The Sun.
London, England, 1828-01-05 00:00:00

reign that his Majesty may be pleased to take such TO Prirn
measures as in his wisdom may appear expedient to
secure the undisputed enjoyment of the territory in
question to his Majesty's most loyal subjects ; and
that petitions should also be presented to the Pro- Gee
vincial Legislature, at their approaching Sessions, 1 heel
praying that they may be pleased to take the ease
etiqu
into consideration, and adopt such measures thereon net ferthc
as the circumstances shall require. Ale Rus
4. That to carry the resolves of this meeting into the distil
effect, a committee of seven persons be appointed,
COUNT)
of whom any three shall form a quorum, with power
to correspond with the other committees already ne`wr by t
event wbi,
formed, or that may be hereafter formed, in other
parts of the province for the purposes for which this shortly.
committee has been appointed, and jointly with said the pos..iN
committees to take such steps as may be mutually ',Preseing
agreed upon its most conducive to the fulfilment of position, i
the trust reposed in them. sludge by
And that Messrs. Blanclict, Stuart, Vallieres, the deters
Henderson, Lagueux, Laforce, and Neilson, do form the means
the said committee. of Durhar
(From the National Intelligencer.)
The question respecting the north-eastern boun-
dary arises out of the treaty of peace of 1783, be-
tween the United States and Great Britain. Being
still an unsettled question, provision was made in
the treaty of Ghent, for ascertaining and fixing the
boundary. Under that treaty, Commissioners were
appointed to settle the question. They were not
able to agree upon an adjustment. In that event,
anticipated as possible by the framers of the treaty
of Ghent, provision was made in that compact, that,
on a disagreement between the Commissioners of the
two Governments, they should report the fact to
their respective- Governments, and that the question
should thereupon be referred to the urnpirage of
sonic Sovereign arbitrator. On that subject negoti•
ations were commenced in London, before Mr.
oag,iilieeaDditi,
Rush's return to the United States, and have been '
continued by Mr. Gallatin, which are understood to
have resulted in the formation of a convention set.
thing the preliminaries of the reference of this quee'
tion according to the treaty of Ghent.
As to the matter of fact, each party has been in
possession of some portion of the disputed ground
that is to say, the Governments of Massachusetts .„-----------
and Maine on our part, and of the province of Neil 1-IPTFOI
Brunswick on the part of Great Britain, have exec'
i
ftrrii,:37
tltheEd:
cised jurisdiction over it; and each party has been
OAY
disposed to strengthen its claim by further acts 01. PUBLIC
possession. In the mean time, between the Foreign, Leto of I
Ministers of the United States and Great Britain SIONS an
there has been a constant correspondence, at consi'
derable intervals, however, but always in the VW;
tone, having for its object the inculcation of mutual 13 a' '
Butt
the of the expediency of the preservation
the same state of things in the disputed territory al, and Rice;
existed at the date of the treaty of Ghent, and 0 re'', Raisil
avoiding all disputes which might grow out of the A bepos
agitation of it. Notes of ti
With respect to the two Governments there is $ Lot at the
perfectly rood understanding upon the obvious pro' mangy to b,
pricty, sill indeed necessity, of forbearance and rno porn
ro4e a I
deration on both sides, as to this question. And
acts of a contrary character are acts of individual ci'
tizens, without the authority or sanction of either ' not le
Government, and of course are to be avoided ad awaY Withi
rebuked. seven fellom
This is the general state.of the facts. As to the forfeited, a,
particular case of General Baker, we can only se' as no even
that if he stopped the mail, and did other obnoxious The sto,
acts, "on what is technically and practically BritiO the yard, 0
territory," by which we understand such territory "1 of sale.
was in possession of Great Britain at the date of tilt Catalog
Treaty of Ghent, and previously, then he was vie u
listing what we believe to be the settled understand' --_______
ins between the two Governments, and his condtiel
lii
will, of course, receive no countenance on the parr THE
of the United States. Whether he was on that ter'
ritory or not, is a question which depends upon eV eetiee, tri
dense not within our reach. will
he hell
We will only add, that we believe that measure 'lament, at
will be taken, on the part of the United States, tc 44.1 hare, on '
ascertain the true character of the transactions 011 "'dock ie t:
the disputed territory, there being no dispositiO TOR, in tli
here to connive at any acts of violence, contrary it ilil health, a'
the understanding which exists between Great P' fired for al
tain and the United States on this subject.

you, Cent
Mr. Row
and I feel
choice of
tify so flat
Zealous eff,
rest!, Agr
are so ex
sers politic
steipate in
never he fi
interest, a
our Consti
and expeci
Russell
of which I
trust you s
aPPear n,„
highest ob
I 1

PALACE COURT, JAN. 4.

West Ind
The
ROYAL
THE
sav fro
,e 4 (Sun
not/ a
ellimPton
zaARNs,
via/4,ineool6e,
s, 1111
"Y StrL
CARUS
Qarbtang.
EXETE
titer.
A 11110
lOLYII
and Bangor
VERI
I‘IILF43I
tordswest.
NORWI
The follow

LYON V. «•isrrNEr.
This was a case of some importance, as it welt
to decide whether the alleged acceptor of a bill'
which he declared to be a forgery, was liable in psi'
ment to the holder. The bill in question was 101
I It, and bore to be accepted by Mr. John Whitney'
the defendant.

It appeared that the brother of the defendant, $
William Wilson Whitney, purchased from the plaio'
tiff his interest in a house in Westminster, for whio,
he gave three bill; two for 101. each, and one 101
111., accepted by his brother, the present defendant;
The plaintiff, on getting the bills, sent a person r(
the house of the defendant to ascertain whether the)
were his acceptances, when the defendant acknoi/'
ledged that they were. The two first bills, 01'
coming due, were regularly paid, but when the third
bill became due, 1111 application was made at till
house of the defendant, and the wife of the defend'
ant said that it should be paid in a fortnight; sulr
sequently, however, the defendant refused payment
on the ground that it was a forgery.
To support the plaintiff's case, a person of the
name of Coney was produced. This witness under'
went a long cross-examination by Mr. EARL; as r`
whether the- intimacy with the defendant was sad',
as that he could not be mistaken as to his identiri
and he was desired to point him out in Court, which'
after some little hesitation, he did, but admitted thol
the defendant's appearance was much changed 3110
May last, when the bill became due.
Another witness proved having been paid the
former bill by the plaintiff.
On the part of the defendant, Mr. EARLE, co'''
tended, that before the, plaintiff was entitled to 1,
verdict, he should have proved the hand-writing u'
the defendant. His Learned Friend had &el'
much upon theeirre.uEmarstlea)ncereaodf
atlheettedreffernomdanor:
wife having told Coney, the plaintiff's witness, the
the Bill should be paid in a fortnight. In explao'
tion of this, he ow
defendant's brother, acknowledging that he had not
only forged the bill in question, but the other of°
which he had paid, and entreating his brotheii
pardon for his offence; and stating, that the presell.
bill should have been paid, were it not that he boy
been disappointed by his wife's sisters. In support
of his client's case, he called a witness to prove
that the letter which he had read was the hand'
writing of the defendant's brother, William Wilsoc
Whitney.
Mr. FLANAGAN submitted, that such a letter cod
not be received in evidence.
Mr. EARLE then produced several witnesses t°
prove that the bill was a forgery.
Mr. BRENT charged the Jury, and after half eo
hour's consultation, they found a verdict for th;
plaintiff.

WoyMou
Norwich
Nottib
ng
ir4tter,
Windsor
nirtoingl
ght.

-14,:"Cerpoo
knutba

lirightor
C'anterbl
Carlisle
before Feu
Derby,
before Fot

Glasgov
fore Four.
Manche
fore Feur.

Netting
Four.

Bristol ;
Milford
Taunter
Windsoi
Liverpo,
TWo.
Norwicl
Five.

Derby,
before Six
Edinhui
before Six
Mche
beretan* Si
x
Notting
,
'111411" 1;4
olyhea
ha, VI n
re Six,
/'tLynn'
e
ota.
tle,fitrdt,tiae!
I) :)14%g01%
P'"re Sevi
-itnterbturi'
Nst
• 4
Tol

BIRTHS.
On the Sd inst., the lady of the Rev, A. P. Kelly, °
Charles-square, of a son.
On the 3d inst., at Lavender.-hill, the lady of Coritl4
Lloyd, Esq., of a daughter. 1
On the 2d inst., at the East India College, the lady 0
Capt; l‘l
3d ichael'
of a son.
On the inst., in Great Corarn-street, Mrs. John Nl('
Bridges, of a daughter.
On the Ist inst., at Maresfield, the lady of Wm. t'Y
Esq., of a son.
•

-
DIED. *La
On the 29th ult., Mrs. Fowler, of Bayham-etreet,"Caa
den Town, aged 53, deeply lamented.
At his residence at Mile- end, Richard Carpenter, FA.'
aged 74.
On the 3d inst., at his house in York-place, Pent°,
Ole, Mr. John Hurst, late of Waterloo-place.
On the 3d inst., in the 26th year of her age, S&
Sophia, the wife of Mr. B. Edgington, of Homerton.
On the 2d inst., at Terling's-park, Heat.) Michael Ha
kin Esq. aged 72.
parr= and PUBUSHBD by M. OUN6f, at
SUN Orr*, DO, We SIM*

e fh
e,
1111t4b11
Passeu
%u4l'll the '
414 °I th.
Lu