Star.
London, England, 1825-06-20 00:00:00


CHESTER -itACE BALL.
TO Tin EDITOR OF THE STAR.

13th June, 1825.

Snt—Haying seen in lour Joqrnal an anonymous article, labour-
ing to extenuate the conduct of the Lords WILTON and Motrszcz,
and Messrs. B. B. WIL.LIAMX and laws, by giving a false account of
the ottrage at the Chester Ball, I bare to request you will give in.
sertion to the unanswered. statement of facts which appeared in the
Morning eironicle the 0..3d of last mouth. On the abovementioned
article L shall make no comment, but treat it with that contempt
which anonymous slander and falsehood deserve.

Dublin, 11,

I have the honour to be, Sir,
Yuur obedient Servant,
:ourt-street. • • THOMAS ItAWLINS.

!ROM SUE SWUM cuaoluctx Of MAY 23.
' At a Pablic Sub-criptinn Ball at Chester, on Wed-
nesday night, the 4th instant, two Gentlemen, Ir. Fitz-
gerald and Mr. Rawlins, visitors in the town during
the Race Weil, were surrounded by a number of
persons, WU" REFUSED THEM 'IIIEIR NAMES, OR AN AC-
KNOWLEDGMENT OW ANY INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY,
having at their head Mr. R. B. Williams, of Beaumai is,
Anglesea (one of the Stewards of the Ball), and were
by them ♦iolently thrust out of the room, and down the
stairs, into the street.
These Gentlemen have now to state, bri. fly and
plainly as possible, the circumstances which preceded
this OUTRAGE, and their own subsequent conduct, with
the motives avowed by the perpetrators in justification
or the act. _ _

Late in the evening, a misunderctand:ng with respect,
to a seat, occurred between Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr.
Williams, then one of a quadrille party.* The dance
being over, these Gentlemen, accompanied by several
others, retired to an adjoining room, for the purpose of
explanation. The affair was on the point of adjustment,
and each party had already admitted that the other had
conducted himself as became a Gentleman, when a
person named Eikin (or Iken) abruptly bustled into the
room, and without hearing a word of the preceding
conversation, declared that Mr. Fitzgerald's conduct
bad been most improper (or ungentlemanlike), Mr.F. di-
rectly referred him to Mr. Williams, for a contradiction
of his assertion, pronounced his interference uncalled for,
and demanded his name; this being RETUSID him,
obliged Mr. F. to add, 4, Then, Sir, I insult you ; I
publicly offer you an insult." The GALLANT reply to
which wan, 44 I will send for a constable." Mr. Fitzgerald
re:urned to the ball-room, and with Mr. R twlins, who
was hitherto unacquainted with the transaction, walked
about conversing on the subject; and, to explain the
original misunderstanding, approached the pact of the
room in which it had occurred; when, to their great
surprise they beheld this very Mr. Eikin sitting cn the
same bench, next to, and talking with a Gentleman who
occupied the identical seat, which,- under similar circum-
stances, caused the difference of opinion already men-
tioned with Mr. Williams. Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr.
Rawlins naturally paused a moment to contemplate
such inconsistent elf ontery, and commented on the
fact, TO EACH OTHER; but they distinctly deny that
either of them at all addressed HIM in the ball-room,
In about half an boor afterwards, and as they solemnly
avow, without further cause or provocation, to their in-
expressible astonithment,:the outrage they have stated
at the commencement was perpetrated.* An outrage so
grossly illegal and atrocious, that, on some days atter,
on Mr. Brooke and others, friends of Mr. Williams,
vomiting the Mayor and Aldermen, as to what steps
they should take, it was unaitimouslydecidtd by the Council that
they, 00 their own statement had nothing 'to complain of, but that
• Mr. F. sad Mr. R. were the aggrieved persons, aid those entitled
to relreu. Next day (Thursday the Sth initard) at the request of
air. Fitzgerald, Mr. Rawlins, accompanied by another Gentleman,
demanded and obtained an interview with air. Williatnf, le pre-
sence of several Gentlemen. at the hem of Mr. Breake, when
'Air. It. communicated to blr. Williams, first on the part of Mr.
Fitzgerald, and then on his own, that they being strangers in Olin.
ter‘ and not having any friends there of sufficient stzpertence., to
Iris.
land to apply on 'such an occasion, bad written off to
land by that day's post (the first possible opportunity) for
one ors whom•they could rely, and desired that, until his arrival,
Sir. Williams should consider the consequences of. his conduct as
ihlpending. Mr. Brooke and the Gentlemen of Mr. W.'s party de-
clared that they would not suffer him to be called open to answer
for his conduct as Steward. Mr. Rawlins replied stick might be their
istentioa, but it was Mr. Fitzserald'sdetermination and his own,
in amse of seek Aggravated Insult, not to suffer any distinction to
be taken bet wten the individual and the Steward. Mr. R. then
dominated aklir.Willisrifs whether he had not declared, on the pre-
vious night, that Mr. Fitzgerald's conduct had been that of a Gen-
tlethan in the 0/AGINAL ausaimasszavanta between them? when Mr.
W. acknowledged' hat such was the fact. " Why, then," demanded
Mr. Ilawlina," did you turn hitu and me out of the ball-r00m?"...
• " Oh !"exclaimed Mr. Eikin (in which he was
tfined by'Mr. Williams and the others),.." it *as because ben sub.
. sequently called me a sattra, &c. in-pretence'of my wife andlaugh-
tak; and because you, Sir, identified yourself with him by walking
Wittfiblatifterwards about the room."
In this lane conference, Mr. Rawlins obtained frqm Lord Grey,
the other Steward of the Ball, a denial of his having (as Mr, IL
had been Informed) assisted those who put the indignity upon him :
tine Urilihip adding that he was noteven in the roan who it cc-
• tarred. Thenext day (Friday,6th). ineonirquence of some doubt
•Sr errinexpression of Lord blolyneux at that meeting, Mr. Rawlins
in presence of a ft lend, obtained fronrhis Lordship a distinct and
frank disavowal of his haviiig used any words to the effect " that
'be ('Mr. L) deserved to be turned Out of the ball-room.'
• Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr.- Rawlins now repaired to Liverpool, to
meet their friend front Ireland, Mr. Stainer, 4th Dragoon Guards,
Midi Whom they tefurnedeo Chester on Sunday evening.(tkefith).
ARMday, morning, finding that Mr. Williams, NOTIMUSTANDING
znigurnezkuog &acme% had left the townblr. framer hadan
• taterviewwith Mr. Brooke, and requested to be informed where
Mr.-William., his late guest, could be found? which ififormation
Mr. Brooke professed himself unable to afford. Having failed in
all- further inquiries at Chester, they set out for Beautuaris,
Angleeea, the residence of his father, Sir IL B. Williams, Bart. and
were there again disappointed of meeting him, but received some
intimation that be was in London, whither they immediately de-
cided to proceed, taking Chester in their way.
Thursday night-(l4th iistatat),shey reached town,ind on Friday
morning havingaucceeded in• obtaining his address, Mr, Stabler
(after unavailing negociation), delivered to Mr. Williams, on the
part of Mr. Fitzgerald, a message demanding Measurable satisfic-
tion fur his unjustifiable conduct, offering him (ads Conceived with
much forbearance), the alternative of an ample phblic apolbey.
Mr. Stamer then delivered a similar message from Mr. Rawahi
—lloth, or either of which, Sir. Willi-ms tracrarzo vo•tocare,
al!zging he did not conceive himself responsible, and•producing a
resulatien to that effect, signed by several persons of rank and coos
aid, ration. - Mr. Starner having protested against this determinatim4
withdrew. •1••1
Upon deliberation In circumstances so dace% it 'Was decide&
(before resorting to the last extremity) to meet itfri-Reitin face 4/5
face, and to strike at the root of -the justification put forward"ej
Vow who committed the outrage. For this purpose, Mr4karn
Fitzgerald, and Mr. Raclin:, notwithstanding the, •••
.• sience and distance, again repaired to Chester, and there-
.•
front Sir. Rifkin a direct eentradiction of his own former 1
" that Mr. F. addressed him in the ball-room, calling him a. ',tuft'',
in the presence of his wife and drighicr,"whkh he'then altered into
declaration that he was informed "Mr. F. was nvertisurd ipplyint
that term to biro is cchrersation with Mr. Reset as. eldrAltintoki
then delivered him a hostile message from Mr,'FieigetaildAsr the
insult • (wholly =provoked) 'Mr: Elkin• had- in *e fast instanek
. offered that- Gentlenfais. 1-- a &Abed -teltnittrand'ltlirear-1
• • Zi
fined ititteediate leativneasures.
Mr. Starner. being under .014 - -•-- -
forthwith, the other •evito'firraletlitrOtolien iftid-suh,
ntittent tlr. Stkreer's • roinute‘.a thelkirt-t
' for biri Rad Mt 'llls deaden, diet to nay, been,'


y availing hit:lst-1f oC liftbsitti4ion ea Steward,and of the nrotec iui
he conceived thrown around htm by the resoldtiorrf of his friends,
to deny Mr. PitzgeralJ
n•id Mr. Rawlins that honourable satisfac-
tion they, as Sentiemen, had a right to demand, and has obliged
them, in consideration of their character, to put forward die fore-
going statement t• the public.
The above is a narrative of incontrovertible facts. They are not
bound to notice the absurd and vulgar calumnies which are or may
be circulated by anonymous traducers, confident drat dys public
will discriminate between Eti:h and the statement of men,' avowing
their names, and prepared to suvport their assertions ith their
lives. They fairly relate the only grounds the Gentlemen of Mr..
W.'s party durst avow to their face, namely, that Mr. Fitzgerald
addressed Mr. Falkin in the ball-room, calling him "a brute," in
presence of his wife and daughter; and that Mr. Rawlins did nut
desert his friend when he ti.ad been insulted. In refutation, Mr.
F. offers his own denial, and Mr. Eikin's self contradiction.
Mr. Rawlins leaves unanswered that part of the charge which re-
lates to him. There remains against them the hearsay evidence of
a private conversation, but they deny that the steward of a ball-
count has a right to take cognizance of a private conversation upon
such evidence. They insist diet e must b. some limit to his autho-
rity—that lie is not to lay aside all better judgment aiti discretion
with impunity—that he is nut to icrget that part of his duty which
enjoins an especial courtesy to strargers, and, yielding to the in-
temperate suggestions of others, come forward at the head of over-
hearing numbers in the absence of all just cause, eassusia tummy
TO LAY lIIS HANDS ON ozarzniem, and with indignity and insult
proceed to measures that could only be justified by some act of
criminal delinquency. And will it he maintained, that the man
whom even the finger of the law points out as tae responsible
aggressor, shall be excused in evading the more dedicate discern-
ment of honour—that, after the deep injuries Mr. F. and Mr. It.
have received—the efforts they have exerted to avoid this painful
publicationthe many hundred miles they have travelled—the
signal forbearance they have displayed in submitting so many days
to unfounded obloquy, Mr. Williams is justified in finally denying
them all reparation, and in anceorlim the shelter attempted to be
offered him by his friends? They admit ate number and consider-
ation of these, but they deem it a duty to themselves and society,
to protest against the claim of any set of men to trample under fort
the laws of honour, and the usages established amongst Gentlemen.
IThey again express the pain they feel at the measure they have
been driven to adopt—they disclaim, throughout, all unworthy
motives of revenge, and anticipating the establishment of their own
unsullied character and reputation, they fearlessly appeal to the
tribunal of public opinion to pronounce whether Mr. Willi_aciisa
conduct has been that of an honourable man or of a cowmen?
London, 32, Duke-street, St. James's, lila)? 21, 1325.

• It is unnecessary to obtrude the particulars, since Mr. \V. and
his friends have disclaimed founding any part of his attempted jus-
tification on the circumstances.
To account for this resolution, and for the seeming sanction
that it carries, Mr. Eikin's conduct must be more fully referred to.
This person, to ingratiate himself with a circle in which wealth .and
respectability in trade might unquestionably entitle him to move,
were be possessed of the feelings of a Gentleman, officiously in-
terfered between Mr. W. and. Mr. F. as has been mentioned, and
brought down oa himself
.tbe prompt rebuff be so justly deserved.
Galled by this, which be had not the spirit to notice in an honour-
able manner, and yet determined on revenge, he procured a party
of Me associates in the room, by whose persuasion Mr. Williams
unfortunately was induced, despite of the consequences, to take the
part be did. Thus the cause of both is one; and so, to protect
their friend, do many higkand respectable persons appear to coun-
tenance a man, and t• support measures they ought to be ashamed of

LAW REPORT.

COURT OP KING'S BENCH, JUNE is.
TIE XINO V.• HUGHES.

This was a rule against the defendant, to shew cause
why he exercised the office of Mayor of the Borough
of Monmouth, and he put in four pleas in justification
of his right; first, by virtue of the Charter of the Sd
year of Edward VI.; 2d, by right of the resident Bur-
gesses, according to the said Charter ; Sd, that the
said Burgesses did so elect, by a majority of votes, the
defendant, at Michaelmas, 1824; and 4th, by virtue
of a bye-law, which confined the right of election to
'such resident , officers. These pleas were met by
special replications, denying the right to be confined
to the resident Burgesses, and denying also the fact,
that Hughes was duly elected by a majority of the
proper officers legally entitled to vote. Thee proceed-
rags were instituted:by a rival candidate, Robert Bevan,
against the defendant. and he claimed being the legal
Mayor. The pleadings and replications were very
voluminous, setting forth, at large, the provisions of
the charter, the rules of election,•and the details of a
contention between the parties in the borough, set out
with all the verbosity of legal supererogation.
Mr. CAMPBELL contended, that all th.se replications
were had, and such as issue could not be joined upon,
and he qirote.l, in support of his opinion, the ctie of
Cooper v. Lever, in 2d Cooper's Reports, 489, upon a
,quo igatrintio, on a writ of error from the Irish Courts,
respecting the rights of certain Burgesses in Galway;
and also the case of the King v. Smith, in 271 of the
same book, relative to the right of electing tin May or
of Colchester.

Mr. Cass supported the validity of the replicatiOns,
andinsisted that such a case 'as that had not yet been
decided. There were many cases in which such. repli-
cations had been held. The Marv. Latham, Sd Bur-
roughs, 1495, was one of these, and Lord Mansfield
had there admitted the principle of 'the mode of pro-
ceedings at priment followed.' It was quite competent,
he maintained, to question the tide of the parties elect-
ing undeg these peculiar circumstances; and it could
not be bettersslone than by opening replications in this
manner, *Nth did, in point of fact, open the whole
question on wriich issue ought to be joined.
The Coons were of opinion, tbat the form of /replication was
bad, as it was calculated to confound tbedistinttion berstofoto pew.
*rived between emporatlons de facts ad* Aire, which ea& to
be squately ascertained in a dWwent eihassr.

CRIMINAL INToRMATION.
Mr. ADOL#MUS moved the Court for a crim'nal in.
formation against a person •t the name of John Jones,
for a libel upon Sir Francis Desanges, late Sheriff of
London, and now }Ugh Sheriff of the County of Ox-
ford. It appeared that Mr. Jones had married the
mother of Sir Francis Desanges, a very old lhdy, and
that animosity existed between Mr. Jones, and his son•
in-law. The defendant Jones •had sett[ a letter of the
most abusive description to *Sir Francis, 'rho had
contrived to trace the author, by means of a workman,
by whom the lithographic copy had been worked. The
letter was extremely long, and stated that the writer
had for a long time silently suffered from the iajostize
or Sir Francis Deranges.-=Mule granted.

CONSISTORY COURT, • JUNE le.
WINNINOTON WINNINGTON•
This.is a suit instituted by-Lady Winnington against
her-husband for a divorce, by reason of adultery. The
'cause has occupied the *Court 'for the'last three years.
At the sitting of the Court 'this morning, Sir John
tNtinnington applied to. be admitted to sue in fbrata
,pftkperis. Lady WinningtOn'sPiector opposed this.
Dr. BURVAii fivhd..priadtd in the absence of Sir.
t."ltontison) said thaalseiWeizre was s 4 so eitraor.
dinary'a nature,. that be roust Wsisiie 'him to make hi,
application orrthe-neat4lOurt:Day, whvn Sir C. Rom-
sou would • hirnstlf Jolla Wirmingtun
bowed and retired. .
. .
• IV lelitatad'in the, 014.04/e Phi*, • fresto a Nespo.
Man Paper, that the-Pli or.Natkaa, with a ••,tetrs to tentOdrags
trok appointed a C,onsOl to
iia4gtotOleftig thlrfitk trine thiethe Welftilitar,' Go.
dent to ttic lleseWarld.

DE,'Ke OP 'YORK AYDIN E,Winth CHEESE.
chefse, which 972$ forwarded to Davies Daven-
port and Wilbraham Egerton, Esqrs. representatives
for Che•bire, for presentation to the Duke of York,
reached its destination on Monday, and was-then sent
to his Royal Highness, with the Address, which we
have before given. The following is his-Royal High-

ness's answer

.. .

" Ifoass•Ottlttss, Ants 13.
" SIR-n-1 have to acknowledge the receipt of the Address which
you and Mr. Egerton have been instructed to present to me from
certain of the loyal inhabitants of the city of Chester, and to re•
quest you wilt assure than of the sense I entertain of the friendly
terms in which they have expressed themselves in regard to the
line of conduct which I have felt it my duty to pursue upon the
subject of the Catholic Question. I must further request, that you
will convey to them my best thanks for the cheese which they
have been so kind as to send tne.—l am Sir, your's,
" Davies Davenport, Eq. M.P. " FREDERICK."