The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-09 00:00:00

rtirtr Vtlition

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock.

BANKRUPTCY.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Commissioner FANE.)
IN RE JOSEPH BEAUFORT CULLEN.
This insolvent came up for his discharge this morn-
ing. He is an Irishman, and formerly resided at Norfolk-
street, Strand, and latterly at Old Cavendish-street,
Cavendish-square. By giving himself out to be a gen-
tleman, and by the use of accommodation bills, he
managed to get into debt to the amount of
5,1691. 16s. 2d. For several large sums included in this
amount he had legal proceedings instituted against him,
and, judgment being taken out, he was thrown into
prison, where he lay till the 24th of December last,
when he made application to the Court for its
protection. He was then opposed by several of the
creditors, and, after an adjourned hearing, he was
ordered to be detained till the present. He now came
up for his disehlrg,o. To-day he was again opposed by
two of the creditors, Mr. Malims appearing for Mr. Day,
of Bull-street, Manchester-square, and Mr. Sturgeon
for John Clements, solicitor, of Fenchurch-street.
Mr. Cooke appeared for the insolvent. The objec-
tion urged by Malims was, that the debt
of 74L 10 owing to Mr. Day, his client, was on an
accommodation bill drawn by the insolvent, and accepted
by a Mr. Rapier on behalf of the former. It came out
in examination that this was not altogether the truth,
and the objection was overraled by the Court. The ob-
jection taken by Mr. Sturgeon was of a similar character,
the Learned Gentleman representing the insolvent
as a person without visible means, niaing money when-
ever he could upon accommodation bills, for which, in
some instances, he was in the practice of allowing almost
cent. per cent. discount. There were no assets to meet
Vie debts set forth in the schedule.
Mr. CooKE, on behalf of the insolvent, entered into
a long statement, how the latter had been involved in
some unfortunate trading expedition to India in 1842,
which laid the foundation of his subsequent embarras-
rnents.
His HONOUR did not think the insolvent had acted
from fraudulent intentions, but that he had been exceed-
ingly imprudent. The punishment he had already re-
ceived he thought sufficient, and he would therefore
grant him his protection from that day.

CRIMINAL COURT.—(THIS DAY.)
W COURT.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
STEALING A COAT.—Samuel Oxford, aged 21, de-
scribed as a japanner, was indicted for stealing a coat,
value 183., from the shop-door of Mr. Edwards, a tailor,
in Newgate-street, on the 19th of March.
The coat was fitted on a " dummy," which stood at
the prosecutor's shop door, and on the day in question
it was knoelsed down by the prisoner, who stripped the
Coat from it, and made off at the top of his speed, but
was immediately stopped and taken into custody.
The prisoner stated that he was passing by the shop-
door, and found the coat laying on the pavement; that
he picked it up and walked away with it.
The prosecutor denied that the " dummy" could have
fallen down by accident, as it was fastened to the wall
with a string, and said that the prisoner ran as fast as
his legs could carry him.
The jury found him Guilty.
The COMMON SERGEANT (to Mr. Jonas, the person
having charge of the prisoner in the dock)—Do you
know him? Mr. Jonas—He is not known in Newgate.
The CoMMON SERGEANT (to the prisoner)—Do you
know me? Prisoner—No, I do not; I have never been
here before.
Mr. Jonas said he understood that the prisoner had
been convicted at the Surrey sessions during the last six
months.
A police-constable said he had been convicted of steal-
ing two coats at the Surrey sessions, and had been out
of prison between four and five months.
The Common SERGEANT—I am certain I have seen
you here before. However, as no one appears to know
you here, I shall not act upon that. After having sen-
tenced the prisoner to six months' imprisonment, he said,
now it is all over, tell me what I tried you for ? Pri-
soner—l really never was here before.
STEALING Two CHESTS OF TEA.—Richard Lanydell
and F 1 ede, ich Payne, labourers, were indicted for break-
ing and entering the warehouse of Mr. John Symonds,
proprietor of the Saracen's Head booking-office, Ald-
„gate, and stealing 1901bs. of tea, value 35/., and Thomas
Etter idye, a cab-driver, was indicted for receiving the
game, well knowing it to have been stolen.
From the statement of the Counsel for the prosecution,
Mr. liaise, and from the evidence adduced, it appeared
that Langdell had at one time been in the service of Mr.
Symonds, as ostler, and was well acquainted with the pre-
mises. Payne had obtained permission from Mr. Odell,
the bookkeeper, to put up dogs now and then in the yard.
On Thurseay, the t3th of March, Langdell was observed
to go to the warehouse door, to take the key out of it
and make an impression of it in red putty, which he had
in a small tin box. During a great portion of the day
following he and Payne were observed to sit at the
window of the " tap" attached to the booking-office,
which c :mmandeda view of the warehouse door, and where
they could observe all the goods placed therein the course of
that day. Amongst other articles placed there on Satur-
day, for the purpose of being sent off on the following
Monday, were two chests of tea. Payne and Langdell
ware in the " tap" during nearly the whole of Sunday,
and were last seen there between seven and eight
o'clock in the evening. About nine o'clock a rumbling
noire was heard in the warehouse. About that hour a
cab driven by the prisoner Etteridge, came into the yard.
Soon after Payne and Langdell were seen standing be-
tween the cab and the warehouse door, which drove
off. Payne went with it. Langdell went to his
dogs, liberated them, and ran after the cab.
The whole of the prisoners were taken into custody in
the Blue Boar-yard the same night. Etteridge said he
sera engaged to drive Langdell and Payne and two sacks
(the tea was taken out of the boxes, which were broken
lap and left in the warehouse) to Pettieoat-lane. He
had some drink with them at the White Horse, and
left them and the sacks at the corner of the
lane. Payne had 71 on him, and it was proved that the
day before the robbery...he had asked a person whom he
knew to lend him 6d.
Mr. O'BRIEN and Mr. BALLANTINE then addressed
the jery for Payne and Etteridge.
The jury fond Payne and Langdell Guilty, and ac-
quitted Etteridge.
The C031310N SERGEANT said he was bound to fulfil
the intentions of the Act of Parliament, and that it was
his duty to sentence them to transportation for ten years.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAI.
GLOBE.—The detention and opening of letters at
the Post-office was last night again the subject of an in-
teresting debate in the House of Commons. All at-
tempts having failed to obtain redress, through the
medium of Parliament, for the individuals who had com-
plained of the serious infraction of their rights by the in-
terception and opening of their letters, the necessity for
terminating the practice by legislative enactment
becomes the more necessary. Mr. Thomas Duncombe
—whose prudence and perseverance in the manage.
ment of this great controversy with the Government
merits commendation—last night brought the question
before the House, on motion for leave to bring in a Bill
to secure the inviolability of letters passing through the
Post-office. The debate was conducted with singular
calmness and dignity. The acerbity which on former
occasions was painfully perceptible in Sir J. Graham,
and which was, doubtless, caused by the severity of
the animadversions to which his conduct in the trans-
actions had been subjected, was no longer visible. The
question had, in a great degree, become divested of the
personalities which were mixed up with former discus-
sions ; and the high constitutional principles involved
iu the practice sought to be abolished were brought
out with prominence and effect. The debate was
thus rendered both dignified and impressive.
The warrant of the Secretary of State
.secures indem-
nity to the Post-office authorities against the conse-
quences of detaining and opening the letters of indi-
viduals. The production of the warrant would be
an answer to any action or criminal proceeding insti-
tuted in consequence of detaining and opening any
given letter committed to their charge. But this does
not establish legality to the Secretary of State's
Warrant. That point is still questionable. The Chief
Suatice of England, from his place in Parliament, has
given it as his opinion, deliberately formed, that a
general warrant issued by the Secretary of State, autho-
rising and directing that the letters addressed to an indi-
vidual specificially named shall be detained and opened
at the Post-office is an illegal warrant and that
a special warrant for the opening of each letter is
necessary to authorise the Post-office authorities to
details and open the letters of any person in their pas-
sage through the Post-office. While the law of the case
is doubtful, the practice is universally eondem
of former As
ned.
a measure of police— to which the Governments
days had recourse under extraordinary circumstances of
peril to the public security, and when the ordinary police
was far less efficient than it now is—the power claimed
is no longer necessary ; while the extension of
informa-
tion, and the jealousy which pervades the
public mind
on all questions relating to personal liberty, render the
employment of such a power a source of disquietude and
alarm throughout the community. The removal of the
invidious and odious power which is now claimed
and exercised, would also relieve the Government
from the applications now made to it by the am.
bassadors agents of Foreign States, to intercept
the correspondence of individuals in this country whom
they may suspect of carrying on a secret correspond-
ence with persons in their territories. The answer to
sueh applications would be prompt and decisive. Mr.
Dancombe put this point with considerable ,effect :-
44 If any minister or agent of a foreign den& should
come stanciering and sneaking to their doors, the Go-
vernment would be able to say to him—' This power no
longer exists.' Whatever redress or protection he might
demand, that they would be able and willing to give,
according to the law of' England and the law of fle-
xions ; but with regard to this species of treachery,
should he solicit it at their hands, they would be able to
say—pointing to the new Act of Parliament—' Such
power is no longer at our command.' "—(Cheers.) Sir
James Graham admitted the odious and justly un-
popular character of the power possessed by the Exe-
cutive, bus; was not prepared to consent to its
abrogation. The entire tone and tendency of the
Ilight Hon. Baronet's speech were subdued and con-
ciliatory. It is obvious that though the law remain un-
altered, the practice has receive d a death-blow. No
Government will again risk an exposure and disgrace so
humiliating as have been caused to the present Ministry
by the detection of the practices to which allusion has
been so often made.
STANDARD.—The important, but extremely diffi-
cult question raised by Mr. Mackinnon's motion, will

continue to recur in Parliament until it shall be satis-
factorily set at rest by some law for the regula.
Wm of interments in cities and large towns. We
can scarcely hope that horrors like those of Spa-
fields can be obviated by prosecutions under the
existing law, when we see the monstrous obstructions
thrown in the way of the prosecution now depend-
ing. We cannot help thinking that the first step
to be taken is scarcely a step in legislation,
though it would do more to correct the present
abuse than any law, it is to provide a sufficient
number and extent of decently inclosed free
cemeteries, if not actually in, at least conveniently near
to, the metropolis. The excess once drained off in this
way, there would be little difficulty in making arrange •
meats for the existing churchyards and cemeteries ; but
without some such drain as we speak of, we defy the wit
of man to guard by law against abuses.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

(THIS EVENING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
RAILWAYS.
Mr. ALDAM presented a petition in favour of the
Leeds, Dewsbury, and Lancaster Railway Bill.
DUBLIN PIPE WATER COMPANY.
The SPEAKER announced that the Committee on
this Bill reported that the Standing Orders had been
complied with.
GRAND JUNCTION RAILWAY.
The SPEAKER stated that the Committee reported
that the Standing Orders had been complied with in the
Grand Junction Bailway Bill.
EREWASH VALLEY RAILWAY BILL.
Mr. BARRY BALDWIN moved the second reading
of the Erewash Valley Railway Bill.
Sir F. FRENCH said he would not oppose the second
reading of this Bill; but at the same time he should say
that unless some arrangement were made by which pro-
tection would be affordd to those whose property would
be very seriously and deeply affected by the line,
those parties should endeavour to protect themselves.
Mr. BARRY BALDWIN did not know why his
Hon. Friend should have made this statement, for no
petition had been presented against the Bill.
BRIDGEWATER NAVIGATION RAILWAY BILL
Mr. DIVETT presented a petition against this Bill.
SOUTH WALES RAILWAY BILL.
Mr. PARKER presented a petition against this Bill ;
the I etirioners prayed to be heard by counsel.
LEEDS AND. LIVERPOOL CANAL.
Mr. BECKETT presented a petition against this Bill
HARROGATE AND RIPON JUNCTION RAIL.