Star.
London, England, 1824-10-16 00:00:00

MR. HAYNE AND MISS FOOTE.

It was not the intention. of the friends of Miss Foote
to say one word upon the extraordinary conduct of Mr.
Hayne, but to wait.patiently the result of her appeal to
the Court of King's Bench. Since, however the wise-
acres in the pay of that gentleman have trumpeted
through the London, and even Provincial Papers, a
garbled and untrue statement, and having besides in-
sinuated that he had not intended to marry the young
Lady, it will suffice for the present to state—That Mr.
Hayne directed (and his Solicitors approved on his part)
the rough ,draft of the settlements to be made, on his in-
tended bride Oat he fixed the day to be married ;that he
caused the b;idesmaid to be' brought i distance of VA
miles, and to be introduced to him ; that he purchaLed
and tried on the wedding ring, and, in his own proper
person, procured, at Doctors' Commons, the license.
This statement will be safacient for the present to relieve the
minds of Miss Foote's friends.

At the trial a recital of facts, demonstrating one of the snit
aggravated cases of ' breach of promise' win be brought forward
that has ever occurred in a Court of Justice.

Mr. Rayne is invited to contradict one lota of this statement W
be dare. .

Thus bad begins, but worse remains behind.—Hanski.
The paragraph announcing the day for celebrating the marriage of
Miss Foote with Mr. Mayne, we have authority to state, was in-
serted at the express and earnest desire of Mr. Rayne. We have
the same authority to add that neither Miss Foote, nor any friends
at her suggestion, have written, or caused to be inserted, one line
in any Newspaper.—Merning Paper.
TO THE EDITOR OF TIIE STAR.

SIR-It never was my intention to have troubled the
Public with any circumstances which have taken place
between Miss Foote and myself, had I not felt some-
thing was due to truth, in the contradiction of those
paragraphs, which made it necessary my Attorney
should do. There I had hoped the matter would have
rested until the action Miss Foote has thought proper to
commence developed everything ; but the notice taken
of it in some of the Papers of this morning, compels me,
reluctantly, to put the public in possession of facts
which I think will justify my conduct, intending to
leave my powers of contradicting such statements to
the proper time and place. Delicacy to the Lady would
almost silence me, did I not feel and know it is so little
attended to by or heeded on her part.
But to the point :—I was not aware, when I made a
proposal to Miss Foote, that she had ever been under
the protection of Colonel Berkeley; her father and mo-
ther having always upheld (and, I believed,) her to be a
paragon of virtue; and had not Colonel-Berkeley, in the
latter end of June last, in the presence of James Maxse,
Esq. (as the Colonel's friend) and Thomas Best, Esq (as
my friend), owned her having had children by him, the
youngest then not a month old, I should have been in
ignorance of the facts until too late to retrieve in,
happiness.
If I were to make every other circumstance public at
this moment, I should not only be anticipating the de•
fence I have at the approaching trial, but might rather
increase the anxiety than 44 relieve the minds of Miss
Foote's friends." My withers are unwrung.
Now a word for Mr. Foote, who, under the plea of
purchasing a Paymastership, borrowed the sum of one
thousand one hundred and fifty pounds from me.—
May I ask him (if he is in this country), to what purpose
it has been appropriated ?—being given to understa,l4
that the fear of being called upon to return it, has in-
duced him to make a Continental tour.

The mention of the above facts "out of Me »tatty,"
will, I trust, induce the public to suspend their further
opinion until the appeal made to the Court of King's
Bench is decided. And in thus intruding upon their
notice, I cannot but congratulate myself at my eicape.
I am, Sir, your obedient humble servant,
JOSEPH HAYNE.
28, Upper Grosvenor-street, Oct. 15, 1524.

Yesterday afternoon, about half-past four o'clo:k.
their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess of Ct.auma, ail('
his Sere Highness the Duke of sistancoss, kit town, oa their
to thiShey.
Sir Rocca and Lady SOPHIA GRIESLILY are on a visit
to the Marquis and Martial/real of VANS Lutiounozaer, at &Attila.

WEST- INDIA SLAVERY.
LETTER VI.
•
TO THE EDITOR OF THE STAR.

Slit—l am again coMpelled to call your attention to
another flagrant instance of misrepresentation in spirit,
if not in letter, on the part of ANGLUS : and I anticipate
the establishment of the proof of this assertion in the
most conclusive manner.
In the text and note beginning at page 572 of the
Quarterly Review, so often alluded to, is a long series of
observations on a public document referred to by Mr.
Whitmore, in his speech in the House of Commons on
tie 18th of May ; and the printer of this article has
made a typographical error, by substituting the numeral
3 for that of 2. The Review says," In a table drawn
44 up by M. Inginac, entitled, General Balance of the
" ' Commerce of the different Foreign Nations with
4'4 Haiti for Me year 1823';" and- it ought to have
"s 4 said, ' General Balance of the Commerce, &c. for the
year 1822.'" The error, as I have already stated, is
n the printing. The reasoning is exclusively directed
to the year 1822, and the document refer' ed to by Mr,
Whitmore. Upon this, ANGLUS remarks, " But there
" is another capital mistake of the Rev iewer, which ren-
ders his whole reasoning. on the subject perfectly fal-
" lacriPus and inapplicable. 'The document of M. In-
" gime, to which he refers, he describes as an account
44 of the Commerce of Haiti with Foreign Nations for
" 1823 ; whereas, on looking into the document itself,
" I find that it contains an account of the Foreign Com-
" merce of Hayti, not for 1823, but for 1822."
Does ANGLUS pretend to suppose that the fact thus
discovered by him was not equally known to the Re-
viewer ? He must have known that the observations of
the Reviewer were directed to the document for 1822,
because it was to it that Mr. Whitmore referred, and, a
few lines before those quoted, ANGLUS says the Re-
viewer strives hard to prove that the statements made
by .Mr. Wliitmore, on the authority of drat document,
were 'fallacious ; and therefore, that the change of the
nurteral 3 for-2 was an accidental error of the press.
He states that he had the document to which Mr. Whit-
more referred before him, and that he had looked' into
the document itself; which is a most unfortunate admis-
sion on his part; for, as it was before his eyes, he must
have perceived, that all the figures expressive of quan-
tities, or values on which the Reviewer reasoned, were
identically the same as in the document before him.
He must have perceived that the question turned on
their abstract accuracy, and not on the point whether
they related to one year or another. And is it possible
that ANGLUS can present himself to the Public as a fair
reasoner, whose arguments are to be truster), when he
contends that the whole reasoning of an argument is
perfectly useless, and inapplicable, because there
is an error in the press of 1823. for 1822 ? The
fact, is, that ANGLUS knew perfectly well that he
could not meet the argument by fair reasoning ; and it
is an imputation on his ingenuity, that he has only been
able to resort to the pitiful expedient which I have un-
masked to the Public, to ward off the necessity of grap-.
piing• with the real substantial merits of the case. Let
it then be supposed that this typographical error had not
bean committed, and then let us take up the argument.
The.tet?dency of the argument is, to spew that Mr.
Wlimpore, who 'cited St. Domingo as an instance of
the advantages of free labour on the part of eman-
cipated Slaver, as compared with Slave-labour, had
been misled by an official document, which had been
placed in his hands. Part of the letter containing the
document alluded to by the Reviewer is quoted in the
Review; (and here I must incidentally remark that AN-
GLUS most have known the error in question to have
been an accidental one, for in the extract from this let-
ter the year 1822 is printed correctly, .and contrasted
with 1823). The passage is as follows Commerce
44 has considerably increased" (says M. Inginac, the Se-
cretary to the President of Haiti, to his Correspondent
in London 444 of which you will 'have an idea by con-
,
" suiting the paper whichl send you, of the importa-
" Lions mod exportations of the year 1822, collected at
" the different Custom-houses." In ••that paper is the
table drawn up by M. Inginac, entitled " General
" Balance of the Commerce of the different Foreign
44 Nations with Haiti for the year 1822," improperly
printed in the note to the Review, 1823.
ANSLUS then proceeds to a second charge. He says,
" In addition to this blunder," (pre:ending to suppose
that the introduction of the year 1823 for 1822 was eat
an error of the press) " he (the Reviewer), adopts the
" tr pographical error of the Morning Chronicle, which
"has translated the mark for pounds weight into di 1
" bus value."

. _
In the first place, it is suspicious whe% ANGLUS be-
gins to accuse the Morning Chrouicle of error 3—but
when he applies the term " typographical error" to a
blundering and ignorant mistranslation of a French
word, is it possible to conceive a greater confusion of
the plain terms of the English language?
The British and Colonial Weekly Rcgister, of the 4th
of September, a paper with which ANGLUS is as well
acquainted as he is with the Correspondent of M.
Inginac, has these observations on the Review : !I One
" cause of the discrepancy might easily have occurred
" to the Reviewer, if he had been disposed to observe
" it, In printing the account in the Newspaper, the
" quantities were headed dollars instead of pounds
" weight. This is so evident in all the.items, that it
" could only have been overlooked by the Reviewer by
"• design."—All that the. Reviewer had to shew was,
that the public had been juggled—that Mr. Whitmore
had been deceived,—whether by intention or design, it
was not his business to inquire—The . British and
Colonial Weekly Register, on the 25th of September,
1824, publishes this very document in the original
French, with this paragraph : ".As the errors" (not
typographical errors, as AnoLus called them) " which
" appeared in the statement of the Commerce of Haiti,
" published in the Morning Chronicle, frost whence we
' copied the article, have occasioned much confusion,
4 we think it expedient to print an exact copy of this ac-
" count, from the original Haitian document now
"before us," (Mr. Inginac's English Correspondent
being very intimate with the Editor of The British sad
Colonial Weekly Register). " The gosrde corresponds
" to the dollar, The pound-weight is neatly equal to
" outs,—one hundred pounds Haitian being equal to
" one hunched and eight pounds English."—l beg to
ir.luire, how came it that the Editor Of The British
und Colonial Weekly. Register, having the original do-
cement in his possession, should have preferred quoting
al incorrect translation which had appeared in the
ilon,ing Chronicle? Is it possible to make an apology

for this sub,titution of error for troth flut then it
must be remembered, that if the mistake had riot been
made, the argunient would have been conclusive
against Mr. Whitmore .and those who had reasoned
with him.

But I have not yet quite disposed of AnoLus and the
British and ColOnial Weekly Register. In the latter
Paper, published June 12, 1824, is to be found this
passage :—" Sugar" (that is, sugar from St. Domingo)
" is effectually excluded here " (in Great Britain) " by
" prohibitory duties: but in France alone, the quantity;
" of Haitien sugar impo: ted in 1822 was of the value'
"of 370,000 dollars." And if any person will refer to
the document itself, as printed in the British and Colo-
nial Weekly !register of May 15, 1814, he will find it
there stated, that the value of the sugar exported from
Haiti to France, in 1822, amounted to 374,000 dollars.
But when a sufficient time had elapsed to allow the ge-
neral circulation of this false statement, if any of my
Readers will refer to the British and Colonial Weekly
Register of September 25, 18'24, they will find it therein
heated, not that the value of. the sugar exported from
Haiti to France in 1822 was 374,000 dollars, but that
its weight consisted of 374,000 French pounds, being the
same identical number.—Now was there ever such a
juggle and farce as this, in a correspondence that as-
sumes the character of being carried on by the organ of
' a very considerable party in a State like Great Britain?
And in pursuing this subject (for it is not yet disposed
of), I would beg particularly to inquire, what is meant
by the explanation prefixed to the Haitien document in
the British and Colonial Weekly Register'of the 25th
September, 1824, that " the gourde corresponds to the
" dollar?" Is it to be understood from this paragraph
that the legal Haitian coin called a gourde is really of
the same value as the Spanish cain called a dollar? Is
it not clearly the intention of the Editor that his readers
should believe that their value is one and the same?—
Because the opinion which any person may form with
respect to the value of the exports aad imports of Haiti
may not only materially, but entirely turn on this point.
M. Chanlatte, of Haiti, in his Appel aux Haitiens, page 9,
says, " M. Martignac, au lieu de denigier d'un ton si
"ridicule ' les petites pieces de cuivre a peine blan-
" • shies, et aux quelles it a plus au President d'Haiti
" g d'assigner la valeur d'un quart de gourde: ne do-
" vrait-il pas de prefereace soupirer Atnerement au sou-
" venir des rnandats, et des assignats, que la France
" await ichanges coritre les monnaies d'or et d'argent
" qui circuloient en France, dans le tents denomme de
" la terieurr —This passage nould give a very diffe-
rent estimate of the value of the gourde. Is Astacus
able t 9 contradict it ?
It fs really amusing to ascertain the extent to which
such grave and learned, personages as the President, the
Vice-l're,idents, and the Committee, of the Anti-SlA-
very Society, had been puzzled by this document from
Haiti, the errors of the translation of which are so
palpable, when the Reviewer deals with them, that it
is said " nothing but design could have overlooked
" them," In page 23, of the Report of the Anti• Sl-
avery Committee, published (be it remembered) since
the last Quarterly Review, is the following passage:
" The sugar exported from St. Domingo, previously
" to the emancipation of the Slaves, say the West
" Indians, was 160 millions of pounds ; but since
" g free labour has been established, that Island does
"' not manufacture enough for its own consumption.'
" The inference intended to be drawn from the fact is,
" that the emancipation of Slaves will tend to diminish,
"if not destroy production. But what ii'the real state
"of the case with respect to St. Domingo? In the
first place, it is not true that Sr. Domingo does not
" grow sugar for its own consumption. In the year
" 1822, besides satisfying its own demand, a certain
44 quantity, indicated by the figures 652,451, was
iicexported thence, chiefly to France.* It is not clear
whether this quantity is intended to specify pounds or
hundred weights." Here is a grave official document,
published for the purpose of enlightening the public
mind, and of settling and consolidating public opinion,
in which it. is frankly avowed, that the Anti-Slavery
Society are so conversant with Haitian affairs, that they
are actually uncertain whether the figures 652,451 are
intended to specify pounds or hundred weights ! I
would only call upon any person who is in the slightest
degree conversant with the bearings which aritfime-
tical data have on argument, to think of the force of
that series of reasoning, and of the authority of those
reasoners, who are obliged to confess their ignorance
whether the exports of sugar from Haiti, chiefly to
France, amounted to 652,451 pounds, or to 73,074,512
pounds (i. e. 652,451 hundred weights), when the
Haitian document itself stated, that only 374,0001b5.
were sent to France. Such are the absurdities into
which men fall, who form opinions under the iufluence
of feelings, and not of facts.
But admitting, for the sake of argument, that the
Haitian document is correct, and that 652,1511b5. or
about 435 hogsheads of sugar really were exported
from St. Domingo, yet this is only about the two hun-
dred and fortieth part of what was produced from the
French part of the Island alone, prior to the emancipa-
tion of the Slaves. Will ANGILUS, will the Anti-Slavery
Society, deny that specific fact, thus simply and for-
Mally stated ? Undoubtedly, if the numbers applied to
hundred weights, and not; to pounds, this calculation
would not be correct ;—but no man in his senses ever
pretended to believe that hundred weights were in-
tended to be expressed by these figures, in a French
official document, wherein cwts. are never used as a le-
gal and official expression of weight.
Astocus appears to contend that St. Domingo manu-
factures sugar enough for its own consumption. 1
would then inquire, how is that .fact to be reconciled
with the fact, which rests on the authority of President
Boyer himself, so late as the 20th of March, 1823, that
sugar was smuggled into Hayti from Colonies where
it had been raised by Slaves, in direct opposition to the
laws of that Republic ? If it ever be permitted to form
human opinions by inference,—how it it to be supposed
that it could answer, to introduce foreign sugar into
St. Domingo, with all her advantages of soil and cli-
mate, if she were enabled to grow enough for her own
domestic consumption, in the fair sense of the term?
Let A Not. us cease to suppose that the cause of the
Abolition,—the cause of putting an end to the worst
form in winch human society ever appeared, can by
possibility be permanently aided by sophistical argu-
ments or by perverted facts. Before this series of let-
teri is concluded, he will find additional reason to be
convinced of this truth.

1 am, Sir, your humble servant,
VINDEX.

Here I muit observe, that it appears only 574,000tb5. are said,
even in the Haitian document, to have been sent to France. 'The
official documents of the United States and Great Britain not
agreeing with the Haitian document, as shown by the Reviewer,
now France is selected for illustration. the Reviewer had not
noticed France iu any wanner.

• •
,_ •
NAVAL INTELLIGENCE.
The Bristol, !'Laver, from Jamaica, is off Cape Clear.
The Hector, BURN/TT, from Archangel to London, is on shore
on the Herd and—crew saved.
The Calypso, LOHILSON, from Dram to London, is lost on the
Lemon Sand—crew saved.

-- ----- -- -----
The Margartt, —, from Liverpool A Limekiln', is on 'bore
near Wicklow.

The Hope, GIIFFITIIS, from Youghal to Uvirpool, is on shore
on Wickluvr Bar.

The Lerwick packer, Srursopr, is on shore near Lerwick.
The Nelson, J'ossoN; Mary, DANIEL; Yeare, NICALZ Henry,
Ilarnmosom ; and Ann, Toon, are all on shore near WarkWorth—
crews saved.

Rumours, OCT. 14.—Wind S.—Arrived tht Margaret, Bow-
DUN, from Villaviciosa ; Eddystone, DALE, from Prince Edward's
Island; and Good Agreement, Rossos, from Quebec.
PLEMOUTH, Ocr. 14. - Wind variable.—Arrived the Priscilla,
MITCHELL, from Aliramichi in five weeks ; William and Jane,
BARLTING, from Liverpool for New York, leaky, and must dis-
charge. Off the port, the Naiade, Hurcluesom, from Teneriffe.
Poarsmouvu, OCT. 15. Wind N. N.E. Arrived the York
Merchant, lIIGGINIOTTO3I, from Hull fur this Dock-yard. Sailed
the Pottun, iIYLTON, for Sierra Leone.
DEAL, OCT. 15.—Wind W.N.W.—Passed through, the Risebro',
BOTDIC, from Jamaica.
Dom, Ocr. 15—Off the port, the Fortuna, Buser, from Ba-
tavia—spoke, on the Bth August, the William Shand, in lat. 35. S.
long. 24. E..
Liveitroot., Ocr.l4.—Arrived the Cortes, Ds COST, from New
York ; Fortitude, BARIHAM, from Smyrna; and the Doris, —,
from Archangel.
CUSTOM-HOUSE, OCT. 15.
Stiles &tram) 'swamis— The Liberty, Perthshire, Diligent,
Netley, and Olive Branch, from Malaga; St. Johannes, front Me-
mel; Tran Maria, from Stralsund ; and Providentia, froin*Rostock.
ENTERED OUTWARDS ••• The Pyrennees, for Sierra Leone; Neva,
and Volusia, for Jamaica; Expedition, for Brtnten • Providentia,
for Elsineur ; Allies, for.Havannah ; and at:solutionfor Hayti.