The Sun.
London, England, 1818-02-14 00:00:00

FINANCE.

Mr. BROGDEN brought pip the Report of the
thirty millions Exchequer Bills Bill.
Mr. TiaaNEY'pvi,hed to ask the Chancellor of
the Exchequer a -question. (Y. the 39,000,0001.
the Right 1-i!m.Gentleinari bad moved for on it
former nitlit, he now proposed to rake but
30,000,000/, and this sum he had stated would
be enough to carry on the public business till
after Easter. He wished to know what w'as to
become of the 6,000,000/. due to the Bank,
which was to •be paid early in the month of
April ? He wi,,hed to know if in'this 30,000,0001.
a provision was made for paying the B.oik ?
• 'flee CIIANCEL,LoR of the ExCHEFIVER ivas
nn-
tierstood to say, that unquestionably the
30,000,0001. would'he sufficient, not only to cover
the current expenditure, but also ro pay, (if it
were net essary to pay it in one sum,) the
6,000,0001. due to the Bank .It was, however,
expected, and indeed he took it for granted, that
this would not he the case, but that the payment
would be gradually made as should best suit the
convenience of both parties,
Mr. TIERNEY presumed it was one of the lea, t
considerations whether the payment should Le
made in one sum, or in more than one. What 1 e
wished. to know was, whether it would be in any
I.'t ay paid by the• period at which the bargain cvith
the Bank should expire ?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said no
part of the 6,000,000/. was to be paid to the
Bank before the sth April. By that time the
Loan would be in,:he course, of payment.
Mr. TIERNEY supposed he was then to under-
stand that on the sth April the Bank was in souse
way or other to be paid in money.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
say toe Bank would-, by that time, be paid the
whole in one sum, but the payments, n I,en the
sth of April should arrive, would have commenc.*
in the way that might best accord with the mu-
tual convenience of the Bank and the country.—
As much would be paid by the, sth April as the,
Bank expected to receive. .

Mr. TIERNEY di:l not know how the mutual
convenience of both parties could be consulted its
the business. He should suppose payment at
once would be most convenietit to the party that
was to receive money.
,If he understood the
Chancellor of the Exchequer right, what he had
now said knocked otethe head all that he had ad-
vanced on a former
,night. He had endeavoured
to tie him down on this subject to something spe-
cific„ by licking whe:her the Bank was to be paid
the .6,000,0001. -it was to receive, in money or in
Exchequer Bills.. The answer given to this ques-
tion was most important. It had,been seen how
it affected the country,.. when it • was stated that
the payment- was to he made in money ; but after
sant hail just fallen from the Chancellor of the
Exchequer they were all at sea again. If out of
the 6„000,0001. which had been borrowed but
'one pond should 'he -giveo to the Bank, it wig ht
be said the payment bad commenced, and the rest
was to be gt actually discharged at some time or
other. But this was impottant to the country, as
the Bank would make their not having been paid
an argument for their ,not resuming cash pay-
ments. Every body bad understood. that 'he
6,000,0001. was to be paid in money. It was
now secu, that of the sum voted (39,000,0001.),
only 30,000,0001. was taken by the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, and the payment which was to be
gradually msde was in fact deferred. It was (Mt.
cult to say why he,should havegot the 39,000,0001.
voted in supply, and then declined taking it, to
pay off the loan which he had called on the House
to satisfy.. He might have good reason for doing
one of these things, hut he did not see how the
Right Hon. Geutlemon could feel justifier) in doing
both. But out of the 30,000,0001. he had said
there would be paid as huge a proportion of the
loan as the Bank expected to receive by the time.
which had been named. Was there then any un-
derstanding between the Bank and the Chancellor
of the Exchequer that the payment of the Loan
should be postponed ? If there were, be ought to
let it be known, that they might start fair. He
(Mr. Tierney) was, the morewas, anxious for an ex-
plicit answer on this head, as a rumour was
abroad,—he had, indeed, heard it positively as-
serted that day,—t hat the payment of the Loan
in money had never been in contemplation. In
short things were now in such a state that no,.
body knew what :he Chancellor of the Exchequer
was driving ar. it only required the simple qua-
lification of knowing the English language to un-
derstand, from the explanation of the Chancellor
of the Exchequer the other night, the direct con-
trary of what it • now appeared to-be his intention
to do. • What bad happened in the mean time to
change those intention& he knew not. Only this
was to be learned from the experience in the pre-
sent case—that whoever asked a question of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer must wait a fort-
ight before he -could expect to hear the answer
which it was really intended to give.

The Cliaslcat.Lott of the EICHEQUEIt.—Ntit •
Withstanding all that was said by the Bight Hon.
Gentleman, he was-convinced that no other per-
son in the House Could have misunderstood what
he said on the occasion adverted to 'by the light
Hon. Gentleman. •On that occasion the Right
lion. Gentleman distinctly asked whether the six
millions was to be paid in money or by an ex-
change of Exchequer Bills. To that be as dis-
tinctly replied, that the payment was to be in
money. No question was asked as .to the time
when the payment was to be made, whether on
the sth April or at any other time ; and therefore
nothing as to the time was said by bite in his an-
swer.—(Hear, hear !)-He said, that even if the
payment were made by an issue of Exchequer
Bills, as these would necessarily be paid oft in
money, his answer must at all events have dis-
tinctly implied, that at some rime or other the pay-
ment would be made in money. The only ques-
tion which he Was asked was, as to the mode of
payment ; and as thtq was all tlqat was asked, it
must be all that he could be understood to an-
swer.—(Hear, hear !)—As to the time when

1:
tlicir Nlyn!-:-fq be t 0 mn.., A.;t
di.tinerly th. it ‘y ‘mill such that
d- yree he do reby prevent-
'ed from tes,ming its Cash Payments; and ,d 1 that
f, TZrght ilinionrableG,.ndemati could be under-
lotl tr.nst have been the effect of
'the limo of le-payment as affecting the rcsumpi
tint, f Ca%b I)•ivineuts.
dr. TIEI:NE? said. the Right lion. Gentleman
certainly 'lady stated the question which he (Mr.
Lad pill on a t rmt.r evening. At the time
when he :o4kro that qtte.tion, he held in his hand
hill, in who II it iii', stlted that the six millions
AVM to he renaid on or before the sth of next
April, anti he certainly thought, that when he
asktd in it-11,in shape tile "re-payment was to be
made, that he. could only be understood to mean
the re-taynient which was ro be made on or be-
foie the sth of April ; And when the Chrincellor of
the Exchequer ilivvered that the re-payment was
to be in money, he -(sir T.) was certainly stu-
pid enough to mulPrstand him as meaning. that
it was to-be made at the time mentioned in the
1301.

Mr. kRPE said, that afro, all that had been
said on the %object, he wished to know whether
the six millin►ns t. ere to be repaid before the
time when the Bank was to resume its Cash Pay-

meats
The CHANCELLort of the EXCHECiUER.—TIke
re-payment will he made at such time as the Bank
may require —([Tear, hear !)
Mr. GaeNFELL said, his understanding of what
the Chancellor of. the Exchequer had said On a
former day certainly was, that the repayment wag
to be made to the Bank, not in Exchequer Bdls.
but in Bank-Notes, before the sth of April. Ile
now understood, that if not before the 5111 of
,April, that at least there-payment would be made
during the present Session. As to making the
time of re-payment accord with the time of re-
Sontitig cash payments, it was to be observed that
there Was, by the Restriction Act, an option to
keep it in force for three years, and if the option
was to he the continuance of the Act for three
years. would the time for the re-paymeet of the
six millions be proportionably extended ? He
hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would
condescend to aitswer this. He was desirous of
taking this opportunity of observing, that Go-
vernment had, for some time past, been issuing
Exchequer Bills at a premium of two-pence per
cent, per diem, which was equivalent to about 3
per cent, per annum, even deducting the premitun
received for the Bills issued at that rate. It was
very gratifying that Government should be able to.
raise money on such moderate terms. But the
most important effect was, that the tendency would
directly he to keep down the rate of interest
throughout the country. He then descanted on
the political benefits of the rate of interest being
; 11141 it stimulated commerce and IMMO..
facaures, and enabled Gentlemen of landed pro-
perty to borrow money upon the security of their
est es. It was a cOrrunon objection to she he-
• nefits of a low rate of interest, that it had
dencv to withdraw capital from the country, for
the puppose of being deposited in the funds in
foreign States or otherwise abroad, where a
higher rate of interest could be obtained. To
this he replied, that the badness of the security
of any 'Foreign Government would naturally pre-
vent any considerable part of the capital of this
Country from being deposited or employed else-
where than this Country. Ile thought that
the rate of interest throughout the country ,was
•irow so low, that the Bank ought to lower its
rate of discount. 11 that was done, it would he
_beneficial, not only to the mercantile-hitt:rest, but
to the interests of the Bank itself.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER Said, that
in reply-to the first question of the Hon. Gentle-
man who spoke last, it would be enotigh to say,
that the re-payment of the six millions was to be
made to the Bank in the course of the prei•ent
year. He generally concurred with the principles
laid down by the Hon-. Gentleman, but would not
detain the House further, than inertly to say that
it was very gratifying to his Majesty's Government
to have been able for some tintepast to raise money
at P lower rate of interest than had been paid for
Loans at any period for a long series of years.—
(Hear, hear !)
SECRET COMMITTEE.
mr. BhoUGHAM wished to know from the Noble
Lord opposite' when it ,sr-as probable that the
Report of the Secret Committee would -be -pre-
sented to the House ?
Lord CASTLECEAGH replied that he could not
name any probable day. The Committee was still
actively employed.
The Report of the ExChequer Bills Bill was
then eceiwed and agreed to, and the Bill ordered
to be read a third time on Monday.
The Report of the Malt Duty Bill was received
and agreed to, and the Bill ordered to be read a
third time on Monday.
Mr. CAecnater presented a Petition from the
Constables attending the House, praying for re-
muneration.
The Petition was read, and ordered to lie on
the table. A Committee to be tnoved for on
11.1ouch,y to take it into consideration.
SCOTS BOROUGH EFFORM.
Lord A. HAMILTON rose, pursuant to his no-
tice, to call the attention of the House to the re-
form whirl had recently been 'nratle in one of the
Boroughs in Scotland. His. motion would he for
-st copy of the Act of Warrant under which the re-
cent changes had been in the constitution of the
borough of Montrose. Ile disclaimed any inten-
tion of mixing op this question with any thing
relating..to_Parliamentary Refoirri ; and wished to
confine it solely to the state of the Royal Boronghs
in Scotland. As these Boroughs were now con-
stituted, the Burgesses bad nothing to do with
the election of the Magistrates, yet these Magis-
trates had the power of assessing the burgesses to
any amount. The Magistrates,inshort, might incur
what debtS they pleased, and for the payment of
those di bts the property of the burgesses was re-
sponsible. The first and greatest grievance of which
he complained Was this. The second was the mode
of keeping the accentits of the Corporation. It. had
been decided, in several cases, and by the autito•
rity of Lord Kannes, that the Courts of Justice
had no power or tontrold over the mode in which
those accopnts were kept. It lately happeoed that
the Corporation of the Borough of Montrose te;l

Into a state of complete Akiolucion. 61, the
ivy Connell, by the instrument for'n copy of
‘vhicii lte would- trove, hid granted what was in

Scotland riled a new sPt of 'the- Borough. and
had constituted it anew, on piineiples that the
grievance of which he complained- WKS abolished,
mild the burgesses now elected the Magistrates.
He (lid not blame this alteration of the Constitn-

;ion of the Borough; but he blauied•theltall4 by

which it had been done. Instead' of having the
authority of Parliament, it was done by the Crown,
and that he conceived to he at► usinpation on the
rights of the Parliament. Ile was aware there
was a precedent in the case of the Borough of
which was altered in a similar way some
years ago; but he denied the authority of that
precedent. It was his intention tai bring the ques-
tion of the general state of the Royal Boroughs in
Scotland bettsre the House soon after Easter.: In
the mean time he moved, " That there be laid
before the House a copy of the Act and Warrant
by his Majesty in Council, dated in Sept. 1817,
authorising the guild-brethren and burgesses. of
!Montrose to alter the set or Constitution of that
borough for all time to conic."
Lord CAsTLEREAGH said, he would leave the
legal part of the question raised by the Noble
Lord to be answered by his, Honourable a►►d
Learned Friend, the Lord Advocate. But he felt
it his duty to oppose the motion of the Noble
Lord, because he conceived it aimed solely at a
Parliamentary Reform in the Scots Borouglo.—
The Corporations of these Boroughs could only
be viewed in two lights—as political or as admi-
nistrative. It was in their political character

alone that he conceived them to he pointed at in

the present -motion anti nlieri,or views of the Noh!e
Lord. If they were looked at only as adminis-
trative bodies; the extreme good order and de-
cinnm which characterised the population of Scot-
land was a sufficient evidence that there was no-
thing- to be complained of in the way in which the
Magistrates of the boronghs exercised thjr func-
tions of administering the laws. It had certainly

always been objected to the Scots boroughs that he
courts of justicc had no power to look into their ac-
cottots ; but if the remedy of that defect was in the
contemplation of the Noble Lord; he need only
remind him that his Learned Friend, the Lot d
Advocate, bad this very day given notice of his
intention to bring in a Bill to supply that defect
in their Constitution. The production of the
paper moved for would he of no practical utility
whatever. The Noble Lord had not made out
any grotind whatever for it production. It
the motion %VHS agreed to, it would have
no other effect, than to be construed in-
to a recognition of the principle that a
Parliamentary Reform ought to take place
in the Boroughs. If there was auy tking

illegal in the case of Montrose, the proper place to
canvass it in was a Court of Law ; or it what had
been done was improper-in a Parliamentary ptilot
of view, as affecting; the election of a Member of
Parliament for tnat Borough, the Gre►rville Act
expressly provided that such a gnestion es con-
cerning the law of Elections should be tried, not
I►v the house itself, but by u Committee of the
ilotis-e, appointed On oath. There w:is, there-
fore, no good that could restdt from the motion,
and for these reasons he felt it his duty to op-

pose it.
Mr. ABERcßomate spoe shortly in favour
of the moliOn. He pressed the necessity of
a Reform in the Constitution of ►he .`,4coteb
Boroughs, and denied that the question, as now
brought tomard, involved thou of a Parliamentnry
Reform in those Boroughs. The subiect was a
fit one ti' Legislative interference, and there:ore
he should vote for the motion.
The Lo HD ADVOCATK of SCOTLAND said that

the Noble Lord, whose motion was before •the
Horace, was CMPriCtely mistaken as to the right
of :ilagisttates of toe Scots boroughs to assess
the burgesses. Did that Noble Lord forget the
Act of the Scots Parliament commonly called the
" Declaration of Grievances," Wherein it was
declared to be tinlawfOl to levy any taxes without
the authority of Parliament ?—(Hear, bear !)—.

'he Noble Lord was wrong in saying that

the litirgesses were liable fbr wii,atever debts the
corporation might choose to eootrAct. There was

no inslance whatever of any stieh liability. It %vas
so completely out of the "question, that no burgess
back ever been made to pay tor 'any sack debts—no
Action had ever been comrtienetd to try their liabi-
lity: In the case of the borough of Aberdeen in-
deed, an attempt bad been made by the corpora-
tion to levy some petty tax 'upon the burgesses in
the shape of customs, and the vestion was triad
at law. But on an appeal to the House of Lords
here, it:was decided that the corporation had no
right whateverto levy any tux, hoWever small,
without the authority of Parliament. As to what
had been recently done in the case of Montrose,
he contended it was 'perfectly legal ; but it was
wrong to say that a borough was dissolved when

there was a failure of the right to elect in bur-
gesses. Lot d Mansfield, in the case of the Mayor
of Colchester versus Seabear, Burrow's Reports,
3tl vol. p. 1566, decided that in such a case a bo-
rough %las not dissolved. As to the reform made

in the borough of Stirling ita 1761, which had
been alluded to by the Noble Lord, that reform
was -precisely the same, and effected in the same
manner 'as What had been recently done in the
case of Montrose. That it was strictly legal
could not be denied, for the:Legality of what wa•
done at Stirling had been expressly acknowledged
by the Courts of Justice, and even by this [louse,
for before -both had the question been diScussed
and decided. The principle was clear and untie-
oiable, that the King has a right to the set of a
borough when the right of the corporation of the
borough is in abeyance. -He wished to know
what evidence there waa before the House, that
the people were not sati•6el with the constitution
of their boroughs ? Disturbances had .certainly
taken place in Scotldnd, but none on that ac-
count ; and if the Scorch people were alarmed, it
would be at measures hke that proposed .by the
Noble Lind.

Mr. ABERCROMBIE RIM the LOZtD ADVOCATE
mutually explained.
Sir J. MAcKt NI-us"! complained that the nature
of the motion had been totally misrepresented.
fin endeavour to rrform one single borough %Vas
n(' systeni calculated to change the constitution of
the whole. The people of Stag Land were not (pi

tl!e smite foolinst, tit tVat Finglaiol-a's to elec-
ti.'o3. Though he thooght tmitersal suffrage the
worst mode: of election, yet he
_could- not be
brought to aprove of that adopted in Scotland
where !here was,' in fact, no popuhr election at.
all. The question not,- whether the Croton
might revive the Corporation of a borough, bat
whether in so doing the Crown might alter its
constitution. In the case of such a.preroptive,
now for the first time assumed by the Crown, it
was the duty of the House to iniluire into the
ground nn which that.. prerogative was assumed.
lie did not deny that it might exist, but he wished
to :Ascertai4i whether it did, • ,

Mr. .1. P. GRANT thought that the house ought
to consider whether the crown possessed by law
the prerogative alluded to, and if it did, to inquire
whether it might not he proper to introduce some
,Parliamentary regulations to modify that unde-
fined and nnrontrolled power ?
Sir It. FEagusosa contended, that a strong
anxiety existed in the people of Scotland to be re-
lieved from the state in which they stood with
' respect to elections.
Lord A. HANILTort, in reply, alluded to the
abuses existing in Scotch boroughs, and the
debts kvhich those abuses forced them to contract.
The town of Aberdeen had thus sunk into a debt
of 230,0001.; and within the last two years the
Corporation had been obliged to borrow 57,0001.
to pay interest alone. As to the opinion of the
lion. Gentlemen opposite respeCting the subject
of his motion, lie was just as south at a loss as at
the commencement of the discussion. He should
therefore think it his duty, at a Witte period, to
move -for a Committee to investigate the subject.

Mr. Fottßes Also defended the conduct of the
Corporation of Aberdeen. There were two sidrs
of a gneqion, and the Noble Lord had caught hold
only of one.

Mr. W. SMITH said, that the question of Par-
liamentary Retorm had never been mixed with the
complaints made against the Corporation of Aber-
deen.

After a few words from Mr. R. DouoLAs, the
question was put and negatived without a division.

PRIZES.

Sr J. MACKINTOSH moved for an account of
all l'ijzes of War,. other than Droits of the
Crown and Droits of the- Admiralty, and of such
prizes as had been vested in, the captors by the
adyidication of Courts' of Pt zes, fyom.the Ist of
Fein-luny, 1793, specifying the date, source and
amount of each receipt, together with a like ac-
count of the application and expenditure of the

same.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER wished
the Hon. Member would postpone lais motion till
Monday, that it might be ascertained whether
snch a►r account could be produced.,
The-motion was then withdrawn.
Mr. WARD presented some Ordnance Accounts.
Ordered to lie on the 'fable.
'1 he Snigery PraCtice Regulating Bill was read
a first time, and ordered for a second reading on
Thursday next, and to be printed.
Adjou►neti'ill Moudiy.

LAW IN f ELLIGENCE.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, FEa,.ls.

ClU'yl CON.
FRANCES V. WILKS.

In th:s case the plaiiiriff, who hold n sitinvian
ill a ptitilic office, Sought to recover from the de-
fenant, who is tieScrilml to be a physician, the
sitm of 2,0001. as a compensation or debauching
his xvit.e.•

itir. Sergeant VAu6l-tAt: stated the circutristatrees
of the case to the Jury ; in doing which he ani-
madverted in very strong terms upon the heinous'.
ness of the offence. The plaintiff, he observed,
was a man who held a situation in a public office,
and tire defendant was •by profession a physician,
who had been introduced into the family hy Mr.
°Nen, a-Gentlet»an extensively known, and highly
respected by all who knew bim, not only,for liis
talents, but also for the high and deserving
character he sit Stained in 'society. Mr. Fran-'
ces was married in tpt year 1812 ; and down
to tSf7 they lived together in an unititer-
,rtipted state of happineSs ; there was scarcely
:my disparity between them in years, and their
inatrinionial alliance Was, crowned by an issue
of two ckildren. The defendant, the Learned
Sergeant contended, was d.oihly culpable—first,
inasmuch a 3 the 'friendly introduction to the fa-
mily by Mr. Owen ought to have been a barrier
to 'any criminal innovation upon the happiness of
its inemberS ; and secondly, that as he was intro-
duced in a professional capacity to administer to •
the irldisposition of Mrs. Frances, he ought not to
have taken an adYantage of her situation, but in-
stead-of being her seducer, ought to have been
her protector and friend. It Might be urged, that
he Was in a state of poverty, and therefore inca•
rabic of paying heavy damages'; but to thir. he
had only to say, that the law said, " If a !nail
could not pay in purse, he must pay in person."
And with these brief observations, he should rely
upon the Jury for a verdict.
Mr. CA SE ER D, who was with the Learned,Ser-
grant, then proceeded to call evidence.

Thomas Dean produced a copy of the r. moister of the mar-
riage of Mr. and Mss. Frances at St. Andrew's, Flo4Fior.n, ou
the 14th of May, IS 19.lilleS West and others were present.
George Caster stated., that hr wits present at the marriage ;
Mrs. Frances was about 20 years of age, and Mr.yratices was
about .25. Witness-lived. with them a year :Ind is half after'
their tnarriAge, anti they lived happily together. Thei.r af-
fection appeared to be quite mutnal.—Witness knew hut
little of the defendant Nita, hut he was received into the
house as a physician; he bad lived in the house ln.itween 2 any!
3 mouths lwfore the defendant and Mrs. F. eloped, which was
in the initiating' October. The day following, their clopeMent,
witness and Mr. Francis went in quest of them: they went to a
house in Foley-istreet; and, in consegitenof in formatitm they
obtained, they final)y saw the defendant and Mrs. Frances at
Union-hall pollee-otliec tocether. The defendant was apisre-
hended on suspicion of having stolci> a brooch ; it was six
weeks after: Witness believed it to be about the 25th or 29111
of December-. Witness desired her to return .with hint, but
she would not. Witness afterwards loom] the letter pro-
tium] in Mrs. Franeesrs odgi ngs in -loincr,trect, St.George's-'
fields; it was addressed to-tier as Mrs. Sevmont.

Exaininej by iN2r..ltisticcLt.:or—Atter they WE'l'e mar-
ried, Ilicy wine iu ludging.s, and hail a servant ; that servadt
was not ;in can't; they bad two chintven. Mr. Frances was
post-otiicc. He usually "went vest in t ruorvim!,
did not retnrii instil the- eveniinz tu dinner, •and
was Left all.tlay with Mrs. Franc,s ; 'nobody but the servant
bring prr,ent.

_ .
Henry Winks stated, that he married a sister of Mr. Prances.
Witness Iced at Tuoiiridge When Air. arri Mrs.
Franc" were firsll4mlc'ed thee: lived in Beulard-street, and
he I)" frequent "Pil'qthoities of seeing them there for too or
time the.-Ate Q.ey wont to reside b Bluoultb.arpt

• • - •
P.r:d from theitte 'to the Aloha CitttoreQ. ;t'l „, ` ,Own
,0
removed. to. INo. 49, Cha I iOtt e-st Vect,
dunag this time tunics opitori unity of ohserviiit,',-,4
'they confiticteti themselves 'Guilt...Tail, afrectionate t0w".170
In tae month of October la4;,' witness touLo
ilefetidatit titeia.; ttpresented himself to he a lib
Witit'ess•uodert,tuoil the conditions. upon which he Was
plaint:art' 11e,ase ; it was t: bile enanibers were brio g.
for him. ;Tie 'eontitnlcd in totk:; only a few days, Kitt
Hutt tin), lie obs'erved'soinething in the coot-tact of Nir.
t 1 iJks
which prAnced a high eachation its the comlnct of Mir;;
Frances; he cnsidered `our not. realls' hetse i-
o
nnd the conduct of the defendant he Zaw a most infamous .1
base acquiescence to eves y thing Mrs. ','ritticis did or said,
of
was convinced that he tta,aoing ail he to avail linnseb
her situation. and, iii eot;stqiiiestee,u;toess communicated lot
suspicions to Mt. I:viiice,, ts Ito took iniu.tediate steps
at°,rt:
move the defendant from the 1111.137... YCir!IeSS dictated
t,.r, and the defendant I-ft the house in con.eseenee ;
witness took Mrs. Frances to his house at Tunbridge,
continued shun.: three or hit r (lats. About t,%0• 11,°11t1,1':
terwards yea:less came to ;own-H.l6s in Hit mono
December), and be met Mrs. Vrances and the do terida°-
walking am and in tog:et He ol.o,erved a brooch ia
lt%lit'
defendant's hoSont wlticii lie knew to he the property of
bt
He was taken in custody to union Mall : the stt. j
ject of the charge %vas omen the brooch. Mrs. I,riince sal
she gave the defendant the brooch, and the charge WM cone
sequently abandoned. Oil floe following morning the
lives were traced to No. 5, Joiner-street, Westutinster-r°4"
St. George's in the East.
Mr. Justice DALLAs.—What do. you mean by her not being
sane. •
udg
Witness.—Fier conversatiton betraved an erroneous
mint.
Mt. Justice DALLAS.—TeII me what that conduct
which you hare asc:ibed to' the defendant to be intanto°
:Mil base?

Witness.—Acquiescing in and adopting her opinions. t 4
Mr. Justice Dai.Las.—Did you see any indecent ferniliarlt
on•the part of Dr. Wilk, I
Wit ness.—No ; I thought it impossible on her part, for 4
manners Were totally the reverse of levity. The plaintiff hp
3001. a year in the Post-othee; lie was eeiv much dist role' •
at the eircumstanceof her elopement. She was particoW
fond of her children. •
tie,( Os'
William George Jarvis, a Sheriff's officer, apprehelatr,/
defendant for debt ; he asked witness for some paper..tit
wrote Mrs. Frances a note, and addressed' her as .%.10'
moor ; he said he bad taken apartments for her in that olf-p,,
James Davis said, h'e lived at 6. Joiner-Street, and r;ul„.,
leeteil that in the month of Decceter last, 4.l..arty an t
tleman came to his house in the name of Mr. mot Nirs.":l6
miner, and took his second ifoor,eonsisting of a front an,d j
room (which was the bed-room); they lived there as Ulan 09
wife for a fortnight. .
Harriet Soare, a child, who ;mewled on Mr. and P.
Sevitiour, deposed to the same effect.
Several letters in the defendant's hand.writin.• were WI
put in and read, to show the analogy of his writing to teller
letter sent Mrs. Frances, in the name of Mr. SeYl,4Ol-0., f
his detention for debt. It rim as follows:—" How to, sce YliTt
I don't know, or whether you can come to Me (0-night. Po-
what have they done with you ! I shall apply to IL
Oh what Shall do, my heloved Haonab
mour, addressed to Mrs. Seymour, No. 5-, .Joiner tfrttthtt
This letter was compared with others, ;rod staid t•"_,l-0
defendant's hand writinK. In another letter was the f~
I.
ine passage :—" I aspire to your affections, and if
felt for a noble creature; like Menai I shall fall, c •
The readin!r•of the letters closed the case on "
part of the plaintiff; when Mr. ANDRRIVS Addres47
ed the Jury in mitigation of damages, and he cot'
tended that there was no atrocity in the case Will
called for heavy damages
Mr. Justice DALLAS recapitulated the evidence
and the Jury almost' i nstantiv found a verdict .1°
the plaintiff—Damages, Five Hundred Pounds. . ;c
the examination of one of the witness"
came out that the defendant is now in prison 'lll'
debt, and Mrs. Frances- is still under the :mote.
lion of her husband, at a relanon's house lo
country.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, FEEL 1,3.
Lord ELL. ENEOROUGH Sat to- clay in West
ster flak lit Nisi Prins, but nu trial took pidce"
li
public interest.