The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-10 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY MORNING, FEBRuAtt i 10 1845.

elusion of the natives, appeared to me not less at variance
with the directions of the Marquis of Normanby to Cap-
tain Hobson, " to obtain by fair and equal contract with
the natives the cession to the Crown of such waste lands
as may be progressively required for the occupation of
settlers," and to apply the proceeds of the " re-sales of
the first purchases' to the provision of funds necessary
for future similar acquisitions. It must be remembered,
that these directions had not only been promulgated, but
acted upon in the colony at an early period after the
sovereignty had been assumed.
Lastly: it appears to me inconsistent with the practice
of these tribes, who, after cultivating, and, of course, ex-
hausting, a givenispot for a series of years, desert it for
another within the limits of the recognised property of
the tribe.
On the other hand, I had no doubt that on your ar-
rival in New Zealand, you would find that there were
considerable tracts of country to which no tribe could
establish a bona fide title ; and still more extensive dis-
tricts to which, by personal communication with the
chiefs, you would obtain a title on easy terms and by
amicable arrangements. I had thus, in some measure,
anticipated the wish of the Committee, but I cannot
with them in directing you "forthwith to establish the
title of the Crown to ail unoccupied land," except, in-
deed, under the extensive qualification of the following
words of the report, " as soon as this can be safely ac-
complished."
On this fundamental point depends the whole of the ar-
rangement with the New Zealand Company, to which I
must now advert; and in reference to which I do not think
that the report of the Committee readers it necessary
that I should is any way modify the instructions whieth
you have already received. I do not think it would
answer any useful purpose to discuss the terms of the
original agreement with the Company. I retain my
fixed opinion, that that agreement was based upon the
assumption that the Company had obtained by purchase
from the natives a much larger tract of land, of which
they consented to receive a portion by ,erant from the
Crown. The Committee have records d their opinion,
" That the New Zealand Company has a right to expect
to be put in possession, by the Government, with the
least possible delay, of the number of acres awarded to
it by Mr. Pennington ; that the Company has this right
as against the estate of the Crown, without reference to
the validity or otherwise of its supposed purchases from
the natives, all claims derived from which have been sur-
rendered ; adding, that the Company, in selecting the
land to be granted by the Crown within the defined
limits, cannot claim the grant of any land not vested in
the Crown."
On this subject I have only to advert to the letter
from my Under-Secretary to the Governor of the Com-
pany, of the 10th of January, 1843, in which I made
an offer, rejected by them on the 24th January, to in-
struct the Governor " to make to them a conditional
grant, subject to prior titles, to be established as by law
provided, not only of such portion of the Wellington
settlement as is in the actual occupation of settlers under
them, but also of all parts not in the occupation or pos-
sessian of others ; the extent of such grant, of course,
not to exceed that to which they are entitled under Mr.
Pennington's award ;" and to the subsequent letter from
Mr. Hope to Mr. Somes, of the Ist of February, 1843, and
to my instructions to yourself, which I had reason to
believe, when they were issued, were acceptable to the
Company. Those instructions authorised you, in sub-
stance, to make grants to the Company, and to their
settlers, of land to be selected by themselves, within the
districts :specified in the arrangement with Lord John
Russell, so far as the Crown had power to make such
grants—that is, subject to the condition that such lands
were vested in the Crown, and that no other parties
could establish a valid claim to them.

Tnis direction was repeated in my dispatch to you of
the 26th of June, and appears to me practically to fulfil
the intentions of the Committee, as embodied in their
4th and sth resolutions ; for while they assert the right
of the Company as against the estate of the Crown, they
as distinctly negative the right to select any land not I
vested in the Crown. The question then ultimately re-
solves itself into the inquiry, whether any particular
lands be so vested ; and I see no mode of settling this
question but by the conditional grant, which you are
already instructed to make, giving to the Company and
its settlers the benefit of a prima facie title ; but not de-
barring other parties from substantiating by law a prior
title. You have already been instructed further to use
your influence in obtaining for actual settlers, on fair and
reasonable terms, the powssion of lands on which they may
have effected impropasents, even though an adverse title
should be substantiate(); and to these instructions I have
nothing to add, nooo'ee the Committee, I think, suggest
any practical solutlifii of the difficulty. I am not with-
out hopes:that heal ate report of the Committee reaches
you, you may have been enabled, in pursuance of the in-
structions which you hare already received, to place this
question on a satilfactory footing.
You will carefully consider the suggestion thrown out
by the Committee in their seventh resolution, of raising
a revenue, and at the same time of checking an inor-
dinate accumulation of waste land in the hands of indi-
viduals, by imposing a tax (subject to the conditions
and exemptions there specified) of 2d. per acre, or any
other sum, upon all lands in the colony. You will ob.
serve, that from this 9iise it is proposed, by the eighth
and ninth resolutions, to exempt the lands of the New
Zealand Company " so long as they shall continue to
Bell not less than 1-25th of the land granted to them
annually, and to expend a fixed proportion of the pro-
ceeds in emigration,' and also lands actually occupied
and enjoyed by the natives, as " reserves set apart and
held for their benefit:. It is, of course, intended that
the tax should apply to all lands claimed as the property
of native tribes, and not in actual cultivation; and I
presume it is contemplated that the non-payment of the
tax shall be followed by confiscation of a portion of the
lands equivalent to the amount of the tax unpaid. I
think it will be very difficult to apply the principle to
the remoter tribes, which are only partially subject to
our authority; and with respect to all, its application
would require the greatest caution. I wish, therefore,
to leave you an unfettered discretion on this point,
though, if it can be peaceably effected, it would appear
to suggest an easy mode of obtaining a large amount of
disposable land in commutation or redemption of the
tax upon the remainder.
The Committee (page 11 of their report) lay great,
and, as it seems to me, very just stress upon the adop-
tion of a good system of native reserves. I agree with
them in opinion that the natives should be encouraged as
far as possible to settle upon land reserved for them, in-
terspersed with the lands of European settlers, rather than
in large and detached block s, wholly. isolated ; but this
is an object which can be only gradually accomplished,
and which you must induce the natives to adopt of their
own accord, and to which you cannot drive them by
force. I understand, indeed, that the local Government
has already acted upon this plan, and also anticipated
the suggestion of the Committee to lease to Europeans, if
they can be induced to take them, portions of the land
reserved for the benefit of the aborigines, which they
may not require for their immediate occupation. With
regard to the reserves within the Company's territory,
the Committee express an opinion by their 10th reso•
lution, " that these reserves ought not to be included in
calculating the amount of land due to the Company;"
but I do not find this subject adverted to in the report,
nor any reason assigned for the conclusion at which the
Committee appear to have arrived.
You will perceive that the Committee, by their 11th
resolution, advert to the confusion and mischief which
has been stated by the witnesses to have arisen from the
non-settlement of the land claims, and recommend that
measures should be adopted for " granting legal titles
with the least possible delay to the actual occupants of
land, except under special circumstances of abuse."
It is probably not necessary that I should now rectal
to your recollection the importance which, in our discus-
sions before you left this country, I attached to an early
settlement of land claims generally. I trust that before
this can reach you, the titles of all who may have been
able to substantiate their claims according to the provi-
sions of the Land Claims' Ordinance, will have been fully
confirmed, and the necessary title deeds been issued to
them. The resolution of the Committee, however, ap-
pears to point to cases of occupation by patties without
legal claims.
It is difficult, without fuller information than I possess
as to the number of persons so occupying, the history of
the means by which that occupation was acquired, and
the extent of it, to give you any precise instructions on
the subject. I can only, therefore, state generally my
wish that such persons should be dealt with in the spirit
recommended by the Committee, in as far as it is practi-
cable to do so consistently with the provisions of the Im •
perial Land Sales Act, 5 and 6 Viet., c. 36.
YOu will not fail to observe an opinion strongly ex-
pressed by the Committee, " That the prohibition to all
private persons to purchase land from the natives ought
to be strictly enforced, except that land which may have
been purchased by natives they should be at liberty to
sell again, provided the transaction be sanctioned by the
Protector.' There can be no doubt of the necessity of
imposing such restrictions on the sale of land as should
preclude the possibility of the Government being outbid
in its negotiations with the natives by private settlers ;
but you appear to entertain an opinion that a mode
might be devised by which parties might be allowed to
purchase directly from the natives, the purchaser paying
to the Government on each sale such an amount as
twouldee be fully equivalent to the ordinary difference be-
n t
land • 13 sold the price paid to the natives and that at which
whether you Government. Until I shall have learnt
euleve taken any and what steps in this di-
rection,
labstain
to the from doing more than calling your at-
tentionopinionof the Committee.
Be fore I quit this s
sect,l must add that with everydesire
to maintain for the natives all their just rights, 1 cannot
but think that some of those by whom they hare been
advised have formed, ouoraied them to form, ex•
aggerated notions of the valuec
which
and have sanc-
tioned claims for compensationi ich certainly appear
extravagant. I have not receivedw
to your
of any cir-
cumstances of this kind subsequentyouwould
arrival in the
colony ; and I am sure that
demands
to discourage any exorbitant or unreasonablefeel it your duty
upon the settlers, by whose presence and exertions it
must 'be remembered the present high valueh
given to the possession of land, which, before fl:" been•al
of Europeans, bore a very inconsiderable money value, It
would, I think, be easy to show, that while it is our
bounden duty to protect the natives against aggression,
it would not tend to their real advantas,,,ee to encourage
them to expect inordinate payments for their land, while
such a system must have the effect of checking the spread.
of European immigration, on which, if properly con-
trolled and regulated, the prosperity of New Zealand, as
a British possession, must mainly depend.
With regard to military and naval protection, touched
on by the 13th resolution, the Board of Admiralty had
already, as you are aware, under my directions, sanc-
tioned the continued presence of some vessel of war; but,
adverting to the calls which are made for steam-vessels
in every. direction, and to the enormous expense of
maintaining them, I cannot hold out to you the expec-
tation that her Majesty's Government will have it in
their power to accede to the recommendation of the
Committee, that an armed steamer should be constantly
" 405•11 silks' rudiment shall be willing to

appropriate funds specially for this purpose ; nor can I
hold out the expectation of a large increase to your mili-
tary force. On this subject we had full explanations
previous to your departure. There is no army in the
world which is called upon to perform such severe duties
as ours in time of peace ; every addition to the colonial
service renders necessary a corresponding increase
in the force at home, in order to maintain a sys-
tem of reliefs, which is absolutely necessary to
the comfort of the men and discipline of the ser-
vice ; and there is nothing which has so per-
nicious an effect upon that discipline, as the system ne-
cessarily resorted, to in the colonies, of breaking up
the military force into small detachments stationed at
remote points for the protection of scattered settlements,
and affording scanty opportunities for supervision by
superior officers. I conceive that the character of the
settlements in New Zealand renders it peculiarly neces-
sary to guard against this evil, and the military force at
your disposal must not only continue limited in amount,
but must also be kept as much as possible concentrated,
and only applied in extreme emergencies.
If, indeed, it had been my duty to instruct you to act
upon the principle laid down by the majority of the
Committee, of considering all unoccupied lands as vested
in the Crown, and of confining the native tribes to such
portions as they are actually enjoying and occupying. I
should have felt that a very large increase of both mili-
tary and naval force was requisite, and should have
looked forward with apprehension to the results of the
alieuation and hostility which such a measure would en-
gender between the two races; but I rejoice to see that
the Committee abstain from recommending that you
should act on the principle which they lay down, and,
for my own part, I cannot take on myself the responsi-
bility of,Areseribing to you a course which, I believe,
would be neither consistent with justice, good faith, hu-
manitydor policy..
I discussed with you personally the subject of the
establishment of a militia, adverted to in the 14th re
solution, or of an armed police force on the footing of
the Irish constabulary ; and directed your attention to
a short dispatch of Lord J. Russell in 1840, suggesting
this subject for the consideration of the local Legisla-
ture, and promising further instructions upon it. It
does not appear that such instructions were subse-
quently transmitted, nor have the Legislature, so far as
I am aware, directed their attention to the subject. It
was brought to your notice by my dispatch of the
1 lth of March, 1844, and I do not doubt but that on
the receipt of that dispatch you will have acted on
the instructions conveyed in it, if you had not antici-
pated them.
I entirely concur in the wish expressed by the
Committee in their 16th resolution, that the natives
should, as far as possible, be employed in the civil
service of the Government, and I need not re-
mind you of your own avowed determination to en-
deavour to act upon this principle, and gradually to in-
corporate them into European society ; conferring
on their chiefs such petty marks of distinction, and such
degree of authority as they might be trusted to exercise,
and employing the natives generally in the duties of
messengers, police, and other subordinate situations, im-
plying,'however, a certain amount of confidence. Whe-
ther it would be possible or safe to embody natives as a
military force, either mixed with the settlers, or as a
native corps, officered by Europeans, as suggested by
the Committee in their 15th resolution, is a question in-
volving very important considerations, and requiring
much more local knowledge than I am possessed of to
form a correct judgment.
The only remaining resolution of the Committee
upon which it appears to me necessary that I should ad-
dress you is the lith, which recommends, "'that efforts
should be made gradually to wean the natives from their
ancient customs, and to induce them to adopt those of
civilised life, upon the principle recommended by Cap
taro Grey in his report on the mode of introducing civi-
lisation amongst the natives of Australia."
Knowing, as I do, the deep interest which you take in
all that relates to the welfare of the natives of New Zea-
land, it would be, I feel, superfluous on my part to press
upon your attention the importance of the subject of this
resolution.
The Committee, in referring to the report of Captain
Grey, evidently can do so only with reference to thq
adoption of the general principle upon which he pro.;
poses that his system should rest ; the details of his plan
are obviously unsuited to the character and habits of the
natives of New Zealand, differing as they do most
widely from those of the aborigines of the continent of
Australia.

The difficulties with which the governors of the other
Australian colonies have to contend in inducing the na-
tives to adopt a settled life, to resort to cultivation of
the soil, and to engage in the occupation of Europeans,
do not exist with you ; and the rewards which he holds
out to settlers for the permanent employment of natives
in their service, and other leading features of his scheme,
are obviously wholly inapplicable to New Zealand.
The principle upon which Captain Grey proceeds, viz.
that of bringing, as speedily as possibly, the aboriginal
inhabitants of the country under similar laws with the
Queen's native-born subjects, and into habits of civilised
life, is one to which, as you aro well aware, I fully
assent, and which no one has more warmly at heart than
yourself.
I am quite sensible that, in endeavouring to effect
these objects, it may be necessary to temper the strict
application of the penalties of British law with much
discretion and forbearance. Under certain circum-
stances, indeed, I am afraid it may be inevitable to con-
sider, before interfering with native customs, which are
in themselves objectionable, how far the means of coer-
cion at your disposal may render it prudent for you to
take steps for that purpose, which, in case no resistance
was to be apprehended, you would not hesitate to adopt.
Difficult, however, as the task may be, I trust that your
endeavours to effect it will be unremitting ; and I cannot
but hope that, by firm and judicious conduct, by inspiring
a respect for the rights which are guaranteed, and a
dread of committing the offences which are prohibited
by British law, at the same time you convince their
minds of its justice, by making them feel that in their
persons and properties they enjoy full protection, you
may gradually wean the native tribes from their savage
habits, render them submissive to British law, and in-
corporate them in the community of British subjects.—
I have, &c., STANLEY.
In a second dispatch Lord Stanley inclosed to Gover-
nor Fitzroy copies of correspondence with the Admiralty
respecting the furnishing a steam-vessel for the New
Zealand service. The average cost of such a steamer as
that required, of the class of the Volcano, is stated to be
about 5,0001. a year; the expense of the Volcano being,
in the year 1841, 9,0012 ; in 1842, 5,1572; and in 1843,
4,5871. In the first of these years:the vessel was completely
refitted.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS
FRO3I THE DAILY PAPERS OF SATURDAY.

GLOBE.—Her Majesty's Ministers are evidently de•
sirous of being considered unusually liberal and resolute
on the subject of Irish education. They have chosen the
medium of the Royal Speech to recommend to the " fa-
vourable consideration' of Parliament " the policy of
improving and extending the opportunities for academi-
cal education in Ireland." It has not escaped the attention
of the public that this is the only measure so distin-
guished. Mr. Gladstone, if we may
.venture to guess at
the meaning of his very elaborate circumlocution of the
other evening, has been scared from his scat in the
Cabinet only by what is here foreshadowed. He, we may
suppose, has looked upon the reality, in all its grim di-
mensions ; and is perhaps the only man, net in the Mi-
nistry, who knows what is coming. We do not forget
his modest averment as to the very limited ex-
tent of his knowledge ; but he " protesteth overmuch."
It is already rumoured, with an air of some proba-
bility, that the " improving" means the complete throw-
ing open of Trinity College to Catholics on the same
footing as Protestants, and an increase of the grant to
the College of Maynooth. The " extending," it is said,
is to be effected by the establishment of two more col-
leges, unfettered by any anti-Catholic restrictions ; one
in the north and the other in the south of the island.
But whatever may be the form of the scheme, it is as-
sumed on all hands that its effect will be the extension
of some real educational advantages to the Catholic po-
pulation of Ireland—some further advance towards the
obliteration of the religious distinctions which have
hitherto been the bane of Irish prosperity. And, in this
point of view, we have no doubt that a large majority
in this country will be prepared to concur in the measure.
There is, however, one portion of the scheme, be it
what it may, concerning which we must confess the in-
dulgence of some slight curiosity. That the present
Ministry should adopt any principles, however incon-
sistent with their past professions, or push them to any
extent that may be deemed expedient for the service of
present purposes, can surprise no one. But there are
difficulties not to be evaded by the most consummate
pliancy of principle—obstacles which mere moral lubricity
cannot syriggle through. how does Sir Robert Peel
intend to provide for the expense of the contemplated
improvement and extension ? Has he, at length, made
up his mind to the necessity of appropriating to
secular purposes a portion of the sinecure revenues of
,the Irish Church Establishment ?—or are the people of
Great Britain to be asked to pay the expense out of the
income-tax ? It is possible that Sir Robe', t Peel may
have discovered some third source more eligible for his
purpose than either of those we have mentioned. Un-
objectionable as is the end he seeks, he may so exert his
financial ability as to make the means equally so. It is
possible—and he will have our best wishes in making
the attempt ; but we strongly doubt his success.
STANDARD.—It has been represented to us by a
friend—one of those whose corrections are so kindly
intended, that they are always received by us with gra-
titude, oven were it not an honour to be noticed by them
—that we have been guilty of an injustice to the
Lord Chief Justice of England, in saying that
he ought not to have lost a day itits rectifying, in his
place in Parliament, the mistake!! made by him as
to the number of the names omitted in the spe-
cial jury book, upon occasion of the trial of Mr.
O'Connell and his fellow-convicts. " I am sure," says
onr kind monitor, " that though Lord Denman made
this mistake in the course of his speech in the House of
Lords—he made it with an expression of doubt ; and
when set right by the Attorney-General for Ireland,
affect the principle,
corrected it but proeseded to argue that number did not
in which his Lordship was wrong."
Now, the spirit in which we have always spoken of
Lord Denman must have greatly belied our feeling
towards his Lordship, if it does not acquit us of any
hostile feeling
towards a judge, whom we believe
to be as able
the bleand as
seat
that upright
e a magistrate as
ever occupied
particularfialnl fills and e
case
et willwe
be remembered that
in the
were
tcarefulhatheto
erredsugge st
onlywhat throughw haste our sincere
belief,
care-
lessness. It was therefore with an anxl'onuds
wish
to find our monitor right and ourselves wrong, thath
we resorted to the only means of ascertaining
the truth upon the point. Our own recollection of Lord
Denman's speech, confirmed as it was by all the news-
paper reports, certainly supported the opinion that, from
fast to last, hia Xxrdahip Looted upon the fact that oizty

names of qualified persons had been omitted from the
special jury book ; but it was possible that a bye
explanation might have passed between his Lord-
ship ani the Learned Attorney-General for Ireland,
that had escaped us all. In the hope of finding such
explanation, we therefore turned to the authorised
report of the Noble and Learned Lord's argument pre-
pared by Mr. David Leahy, one of the counsel in the
case, and published by Mr. Butterworth, the eminent
law bookseller, on the 12th of October last—a consider-
able time after the judgment had been delivered. We
call this an authorised report, because Mr. Leahy states
in his preface that he was in communication with the
Lord Chief Justice upon the subject of his publica-
tion, and he was even favoured with the Noble and
Learned Lord's private notes upon the case, which he
prints at the end of the speech to the extent of no less
than 20 pages. Now, in the speech, and the annexed
private notes, we find the omitted names uniformly
enumerated at sixty, without any expression of doubt,
any explanation, or any correction of the number. "If
I am asked," says Lord Denman, in the concluding pa-
ragraph of his privat' notes (p. 67), " how many omis-
sions and interpolations will suffice to vitiate a return,
I might perhaps decline the question as irrelevant,
because the number actually omitted is at all
events so considerable, as to disturb the identity of the
return. But I would decline to answer it for another
reason, the impossibility of tracing the operation of the
faulty proceeding. The truth may be, that the whole jury
of twelve would have come out of the rejected sixty."
Here, then, we think, there is conclusive evidence
that Lord Denman did not correct his error in the
course of his speech, for he would scarcely permit
what (upon the hypothesis that he did) he must
have known to be false, to be printed as with his au-
thority, a month after the speech was delivered.
That Lord Denman did correct, with his charac-
teristic candour, one very important error, we re-
member ; and we find the correction noticed in Mr.
Leahy's authorised report. " I understand," said the
Noble and Learned Lord, " that the whole list of
jurors for the county of the city of Dublin
consists of 717 ; it is also mentioned by Mr. Justice
Burton in his judgment. Now the special jury list out
of that must be a very small and inconsiderable propor-
tion of it (viz. of 717), and the omission of sixty names
out of such a proportion of the Sheriff's jury list
as remained for special juries is enough to affect
any panel. I am not sure whether I am
stating correctly the number of the whole book or
not." " The Attorney-General for Ireland—As
your Lordship has appealed to me, I would say that
the special jury list contained the names of seven hun-
dred and odd." " Lord Denman—l am much obliged
for the correction," &c.—(See Mr. Leahy's Report, page
17-18.) We cannot help thinking that this is the cor-
rection which our kind monitor confounds with another
equally important correction, which the Noble and
Learned Lord ought to have made, but which, uufortu •
nately, he does not appear to have made.

PROPERTY AND INCOME-TAX.
On Friday next the Premier will propose the continu-
ance of the property and income tax, as he is pleased to
intimate thus early, "fora further limited period." What
that limitation is to be, whether two years or seven, or
the term of our natural lives, he leaves us still to con-
jecture. What taxes he may at the same time propose
to remit, is a matter for the present equally inscrutable
to human eye. A week longer is left for the respective
patrons of cotton, and corn, and tea, and sugar, and
paper, and windows, to weary Heaven and Sir Robert
Peel with their cries of deliverance for their several
articles. For a week longer the tariff will be melted
down to the consistency of speculative or contingent
matter in the secret chambers of Whitehall. Once
recast, once chrystallized into a financial exposition,
vain will be prayer, deprecation, and argument. It will
then receive the adamantine obduracy of its maker ; and
no consolation will be left for those who happen to be
then disappointed but the reflection that all things pass
away and so must ultimately Sir Robert Peel.
As we have not given ourselves in a very headstrong
way to any one application of this nature, and can bear
with equanimity an absolute refusal, we can afford to
survey the Premier's dilemma. He lives by his income-
tax. It is the Club of the Conservative Hercules.
Others have a thousand resources, many of them rather
indifferent; he has one, and that fairly effectual for the '
nonce at least. Others insinuate a tax here and a tax
there, wherever an opening offers; Sir Robert does his
work with one knock-down blow. " A strong pull,"
and, we fear, " a long pull," is his motto. Unless he is
blessed with some unforeseen opportunity of changing
his line, he must pass for a man of one idea, viz , 7d. in
the pound. He will be computed as an additional
pressure of 3 per cent. on human industry. As he de-
serves a better fate, and a more honourable name, so
we heartily desire he may repent of the tax before his
official exit. For his own sake we should be sorry that
he should go down to posterity with that rough append-
age. Nothing is so intolerable as any approach to a per-
sonal impost. Vespasian procured for himself thereby
an unseemly association of ideas. A poll-tax and Wat
Tyler cleave to the memory of Richard the Second's
advisers. Peter's penny helped to put out the Pope.
Ship-money and benevolences contributed much to the
ruin of Charles I. The duty on hair-powder revolution-
ised the dress, the manners, the mind, and almost the
Constitution of England, and is an everlasting type of
Mr. Pitt's necessities. We could almost predict an equal
perpetuity of fame to Sir Robert Peel's income-tax.
How many examples in practice will he furnish to future
Cockers and Walkingharnes : How often will the Lex
Pelia perplex the student in British antiquities ! How
many thousand times will the schoolbc,y confound an in-
come in the Three per Cents., and three per cent. on the
income ! His confusion will be worse confounded when
he further reads that this same skinflint Peel wantonly
mulcted the people 3d. or more on every sovereign.
What with the attrition of the metal, and the diminution
of the revenue under the Whig regime, the puzzled youth
will arrive at some strange- conclusions to the pre-
judice of Peel or of the Whigs, as the case may happen
to be. Sir Robert, who yields to no man in his eye for
future contingencies, has doubtless foreseen all this; and
is not a little anxious to set himself quite right with pos-
terity. To do this, he must soon or late resign the in-
come-tax. It is one horn of his dilemma.
The other is how to do without it. The extent of this
difficulty may be perceived by casting one's eye over the
return of the public income and expenditure just laid
before Parliament. In that important summary the in-
come-tax is expressed by the very respectable figure of
5,191,596/. With it, there is an excess of income over
expenditure of 3,356,1051. Without it, a deficiency of
1,835,4911.; in round numbers two millions, which is no
such very great improvement on the good old days of
Lord John. Now, the principle of this tax was, that
under its temporary shelter, a thriving young plantation
of smaller taxes was to grow up to such vi ;our and di-
mensions as to dispense with their unsightly protector.
They are two millions a year off yet. Such is the exist-
ing embarrassment which the public importunity has
aggravated, and threatens to aggravate still more. On all
sides arises a clamour for reduction ; commerce, manu-
facture, enjoyment, and life itself, demand fresh ease-
ment. Yet every thousand surrendered, is another thou-
sand added to that two millions which the still laggard
revenue must pull up before it overtakes the runaway
expenditure. Gladly would we see the cotton-tax or
the window-tax removed, but the former reduction alone
would make the deficiency in our permanent arrange-
ments nearer three millions than two. If we once begin
with lopping off the lesser taxes, on the strength of that,
temporary and fictitious excess presented by the pro-
perty and income-tax, we may as well give up all
thought of its entire abandonment, and resolve it into
its temporary and its constant part, its mortal and im-
mortal nature. Tax wealth, and frank industry—lay
your permanent burden on permanent property, but
deal lightly with the precarious labours of trades and
Professions, and the Minister will have no need to meet
Parliament every year with apologies for national con-
fiscation.
Meanwhile a document has been ushered into the
world, with a degree of coyness and backwardness
quite inexplicable, which seems to throw some light on
the Premier's intentions. Unless he has put it out
merely in defence of what he has already done, or in
a certain exuberance of arithmetical production,
merely because it is his nature to develop in tabular
forms, it means a further modification of the tariff. In
a blue book of considerable bulk we have a comparison
of imports and duties before and after the establishment
of the new tariff.—The genius of minuteness and subdi-
vision never showed to better advantage. Eight sche-
dules give this comparison on articles now producing
respectively less than 1001. a-year each, from 100/. to
500/., and so on till we come to two schedules containing
the more important items of revenue from 50,0001. to
100,0001. each, and 100,0001. upwards. The commo-
dities under each schedule are further divided into
raw materials of manufacture, partially manufactured,
wholly manufactured, articles of food, and miscellaneous.
To this is prefixed a summary of the produce to the
revenue, which our readers will find entire in another
column. The first subdivision shows the amount of the
direct relief which manufacture has received from the
new tariff by the reduced duty on its raw materials. viz.,
about 800,000/. a year, the amount of the materials them-
selves having considerably increased. The second has
much the same aspect, showing about 400,3001., repre-
senting more than that amount of annual aid to those
processes which work up and finish partially manufac-
tured articles. The third shows that, under reduced
duties, the import of wholly manufactured articles has
so increased as to return the same amount of revenue.
The fourth exhibits this still more strikingly in the case
of articles of food, comforts, and luxuries. Notwithstand-
ing the serious, and we suppose it must be added alarm-
ing,th e
in reductione
aosf
eddu t
mi e so
roen
tthhaens e
li,4t eomo
()tol. ll
ar
yv ec
an
ru. e upon
e
total shows the revenue a gainer by the new tariff, and
the kingdom consequently a gainer by the vastly in-
creased importation. It is evident that a comparison of
the produce to the revenue is the only possible method
within the reach of Government for indicating the com-
parative quantities imported, money being the only
common measure of the twelve or fifteen hundred
various articles specified in this return. In a day or two
we may perhaps gather resolution to plunge into this
vast and most miscellaneous store. At present we can
only single out one giant loss or sacrifice, as people may
choose to take it. By the reduction of the duties on
timber the revenue has lost about 800,000/. a-year ;
when it is evident that through the general improvement
of trade we should have had an immense increase under
that head, but for this sweeping reduction.—Times.

GREENLAND.—The Greenlanders, who are not very
tender with regard to the weather, have this year had
to endure a winter much more rigorous than ordinary,
the cold having often been 58 degrees below the freez-
ing point. The inhabitants of these desolate countries
have besides been so tormented by famine, that they
havekins been b
reducedeasts. To heighten
to eat their
their o
old
d igarments,,tre:
contagiousform d of
s
malady has broken out among them, which' a
has -carried
off many persoia.—Commerce.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Feb. 8.
(Sittings at Nisi l'rius.)
'Before the LORD CHIEF BARON and a Common Jury.)

31`DONNELL V. TYLER.

This was an action to recover damages for an assault.
The offence was alleged to have been committed in
August last, on the premises of Mr. Abraham Tyler,
builder, in King's-road—the defendant being his
son. The evidence went to show that the
plaintiff, a week after quitting the employment of
Mr. Tyler, called at the counting-house, and demanded a
shilling, which he said was owing to him. The defen-
dant refused the demand, on the ground that nothing
was due ; and, on his desiring the plaintiff to go away,
the latter said " he'd be d—d if he would, and that
it would take a better man than the defendant to put him
out." On this the defendant pushed him out of the office
in such a manner that he fell en the ground, and received
bodily injury. This it was which constituted the alleged
assault.
The defence rested on the statement that the plaintiff
was intoxicated at the time, and that his language and
behaviour were such as to justify the conduct pursued
towardshim.
Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, one farthing.
On the trial of the above case the LORD CHIEF BARON,
in addressing the jury, made the following remarks:—
"I cannot help expressing my regret at the existence of
the law in its present form, and happy should I be to see
the day when juries shall have an opportunity of ar-
riving at a conclusion on the evidence solely. As
the law is now administered, there can be no
doubt that the plaintiff has a considerable advantage.
Those of you who have been here on former occasions
must be aware that he is the first heard and the last
heard. I make these remarks because I think it is to be
regretted that juries are left in the dark on certain mat-
ters, for fear of a reply. It would be very much better
if the whole truth were brought out on all occasions, so
that we might judge of the entire case, instead of hear-
ing a part of it and guessing the remainder."

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Feb. 8.
(Sittings at Nisi Prius.)
(Before the Loan CHIEF JUSTICE and a Special Jury.)
FORTH 2". Lawsox.—LlßEL.
This action for libel has been tried before, when the jury were
locked up all night, and, not being able to agree, the next day were
discharged by consent.
The trial being called on at half.past nine o'clock, the special
jury list was called over, when but five of the gentlemen summoned
answered to their names. The Lord Chief Justice ordered the fine
of 10!, to be enforced on each of the absentees. The plaintiff
prayed a tales, and a jury was made up.
Mr. JAMES opened the pleadings.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOUan stated the case. The plaintiff was a
clergyman of the Church of England, and the libel for which this
action was brought was calculated to do themost grievous injury to
the character and feelings and to the dearest interests of the plaintiff.
The defendant was a gentleman not unknown in the courts of law,
in connexion with the greatest and most important journal in the
world—the Times newspaper—as the registered publisher of which
he now came into this Court. The libel was published in the Times
of the 26th July, 1843. The libellous allegation was, that the
plaintiff, being a clergyman of the Church of England, was sus-
pended for misconduct by the Bishop of London. The pleas which
the defendant had been advised to make rendered it necessary for
him to introduce the libel to the jury, with a statement of
some circumstances in the life of the plaintiff. Mr. Forth was
the son of a gentleman who once possessed a considerable fortune,
and previous to the French Revolution filled a diplomatic situa-
tion at the Court of Versailles. Whilst serving the public in that
capacity he became connected with persons of the first distinction
in France, and, amongst others, with the Duke of Orleans, the
father of the present King of the French. He advanced large
sums by way of loan to that Prince, in consideration of which
three annuities were to be paid—one of 1,000/. for his own life,
one of 5001. for the life of his wife, and one of 1,000!. for the life
of his son, the present plaintiff, then a child. The Revolution
came on, and the family of the plaintiff were severely dis-
tressed in consequence of having "placed too much trust in Princes."
The plaintiff entered the army, and served in Holland under the
Duke of York. But he afterwards left the army, and entered
Pembroke College, Oxford, to prepare himself for the Church, in
which he was ordained deacon by the Bishop of Winchester, in
1803, and priest by the Archbishop of York, in 1806. He after-
tersverds served as assistant-minister at Dulwich College, and
preached at various churches in the metropolis. He was also some
years assistant chaplain to the Philanthropic Institution, where, in
consequence of some dispute relative to the matron, he resigned
his situation. From this circumstance, which occurred thirty years
ago, it was sought in this libel to fix an imputation upon the plain-
tiff's moral character,which would be proved to be wholly groundless.
From what he had already told the jury, they were aware that his
family had shared in the misfortunes of the Revolution ; arid after
the peace of 1815 he applied to the Commissioners of British
Claims for a compensation. A large sum was awarded to him,
which was all paid over to his creditors ; and he still pressed upon
the family of the Duke of Orleans, when restored to their estates,
his claims to the annuity for his life, the arrears, and the interest
due. For some time after the accession of the present King of
the French he resided in Paris, urging upon that Sovereign his
claims upon him for the debt of the Prince, his father. Failing
in his application, he returned to England, and for some time re-
sided with his wife and children, in circumstances of much
distress, in Wandsworth. In July, 1843, an altercation took
place between him and his landlord on the subject
of the rent which he owed, and it resulted in the latter
bringing him before Mr. Clive, the magistrate, upon a charge of
assault, and that gentleman, instead of dealing with the charge be_
fore him, put off the case for a week to give him an opportunity of
raising the money to pay the rent due-20s. This was a matter in
which the magistrate had no right to interfere. However the
Times next day reported the case, and it was only justice to say
that their report represented the case of the plaintiff in so affecting
a manner, that subscriptions for the relief of Mr. Forth and his
family were forwarded by several correspondents. When the week
himohui andwould
aoti
rt
dereprimandedAir.i
nothing
himrth
but ftohar
the payment
opnl
oaoygt
ims
eeadi
tt e
on
butfdit nh ge
9tanhc:-.
expired, Mr. Forth did not go to the police-office. The magistrate
acme. nar tdg
tfgro
ar t
et
o
:Imannesldt:e
aaf annuddl t
et,
cci
s.otmpadgm)mei
aged
much
rent, and as Mr. Forth could not pay that, Mr. Clive ordered him
prison
sp:any
for
T2oh
fourteen
wasfuorrt reportedet
nh
daysass
nlr t
tt athineeda:
greater
gentlemanoecdhgh
riema
was that eight sent off in the prison van to Kingston gaol, where
he remained until his wife procured his release by a ine the °O
sympathy. Subscriptions were transmitted to Mr.ie Clive for the
gentleman's relief, but that magistrate, instead of forwarding
to Mr. Forth, sent to require his attendance at the them
police-office to
receive the money. The plaintiff declined to expose his distresses
again before the public, as he was not then compelled to do as in
the previous case. Mr. Clive, in commenting
upon his obstinacy,
said that he had made inquiries into •
his character,
in consequence of which he would return
the subscrip-
tions of those donors whose address he had, The Times
reported this unwarrantable remark; and added, upon its own
authority, the statements now charged against the defendant as
libellous. The Learned Sergeant made a brilliant speech, in which
he paid in impassioned tribute to the memory of Mr. Barnes, the
late editor of the Times, under whom he himself had been engaged
for that paper; upon which also, its vast influence. gigantic power,
and exertions in the cause of the unfortunate, the poor, and the op.
pressed, he pronounced an eloquent and elaborate eulogy. He
concluded by calling upon the jury to give such fair, moderate, and
reasonable damages, as would compensate the plaintiff for the in.
jury done to his character and feelings.
Captain Abel Rouse Dotted, examined by Mr. JAHEs—Had been
an officer in the army. Served in the same regiment into which
Mr. Forth entered as a cornet in 1796. That was the Ist Life
Guards. Witness left the regiment in 1798. Renewed his ac-
quaintance with Mr. Forth in 1835. Was then Member of the
House of Commons for Southampton, and brought the claims of
Mr. Forth before the House. The claims were for debts due to
him by the late Duke of Orleans. Witness saw the articles in
the Times, stating that the plaintiff had been suspended, but he
thought nothing about it. Knew that plaintiff had entered the
Church.
Cross-examiued by Mr. HumFanv—Never saw Mr. Forth
officiate.
Mr. Hudson, secretary to the Archbishops of York and Canter.
bury, and registrar to their dioceses, put in and proved the letters
of plaintiff's ordination.
Cross-examined by Mr. HUMFREY—Had never known Mr.
Forth to officiate. It was necessary for a clergyman in going
from one parish to another to have a license from she bishop of the
diocese, before he could officiate Had never known Mr. Forth re-
ceive such a licence from any of the several bishops to whom witness
had been secretary.
Mr. Gell, coroner for Westminster and registrar of the diocese
of Winchester, put in and proved the plaintiff's licence as curate
of Melsham and chaplain to the Philanthropic Institution.
Cross-examined—Plaintiff remained in the Philanthropic Insti-
tution four years, and since that time witness has not known him
to officiate.
Re-examined—Mr. Forth might have officiated in any diocese
out of Winchester without witness knowing it. Knew of nothing
to hinder him from doing the duty in any diocese.
Mr. J. Bedford, Deputy of Farringdon Ward, deposed that he
had known Mr. Forth since 1811, when that gentleman was
Curate of St. Sepulchre's, Skinner-street, and regularly officiated
there until 1813.
Mr. Allen, formerly Warden and Master of Dulwich College,
stated that there were three Ecclesiastical Fellows in that College,
and in 1806 and 1807 Mr. Forth frequently did duty for one of
them, Mr. Smith, the preacher.
Cross.examined—Knew from Mr. Forth that there was some
dispute between Mr. Forth and the Governors on the subject of
the matron. Only knew it from a printed paper put into his hands
by Mr. Forth. Mr. Forth either resigned or was dismissed at that
time. Had not known him to officiate since.
Re-examined—Plaintiff might have officiated every day since
without witness's knowing it. Was not aware of any imputation
on Mr. Forth's character, in relation to the disputes at the Philan-
thropic Institution.
Mr. C. Druce, formerly steward of Dulwich College, gave simi.
lar evidence. Witness never heard any imputation on Mr. Forth's
character.
Mr. R. Farquharson examined—Knew Mr. Forth when that
gentleman officiated in St. George's, Bloomsbury. In 1816
plaintiff officiated at the burial of witness's father. Witness had
not heard him in any other church but that of his own parish.
Had seldom been in any other church, and lived now in the house
where he was born.
Mr. Lake, High-street, Bloomsbury, surveyor, stated that he had
known the plaintiff some years before 1816, and believed that no
man could deserve a better character as a clergyman and father of
a family. Witness had read the articles in the Times, and was
very much hurt at them, as he knew the plaintiff did not deserve
imputations. Witness knew him up to the last ten years.
Other witnesses gave similar testimony.
Mr. J. St. John Brooke, Parliamentary agent, stated that he had
conducted the plaintiff's application to Parliament on the subject
of his claims upon the King of the French. Dir. Law, the Recorder,
had taken up the case in 1840 ; but witness did not know whether
he presented the petition or not.
It was also proved that the Commissioners appointed to investi-
gate the claims of British subjects upon the French Government,
after the peace of ISIS, awarded a large sum, between fifteen and
twenty thousand pounds, to Mr. Forth. It was paid into the
Insolvent Debtors' Court. That sum paid the creditors 20s. in
the peund, and in consequence of the exertions made on their be-
half by Mr. Forth, they allowed him 5 per cent. on their claims.
Mr. Humeeee then addressed the jury for the defence. Was
sure that they had heard with pleasure the eloquent speech of his
Learned Friend, and they could only regret that such beautiful
language, and the almost universal talents of his Learned Friend,
were wasted upon such a subject. But he (Mr. Humfrey) would
not attempt to imitate the brilliant display of his Learned Friend,
in which he should assuredly fail ; but would confine himself to
the mere matter-of-fact question, whether it were just that the
jury should give the plaintiff a verdict for 408., which would enable
the attorney to get his costs. That alone could be the object of
this action; for it could not be imagined that Mr. Forth, who, in
the former trial, blazoned forth to the world his misfortunes
and his claims, and after the jury had been locked up all night,
and discharged in the morning by consent, shou.d again desire to
parade his distresses, if it were not to put costs in Isis pockets.
Although the evidence given on both these trials did not in any
way meet the statements against Mr. Forth, yet the defendant did
not wish to prevent his deriving any benefit which might accrue to
him from the statements made by the witnesses in favour of his
conduct five-arid-thirty years ago. But the jury would observe
that no desire to injure the plaintiff has been charged against the
Timer. On the contrary, it was admitted that the Times,
in the first instance, regarded his case as in some degree
-of oppression, :and that the sympathy of the public
was enlisted ill consequence of what appeared thers.

But it was the duty of a public journalist, who had induced the
public to confer its bounty upon a person who seemed to deserve
compassion and relief, to make known any matters which might
afterwards appear to prove the individual unworthy; so that the
public might be guarded against a further mi,application of its
bounty; and that is what the Time* has done. With the excep-
tion of a single passage, to which he would call their attention—
with that exception, there was not a single line of which his
Learned Friend had made a shadow of complaint. He must be
here permitted to say, that his Learned Friend and those who sup.
ported him had adopted a very dexterous course. They had se.
lected that part which was now admitted to be a mistake, leaving
out all that which they could attempt to justify. How
stood the matter ? Mr. Ford was a person to whom, from the
time he was ordained by the Bishop of Winchester, in
1806, no license has been granted. He did for a time
it was true do duty, but they were acquainted sufficiently with cc.
clesiastical matters to know that when a person undertook a curacy
he must have a license, and the object of that was manifest. When
the application was made for a license testimonials to his character
would be required.

the pite.inttlF—The ministers were all dead.
Mr. HuNtrazy—They were not dead then; and he would ask
the jury, if the proper way would not have been for a clergyman,
however bowed down by misfortune, if his character were clear
from suspicion, if he came into a court of justice to vindicate his
character, to bring some friends to speak to his good name. He
was not seeking to throw imputations upon Mr. Forth, and the
Times in the same spirit, said " When in the spirit of liberality we
pointed out the plaintiff as a fit object for the charity of the public,
in the same spirit we, when the magistrate stated that he was an
unworthy character, felt bound to warn the public against him."—
(The Learned Counsel then read the extracts from the Times on
which the action was founded.) The inquiries made by direction
of the magistrate into the character of the reverend gentleman
were most unsatisfactory. He would read what Mr. Clive said
from the bench when Mr. Forth had failed to attend, although
solicited. He publicly stated that he had received many small sums,
and he would receive no more sums for his use, and in conse.
quence of the inquiries he had caused to be made he (Mr. Clive)
declined for the future to have any communication with Mr. Forth
or his family. That was not, however, complained of; nor did
Mr. Forth bring forward any one person who knew him to speak
to character. If, instead of saying he had been suspended, the
reporter had said that he had never applied for a license, would the
observation have been a bit less objectionable ? Not one whit.
But the reporter did make a mistake. The Rev. Gentleman was
not suspended. His Learned Friend, Sergeant Talfourd, said why
did the paper which inserted the error not insert also an apology P
Why, the article was inserted on the 26th, and the writ was issued
on the 28th, just two days after. But would it not have
been better if Mr. Forth had written to the Times and explained
the mistake, which would no doubt have been inserted. But that
would not have suited the attorney, for he in that case could not
have brought this action.

Sergeant TAIAOOURD—There followed an article on the same sub-
ject in a future number of the Times.

Mr. 1-lumvirv.v was not aware of it, but of this he was certain
that it contained nothing which could militate against the Ti.es,
or it would have been put into Court by his Learned Friend. His
Learned Friend said that the circumstances alleged to have caused
the dismissal of Mr. Forth from the Philantropic Institution had
no foundation in truth. That WAS very easily said, but why had
not the Governor or some other of the officers of the institution
been called forward? It was essential that the doings of the courts
of justice should be given to the world, and they ought not to visit
a slip with a severe punishment, and he implored them not to gra-
tify bad passions, but, by giving the smallest damages known in
that country, further the ends of justice and defeat the objects of
artful men.

The Loan CIIIIEP JUSTICE summed up. The statement which
appeared in the Times newspaper was admitted by the Learned
Counsel not to be true, and therefore it was undoubtedly a libel,
and the jury would therefore have to find damages for the plaintiff.
What the amount of those damages should be would be left to
their own good sense, and he had no doubt they would give the
subject their best consideration. With the remarks made on the
character of the magistrate Mr Clive, he did not agree. If he
was in error at all, it was an error on the side of huma-
nity and kindness, for instead of going into the circum-
stances of the assault committed by Mr. Forth upon
his landlord, the magistrate hearing that he and his
family were in a state of great distress, remanded the mat-
ter in the expectation that a subscription would be made to
relieve his necessities. He did not, therefore, think that Mr.
Clive's conduct ought to have been so severely remarked upon in
this matter. The learned Chief Justice then briefly recapitulated
the leading events of Mr. For h's life, with the view of assisting
the jury in their award of damages. He did not think that
any malice had actuated the writer of the article or the
proprietors of the paper which gave it insertion. The matter was,
however, in their bands, to return what they conceived to be fitting
damages for the injury sustained by the publication of what was
certainly a libel.

The jury, after very shortly consulting, returned a verdict—
Damages, le.
Sergeant TALFOURD applied for a certificate to carry costs, but
the application was refused by the Court.

SHERIFFS' COURT, Feb. 8.
(Sittings at Guildhall.)
TIIE LAST ST. LEGER.-NEWHALL r. WARD.

In this case the plaintiff, Thomas Newhall, sought to
recover the sum of 201. from the defendant, James Ward,
being the balance of a bet on Foig-a-ballagh, the winner
of the last St. Leger.
Mr. Huddlestone appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr.
Russell Gurney for the defendant.
Mr. HUDDLESTONE stated that the debt arose out of
the following circumstances :—There was a person of
the name of Beate who owed the plaintiff 20/. The de-
fendant being indebted to Beate in the like sum, the
latter individual entered into an arrangement with the
plaintiff, by which he agreed that the debt of Ward due
to Beate should be transferred to h•m, the plaintiff.
Now, the only knowledge that the plaintiff had of the
money owing by the defendant to Beate being the effect
of a bet, was in consequence of some words in the order
drawn by Beate on the defendant to pay the 201. to the
plaintiff, and which was to the effect to request him " to
pay the balance of 20/. on the Leger." The question the
jury would have to decide was as to the legality of the
debt; and whether the plaintiff had any knowledge that
the debt arose out of any gambling transaction; and, if
he were aware of that circumstance, whether, at the
same time, he was cognisant that the bet was to that
amount as to render it illegal. It was true that the law
had rendered all bets above 101. illegal. But the amount
osBinc, by the defendant might be the amount of a num-
ber of small debts under 10/. Thus there might have
been a variety of bets of 7 to 3, or of 5 to 2, the whole of
which would amount to 201., and they were, therefore,
not illegal. The jury must be satisfied before they re-
turned a verdict for the defendant that the plaintiff had
unequivocal notice that the money owing was the effect
of a bet which rendered the debt illegal. If that fact
was not proved, then his client was entitled to a verdict.
Mr. Beate and another witness were then examined
for the plaintiff, and some letters were put in.
Mr. GURNEY, for the defendant, said—lt would be for
the jury to form their opinion upon the evidence pro.
duced, and he thought that the impression in their mind
must be that the plaintiff was swat* of the &ht. being
betting transaction.
The jury, after half an hour's consultation, returned a
verdict for the plaintiff, 201.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Feb S.
THE HIPPODROME RACE COURSE.

Mr. Commissioner Poi. Loci( held a court on Friday,
at Reading, when Jacob Connop, the lessee of the Hip-
podrome Race-ground, appeared for hearing.
Mr. Woodruffe opposed on the part of Mr. R•-üb-n
Laurence, a builder, and Mr. Cooke -upported the ap-
plication.
The opposition was direc;ed to the inc .rrect state•
mews made in the schedule, and after an examinatt,n of
some length, Mr. Commissioner PoLLocg. held that a
very different document must be preseetc•d before thp
case could be heard.

The case was ordered to be adjourned to the next
circuit. _ _

A question then arose whether the insolvent could not
be liher•a,ed on bail. The judgment debts were betw.,en
3,0001. ant 4,0001, and according to the usual practice
of the Court the double amount would be required.
Mr. COOKE asked whether the Court would not accept
bail for 1,000 ?
Mr. WOODRUFFE resisted the application.
Mr. Commissioner POLLOCK thought that bail could be
accepted for 3,0001., and adjourned the case to the next
circuit.

Some intimation was given that the insolvent would
be removed to a London prison, and his case heard in
town.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.
(Before Baron PARKE and Justice WILLIAMS).
THE RUISLIP MURDER.—Charles Lamb was placed at the bar
at ten o'clock this morning, charged with the murder of a young
man named John Brill, in a wood at Ruislip, in the month of
February, 1837, He is a heavy sort of man, about 35 years of
age, and has the appearance of a labourer.
The indictment having been read, he pleaded Not Guilty in a
faint voice.

Mr Clarkson appeared for the prosecution, and Mr, Wilkins for
the prisoner.
Charles Churchill was, In the year 1837, a farmer at Ruislip, and
had the deceased long in his service. He was sent on Thursday
the 16th February to a wood to prevent the underwood from being
stolen. The boy never returned, and at the end of three days his
body was found. His front teeth were knocked out.
James Lavender proved finding the body.
John Bray met the prisoner Lamb on the day of the
murder in a field, one mile from the wood ; and he accompanied
him to the Six Bells public-house, where the body of de.
ceased lay. He was coming from the direction of the wood.
Robert Norton, a surgeon, examined the body. The mark of
a severe blow was behind the left ear, and on removing the scalp
there was observed a severe contusion. There was effusion of
blood upon the brain, and his opinion was, that the injuries were
inflicted by a flat instrument, struck twice with great violence.

George Sibley deposed to a certain confession made by the pH.
soncr to the witness of the murder of the boy, and he described
the place where the murder was committed (the whole of which
has been given at length in the former notices of this case).
Mr. WILKINS then addressed the jury for the prisoner, in a
lengthened speech, and contended that no credit could attach to the
evidence of the man Sibley.

Mr. Baron PARKE summed up. lie said the duty of the jury
was a most serious one. The evidence in the case was of the most
circumstantial character, for the question of the prisoner's guilt
almost entirely depended upon the credence they gave to the
witness Sibley, and the confession alleged to have been made by the
prisoner about four month ago ; independent of that, there was
no evidence sufficient to cast anything beyond suspicion upon the
prisoner. If they believed the evidence of that confession, it would
be their duty to find the prisoner guilty of the crime of murder ;
but ff.:they did not attach credence to it, then they would acquit
the prisoner. The Learned Judge then commented upon the evi.
deuce, and concluded by leaving the case to the consideration of
thejury.

The jury then retired, and returned in half an hour with a ver-
dict of Acquittal,

THE LEICESTERSHIRE BANC RORRERY.—Upon the application of
Mr. BALLANTINR and Mr. CLARKSON, the trial of Richard Elliott
an omnibus driver, and Richard Vincent, a cigar.dealer, was post-
poned until the next session.

Mr. Justice WiLus.ms said that Elliott must remain in gaol
until next session, and Vincent must renew the bail he had entered
into before the magistrate.—The case was ordered to stand over,

NFU' C')URT.
(Before the COMMON SERGEANT.)
At the sitting of the Cou't this morning, the f.dlowtog ,•ri,oners
pleaded Guilty of the offences charged agaiitA them, and received
the sentences affixed to their nem, s ;_George Smith, 9 months;
Frederick Shepherd, 3 months ; John Williams, I year ; George
Brown, 4 months; Charles Chapman, 3 months ; Rouert Parker,
3 months; Ellen Conway (who had been twice convicted), 7 years
transportation; John Thomas, 3 months; Thomas Simpson, 2
months ; Richard Townsend, 6 months.

Mlham Ci&i.,ra. a respectably.dressed youtl,6 inn, Viiib con-
victed of stealing a box, containing 9s.
It appeared that be had been tried in that Court, uoder suotbq

name, six years ago, which he admitted, and that he had been
lately summarily convicted.
The COMMON SERGEANT told him that he had been too lenient on
the last occason, and ought to have transported him. The sentence
of the Court was that he be transported for ten years.

On turning to leave the dock, he laid hold 01 the inkstand placed
there for the use of the prisoners, no doubt with the intention of
hurling it at the police, who had sworn to his having been pre-
viously convicted, but as it was fixed he could not carry his haul
tion into execution, and he left the dock exclaiming against them.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(SATURDAY.)
BO W-STREET.

A tall young man. who gave the name of Edward
Smith, but who refused to give his address, was placed
at the bar before Mr. Twyford, charged with having
stolen a number of books from the library of the Uni-
versity College, in Gower-street.
Mr. James Goody, the house steward, stated that on
Monday and Wednesday last there were missed from the
general library of the College the three books produced,
of which circumstance he gave information to the police,
and from some circumstances that had subsequently
transpired, there was reason to suspect that the prisoner
had stolen them. Witness did not know the prisoner,
but recollected seeing him in the library on Thursday
last, when " Wilson's French and English Dictionary,"
and " Grant's Outlines of Comparative Anatomy," were
stolen. All the pupils had access to the library, and
when a book was required by any one of them, the prac.
Lice was to write the title on a slip of paper, and then to
present it to the librarian, by whom he was furnished
with the volume he required. All the cases containing
the books were kept locked.
Mr. W. J. Chapman, the librarian, stated that, having
seen the prisoner in the library, his impression wa- he
was one of the students of the college, but since his
apprehension he had discovered such was not the case.
lie missed the works above named when he was locking
up the book-cases, from the table of the library, on
Monday, but was not certain whether he saw the pri-
soner there on that day. On Wednesday, on which day
he recollected the prisoner conversing with him in a very
familiar manner, he also missed a book from the library
table. .

In answer to questions from the prisoner, the witness
said that strangers could easily gain admission to the
library of the college, and had opportunities of taking
away books unnoticed by any of the officers of the
institution.

Mr. Nock, a bookseller in Tottenham•court-road,
stated that he had seen the prisoner eit several occasions;
that he bought the dictionary of him on Monday last for
10s., believing it to be his own, and, though a portion
of the fly. leaf was torn off, he thought that the prisoner
had perhaps written his name there and torn it off before
he offered it for sale, as was the usual practice with stu-
d.,nts when they offered books for sale. On the last
occasion he had a suspicion of the prisoner's honesty,
and gave information to the police, by whom he was taken
into custody.
The Inspector stated he thought it his duty to inform
the Court that the last witness had afforded every assist-
ance to the police to enable then to make the necessary
inquiries.
The prisoner. who declined sAying anything in his de-
fence, was remanded for a week.