Star.
London, England, 1817-05-26 00:00:00

REV. DR. CII.4L3IERS.

Yesterday the public had another opportunity of
Dearing this eminent Divine, rrevi,ius to his leaving
own for Glasgow. He preached in the forenoon
the Hibernian Society, in the key Mr. MANUEL'S
Church, London Walt, and in the afternoon in Swal.
low•street. In the forenoon he advocated the cause
of the Sxiety with his usual ability, but his sermon
ia the afternoon on the deKeneracy of man," was
one of the finest specimens of eloquence that could
pocsihly be &livered from the pulpit, and displayed
the most profound knowledge of the human mind.—
The pr egress of vice, its fascinating allurements, and
is tendon:, to the eternal ruin of its votaries, were
depicted in the most glowing colours. The discourse
.5.,0 concluded by an animated and powerful address
II the vicious on the toll). and absurdity of their con.
situ,. The pressure alt both places of worship was
immense, and though- every accommodation was
made, many thousanus went away very much disap
ointed, for want of room to stand even at the doors.
14r. WiLuensonce,' and several Members of I'arlia-
rnent, were present in the afternoon. We understand
the collection made atter the sermon for the Scot-
tish Hospital, which he preached in Surrey Chapel on
l'htniday, esceeded /MO, which was very great,
considering that every day during the last three weeks
collections had been made in the metropolis.

Divine Service was per:mimed yestaday, by the
ire Dr. Burisinpr, at the Queen's Palace
Yesterday Divine Service was per formed at Carlton
Home, by the Rev. Dr S. CLARKE.
The LORD CHANCRLLOR lett town oh Saturday
morning for Winchester, accompanied by his grand
SON Matter Scerr, for the purpose of leaving the
yosng Gentleman at Winchester College.
Notre ,t,E ELACTION-00 the close of the Poll on
Naylth day), the numbers were••••••
of Mr. WOIIIIIIOU SI 3!61

For Mr. Pawl r
Majurii y for Mr. Wooziness —573. •
On which Mr. Paarr declined any farther contest,
and Mr. Woneuousa was declared duly elected.
Dom—A duel was fought on the 19th instant near
Donbnyne, Dublin, between Captain PowMt, of the
4th Regiment, and Mr. Holism attorney, of Sum-
131r-bill, when the latter receiled a wound in the hip,
Which is supposed to be mortal. A transaction which
occurred three years ago was the cause of the unfor-
tunate meeting.
Yohrice WATsoN.—In a letter from Plymouth, of
Monday last, it is stated that young Wallets, instead
escaping to America via Liverpool, actually sailed
from that port. Wdaseita found his way there in the
drat of a woman. On the 19th of December, he
vat on board a ship in the harbour, called the Se-
*an, of and for P:idadelphis. A fair wind spring-
rf; op, the Severn sailed from thence on the 20th,
hat was forced back again by uniavourahle weather
(lithe 23d. The Severn was commanded by a Cap-
-44.10 Wartime; and it is supposed that young Wassosl
IN there 19 days, during all which period the walls
',recovered with the proclamation for taking him.
• The importation of American Flour, last week,
to Liverpool, amounted to the immense quantity
of twenty-eight thousand four hundred and fourteen
bands.
CORN EXCHANGE, MARK-LANE, MAY 26.
021' Market being very thinly supplied with bVheat
min our own coast this morning, and having many
hYers, sales were brisk, at an advance of 6s. per
gooier on the prices of this day week. Barley is
illsrn 29. to 45., higher, the demand having conside.
',46:y increased for shipping. Beans and Oats are
mal 4s. per quarter dearer. White Peas, 6s. Grey
mss, 4s. higher.
CURICINT rants AS UNDER I
71101.1111. Oats, Potatoe,ll6s. 48s.
14'2 I. Keil, and Essex, Old, I Ditto, Poland, gm' 46$
Ls" 1365. i icis. I Ditto, Feed, 12s. 4110.
Zeds. 1265. 140 a, I Rapeseed. £SO ASS per last
, Ms. 1261. Floor, 105$. 110 s. per tack.
y'.501.63.. fOllitGN.
miitis Ns Ms Wheat, Dantzle, 1265. 1364.
Nief SMITHFIELD MARKET; MAY RS.
Ss SI to 41, O.Veal 4s Od to Ss 6d '
/14004 Sr 64 to 4$ 114 ) Pork 4s 04 to Ss 44
lloa4 Lamb Ss. 64 to 6s. 64.
---•,—Sbaoir alai Lambs 14,1 70 —Calves 150...P1p 260.
HAY AND STRAW PER LOAD.
44- O. to As. s•--Clover £6. Os to 111 , Ss.
maw Al. 16s. to 411.

LAS' IMELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, MAY N.
TUX IMO v. it. 0. BUTT.

The defendant, in this case, was indicted for pnb-
lishing a false, wicked, and malicious libel, rtflect-
mg on the character of L,lrd Ellenborough.
Mr. Rienitansosi opened tit- pleadings.
The ATTORNa y-Otmut.u. then proceeded to state,
the case to the Jury. I'. e defendant, together with
Lord Cochrane and others, had been convicted of a i
conspiracy, the particulars of which were so well
known to ihe Jury, is er is unnecessary to repeat
them. When brought np for the jotiginent of the
Color, the defeadatit was sentenced to imprisonment,
t.; stand in the pillory, and to pay a fine of £l,ooo'
to the King. and to be further imprisoned until that'
fine was paid. That part or the sentence which re-
sated to standing in the pillory was remitted ; the,
fine, however, had been enforced, and the libel tor
which the defendant was now to be tried, charged
Lord Ellenborough, the Judge before whom the
trial took place. with putting the fine into his own
pocket. The Learned Counsel observed, whenever
wicked persons wished to bring our Courts of Justice
into contempt, their practice was to attack those by
by whom the laws were administered r such had been
the course adopted by the present defendant ; but in
this instance the object had failed; the character of
the Noble and Learned Judge against whom the slan-
der had been aimed. stood too high to be affected by
the breath of calumny. It was, however, nut the
less necessary to check these persons in their wicked
and mischievous course. The respect which Jurors
felt for Judges, to whose opinions they were in the
habit of looking up, would soon cease to exist, if
those Judges were to he represi-nted and placarded in
the streets of the metropolis as men man and despi-
cable; corrupt, wicked, and covetous; wh.; per-
verted the course of justice to forward their own pri.
vote gain and emolument. The trial of the &fen-
dant and his sentence took place in 1814; and in
Marco of the present yotr, the following libel was
placarded about the streets, as he should prove, by
direction of Mr Butt

" FAIR PLAT'S A Lord Chef Justice El.
knburougls has committed a robbery of sei,o4:o upon me, by
passing a sentence to make money, and put the King's fine into
his own pocket, insiead of its going to the public treasury; I do
hereby placard him as a disgrace to the Bench of Judges, to the
society of Gentlemen, and to the nation at large.
" uis, Oxford street. '6 R. 0. BUTT."

This atr 514.. us libel, he should prove, was posted
about the must public .streets of Westminster by de-
fendant's order ; and, having done that, he had no
doubt what the verdict of the Jury would be.
The proof that Lord Ellenborough was Chief Jus-
tice of the King's Bench was then given.
The libel was read, and David Dunlap, a bill-
sticker, was examined, who proved that he had re-
ceived 200 of these bills, with orders to stick them
up in the most public streets in Westminster, in Ox-
ford-street, Picca.iilly, &c.; and that he did as be
was directed.

Mr. Butt to the witness—ft I believe I told you
afterwards that pits had done your duty ; and I paid
you for every thing you did for me."—Witness an-
swered in the affirmative.

Mr. Butt was then called on for his defence, and
addressed the Court himself. He lowed that he had
now been nearly twelve weeks confined, during the
greater part of which time he had been stun up tna
room with six • felons who were under sentence of
transportation. He acknowledged having published
the alleged libel; he had no other mode lett of bring.'
ing the conduit to issue. He had been described as
a madman; if he was so it would be no wonder, if
the chlEculties into which he had been plunged by one
of the greatest scoundrels that ever existed, Mr.i
Cochrane Johnstone, were considered.

Mr. Justice ABBOTT stopped the deleadant, and
said, he could not allow him to take this opportunity
of slandering persons in no way connected with the
question at same.
The defendant then resumed. He should now en-
deavour to prove what cause he had to placard Mi-
nisters of State and Judges. He would prove that
Lord Ellenborough, assisted by his gaolers, had made
use of the public money; and it he had done so, he
ought to be exposed. He then proceeded to call his
evidence. The first was

reArkes, the Bow•street Officer, who apprehended
him on the 6th of March, for the libel. _

Filewood, turnkey of the King's Bench Pri.
son.—Witness recollected defendant's leaving the
prison on the 20th of June, 1816. Defendant went
away without paying his fees. He told witness be
had arranged every thing with Mr. Bruchoffe, the
Marshal's clerk.

Wm. Audley was a prisoner in the Bench at the
time the defendant quitted it ; on that morning he
saw a Banknote for £l.OOO lying on defendant's
table ; defendant said it was intended to pay his fine.

Mr. Ju►tice A&IOTT ordered defendant to examine
to facts only. conversations with other persons were
not evidence.

T. Gibbon, tipstaff to the Judges, apprehended
defendant a few days after he quitted the Bench, by
direction of the Marshal, he having left the prison
without paying his fine.
The Hon. Mr. Bennett, M.P. had been applied to
by defendant to present a petition to the House of
Commons: on reading that petition, however, wit-
ness declined, and told defendant his remedy, if he
bad sustained injury, would lie in a court of law.
Juseph Fearn, the defendant's stock-broker, on the
7th et July, 1815, sold out £1,200 live per cents.
for defendant's use, and sent him a £l,OOO Bank-
note by Miss Butt, which note he understood was
intended to pay his fine.
Mr. Gunnell, toemerly solicitor to defendant,
proved having paid a note of £lOOO to Mr. Barlow,
of the Crown Office, for Mr. Butt's fine, on the 7th of
July, 1815, and produced Mr. barlow's receipt fur it.
Mr. Bruchoffe, clerk to the Marshal of the King's
Bench, attended Mr. Gunnell, and saw the &IWO
paid to Mr. Barlow, and the receipt given; no other
fine was ever paid to the witness by the defendant.
Mr. Barlow, Secondary of the Crown Office, paid
the £lOOO into Gosling's house, not on the private
account of Lord Ellenborough, but directly on ac-
count of Mr. Lushington, the Master of the Crown
Office. Witness paid it as Mi. Letshington's se-
condary, as he had done many thousand pounds be.
lore. Witness is not appointed by Lord Zlkak-
rough, .nor has Lord Ellenborough any power of re-
moving him, except be should be guilty of misconduct.

He was no otherwise tinder the crotrnol of Lord
Ellenborough than all the officers of the Court were.
Examined by the Arroatm-GaNetrAL.—All fines
to the Crown art paid to the Master of the Crux,'
Office, and by him estreateJ to the Eicheyier ; il,e
sum in question was paid item the acl.equei on the
12th of February following. Mr. Luslongton is ap-
poinied by the Crown ; he is Lord Eiletih-ir..tiA's
nephew, but witness was not at all under his controul.
l'he defendant then proposed to put
in .his petition
to the House of Lords. Mr. Justice Anhui t told de-
fendant no act of his could he made evidence for
himself. The defendant said he wished the petition
to be read, to shew hw hAd done every thing in Lis
power in get redress, previous to putting up tl.e al-
leged libels.

Mr. Justice Aurtorr was desirous of giving defen-
dant every possillle advantage. If any person present
would prove the presenting that petition he would
receive it.

The defendant then called Sir F. Burdett and Mr.
Bennett, to prove the petition had been presented.
Mr. Watts, clerk in the Secretary's Office at the'
Bank, recollected Mr. Butt coming to the office at
the Bank, and making application respec►ing some
particular note, but could not tell what 'rote.
Mr. Best, Secretary to the Bank, recollected the
application of Nfrs••Butt to him respecting a note, and
a desire to see the Directors. The Directors having
decline 4 seeing him, he threatened to post them all,
and witness amongst them.
Mr. Hase, Cashier to the Bank, was next examined.
The witness des not recollect ever having Seen the
defendant before. Witness has not the note, Nu. 9544,
in his possession.
The defendant desired to have that note produced ;
he wanted to shew the forgery on the back of it. Mr.
Justice Abbott said he had no power to order the
note to be produced. The defendant hoped the Court
would indulge him. Mr. Justice Abbot said, his
conscience did not accuse him of want of indulgence
towards defendant, but he had no power tc order Mr.
Best to produce the note. The defendant —" Mr.
Best will you fetch the note Mr. Best—" My
Lord does nit order me. and I decline."
Defendant" Gentlemen of the Jury, you see he
refuses to fetch the note."

Mr. Manning, the Bank Director, had a faint re-
collection of the defendant's application to him, and
he applied to Mr. Mellish, then Governor, and .ob-
tained permission for defendant to see the note in
question. Witness did not receive any letter from
Lord Ellenborough or other person, desiring Mr.
Butt should not see the nom, nor did he believe any
such letter was written.

Mr. Wm. Mellish, M. P. did not recollect ever
having seen Mr. Butt before this iv °ming ; that he
had a faint recollectitm of Mr. Manti.ng's communi-
cation to him; witness never received any letter de.
siting him nil to let the defendant see the note in
question. The Directors had every wish to forward
the cause of justice, and witness, with that view, had
sent a person now for the note.
Mr. Nesbitt, inspector of hand.writings in the Bank,
was :hewn Mr. Barlow's receipt, and s..id he believed
the signature was W. Birlow.
The defendant then proceeded to call witnesses
trace the note. Mr. Niaton, Deputy Receiver of
Taxes, received the note from Mr. Warren, of Sta.
tioners'.court, who on the 20th of July, received it
from. Goslings' house.
Mr. F. Gosling recollected Mr. Butt's application
to bins respecting the note ; which was paid in by Mr.
'Barlow on the 7th of July, 180, and placed to Mr.
Lushington's private account. Witness never heard
of any balances of Mr. Lushington's account being
paid over to Ford Ellenborough.
Mr. Vansittatt, Chancellor of the Exchequer. could
not say of his own knowledge, bat he understood Mr.'
Lushington's receipts had been regularly paid into
the Exchequer. The fines of individuals were not'
specified in the accounts laid before the Treasury,
but only the sum total received from the Master of
the Crown Office.

Mr. Parrett, Deputy Comptroller of the Pipe Office,
Was applied to in the course of last year by Mr. Butt,
on the subject of his receipt of fines from Mr. Lush-
ington. Witness never said he had been astonished
for some time to know where this money had got to.
lie had written to the Lords of the Treasury respect-
ing the payment of fines by Mr. Lushington.
Mr. Justice Assort —The mode of Mr. Lushing-
ton's payment of lines is quite irrelevant to the pre-
sent question.
Mr. Hewins, cashier to Mr. Goslings. attended at
the Mansion /loose when Mr. Barlow was before the
Lord Mayor. Witness did not then refuse to tell to
whose account the note was paid in ; he said then, as
he said now, it was paid in to the account of Mr.
Lashing ton.
The defendant then called Mr. Birnie, Mr. Fa-
rant, Mr. Chambers, and other police magistrates, io
give evidence as to his applications to them fur war-
rants against Mr. Barlow,—some of whom stated,
they never saw defendant. Mr. Chambers had seen
him, and took him for an insane person, and under
that impression had as little conversation with him
as possible.
The Lord Mayor said defendant applied to him
to take Mr. Barlow into custody- for forgery ; com-
municated the defendant's charge to Mr. Barlow,
who attended and produced all the necessary books
and documents, and proved, beyond a doubt, alter
the fullest investigation, that there were nut any
grounds for the charge. The result of the investi,
gation wits, that there was nothing like fraud in the
transaction, but that it was the most honourable to
Mr. Barlow. Witness was aware that the defendant
was dissatisfied with his decision.

Defendant then called Lord Sidmouthc but the
Noble Viscount did not attend.
Mr. Swann, Member of Parliament, recollected
having been applied to by defendant to present his pe-
tition to the House of Commons. He did present it,
but recollected nothing further on the subject. .
Lord Holland was applied to by defendant to bring
his case before the House of Peers, but declined.
Lord Torrington'. was applied to, and granted de-
fendant an intenvnew some conversation passed re-1
specting the payment of this fine, and the defendant'
wanted the Noble Lord to present a petition to the
House of Peers fur him, but the Noble Lord declined.
. Lord Gtey, Lord Erskine, and Lord Folkstone,
were milled, but did nut an►wer.

41r. Barlow (again)—Wltneu•kept cash received
by him in bis official situation, at Goiliiisst; bi. pri-

viste !striker was Child's. (lading? were Lord El.
lenhoroneli's banker, as well as Mr. Lushington's.
Mr. Hewins was again called back.--N rustle
shuLnt~ of rh one thousand pounds was applied to
Lord Ellenbornugh's use.
Tie defendint said his case was closed as far ache
could go without the note.
The Cnuir waited some time for the arrival of the
nott. when the Bank clerk arrived with it Mr.Wara
seri proved, by an iiichirsrit.ent, that I.e received it
troth Goslings' on the 2.4)th of Jniy. ISIS.
hir..Nesbiu was cal'eJ back and shewn Mr. Bar•
low's indonement, and said, that looking ■t it in a
transient way, he should take it tor W. Barlow, bloc
it might be taLen (idler as W. or H.
Mr. Bulou —" The indorsement is mine, and this
is the mode it. whi_l,, t.)r twenty years and upward,.
t have signed my flume in die dividend books at the
Ear.k, and in no other."

Lord Coeirane was called, but did not appear. VI
Duke of Bedford has also called, but did not answer.
Tile defendant then clostal his ca:.%-.
The Arroissev.etAritar. then rose rn reply, lied
°Lie:vet!, this was the first case in which he, as A.-
tornes-General, had prosecuted for lil el, and ho
had no doubt but many of Lis Learned Friends wrint.l
blame him for not objecting to many points which he
had allowed the defendant to enter upon; bth as the de-
fendant stood without legal advisers, ands as ignorant
of forms, and consideling the, high character of the
Noble and Learned Lord who was the subject of this
libel, he had wished to allow the defendant to adapt
lany mode of defence Will, 11 he thought fit. The de-
tetitialit had himself lllAtie our the case f..r the pree-
ctition ; for he had this day called Members of both
Housesot Parliament, gentlemen al a ays vigilant and
properly vigilant, in investigating all stihj.-cts of
and private injustice ; all these nob :e .:nt!
able persons, after lull ccnsideraton, had ierh,ed to
' hear him, or to take up his ca,e ; had nest .ip:dicti
to Magstrates of lower rank, but GI as high hanoirr, all
of whom, however, had declared for thtmsels. s, that
they believed the defendant had no foundation nor the
charge which he brought forward a.eainst Lord Ellen-
borough. He had also attempted to malign one of
the officers of the Omit, a gentleman, though not
equal in rank, yet equal in honourable feelings to
the Noble Lord, and here his object had
Idled ; he then had recourse to the last resort of a
most malignant mind ; tie had employed his agent.
to libel the Noble Lord, by posting bills in Westmin-
ster, in the very neighbourhood where his L
had to discharge the high functions of the tit st Judge
of the first Criminal Court in the kingdom, and of a
Peer of Parliament. The Learned Counstl ten pro-
ceeded to comment on the es tJence, and observed,
that on the evidence of the &fetid:tot himstlf, the
charge against the N ble Lod WAS negatived. One
observation he must make, an th it was on the evi-
dence of Mr. Chambers, to whom defendant had ap-
plied to have Mr. Barlow taken win custody ; 'OO
stated, that from-the charge exhibit, dby Mr. But',
and from his conduct, Lc beltt vesi tiro to be de.
ranged. He, die Attorney•Getieral, was aware tiFit
malignity had sometimes such an effect oa:
minas, as to produce a teitau portion of insanity;
hot in this case, it defendant vas mail, there ct as,ii -
deed great method in his inadoesc, amid lie 'w.is con-
vinced the verdict of the Jury would be inc.as to
prove that defendant had thutred himself anti I ain
hopes, .he ti4Si 44 b. ,CsC pr pu ntsh menr 01, the
grounds of insanityator one t f the aossest libels that
ever was published on any ind,vidual.
Mr. Justice Meter? tliea proctedtd to sum up the
evidence, upon which lie conimented ai he prim, cried,
and observed, that with All the latitude which the
Attorney-General had aliovetd to him, he had ii t
succeeded in making out even a shadow of ch tike
against the Noble )..orcl, who had now presitli-d tor
15 yews at the head ut that Court, and whose conduct
in adnrinistei ing justice, every one a ho had had asi o;,-
portunity of observing it, he was convinced, a twirl
agree with him, was such as to place hint abov! as
suspicion. As little foundation there Inr the
charge which had been brought against Orel. respect.
able Gentleman (Mr. Btaisej, whose character for
honour and probity stood unittipeached. No p.irt of
defendant's evidence could at all apply to the pre-
sent case. The Jury would 110 W say whether
dant was guilty or not guilty t the qu.,•stnin of pu-
nishment would be for the future consideration of the
Court.—The Jury, without hesitation, found deten-
dant—Guilty.

Tun KING W. RINIAILD OVITIV);IV BUTT.
Mr. SIIEPIIERD at.ded, that ttiii was an indictment
against the defendant I. r a libel op I.,ird Castlereagh
and
'Ptie airrousiEst-GENEit,st. then proceeded to ad-
dress the Jury, and stated the libel, whin, imputed to
Lord Ellenboraugh that " lie unjustly consisted him,
Mr. Butt, to make money of I,isti :" a lalser, or a
fouler imputation never was cast upon nun. As to
the meaning of the ins one could clooht it, and
the mode of publishing it was intended to interrupt
the course of justice, aild to bring the Noble Lord
into contempt. With respect to the 111).1 on Lord
Castlereagh, it appeared that some discussion had
taken place in the House of Commons on the sub.
jest of the conviction of Mr. lint and others, when
Lord Castlereagh stated id the Mouse that Mr. Butt
had petitioned the Prince Regent to remit the swish.
went of the pillory ; whereas the defendant now said
he did not petition the Prince Regent tot A remission
of the punistment of the pillory, but fora remission
of the sentence altogether, as unjust. This took place
in 1814, and it was suffered to rest till 1017, when
the defendant thought proper to publish tilt libel in
question, stating, that la 1814, Lord Castlereagh had
asserted a falsehood to set ye his own purposes. This
libel was not argument, but it was a base assertion
that Lt rd Ellentwrwigh, for corrupt purposes, Earl
perverted the course of jii..tice, and that Lord Castie.
reagli, for the basest plAt pUSC., had asserteJ a deli L-f-rate
-rate fabehood.

D ivid Dunlap, bill-sticker, eX3 mined h t!i? form: r
case, proved, that on Tuesday, March 4. the
defendant applied to witness, at }as residence, to post
some large bills for 1 iii. Witness received one lorr•
dred bills from defendant, which were to to posted
in Piccadilly. Westmins:er, &c. they scere posted in
the most conspcuous parts of the strcer, anJ Lett 414 y
Mr. Butt paid him tout shillings for his trouble. and
gave him .wo hundred more bias, wit:i directions to
post them also.

• •
t • The was put in and read. It was beaded...-
" filloty, Pillory !" btr.s. aLd I