admitted into .
workhouses, when it was impossible that they could be •cured
there. This Bill
.would increase the county-rate to a great
extent. He objected to it also for the manner in which the
rate was to be levied. The owners of land and not the occu-
piers should be taxed. He begged that his Noble Friend would
reconsider before determining that he would not send the Bill
to a. Select Committee. It would be very much amended in a
very , few hours by a Select Committee up stairs. This Bill
passed through the Houseof Commons, where there were many
gentlemen who were considered to represent the agricultural
interest ; but if an election took place to-morrow, he did not
think that they would be called upon to resume,their duties.
He would
,move, that it be referred to a Select Committee.
. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that he would suggest
that it was not convenient that this Bill should be proceeded
any further with, as far as the seeped reading was concerned. He
understood that a clause bad passed through the House of Corn..
mons by mistake, which it was necessary to expunge. They
should then proceed with it as a .new Bill, and read it a first;
time.
A message from the House of Commons was brought up,
stating that. an amendment was, made on the Pauper Lanatica
Bill, at-present before their Lordships, which amendment was
net made on the engrossment of the Bill, and requestieg that
this amendment should be inserted in the Bill, and that the 85th
(")arise should. be.expunged from the printed Bill, as it elid net.
form part of the Bill when it left the Commons.
Lord CAMPBELL- did not understand the nature of the,
amendments, nor did he exactly understand the present posi-
tion of the Bill in consequence of that message. .
The Duke of RICHMOND thought that their course was
very clear. . All they had to do was to send their messenger
with the Bill to the House of Commons, and say that 'their
Lordships would expunge the clause as requested. .
Lord, COTTENHAM thought the most regular way would
be to send the Bill back to the Lower House as it was, arid let
the alterations andemendments be made there.
The LORD CHANCELLOR did not concur with the
Noble Lord who had just sat down. In 1836, Mr. Wilkes brought
a message from the Commons, requesting that a certain provi-
sion should be expunged from. the Marriage Bill for England,
which had-been agreed to on the third reading in the Commons.
The way in which that message was dealt with was thise.e-All'
the proceedings whiehevere, already had on the Bill in their
,Lordships' House were vacated. - The provision was expunged.
The Bill as amended was then read a first time, anti cisderee
rto be printed. • Now, thepresent Bill was in a -state precisely
analogous, and he conceived that, with such a preoedent,eheir •
course was very clear.
Tfee.Earl of DEVON said it was perfectly true that, in the
case of the Marriage Act, such a course as had been stated by'
the Noble Lord had been pursued, but it was a coarse not sup-
ported.by precedent. •
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that it was done quite
in accordance with precedent, for Lord Melbourne under whose
guidinue the :Bill was, ladedluded 'to two precedents where a
similar course had been adopted, and those welt-cues fertwhich
the messages were brought up by Mr. Wilberforce and Sir '
George Hill, in 1823.

After a few words from Lords Comm nAU and Lord CA mt.-
Lord WHARNCLIFFE moved that the proceedings
on the Bill up to the present 'stage be vacated ; that the
amendments be made, and the clause expunged, as requested ;
and that the Bill, so amended, be brought in, read a first time,
and ordered to be printed.—Agreed to.
The Duke of RICHMOND then gave notice that he would
move that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the
existing laws and regulations on the subject.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said he would take the second read-
ing of the Bill to-morrow ; and if the Noble Lord persisted in
his motion, he would take the sense of the House upon it.
A desultory conversation then ensued, after which
The Duke of RICHMOND withdrew his motion, and the
subject dropped.
COMMONS ENCLOSURE BILL.

Lord STANLEY moved the second reading of the Com-
mons Enclosure Bill, and explained its provisions in detail.
He hoped their Lordships would agree to the Bill, and not
allow a subject of such importance to be delayed for another
session.
Lord FITZ HARDINGE agreed in the general principles of
the Bill, but objected to the 151st clause, and was of opinion
that the Bill should be referred to a Select Committee to un-
dergo the requisite alterktions.
Lord STANLEY replied that the 153 d clause removed
what appeared to be objectionable in the 151st. He hoped the
Noble Lord would allow the Bill to proceed, as any suggestion
he had to make could be considered when the Bill went into
Committee.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed on Monday next.
MERCHANT SEAMEN'S BILL.

On the motion of the Earl of HADDINGTON this Bill
was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Mon-
day next.

COLLEGES (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed
WASTE LANDS (SOUTH AUSTRALIA).

The report on this Bill was brought up, and it was. ordered
to be read a third time to-morrow.
The other Bills on the table were forwarded a stage, and their
Lordships adjourned.

PROTEST ON PRIVILEGE OF
PARLIAMENT, Jima' 4, 1845:
DISSENTIENT-
1. Because this House is now for the first time inter•
fering to stop by force an action brought against a party
for &wrong done to a fellow-subject in slanderous words,
alleged to have been falsely spoken, and in thus inter-
posing its power, under the name of privilege, between
the subject and his strict legal right, sought to be made
good in a court of law by the course which the la* has
prescribed.
2. Because, whatever right the Hou'se may be supposed
to derive from precedent, that is, from former instances
in which it has exercised similar powers, there can be no
doubt that in former times both Houses of Parliament
were wont to do many acts, under the name of asserting
their privileges, acts which, in the present day, and for a
long time past, both Houses of Parliament have wholly
abstained from doing, and which would now be consi-
dered by, all mankind to be gross and wanton violations
of all justice.
3. Because, though the right, however founded, or
however proved, to do such acts as these, or even such
acts as the present of a far less objectionable kind, were,
admitted; yet it is always a question of expediency and
discretion whether or not this power, even if it be pos-
sessed by right, shall in any given ewe be exercised ;
and it ever behoves both Houses of Parliament to be most
cautious and abstinent in the use of porters like these,
which are assumed by them over parties chareed.with
offending against themselves, and are used be- them in
their own case without the intervention of any ita',Partial
and judicial authority.
4 Because it is, in a peculiar manner, the duty of
both Houses to abstain from such acts when they refleci
that there is no code of privilege promulgated whereby
the people may know against what law they offend, that
the law is in each case declared; poSsibly made for the
first time; after the alleged breach'of has been com-
mitted, and made in the heat of the strife ocCa:irioned
•by the 'alleged offence, that the Members of the two
Houses. always differ among themselves both as to the
law and its application, and that they who promulgate
it are at: once the lawgivers, parties, prosecutors, jurors;
judges, and executioners ; while in this instance alone
no power of extending mercy to the offender exists in
the State.
5. 'Because it behoves this House in a more peculiar
manner to avoid placing itself in so strange and ano-
malous a position, seeing that as it is the court
of justice in the last resort in all cases criminal and civil,
so it ought to be most anxious ever to set the example
of strictly just, regular, legal procedure, and should most
carefully shun all violations of law andjustiee, and should
especially be slow to interfere with pending actions,
which may, in their result, come 'before itself, as a' high
court of 'appeal. • . •
6. Because the cases in which it iS'expedient and jus-
tifiable,' from absolute necessitY, 'ti interfere esith the
rights of individuals and the ordinary course of the law,
are of tiadescription wholly different from: the, present,
being actual obstructions offered! to-the proceedings of
the Houses, and which must be removed without any
delay, else, the arm of Parliament would be paralysed ;
and because no objection could ever be raised to such
an exercise of power, and of rightful power, either
by the 'two Houses or by any other tribunal. But
constructive contempts like the present are of a wholly
different ' description, and no harth whatever:. can
arise frOm allowing them to be 'dealt With by the:course
of the law as administered in ihnregular courts of jus-
tice, those courts to which the SOvereign as well as the
meanest of his subjects must always, resort 'for the. esta-
blishment of rights and punishment of wrongs—those
courts to- which the Houses of Parliament 'may most
safely resort as the abodes'of strict justice—eoUrta pure
fl-otn all taint of corruption, free froth 'tlll bias of in-
fluence; amcontrolled by the threats either of .regal
authority. or aristocratic insolence, or
.popular. violence,
and to which neither faction nor Tear can ever gain
access. , , , •,,
. Because the 'argument that witnesses must.be pro-
tected from vexatious and costly suits is wholly inappli-
cable to the case, inasmuch as no one pretends to doubt
that they may be prosecuted at the instance either of the
Crown or any individual, whether a Member' of the.
House- or not; and if so prosecuted never-could recover'
one farthing of their costs, though ever so honourably
acquitted.
8. Because no punishment which can bp_ inflicted
either by a prosecution or by the House upon a witness
for the,wost Branton and the falsest slander ,of an indi-
vidual, can .afford any reparation whatever to the party
thus injured, as the House has not brialea the power, if
petitioned, to give any such compensation.'
9. Because the protection "Withessei-he"fore the
Houses df Parliament never can' be regarded as more
essential to the public weal than.' the' protection of wit-
nesses.before the courts of civil and. criminal judicature ;
yet no ;one, pretends to doubt that an action may be
brought' against any person for. slanderous, words
falsely spoken by him in giving his evidence before these
courts, and though no damages could be recovered if the
words were spoken in answer to a question put' in the
cause, yet it is quite certain that the action must take
its course, and that nothing could be done by the court
to stop it ; so that the witness must be-exPeeed to ex-
actly the same vexation and expense'which are alleged
to form 'the only ground for interfering to stop the
action in the present case.
lb. Because the order to 'prevent a def,ndant from,
pleedisigaarahe, cammiimeet of, the plaintiff..for a con-
structive Contempt, never can ',really stop,sthe action;
which may proceed through all its:.stages whatever be
done to the parties; unless, indeed, the greater and un-
heard-of vi dense were committed of arresting_ the
judges and their officers, an-1 destrciying the record ants
tearing the proceedings from the'file.'
11. BecOuse all the argumeriti drawn from alleaed
analogies in a court of equity are whelly
wide of the question, inasmuch as the granting
an injunction to stay actions, at law, or to prevlnt
receivers.. and other officers, or
,quasi officers, of the
court being sued for acts done under its'authoriV,
are not. granted discretionally, but are :natter 'of strict
right Rod ; urd inasmuch as such injunctions only prevent
" the party against whom they issue froni obtainieg his
re acdr in One form; reserving it'to him in another,
securing it to him in the 'Court Which staVs the action
whereas the present proceeding. deprivesi'lie:pirtSepf all
remedy Whatever, the House ha ing no posher or autho-
rity to grant him redress- .
12. Because it is a
great aggravation .0r the'-.mischief
justly complained of, that tor the, last nine years the
other, House of Parliament has sold all the papers printed
by its authority, allowing a discount to 'encourage the
trade in those publications ; and that though this Howe
has not as yet engaged in this branch` of business, yet it
commiinicates its prints to the Other', Which sells them
with its' own. , ~•
13. Becauee the inexpediency, injustice, arideruelty
9f exercising the alleged .privileges of the House is
strongly illustrated by the peculiar circumstances of the
present case. A complaint is made by a peer that an
action has been brought against a witness. The deicu.
dant is publicly described as a most respectable person,
who had served well in the Peninsula ; to the- plaintiff is
applied the most severe and even coarse expression,
while in no court that tried the' ease could praise
or censure of the character bOrne by the parties ever be
heard for an instant, much less proved in evidence ; and
while it is also manifest that precisely the same course
must have been pursued .had, the respectable man
been the -slanderer, and the censured eman• been
the injured party. Under the , prejudices excited by
such statements, the parties. are examined - 'at the
bar. The plaintiff is compelled to disclose his case
to the defendant. He describes 'himself as grieirOusly
injured, and as severely suffering from the effect of the
attack made upon his character by he defendant.' He
further declares that he was wholly ignorant of the
privileges of the House, wholly unconscious of his having
acted in breach of them by bringing his suit—a thing
the more easily believed when we reflect that the nature
of Parliamentary privilege wes distinctly stated, in de-
bate, to be wholly unknown to the judges of -the land,
and only understood by the House itself. Finally, the
attorney, who has been seised and imprisoned for for=
lowing' his client's instructions, declired that he acted
'under the advice of counsel ; and afterwards 'informed
the House, through a Peer, that he had received direc-
tione to discontinue the action ; . yet both client and
attorney are imprisoned, the attorney after this com-
munication was .made ; and nothing whatever is done
against the counsel who deliberately advised 'the whole
proceeding.:.
14. Because nothing can be more unlike all the judi-
cial proceedings to which the present h-is been compared
than the'course now pursued, inasmuch as wheneier the
law has declared that a Court shall not proceed' in any
case by reason of 'another jurisdiction being interfered
with, a particular mode of preventing this proceeding is
provided. by the known law ; and in another and im-
portant particular, the present proceeding is extremely
unlike that of injunction, to which it has been likened,
for an injunction is commenced to stay proceeding in
one Court, in order that justice may be &mein another
which has possession of the suit ; nor' iS 'any ono pre-
vented anlees he disobey the order se; 'given ; whereas
we issue no order, but at once Pideeeel to to punish the
party before he has been guilty of any disobedience, or
had any opportunity of doing. what we desire he should
,do, and we punish him on the sole ground of his having
broken some privilege unknown to him,- and which we
admit is understood by nobody butoutselves.
15. Because, finally, it is all along affirmed in the
course of these discussions, that whatever privilege we do
not in any case exercise, we cease to possess'; 'whereas
there are many privileges most undeniably belonging to
,us, some which in former times were constantly exer-
iihich we still declare to be ours on the face
of our standipg orderse-and none of which have now for
a long time past been exercised at all'; and in illustra-
tion of the varying usage which -exists respecting such
privileges; it. may further be remenfbered that a very-
great change has come over this question, 'even within
the last forty years ; as no one can affect to think that
either the Houses of Parliament or fhe'Courts of Justice
would at this day punish summarily for contempt those
acts which frequently were thus visited within that pe-
riod of time,, including the very publication for which Sir
Francis Burdett was sent to the Tower, and which raised
the lait great discussion of the privilege question in
Parliament, in the Courts of Law, and in this place.
• BROUGHAM.
WICKLOW.

MANCHESTER:STATE OF TRADE.—There has been
no material change in the demand for goods this week. -The mar-
ket does not exhibit much animation, but is very steady, and prices
perfectly firm. For yarn the demand still outtune theproduction,
and prices,, especially of warps and the common counts of water-
twist, have an upward tendency. There has been a failure, In
Liverpool, of a house engaged in the Mexican trade ; the liabilities
are understood to amount to about 60,0001., a considerable.portion
of which ii•due to parties in this town. It is understood that the
failure is owing, in a great measure, to unsuccessful mining 'peen.
lations. —Manchester Guardian'.
A man-named George Robinson, sixty-eight years
of age, Who was said • to be an illegitlinate son of tile4ge. IV., was
charged at Bow-street Police Court, on Wednesday, with hating,
when intoxicated, indecently assaulted threw boys. lie was ordered
to And bail, and angrier the charge at the Raton,

ATTEMPTED SWINDLING AT
NOTTINGHAM.

A case of an extraordinary character has just occurred
in Nottingham, in an attempt by a clergyman to swindle
several tradesmen out of goods to a large amount ; but,
owing to his former proceedings having been made
known in the public prints, happily, in this instance, he
has been defeated. Three weeks ago an advertisement
appeared in the Nottingham papers, of which the follow-
ing is a copy :
" SCII.OOL-COLLICIATI, COMMERCIAL, AND AGRICULTURAL.

" A married clergyman of some standing, and of considerable
experience as a tutor, has come to reside in Nottingham, for
the purpose of opening a boarding schoiil for young gentlemen,
and has taken the house in Castle-gate, formerly occupied by
Dr. Mitchell Davidson, which will be ready for the reception of
pupils on the 4th of August.
" The plan of education to be adopted will he based on strictly
religious principles, upon a system as far u possible catecheti-
cal and explanatory, and will embrace the usual Greek and
Latin classics, the pure and mixed mathematics, and a solid,
liberal, and comprehensive course of English literature ; so
that whatever rank of life the pupil may occupy, it will be the
aim of the master that he possess the character and feelings of
a scholar, the Christian, and a gentleman.
" A course of simple lectures, on a level with the capacities
of the pupils, will be given once a fortnight, on some scientific
or literary subject— it having been found .by experience that a
conversational style of instruction commands the attention, and
awakens the energies of the mind without. oppressing it ; and
while it affords an ample opportunity of frequent illustration,
accustoms the mind to reason and think for itself—a point of
the utmo't importance in the education of youth, arid far more
beneficial than heaps of undigested matter obtained by rote.
" The accGmplishments by eminent masters.
"French and drawing taught without extra charge.
" The advertiser would he happy to meet with clerical duty
in the neighbourhood.
For prospeetuses and reference', apply to the Principal, at
his resOence, Castle-gate, Nottingham.
" Casty-gete, July 16,. 1845."
This advext,isement excited much interest in the Own
and neighbourhood of Nottingham, particularly amongst ,
the clergy, who felt their order somewhat involved by a
gentleman entering the town without announcing his
name : and it is mainly owlsg to this circumstance that
the attempt at wholesale swinciline• has been successfUlly
prevented. "liiiMediately after the above announcement
a gentleman, habitea likeU clergyman and of polished ad-
dress, called upon Mr. Jones, upholsterer, Beast- market,
hill, Nottingham, and gave his name as the Rev. Dr. Ber-
rington ; he stated his intention of opening a
school, and referred to . the- terms of his ad-
vertisement, which had appeared on the Fri-
day preceding, and expressed a wish to he supplied
with furniture, carpets, &c., for his house in Castle-gate.
On Mr. Jones requesting a reference, the name of
" Mr. Welchthan; 77,'Cernhill, London," was given, and
he was described as a West India proprietor of great
'wealth. So frank and prompt were the answers to the
several questions put, that Mr. Jones thought all was
right ; and believing that proper inquiries must pre-
viously have been made, or so large, a house would not
have been 'Consented to supply the goods. Men
were immediately employed' in making and fitting
carpets, setting up beds, and arranging the furniture to
resider the mansion complete. The articles supplied
amounted t 6200/." Finding that success had attended,
his efforts, Dr. Berringtem then applied to Mr. Whetnall,
wine-merchant, Parliament-street, of whom he ordered
wines and porter, which soon found their way into the
cellar in. Castle-gate., Mr. Hurst, china-dealer, Chapel-bar;
was also favoured with an order for china; and Mr. Parn-
ham, bootmaker, Long-row, opened an account for shoes;
the china and six pairs of shoes, all being promptly sap-,
plied, , Mr. Palethorpe, engraver, speedily. got ready
Large brass plate, which was placed on the hall. door;
having had engraved upon it " Rev. Dr. Berrington's
Academy." A barrel of ale and eatables of every de-
scription followed in rapid succession, and on Saturday
morning last Messrs. Astill and Hedderley, ironmongers,
Clumber-street, on ,hearing the oft-repeated tale, under-
took tosupply kitchen utensils to the amount of 401. or
50/. ; part of these goods was sent- in the same after-
noon, and the remainder was to go on Monday morning.
A speedy entlehowever;--was past to this extraordinery
.career by a- elergynian, who, after anxiously search-
ing to discover' the character of the " married clergy-.
man" about to,f4vour .the public.with,a ", glen. of educa-
tion based .on strictly, religious principles," and a per-
formance of clerical auties in the neighbourhood, found
a newspaper- containing a full-length description, in
characters not to be misunderstoo 1, of the celebrated
Rev. Dr. Berringten ! This. Paper, the tartness, a Scotch
ii,wsnepee, being • placed on Saturday evening 'in Mr.
Jones's harid;- liedieeotiered; td his utter astonishment
end alarm,. that his customer was the Veritable 'Dr.
Berrington, who -fignred rat Oraveley, in Herefordshire,'
in the; month. of March -last, by taking a' large house,'
opening school, giving extensive ordets, and obtaining
credit for goods to the amount 6f several 'hundred
pounds. On reading - this article, copied from the
fleY tford Reformer, on .the 29th of March last, Mr.
Jones determined to adopt a prompt but a judicious
coarse. Ilevingearia.ngeet to call. in. Castle-gate that
afternoon," he instantly sent an excuse, as it Was
Market 'day, and' requested that Dr. Berrington
would call upon Mr. Jones' at his house, as he wished
to speak 'to him there. In a short time Dr. Berrington
was on 13eastImarket hill, and in conversation with Mr.
Jones. During this interview, which was contrived to
be continued three hours, twenty of Mr. Jones's work-
men were despatched, awl they, entering the " large
house," completely cleared it of all the articles which
had been fUrni:Shel by their
.eniployer. Dr: Berrington,
on returning into -oesele- gate, found out his mistake ;
and the news of the discovery getting wind, the house
IRecanee so beeieged, that the occuier quickly left it to
the will ofiaie creditors. On that day, for ihe first time.
the lodgings this " gentleman" had .taken were.disee-
veretL It appears that three weeks ago he took his two
toys—one four, and the -other ten years old—to the'
house of Mrs. Havi-k;ne, Milton-street, where he re-
ruained with them while he made the effort to swindle
the tradespeople.`
°Oa the-tley 'he was diseovered,- his wife, in a far ad-
vanced state of pregnancy, arrived by train froth Lon-
don, and she, as well as the children, was 'wretchedly
attired. cheseeeg_her,
_the Doctor said he had got Ole
house ready, the wine was decanted, and bouquets; of
fresh flowers neatly :arranged upon the tables.,. New
clothes had been ordered for the bop, and every reqUi
site had beeirfurnished- for a splendid career. The er-
pose; however, -had, unfortunately for him, but happily
for others, ruined his bright prospects, and on the fol-
lowing day.ZStinday); this Rev. Doctor and family set
out by train for London. -