Star.
London, England, 1821-12-11 00:00:00

GLASGOW, DECEMBER 8.

Monday evening, the first series of Concerts, called
the Musical Festival, took place in the Theatre.—
Though the doors were thrown open nearly two hours
before the performances commenced, a large assent.
blage had previously collected, and the pressure was
great, but of the most orderly kind.
A move magnificent toast ensemble than that at the
Theatre on Wednesday night, cannot well be ima-
gined—the House was brilliantly illuminated—the
Orchestra fitted up in a very tasteful and appropriate
style--and a finer assemblage, or a greater display of
beauty and fashion, was never witnessed in this city.
Among the strangers who have already appeared
at our Festival, were—
Lady Augusta Clavering, Lord Archibald Hamilton, Lord
and Lady John Campbell, Lord and Lady Kelburne, Hon. Ad-
miral Fleming and Lady, Sir William and Lady Maxwell, of
Calderwood ; Sir William blanker& Napier, Mr. Maxwell, jun.
of Pollak, M.P. and Miss Maxwell; Mr. Campbell, of Blythe-
wood, M.P. Mr. and Mrs. Hamilton, jun. of Dalzell, and party,
Mr. and Mrs. Alezander, of Southbar, and party ; Captain
Smollet, of Bonhill, Mr. liorroeks, of Tillybewan Castle, Mr.
Napier, of Blackstone, &c. &e.
'Thursday night there was a brilliant Assembly;
the LORD PROVOST, Director; Mrs. DOUGLAS, of
lllythswood-place, Lady Directress.
The crowd and pressure at the Musical Festival
was, if possible, still greater last night than on any
preceding evenings. A great many Ladies lost their
gloves, hair ornaments, reticules, &c.
Wednesday night, a musical knight of the last, who
had concealed himself between the ceiling and the
slates, over the gallery, through the day, wishing to
hear Madame CA TAL A mfir nothing, was discovered
by part of the plaster falling, to the considerable alarm
of the House, and conducted to the Police•office, and
ultimately sent to Bride well for sixty days!

The action of Mr. GIBSON against STEVENSON and
others, Printer, Editor, &c. of the Beacon Newspaper,
came on in the Court of Session, at Edinburgh, on
Thursday last, when it was remitted to the Jury
Court.—The cause GIBSON O. the LORD ADVOCATE,
&c. securities in a bond of credit for the Beacon,
came on next, when Mr. MACKENZIE and Mr. THOM..
SON were heard as Counsel for the defendants, and
Mr. MONCRIEWIP and Mr. CRANSTOUN lot- the plain-
tiff. The JUDOE (Lord ALLOWAY) delayed judgment
till the meeting of the Court on Friday, when his
Lordship pronounced his decision, finding the action
relevant, and made the usual remit to the Jury Court.
The next case in the roll was that at the instance
Of Mr. STUART, against Messrs. ALEXANDER and
BORTHWICK, printers of the Glasgow Sentinel news-
paper, and Mr. DAVID ROBERTSON, news-agent in
Edinburgh, and as such agent for that paper. Mr.
CLERK, Counsel for Mr. STUART, having passed from
that action so far as respected Mr. ROBERTSON, and
agreed to a decree of absolvitor with expenses in his
favour, the LORD ORDINARY also found this case re-
levant, and remitted it to the Jury Court.
POLICE COURT, PAISLEY—Friday se'nnight a num-
ber of journeymen tailJrs were brought before one of the Dailies
of Paisley, charged with illegal combination for the purpose of
raising theirwages. After bearing Prima JAME, Esq. writer in
Paisley, in behalf of the defenders, the combination was found
proven, and they were severally fined and admonished.
MRS. SARAH Dorm—The immense wealth which
this extraordinary woman died possessed of has na-
turally caused considerable alacrity, and a good deal
of anticipation, among all who think themselve, in
any degree entitled to be her heirs. No le.s than
eight caveats have already been entered against let-
ters of administration beiog granted ; among which
was one in behalf of his MAJESTY, by his Plocurator-
General, Sir J. NICHOL. Other competito s fur the
valuable prize have, however, started in the sister
kingdom. Two families, living at Brown's-grove,
near Castletown Roche, in the county of Cork, have
put forward their claim to the property, as nephews
and nieces of the deceased Lady.
MELANCHOLY CracustaTANcE.---Wednesday last,
Mr. TOWERS, a surgeon of Kendal, attended his wife,
her mother, and another Lady, on a visit. When
they returned, he deliberately walked into another
room, and brought from it a double-barrelled pistol,
with which he shot his wife through the head, who
immediately fell down and expired. He then placed
the pistol to his own head and fired ; but, although
he fractured his skull, he is likely to recover. An
Inquest sat on Thursday afternoon on the body of
Mrs. TOWERS, and returned a verdict of—Wilful
Murder against the husband. The individuals con-
cerned were both in the prime of life, and highly
respectable. It is supposed that the unfortunate
husband committed the fatal act in a state of tem-
porary derangement. The town is agitated beyond
measure by this tragical event.
FATAL ACCIDENTS.—Wednesday, in the afternoon,
as Mr. David Brook, a carpenter, at Thorp, was re-
turning home from Leeds on the rail-way towards
Middleton, having elevated his umbrella to prevent
the sleet beating in his face, a number of coal-wag-
gons, drawn by the loco-motive machine, came
upon him unobserved, and passing over his lower
extremitiesmangled his legs and thighs in so dread-
ful a manner, that he died in the Infirmary in the
course of the same night. The deceased has left
a widow and six children.—A still more terrible
accident occurred at Lofthouse on the following
day, by which four individuals lost their lives.—
It appears that early in the morning of that day four
persons were descending in a curve into a coal-pit,
when the rope giving way, they were all precipitated
to the bottom, and two of them killed on the spot;—
the two others, one a boy about sixteen and the other
twelve years of age, were removed to the Leeds Ge-
neral Infirmary, where one of them died immediately
on his arrival, and the other within half an hour al.
terwards. The names of the deceased are, George
Hould, a boy about sixteen years of age, and.
Hould, his father ; a young man whose name we have
not heard; and Joseph Farrar,- a boy about twelve
years of age.—The same day, Thomas Salt, foreman
to Messrs. Brown and Co. shear-grinders, at the
Crown-point, in this place, got entangled in one of
the fly-wheels, and was literally cut in two. The de-
ceased was a steady worthy man, and had been in his
masters employment upwards of six years.—Leeds
Mercury.
BETTING AT TATTERSALL'S, DECEMBER 10.

mow.
11 to 1 apt Landscape colt 13 to 1 apt Sycora;
12 to 1 apt 'Marcella 16 to 1 agst Bess colt
13 to 1 apt Frolic (taken)
gag,.

9 to 2 agot Parasol 110 to 1 apt Cal
14 to 1 opt Tippityadithal
6 to 1 agst Mama

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CH A NC ERY, DECtMBER 10.•
BOLD V. STEWART.
The LORD CHANCELLOR decided, that the injunc-
tion which the plaintiff had obtained to restrain the •
Sheriff from proceeding under an outlawry must be
dissolved. He was of opinion that the Court of Er-
chequer only had jurisdiction to stay the execution of
an outlawry'.
COURT OP KING'S BENCH, DEEEMBER to., -
VIE KING V. THE REV. NA.THANIEL
Mr. SHEPHERD stated, that this was aninforma-:
tion preferred against the defendant, ter
-a libel on
his Majesty.
. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, on the part of the
drown, said, this was an information which he had
been reluctantly indeed obliged, in the perform-
anCe of his duty, to prefer against the defendant. for
an extremely gross libel against his Majesty. The
defendant was a Clergyman, and some time ago re-
ceived a pension from the revenues of Cornwall, but
that pension had, for reasons unnecessary now to ex-
plain, been withdrawn, and since that time the de-
fendant, forgetting the respect due to the Sovereign,
and the duty of a good subject, especially one belong-
ing to his profession, had conducted himself in a
manner which had obliged the Law Officers of the,
Crown to notice him. In May last, the defendant,
as would be proved, delivered with his own hand, at
Warwick-house, a letter addressed to Sir Benjamin
Bloomfield, containing the grossest libel on his Ma-
jesty; and in this letter was also inclosed a letter to
his Majesty, couched in terms of the mast disrespect-
ful nature. The letter to Sir Benjamin was the libel
complained of; and he was convinced, when the
Jury should hear that letter read, they would enter-
tain but one opinion upon it, and that the result of
their verdict to-day would be, to convince this Gen-
tleman that he must, in future, abstain from a repe-
tition of such conduct. Ile felt it unnecessary to de-
tain them further, and should content himself with
proving the defendant the author of the libel, and
reading it, secure as he was of their verdict.
The first witness called was Thomas Gates, one of
his Majesty's footmen. Remembers receiving a let-
ter, on the 9th of May last, at Warwick-house. It
was addressed to Sir Benjamin Bloomfield. The let-
ter now handed in was the same. Witness received
it ironi defendant. It appeared to contain inclosures.
The defendant gave his card, with his name upon it,
at the same time. Witness marked the letter, so as
tinknow it again, and then put it into Sir Benjamin's
private box. Sir Benjamin was at that time absent;
but on his return, on the same day, witness delivered
the box to him, with the letter in question in it. Wit-
ness saw him open the box and tike the letter oat.
Witness afterwards attended at llow•street, when the
defendant was examined, and heard him acknowledge
the letter to be his hand-writing.
Sir ll.mjamin Bloomfield, Private Secretary to his
Majesty, received the -picket now banded to him on
the 9th of May list. On breaking the seal he found
the papers now produced inclosed„ in the hand-writing
. of the defendant, The defendant afterwards tcknow-
'edged at Bow-street, before the Magistrate there,.
that the vriting was his.
Cross examined by Defendant.—Dues not recollect
defendant waiting onlim at Carlton-house in 1811,
or any conversation passing at that time on the sub-
ject of a petition. Had had many conversations on
that subject, but had no recollection of conversations
so far back. Does not recollect communicating to
defendant that he had shewn the petition to Mr.
Adam, his Royal Iligliness's.Secretary, and stating
that there was no objection to his presenting it at the
Levee, though such a conversation might take place.
Witness had no doubt he might have referred the de-
fendant to Colonel MiMalion, if it was during the
time the Colonel was in office. Was certain he had
never said he entertained no doubts on the justice of
the defendant's claims, because he always had enter-
tained doubts on the subject, and did so still: might
have said he wished defendant to make out his claims
as far as he was entitled to do.
Tue libel was then lead.—lt was a letter, dated
Surrey-street, May 3, 1821, addressed to Sir Benja-
min Bloomfield, Private Secretary to his Majesty;
and stated, that. as his Majesty bad, by his conduct,
shewn his unjust treatment of an individual, and the
dishonour of his Royal word, he must not be sur-
prised if the terms used in the ordinary transactions
of society were applied
,to such a breach of moral
duties. This letter contained an inclosure, addressed
44 To the most ignoble. the lying , and cheating Duke
of Cornwall, K.G. since become George the Fourth)l
Carlton Palace."
The Defendant then addres;ed the Court and Jury
at considerable length; commencing with a review of
the Ecclesiastical Laws of the kingdom from the
earliest period ; and contended, that as the King was
the Saprerne Head of the Church every ecclesiastical
person had a right to petition. Upon that established
doctrine he had acted ; and he trusted he should be
able to slie.v, in the course of his defence, that he was
entirely innocent of the charge now made against
him of an intention to slur the character of the King,
and to Brill his most geacions Majesty into con-
tempt. Ile then entered into a wide and extended
history of himself and his early life; and read, from
-a large printed volume which he held in his hand, a
copy of a Petition presented to his Royal Highness
'the Prince Regent, soon after his Royal Highness
was appointed to the Regency, in which he stated,
that breleven years close study and application in
the University of Cambridge, he bad succeeded in
obtaining the degree of Doctor of Laws ; which de-
gree, he contended, qualified him to act as an Advo-
cate in any one, or all of his Majesty's Ecclesiastical
Courts, and to hold Ecclesiastical Offices. That this
right was first given by Charter of Henry IV: and af-
terwards confirmed by the 13th of Elizabeth, and
subsequent Acts and Charters. That he had applied
sto be allowed to discharge the duties of an Advocate
in the Courts and had been refused. He then ap-
plied to be permitted to show, that by the Canon, by
Charter, and by Act of Parliament, he bad the right
to the privileges he claimed ; but he had been refused
a hearing. And he now humbly prayed, that his
Royal Highness would be graciously pleased to com-
mand that lie should have a hearing. This Petition
was presented to his Royal Highness, and in answer
be had the promise of his Royal Highness to see him
righted ; at least his Royal Highness's confidential
servant communicated such promise as from his

;Royal Highness, and' as by his-Royal Highness's ex-
press command. If the servants had presumed to
misrepresent their august master, and to communi-
cate as from him what was not true, they were an-
swerable for libelling his Royal Highness, and not
,him who,• led into error by their misconduct, had
acted on their misrepresentation;' but he would shew,
by the course pursued for three years immediately
following the Tear 1812, and, indeed, up to the pre-
vent time, that his Royal Highness must have been
aware of the promises made in his name. He then
*proceeded to read copies and extracts of various let-
iters written to the Lord Chancellor, Lord Liverpool,
!and others of his Majesty's Ministers, and minutes of
:conversation which passed at different interviews with
these respective individuals ; and, also, subsequent
Petitions presented to his Royal Highness the Prince
Regent, and contended that the course adopted
throughout by Ministers justified him in adopting the
terms he had adopted in the alleged libel. He then
proceeded to comment on the course adopted in this
prosecution. Why had not the course by indictment
been adopted on this occasion ? In such a proceed-
ing, had the alleged libel alone been laid before a
Grand Jury they would have come to the conclusion
that the writer was an insane man : and if it had
been submitted to them with all the accompanying
circumstances of the last ten years, they would then
have ignorcd the bill. He also contended, that here
was no publication of the alieged libel: it was in-
closed in a letter left by himself at Warwick House,
sealed and addressed to his Majesty's Private Secre-
tary, and marked private.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL shortly replied, and
contended that not one word of the long address of
the defendant, which occupied the Court and Jury
four hours, had gone to effect the object he had in
view, namely, the justification of this gross and scan-
dalous libel. He had applied to the King for what
he had no right to obtain, and what the King, who,
according to his own statement, was bound by the
laws, could not, therefore, grant. In the libel be
talk,:d of the King's breach of promise, when, in fact,
from his own statement, it was plain his Majesty had
made no promise ; all his Majesty had done, accord-
ing to the defendant's own statement, had been to
receive the Petition graciously. The defendant had
said there had been no publication of the libel ; but
the sending it to Sir Benjamin Bloomfield was a pub-
lication. The defendant had said if this libel had
been submitted to a Grand Jury they would have
decided that the writer wa; insane. He (the Attor-
ney-General) could scarcely differ from such an opi-
nion ; it was alinost impossible to account for the de-
fendant's'aiticiuti on any other ground. Thus much
he could.assure 'the Jury, that had it been possible
to have restrained the defendant and to have pro-
tected his Majesty from continual insult in any other
way, this prosLcution would not have been instituted.
The CHIEF JUSTICE summed up, and in doing so
observed, the great reluctance which lie always felt
to interrupt or stop a defendant in making his de-
fence, had, he feared, induced him to allow the pre-
sent defendant to waste, on subjects it relevant to the
case now before the Jury, a greater portion of the
public time than he was strictly justified in doing.
As to the publication of the letter in question, that
was completed in law by the sending it to Sir Ben-
jamin Bloomfield : that its contents applied to his
Majesty no one could doubt who bad read it, and
beard the evidence. That it was gross, scandalous,
and libellous, it was his duty to tell the Jury lie en-
tertained not the slightest doubt of.
The Jury found defendant Guilty; but, at the same
time, begged to recommend him to mercy.
Defendant—My Lord, I ask for justice, not mercy !
Cuts). JusricsSir, you havebeen heard already.
The defendant appeared far advanced in years, and
very intim]. He left the Court in a state of exhaustion.