The Sun.
London, England, 1828-10-28 00:00:00

solved and dispersed in five minutes ; we learned upon the
Green that the Brunawickers had carried it, but none o' us
ever knew the cause, until Saturday morning, when I gen: to
the High Sheriff for my petition, and when I was informed
that IT HAD NEVER BEEN PUT UP AT ALL; and that it
bad not been put up because I called the petition the peti-
tion of the PEOPLE OP KENT, and not the petition of tll?
PREEHOLDERs of KENT! So that, here was a pretty
proceeding. Mr. Llodges's motion was an amendment
upon my petition ; the amendment was put by the Sheriff;
though it was made upon a paper which he regarded as
notlany, on account of • its informality ! The absurdity,
or the gross partiaY ty of this proceeding, needs no pointing
out to any man of sense. But the material thing of which
the public is to be informed is this--those who voted for
me, as well as those who voted for Lord Winchelsea, voted
alike againt Catholic Emancipation. And though I regret
that we Radicals had not fair play, which we should have
had if I had not been kept at so great a distance from the
Sheriff, and had not, by artfal delays, been put off till
the close of the day, I do not regret that the majority
was, not three to one, as the reports Say, but nineteen to
twenty against Catholic Emancipation in the present state
of things. Indeed, the vote in that respect may be called
unanimous; for there were, in fact, not ten men in the
whole'meeting who would have held up their hands for
Catholic Emancipation—a proof of which I will now pro-
duce that no man will question, and which is completely
decisive upon the point."
Let us now hear Mr. Cobbett's character of the
Meeting :
" First, however, as to the character of the meeting.
From the report, one would gather that it was, after all,
but a middling sort of a concern; that there were, to be
sure, 30,000 men assembled ; but that these were, 14 the
most part, mere hinds brought like cattle by the land-
owners; quite ignorant of the questions at issue, predeter-
mined before they came to the spot to obey implicitly the
command of the masters; that uproar and confusion pre-
vailed (except when Mr. Shea and Mr. Sheil were speak-
ing !) and that every thing was indecorous, disorderly,
confused; arid that, as to the decision, it was, in fact, no
decision at all.
" Now, Sir, this Meeting presented to my eyes the
finest, the grandest, the noblest sight that those eyes
ever beheld. There were- not less than two thousand men
on horseback, more than a hundred poet-chaises and other
carriages of that description. The meeting was held on a
beautiful smooth piece of green sward, on the side of a very
gently rising hill. There was au enclosure by posts and
ropes, somewhat in the form of a horse-shoe, the outsides
of which were lined with waggons and eoaches, and at the
open end were drawn up .in rank and file, four and five
deep, about three hundred men on horseback, who sat there
mounted from twelve o'clock until half-after fire. There
was not, during the whole time, a single broil, a single
blow struck by any body, a single act of violence of any
sort; and I neither saw nor heard of a single instanct of
which brutal language was made use of by any one man to
any other; nor did I see or hear of one single instance of
drunkenness. Ido not believe that such a scene has been
beheld in England far a great number of years : it was an
honour to the county, and an honour to the country.
" So much for the character of the meeting, which, to
read the reports in the liewspapers, any one would believe
to have been a scene of constant violence, uproar, and con-
fusion. Lord Winchelsea and his frient:s had certainly hail
the advantage of ground allotted to them. They took their
station on the upper side of the enclosure, the, enclosure
being allotted to people on foot. Their waggons were also
furnished with seats. They were in a more compact form
than the waggons and carriages on the other side. But
there was nothing unfair in this ; and if they had the good
fortune to have the really greatest captain of the age' at
their head, there was no blame to be imputed to them on
that score. I perceived nothing unfair on the part of Lord
Winchelsea or any of his people; and if they did triumph,
they triumphed as fairly as any men ever triumphed in the
world."

Nobleman or Gentleman ought to have compelled his
tenantry to vote against their conscience; but he
ought to have inquired into the state of_their minds,
endeavoured to set those tight who were in error,
and stimulated those who might be sound in opinion
but slow to act. The Whig Aristocracy either be-
lieve this to be a vital question, or they do not. If
they believe it to be a vital question—and they have
constantly maintained that it is—how can they re-
concile such a declaration with ali e indifference to all
but their own acts which is implied in the neglect,
on such an occasion, to exert their influence to avert
this paramount evil ? Whoever is strongly impressed
with the importance of any object, is naturally
anxious to persuade others to be of his opinion.
Mar, sympathises with man. It is unnatural to lock
tip o?inions on vitally interesting subjects in our own
bosoms. We protest against this system of egotism
on tits part of those who, from their station, claim
a right to guide the country.—Morning Chronicle.
When we congratulated our readers on Saturday
last, on our success in having procured them the best
Report of the great Meeting on Penenden Heath,
we little anticipated that every puny whipster, and
every dirty print would have assailed us in conse-
quence. Our cotemporaries, however, appear
to have scarcely recovered from the impression which
our report was calculated to make on the public
mind, before they determined, one and all, to fall
upon us open-mouthed, and to worry us into a still
greater revelation of the secret of our success than
we had then chosen to make. First and foremost in
respectability, though not in wrath, comes the
Pompey (we mean the Courier) of the tribe, apolo-
gising "to its readers for having printed a speech
" which was not spoken, namely, that attributed to
" Mr. Sheil. It was," adds it, "inadvertently
" copied from a Morning Paper, to which Mr.
" Sheil consigned it in manuscript, before it pos-
" sibly could have been spoken. The speech which
" he did speak, but which we defy a mob to have
" heard connectedly, was mere bother, blarney, and
" impudence." So says the Courier; the Standard
is still more violeit on the occasion, and under the
head of "Scandalous Newspaper Fraud," inserts in
its obscure columns not only all the impudent lies of
the political quacks of the day, but, in its own pecu-
liarly impudent manner, declares that no part of the
speech ascribed to Mr. Sheil was spoken by him !
With regard to the two additional assailants, whose
accusations we are about to lay before our readers,
we really know not which to place foremost—Cob-
belt, or the Morning Journal. It is the toss of a
halfpenny, and Cobbett—aye, Cobbett, as he de-
serves, has won the day. Well, then, Cobbett has
written a long letter about us to a Morning Paper,
which, in its usual unprofessional mode of going
to work, has given it a place in its awkwardly
arranged columns, and, to cut his verbiage short,
the gist of his accusation is" that the report of the
" speech of Mr. Sheil was sent in print to the
" office of the Morning Advertiser." He then
goes on to say, " That fact I know. There is a
" small part of it which, as it stands in your Paper,
" has been prefixed, as was originally written and
" printed, and as it stands verbatim in the Morn-
" ing Chronicle and the Morning Advertiser. It
" was sent about midnight in print, to the office of
" the Morning Advertiser. If you examine the
" two Papers you will find the speech the same,
" word foe word. It was most likely printed at the
" office of the Chronicle, and sent from that office
" to the rest of the Papers. You know yourself, Sir,
" that it was physically impossible that a speech
"of that length could be closed at about four
" clock, written out, copied verbatim, actually
" in print and printed off by midnight, after, having
" been conveyed six-and-thirty miles, exclusive of
" the two miles from the heath into Maidstone.
" With you, Sir, a little more precaution was neces-
" sary than with the Morning Advertiser; end,
" therefore, this famous speech is, in your Paper,
" made to refer, at the beginning of it, to transac-
" tions upon the Heath ; and, therefore, if you
" will please to look at the report in your own
" Paper, and go down to the fifty fourth line from
" the beginning, you will there find the speech
" begin as it begins in the other Papers, and then
" go on, word for Word, to the end, with the. excep-
" tion of the last sentence, as it stands in those
1" Papers ; which little curtailment was also thought
" necessary for the purpose of imposing upon you.
" There is, however, one little alteration in the last
" line but one at the bottom of the first of the co-
" lumns of the speech in your Paper. In your Paper,
" the eloquent speaker asks, ' does_Lord Winchelsea
" think,' &c. and then, in the next sentence, he
" says, ' but to touch upon a case that apper-
" tains more nearly to his Grace!' Your readers
" must have thought this a bull ; but, if they will
" look into the speech in The Morning Chronicle
" and in The Morning Advertiser, they will find
" that it was a little rhetorical alteration,. and not a
" Hull ; for, there the eloquent person says, does
" the Duke of Newcastle think, grc. ?' and then you
" know, Sir, ' his Grace' comes in very well."—
Such is the amount of Mr. Cobhett's remarks, of
which by and bye. Next comes a despicable print,
which, after, having changed its name, until it is
only known as the alias Paper—which, after having
forged the title of what is termed the "Leading
Journal" of the kingdom, has, tires acquirens
eundo, committed a still greater forgery on every
Morning Paper in town—which cannot boast of even.
one-fourth of our circulation, and not one cent either
of our respectability or age—a Paper, in fact, which
is the scorn of all parties, and the confident of
none—this disreputable print, we say, which is
never known or heard of in town, and which we
have been guilty of honouring by naming it, has de-
dared that " Mr. Spiel first wrote his speech, and
" then sold it to an obscure Evening Journal; and
" that the purchasers being thus in possession of
" the thing before it was delivered, retailed the pro-
" perty to a Morning Paper, of an equally obscure
" and humble character." Such are the accuse-
tions of our cotemporaries. Our readers are aware
that they have their origin in disappointed feeling
and petty envy at our success, and one word more
we shall not bestow on the motives of the parties.
Neither shall we offer. any remark on the apo-
logy which the Courier has thought proper
to offer to its readers, for having copied from
us one of the best speeches, if not the very best,
which was ever spoken, or inserted in its columns.—
With regard to The Standard, it is perhaps sUfficient
to observe, that when we observed the heading of
" Scandalous Newspaper Fraud," tinder which it
has classed all the lies which found their way into
its Editorial box, our recollection carried us immedi-
ately back to the "nine days' battle before Shumla,"
and the despatches of Lord Heytesbury, on which that
veracious account was founded. We might also, per-
haps, make the same short work with Cobbett, if we
felt inclined; but, as he asserted that he knows it for a '
fact that "the speech was sent to us in print," and that
" it was physically impossible that a speech of such
" length should be closed at four o'clock, written
" out, copied verbatim, actually in print, and printed
" off by midnight, after having been conveyed six-
" and-thirty miles, exclusive of the two miles from
" the Heath into Maidstone, and that we probably
" received it from the Morning Chronicle Office,"
we feel bound to state • in the most distinct
terms, that Mr. Cobbett knows nothing of the
facts which he professes to know—that there
is no one employed in our office who would
be guilty of informing him, or any other per-
son, whether the speech was sent to us in print. or
in 'manuscript ; that we did not receive it from the
office to which he alludes; and, finally, that there is
not only no physical impossibility in doing what he
asserts, but that we can take notes of, write out, arid
print, between four o'clock in the afternoon and
twelve at night, at any time, on due notice, a speech
of twice die length of that of Mr. Sheil ! With
regard to the assertions of the disreputable print
to which we have already alluded, it is really super-
fluous to make any observation upon them. There
is but one word in the vocabulary which could
furnish a proper answer to them—a word of three
letters, with which we shall not soil our lieges.. Our
would-be cotemportiry,however,need not beao angry,

that it was outstripped in the account of the Meeting.
A less niggardly arrangement would have saved it
from the disgrace of not having one word of one of
the best speeches which has ever been spoken on the
Catholic side, and of having been laughed at for not
having produced even at eight o'clock next morning,
any thing at all approaching to a proper account of
the Meeting.—Morning Advertiser,

LORD ROSSMORE AND MR. LAWLESS

(Front the Dublin Evening Mail)

The letter which appeared in the Mail of Wed-
nesday, signed by his Lordship, has produced from
Mr. Lawless the following " retort---courteous,"
which has been published in all the Dublin Papers :

" LORD ROSSMORE AND MR. LAWLESS.
" 15, Leeson-street, Dublin, Oct. 22, 1828.
." Mr LORD-I have read, with no little surprise, a let-
ter of your Lordship's, directed to the Editor of the Dub-
lin. Evening Mail, in which you have presumed to say
that I have made false statements respecting your Lord-
ship's conduct in Monachan. I fling back the charge upon
your Lordship with all the contempt it deserves, and now
do I solemnly re-assert all my statements respecting your
Lordship's late pusillanimous public conduct, unworthy of
the spirit and integrity of the Magistrate, or the sincerity
and honour of the professing Patriot., You mistake my
character much, my Lord, if your Lordship will flatter
yourself that I will not return blow for blow, no matter
whose the hand that strikes it; with your Lordship I
will not hesitate to appear at the bar of public opi-
nion, and let that tribunal decide whether I or your
Lordship are the most distinguished through life for our
adherence to, truth, consistency, and honorable conduct.
I have the honour to remain, your Lordship's very respect-
ful, "JOHN LAWLESS.
" To Lord Rossmore, Cortolvin

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

BOW-STREET.

Yesterday Norman Davis, alias Davison, and
Emanuel Charles Green, the man of colour, both of
whom stand charged with having conspired to de-
fraud Mr. Thompson, the patent bed manufacturer
of Long-acre, were brought forward for a final exa-
mination. The appearance of Green had undergone
considerable alteration since his apprehension, and on
being placed at the bar he was in a very weak state,
the cause of which Ford, the gaoler, explained to the
Magistrate, by stating that the unfortunate man had
attempted to cut his throat with a razor, at Tothill-
fields prison, about half an hour before. It appeared,
that while Ford attended to convey him before the
Magistrate, Green, with seven or eight other pri-
soners, who were at breakfast, was placed in a sort of
waiting room at the prison. In a fit of temporary
desperation, he snatched up a razor and inflicted a
wound on his throat that extended almost from ear to
ear. He then dropped the razor and was secured.
Li a short time the surgeon belonging to the prison
sewed up the wound, and soon after the prisoner and
his companion Davis were conveyed to this office in
a coach.

Previous to the examination being gone into, Sir
RICHARD RIRNIE said that he had received a letter
from the prisoner Green, stating that he had been the
dupe of Davis, Edgard, and others, to whom he had
been introduced in Paris by a Frenchman, named
Carnel.

Green (in a faint voice)—Yes, Sir; pray read
my papers, and you will find that I have stated
nothing but the fact.
Mr. Cross, the solicitor for the prosecution, sug-
gested that the evidence previously taken should be
read over in order to see how far the prisoner Green
might have been concerned in the fraud.
The evidence of Mr. Thompson was then read over.
Mrs. Glindon Was then called forward on the part
of the prosecution, to prove that Green had parti-
cipated in the fraud respecting the bedsteads. She
stated that she was the wife of Mr. John Thomas
Glindon, of No. 6, Salisbury-street, Strand. The
prisoner Green lodged there. •
_Understood that four
bedsteads and 'bedding had ,been sent directed to.
Mr. Green during her temporary absence from home.
The beds were placed in the draWing•room. Mr.
Green told witness that the beds were his, and that
he wanted to send them to France. The next
evening the prisoner Davis and three Frenchmen
came to the house in two coaches, and took away
the beds. The prisoner Green assisted in re-
moving them. After they had been removed, he
expressed a Wish that they would go safe. Witness
suspected at the time that all was not right, and in
two or three days after she mentioned her suspicions
to the prisoner Davis, who said he had merely acted
as broker for the sale of the beds, and expected no-
thing for his trouble. Witness then told him, so
convinced was she that a fraud had been committed,
that if she knew the-person from whom the bed-
steads had been obtained, she would tell him her
suspicions.
Mr. Thompson said that another person whom
the prisoner Green had defrauded was ready to come
forward.

Mr. Wm. Frazer was then examined. He stated
that he was a tailor and breeches-meker in New
Bond-street. On the Bth of October inst. the pri-
soner Green came to his shop, and ordered clothes
to tile amount of between 20/. and 2.5/. He first
asked the witness if he had any objection to give
credit, to which witness replied he had none in the
least, provided he had obtained a satisfactory refe-
rence. The prisoner then wrote down the address
of Messrs. Davison and Co., No. 70, Mark-lane, to
whom he referred the witness, stating that iose
persons were his agents. The prisoner added, that
he had lately arrived in this country, and that if he
could have a coat and waistcoat made for him by five
o'clock the following evening he would feel obliged.
The witness added, that he took the precaution of
waiting upon Mr. Davison the following day, and
asked him what he knew of Mr. Green. Davison
replied that he knew him very well, that he was in
the habit of trading from this country to France,
and that he would shortly be in possession of a con-
siderable sum of money. The witness then told
Davis that he was a tradesman, and wished to be
informed whether Green might he trusted with pro-
perty amounting to 2.5/. Davis replied, certainly;
and added, that any orders given to him after Christ-
mas he would undertake to discharge on the part of
Green.

Green—Did you not say you would trust to my
own honour for the payment of the clothes I ob-
tained from you, independently of the reference I had
given you ?

.. -
Mr. Frazer explained, that he did not much relish
the appearance and manner of the prisoner Davis,
and as the coat and waistcoat which the prisoner
Green had ordered were made 'up, he thought he
might trust to his own honour for the amount.
A Solicitor submitted, that this was no fraud on
the part of the prisoner Green, inasmuch as the pro-
perty in question had been obtained without any
false representations.

Sir K. BIaME said, that the case of Mr. Frazer
ought to be coupled with that of the beds. - It
would be for a jury to decide upon the evidence.
Green said—" I am innocent of these charges,
and the man stands before me now-4 mean you,
Francis Emanuel Carnel—who was the means of
introducing me to Davison, Edgard, and others. It
is your fault that I stand here to-day."
Mr. Cross submitted that Mr. Camel ought to
be examined as a witness. His name had been fre-
quently used by the prisoner Green in a way tend-
ing to implicate him with the fraud upon Mr.
Thompson.
Mr. Carpel was then sworn; but being unable to
speak a word of English,
his evidence was inter-
preted by Mr. Glindon. lie stated that he was a
wine-merchant, and that he first became acquainted
with the prisoner Green at Marseilles. about two
years ago, where he met him by accident at a table
d'hote. On the 12th of last July witness came to
London, and was met in the Strand by Green, of
whom at the time he had no recollection. Green
spoke to him first, arid asked him where he was
going. Witness replied that he was looking for a
lodging. The prisoner then told him that he lodged
at No. 6, Salisbury-street, where there was a vacant
apartment. Witness accordingly accompanied the