Star.
London, England, 1818-08-20 00:00:00

'' ha *li-ad combined•
- ralibrt; as one t t . with Carter to
deleathis creditors, that had gbt all the property,
old that had behaved with baseness, perfidy and trea-
;fiery. Such was the impression produced by the report.
The libel was evidently premeditated ; at all events
was most unjust to publish such calumnies, even
the report were correct, Lewis not being present to
idicate himself. The object was evidently to deH
tine Mr. Lewis, in noticing nobody else hardly, an
he
dl
led " ShameT
Shameful conduct of an Attorney:'
,eport,' which was a column and a half in length,
ptocee-10 to describe the application of Carter, as
possessing a house and garden, exceeding £5OO
'aloe, being opposed on the ground of wasteful
'of property in preferring Writs of Error &c. of
idulently referring the claims of Mr. '
Lewis, of
:artisgate (.lanterbury was meant). The PoUnsel 01r.
Bas Sett) was-described to have Aiwa, that Carter had
• been guilty bf fraud, but that " Is and h 4 familY
l beer reduced from a state of respectibility by
; baseness of hit attorney, to a state of-want, die'
ease and imprisonment." He (Mr. M.) would not he-
re that tidy' Crenleman at the Bar would have used
1 langtiage. The libel neat stated, that the Insol-
_At applied to Mr. Lewis to arrange with his credi-
:ors, as his property would pay 10s. in the pound—
hat he signed instruments he knew not what for Mr.
Lewis--that Lewis had not only got a mortgage, but
had seized on all his household property—that be b •
been ruined entirely by Lewis; and that he was "so
greatly distressed since his confinement,
moment Ile got his discharge, he must get tits ad '
/tots into an hospital, for he had °lily two two-penny
lostves to subsist on for the space of four days, and
is wife and children had been compelled to seek re-
tge in a workhouse, 'and Carter had obstinately re.
tamed in prison." Mr. Lewis was then accused tif
Lying improperly 'Apt the deeds, &c. but in conclt,
,on it was said, • "'Mr. Serjeaut Runnington depr+,
.sated in iti.onglanguage the conduct of Mr. Leviiis;
and suggested t 6 Mr. Heath, that in such a fla;rasii
case they ought to apply to the Court •of King'
Bench, on the subject of Lewis's conduct." Lasil
,
-- said, "To the great satisfaction of every eitie
►
...'ourt, the poor old man was discharged." He (Mb.
N.) would not believe that the Judge used any such
1
language :sand as to the poor old man,_ he was a ea.
46! This eport was most unfair, rad wis-garb ,
with observations ; and many parts of it We rt wilf ,
False. Mr. Lewis went to town. lie and. Mr. Walla
went to the office, L'it could 'net it the lteporteril
-Add a contradiction- . inserted with-

name ; nor wot
out 'paying six guineas for it. And after that pro-
:eeding it only appeared in pax of the publication
many of that day s publication having oppeared with-
out it. This Report contained calumny, and that too
-egarding a person not prdsent ; and he dontended'
-4. Par iblished such alerts Re poi
oakts, at their
Nes

that ,pees put ,
peril. here were observations, and _ v. Stiles
had established that such an article ceased to be iv,
report. In a case against the same Paper (Yolland'sl
case), Lord Ellenborough lately said, that the pobli.
cation of calumny to gratify curiosity might be vex
nial, but it was no justification of the act. Here it
was not only not a correct Report, but it was miffed
IT with extraneous matter and dbeervation ; and he
trusted that the verdict of the Jury would establish
that such Reports were not the Reports endured by
the Law.
James Mallison, of the Stamp Office, was ttiel
called. lie produced the Obterver, of Novembet pa,
1817, and the Paper of the following Sunday, N.
vember 30th. They were returned to him to be le-
gistered according to the Act.
Mr. Burke, from the Stamp Office, produced Mt:Mr.
Clemeat's affidavit, sworn before the Commissioners,
• stating that he was sole Proprietor of the Observer.
The libel was then read. The leading portions of
it having been detailed in Mr. blarryat's speech, it is
unnecessary to repeat it here.
Richard Petman, of Canterbury,bricklayer, stated
that he knew Mr. Lewis. He read the Paper in pub-
lic company, and considered that it alluded to Mr.
Lewis, of Centel-brew he knew no Mr. L. of Rams-
gate. There was much conversation about the libel
wheel) he hid read.
Thomas Pierce, of Canterbury,. said he knew Mr.
Le(‘ is. Ile had read the Report, and considered it
to allude to Mr. L. of Canterbury.
Laurence Williams, oi Cursitor-street, an Attorney,
stated, that Mr.• Lewis was articled to him. Ile had
acted as Mr. L.'e agent : he had justified bail in 1816,
Wood v. Carter, and he afterwards brought a writ'of
error: he had not the papers. He was not Mr. L's
agent now
papers Were asked for, bat they
were not in Lourt.j
In September, 1816, after putting in bail in Eades
.. Carter, ha received instructions to prepares mort-
gage ; and Mr. Carter waited on- him with an en-
grossment of it. Carter brought an account of
money received, desiring witness to make out his ea-
count, as Lewis's agent. He did so. The accounts
produced were the accounts. The amount was £275.
Carter came to him to execute the Mortgage. Wit-
ness filled up the blanks when the sums were ascer-
tained. It was not read over te hirti. Carter said
and
it
had been read over to him before by the clerks,
it was very long. Witness explained to himeehat
the mortgage was for, the amount, &c. before it was
signed. Carter also signed an approbation of the
bill of costs, stating that the attendances were cor-
rect. It was executed December; 1816. Carter then
said that Lewis had been his greatest and Ns only
friend, and he therefore whited to secure 'him his
debt, particularly as it had-been remedy* so con-
tracted. Ninety pounds of the arhouni was money
- advanced. Carter at the sometime executed a-War.
rant of Attorney. He at the same time made-out
the account for the Wtit Of
.IForty. Tarterkissired
him to bring a Writ of Ester -in.Caddits :cue; after'
Carter
there . being *may one in Wood'scaiti
Carter wishing to protect- his property. He ad'va.
rreed
snowy to Carter, but at last held his hand. Carter;
whom he saw in the Bench, was displeased ; brit *rite
mess observed that much had been already adi-anced;
Mr. Judge ARBOTT observed, that it Was only con-
tended that the Report was correct, and that the as-
sertions and facts it contained were true (the defen-
dant's Counsel having objected to the course of mi.
dence ; tent the objection was withdrawn),
Mr. Williams continued. Carter's friend in th*
De.nch said, they thought of making C. a bankruie,
and thus overhaul Mr. L.'s securities. Witness; sard,
you Lad better pause, as Mr. 1.. having the Warrant,
or Attorney mizitt eater rip judgmezl. and then de-

feat such proceeding. ('niter smiled and said, lie
had taken care of that. Ili went to thu Observer
Office, at Mr. L:srequest, to know by whose autho-
rity the account had been inserted. He was desired
to call again. He did. He was then told that it
was- inserted- by Mr. C. as a Report, and that Mr.
Clement would take upon himself all the conse-
quences. They refused to give the Reporter's name.
He applied for the insertion of a contradiction by
Mr. L. at the same time shewing it.
veldt n o did
ther
not
know that the contradiction had appea
Papers first. In answer, he was next day told that it
,would not be inserted except six guineas were paid
for it as an advertisement. Ile com
itplained of the
enormous price. He afterwards paid siz guineas;
ith-
at
the same time he said, "if they would insert w
out payment Mr. L. would forgive them—o
htherwise
he would proceed against them. They said te six
guineas must be paid. lie paid it. It was to be in
the next Sundays Paper, and it was inserted, but
only in some of the copies. In that Paper it was in-
serted-,--and in that l'aper it was not inserted—(Look-
ing at. two of the same Sunday's Papers.)
lk.lr. Burke said, that two sets of that Sunday's
Paper had been regularly left at the Stamp-office.—
The stater.lent had not been charged with Advertise-
ment Daty.
Mr.-Laurence Williams resumed, He could not
positively say that the six guineas was paid before the
,Saturday; he thought it was paid before the Sundayr
Cross-examined.—He had procured friends of his
to become bail for Carter, for which he charged for
•attendince, I* indemnifying the bait Mr. L. was
Indy a'creditor, not a detaining creditor. • lie did not
know what day Carter was to apply for his dis-
charge ; he had only a general knowledge that Carter
intended to apply.
• George Lewin was clerk to Mr. Lewis, in 1815
and 1816. Papers were lodged with Mr. L. by Mr.
Carter, to raise £250, and several Advertisements
were inserted in the Papers for a loan. Carter was
arrested by Wood, Decertiber 1815, and Mr. L. got
him released. He was told that no money could be
got—and none could he get on mortgage featly Mr.
Rowe. Attempts were made to sell the property,
'but it was unavailing. There was then a meeting of
editors. Carter was apprised f the Writ of Error
'icrn Wood's case, and authorisedo
all means of delay
that the law would warrant. Mr. L. had at different
times advanced money to Carter. Witness engrossed
the Mortgage, and it was read over to him. Wit-
ness and another clerk examined the deed with the
draft iti Mr. Carter's hearing. There were blanks
left in the deed for the sums. Carter's house was they
full of good furniture. Carter and a Mr. Holmes de-
'livered the title deeds into Mr. L's hands, and they
inutined there till the mortgage was executed.
"Cross-examined.—He waited on Mr. Rowe. Car-
ter knee/ of the proceedings adopted to delay • he
said his creditors should never receive a shilling while;
he could keep them out of it. lie never saw any
i notice of Mr. C:s intention to apply for the benefit of
the Act ; but he had heard Mi. L. say that he knew
',smiting about such intention.
A letter from Carter to Mr. L. authorising pro-
itedings of delay to be adopted against Wood was
reaj. Another was read, asking advice, as he wished
to make his two creditors suffer as-much in pocket as
be had in health and mind, if possible.'
The memorandum on depositing the deeds was next
read, it also authorising a mortgage to be prepared.
W. Miles was pmsent at the attempted sale of the
property ;no bidder could be found. He talked with
Carter about a Writ of Error brought against Wood,
he
_appearing satisfied with such proceing._
Mr. Cross said nothing was rendered to Mr. Lewis
out of the execution.
Mr. Farris proved the meeting of creditors, at
which Mr. Lewis offered to some in as a creditor, if
paid the amount of money actually advanced. The
amount of Mr. Lewis's debt was mentioned at the
meeting, it amounted to upwards of £lOO in No-
vember 1816.
John Clarinbold said he was a fellow-prisoner with
Carter in Dover, when he spoke of Mr. L.'s friendly
conduct,. This closed the Plaintiff's case.
Mr. Anor.rnos addressed the Jury for the Defen-
dant at great length. He said that any loss that
could possibly be sustained by the Defendant was
nothing when compared with the principle now
'about to be enforced. If it succeeded, the Liberty of
Ilthe Press might be talked of, but it would no longer
,exist. The point at issue was, whether a Newspaper
was henceforth to be entitled to publish reports of the
proceedings of our Courts of Justice, and the publi-
cations of the proceedings therein, as the best sup.
IPlement to moral discourses and the addresser of Di-
rvines ; but those advantages would be gone for ever
if the Plaintiff prevailed. The Jury would recollect
that /kir. Clement did not say that the various
Icharges wereAtite ; his plea of justification was, that
the Report was an accurate account of the proceed-
ings in the Insolvent Debtors' Court. That would
be established ; it was fair and faithful, but rather
snitigatea, if any thing. He denied his Learned
friend's law. It was not held that nothing could
be published regarding an -absent party. The -King
9"d. Wright did apply. 'That-wes for republishing a
Report from peculiar motives. ln the King v. Fisher,
Lord Plenborough declared, that although Reports
Might be injurious to individuals they had been pri-
*Regal ; and his Lordship trusted that they would
cc:Winne to be privileged, althoUgh partial inconve-
niences might result 'front them. That was law, and
that was the ground on which Reports' were pub-
lished. As to esleyte Reports notkeing allowed,
did they not constantly take place,' pattrenlarlykr
Maims to shew Cause. They and the-Affriasitur
Wert published with the sanction aft h e law. -As-to
`Nocikes v.-Stiles, 'that was a "*lrlektleltpOrti. the
bbject being to hold the 'party_tip to lidicule, it'orem,
dent from a fair Iteporilike the °birder's.
Tfir..lndge.Arvort said; die iiiiiesticnOwah Weide
the law of the subject; the 'issue was, ithettits'llle.
Report was true or false?
'Mr. AvoLeiros said, he would not, after such in-
tiritaticm, pursne such division df the stbjectfurther.
The truth of the Report -would be established ; and
as W the heading of the article, that on y. told the
-reader the main point agitated in it. The ease as
t
detailed by Carter was such as tended to make the
most unpitying bosom relent; yet, according to Mr.'
Lewis, the-Palic was to' know nothing abotit ito•.
such things Were to be heard without being
Mitred 10.8,6' tbetinenith,—they aiore to be dftiled
le-atoitrttilitifkloi;' bat `they +sere 'net to ibe le-

ported.
,14 to &•. t'.blva N loolts, that sea% int-
posNiblt, and it such Reports could be given, they
would often be nonsensical anal unintelligible gabble.
The case as detailed in Couit, was full of afflicting
detail ; and how was the impression lessened by the
deeds, mortgages, bills of costs,
.and Mr. Williams's
charges for " hiriug and indemnifying bail." If the
liteport could not be proved to be a false one—on
the contrary if it could, as it would, be established
JD be a correct one, the Defendant must have a ver-
dkt. If they should deem it right to give the Plain-
tiff a Verdict, much as he had had to contend `with
through life, he should deplore the event as or.c of
the most Unfortunate he had ever been doncerned in.
It would determine that the subject had no right to
know what passed in a Court of Law—it t.aulrL
effect more than Cromwell with all his po..vcr had
been able to accomplish—it would completely close'l
the Courts of Justice against the Public.
Mr. Parish produced from the King's Bench Prison
the order for Carter's discharge.
It. W. Clarkson, Clerk of the Insolvent Debtors'
Court, remembered W. Carter being brought up foe
discharge. Ile had no remembrance of what passed.
Mr:A, W. Bassett, Barrister, said he remember*
ed Car* being brought up. Ile had read the 1
Newspmer Report of the event ; he considered it a
true and faithful Report. The words attributed to
didinm
not recollect, but he thought them sub,
atantially correct.
Cross-examined.—lle wok so notes, he thought;
he seldom took notes. . .
Mr. Norris, also a Banister, was likewise present:'
He was not engaged as Counsel, but he attended to
it from the circumstances of names, &c. He thought
it was a faithful Report ; indeed he considered the
case as rather understated.
Cross-examitted.—lle thought the Reporter of the
case Was named Edmonds. He was not an acquain-
tance of his, but he had repeatedly spoken to him.
He Would not vouch for the words, he might vouch
for the epithets; if any were pointed out to him, he
would say whether he recollected them.
Examined by Mr. Justice Asnorr.—He recol-
lected that Mr. Serjeant Runnington animadverted
strongly on Mr. Lewis's conduct, and said some-
thing about application to the King's Bench to get
Lewis struck off the Rolls. He also said something
about the Assignee bringing an action. There was
a sort of apprC,bation on the man being discharged—
there was a clapping of hands. Carter appeared to
be an elderly man.
Mr. Clam k son re. examined.—Tle had "no doubt that
the Serjeant said, " if this be true," there ought to
be an applic:ition to the King's Bench, but he could
not charge his memory with the fact.
Mr. Corkhill, Attorney far Eades, had read the
Report: It was substantially correct ; indeed, it did
not go the length of stating all that occurred to the
discredit of Mr. Lewis's character. The case was
under-stated. Mr. I spoke from a itness's in-
structions. The property had been sold for upwards
of SOO/. It fetched more, he believed, than would
have been obtained, had Mr. Lewis had the selling
ofit. lie was the real purchaser—he did not like
hfs Client to lose more.
George Goodyer, employed in the Observer Office,
ititedthat he saw Mr. Williams on the Thursday.—
He wanted to know the name of the author ; witness
said he could not give it. He came neat day, and
brought a contradiction, leaving, it for the Editor to
look at. He returned again on Saturday, at twelve
O'clock, and left the article, after paying for it. The
Paper was then at press, 2000 had been worked
wards
off.
It was immediately set up, and inserted in up
of 9000, being the residue of the publication. It was
also in Monday's edition.
Cross-examined.—He did not know the Reporter,
except from what he had since heard. • There were
many Reporters who attended the Court—Mr.
111 r. Byrhe, Mr. Kerr, Mr. Haines, &c.; but he
did not know the Reporter of this particular case.
Mr. W. Carter was called, but the Defendant's
Counsel declined examining him, at the suggestion
of Mr. Justice. ABBOTT, as the accuracy of the Re-
porter was the only question.
Mr. MABRILAT replied, contending that no frauds
on the part of Islr. Lewis had been made out. Much
had been said about them in the course of Counsel's
speech, but proof there was none. Where had it
appeared that Carter was solvent when he got into
Lewis's hands? As to the Report being a faithful
account of. what had passed, if it were Nfr. Clement's
own Reporter that gave it, why was he not named ?
Why had not tire manuscript been produced, to chew
'what interlineations or alterations had been made in,
it? That, however, was not t. convenient course for
Mr. Clement to pursue. Two persons were adduced,
but no note taken at the time was shewn and they
were to be fiatisfied with the opinion of two persons
Who considered it to be a faithful Report, without
-lag to words or epithets. There was nothing
to prove that tha account was faithful in its language.
Ought they to be satisfied with the apprehension of
two persons, when Mr. Clement had better means in
.b. power to prove the accuracy of the Report by
producing the notes and the manuscript? But
against this apprehension there was the strong per-
suasion of Mr. Clarkson, that the Serjeant's words
had not been fairly reported ; and all experience of
the Judge confirmed that persuasion. He maintain-
ed that the justification had not been made out.—
As to daniages,-Mr. Lewis requited not insignificant,
.tit such damages as would vindicate his character
hr tlie`county.
Mr. Justice Asa= summed up, stating the nature
of the action, and the character of the evidence.—
There was a justification entered on the record, and
e issue to'be tried was the truth or falsehood of the-
Report—vihether it was really a faithful account of
hat took place in the last Insolvent Debtors Court F.
If the Defendant, in the opinion of the Jury, had
made out the justification, the Plaintiff was not enti-
. ed to a verdict: The language attributed to Ser-
?eant Runningtou was an important part of the case.
It represented the Judge as giving entire credit to
the charges against Lewis. Now, would thzy say
that such language bad been used after what was
said by Mr. Clarkson, and after what they knew of
Mr. •Serjeant Runnington's general caution? lf,
therefore, the Report failed in any particular, it was
'not a faithful Report ; to be substantially true, it
must be .accurate in all its parts. Much had been
said by the Counsel on both sides, on the law of the
'Object. • •On.oise hand, it was said, if Newspaper
Peopaietetelvetaiebt-allowed to palish all that took

place in the Court :.^•f Law; &re rixiisi be a:. t,.
~f the Liberty of the Press ; and by the halatii
Counsel it had been urged, that ez-parte acay.:r.

ought not to tie published, nor accounts impica irk
absent partici; Whatever Might be the cffect of sucz
1-publications, he was released from the duty cf stating
*bat he deemed to be the law ; for the Defend-4qt
'bad rested his defence on the truth of his Report—.
On that question issue was joined, the question of
law was not raised. But he could not avoid saiiin,
'that if all that had been urged by the Defer:dui.'
Counsel were examined, it would he found not to be
He said thus much to prey ant his silence from be,,.
construed into acquiescence in the Lenrued God;
man's doctrines. The question for them to determine
vrai, after what they had heard urged from :.leso.
Bassett, Norris, &c. Whether the Report was an a„,
curate detail of what happened ? There was no ece
taken at the time, the recollection of iadividualtru
relied on ; and if Mr.Cleinent's ItepoattT were rz.Oly
present, it rather made against hire net t, havc
ed that person. As he could not antici,otte
their verdict would be, he ought to speak to thee
on the subject of damages. The partiaken by Ltis,
even according to his own 'hewing, was not such a
all must wish to lee adopted by a professional ma,.
The advice was, not to pay debts, bet to resist them;
and Lewis ultimately adopted steps to secure hin:seli.
Although that conduct was not praiseworthy, it ca
different from the description in the Report. No
frauds were proved. Bet should they bare to coni.
der the amount of datitages, the Plaintiff's real con.
duct ought to be considered.
The Jury, after consulting for about ten minutes,
returned a verdict for the Defen,t.tr.t.
The trial lasted nearly seven hours.

Monday night, or early Tuesday morning, seem
villains bloke into n Gentleman's house r.pcit,
Chingford Church, in Esse:, and without sitsturbin;
the family, who were all asleep, succeeded in tohlin.
the parlours and kitchen of some valuable picuires
mirrors, looking glasses, window curtains. carrri
rugs, a quantity of valuable cut-glass, ar.d. canoe
other articles, and effected their es: are.
Qc ESN-441U Alt E.—Yesterday a fem.!!
portment indicated that she was broug.A up suer
to persons in low life, wars charged .by 31r1 Man}
Sommerville, of Luke's-court, Peter-street, Wercri,
ster, with stealing her infant ; rad a:,,0 a rocir
sheets, three blankets, and a set of window-cunai:
her property.--Remanded.
Sidney !['[Nuance, Mary. Abrphg, and Sarah Le
charged with :ebbing a .child belong,: ng tl a sold
in the Guards of a handkerchief bundle, contaici
shirts, stockings. &c. in the street, on Saturday 1:
underwent an examination, committed.
UNION 'la it..—Yesterday a man who was
il
ped in Lambeth with a basket of melons md
fruit, of considerable value, was brought be-ure
Magistrate, clia-gest with stealing.tlie
of a Gentleman's grounds. The prisoner WAS
manded, to allciw the person!. who have beense.
time to come forward:
WO II snit,- R Err.--Yester. day Juhst Burgei
committed to the House of Correction for :ever:
for a breach of contract in not reaping a tie'
wheat belonging to a farmer at Haclo.ey.
DIM TR or A 31ISER —Saturday last, died in II
girth-street, Durham, Mr. A. Featouby, aged si
This person, who lived during the grecter part cI
life in a state. of abject penury, is said to have
worth*D2o,ooo ! He has not untrequently :tree
employment on the turnpike roads, in ele
of stones, &c. and the coat which be wore up t
time of his death was so patched, that scarcely:
ticle of the cloth of which it WAS originally comi
could be discovered amcngrt the' shreds ar.l
pa
which it exibited.

whoie

BIIITIIS.
Saturday, at the house o her mother, Lady Calcrte,,
meat, Chelsea, the Lady of Captatzt iMayn Lia
Service, of a eon.
Lately, at lieavitree, the Lady of CArtain flder, P. 3

daughtei.
Aug. 14, at Penzance, the wife of the Rev. G..lnith. of
MARRIEI).
Tuesday se'nnight, at Topsham, Dr. David Wal-e 11,11
'debut to his Majesty's Quaranth.e Service, to :Law,
daughter of the late Capt. Robt. Carter, R.N. of tLe
Tuesday se'unight, at St. Martin's Ch:alit, the
Orchard, of the Wesleyan Connesion, to lliss Soak ef
August 4, at Flthain, Richard MIN DWI- 121 tb..
Office, to Sarah, youngest daughter of the lice. Jar Ui
DIED.
'Monday, Lady Wilson, of Chariton-house, Etnt.refio
late General Sir Thomas Spencer Wilson, 13..rr. h:r
_
6.satilTugy, at filthy Kent, m. Burgundy aurAr
e
Post Captain of the Royale W
Navy.
Thursday, at Penryn, Captain GraTcs, after a ber,Te
twelve days :—Le had been oo a visit to Lis :thrive.
neighbourhood.

BY lilt. MAJBS Y'd Lts hlts An
LVENEAKE'S GENUINE PILLS. jut?
far curing, Is at its quart, the ERAL I
One small Pill is a dose, and the taking of ww
ease, will soon tonvince the patient of the certainty Atli
recovery. Nothing can be better contrived. nostv
convenient than this P enwdy, for such at are oblvd,4
nuts or to sea, as It needs no confinement nto tenant'
and slaty yearreaperience (in an extensive pr:ctire)
that it wilt effect a Cure when repeated Salivation awl
methods avail notion;. For the Scurvy atol miter
Disorders. this Medicine has not its parailel.
Ili
40,000 perioes of both sexes have toot radizalty :u
above cruet disordersi within the last tight yt:rs.
told by the dole Proprietors, T. CAYI.Ott and aON,
ot the Royal College of Surgeons, at their tiotoe,
Bridge-street, in Boxes et Cony 2a. 9d. each, duty i
N.B. Tweiback doors, snd I.ights in the Pattt.get
they are mina sold by ;heir appointment, with cci:ints
alike 1 ay Shop, 103, 000 rd-street ; Mr. Doltorti4
Fistvotreet4W, nearly wroth* the Moounakot ;
Person in every cosoiderahle Town in Great Brow!:
Advice gratitto 'persons talosurthe at...oe, or etba
nvistor's Maliewies

COAL MAIIII.CT, Avcou 19.
Ships at 111.411..(t. 4Lip. Sd. Price
NI Neu cad* 23i 36$ 94
Sundetiaad 364 yd

PRICE OF niOC
Bk. &Oa
Reduced 76ftil
Cons. 761 ti
SI per Cent. S 6
4 per Ct. 96 95tif
Navy'lo3i 104; 10,5 i
Long Ans. 20}

'KS YLSTERDA'
India'Stocl:
Bonds 87 r.
Omn.3 Si wc-
Exch. Bills (..W
Ditto (2111 IS.
Cons. for Ac.
I.ottery Ticket
-----,..,—,

HUI.
V/AT&lts—W--rr---ILO DON 'MIDGE uh.
7 mutate

gimping
W rallifi rebtiebt—a %
use.em& )4.

SS •-••""'"