The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-05-15 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-TUESDAY.

The third reading of the Portsmouth floating bridge bill,
moved by the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, was after
much discussion, deferred till TueSday, to afford time to con-
sider new clauses, which _

- Mr. ESTCOUILT condemned as proceeding on a very bad
principle—that of introducing fresh clauses after the bill had
gone through committee ; all such bills, he said—and the
sentiment was loudly cheered—ought to be recommitted, in
justice to all parties concerned.
On the motion of Mr. STANLEY, a new writ was issued for
the borough of Armagh, in the room of Mr. Sergeant Currie,
who had accepted the office of Master in Chancery in Ireland.
Mr. G. PALMED. postponed till the 28th instant, his mo-
tion respecting China.
Lord SANDON, for Mr. J. E. Tennant, gave notice that
on the 26th inst. the latter member would move for papers
relative to the claims of British subjects for losses sustained
in Brazil.

Mr. SHAW gave notice that he should, on Friday, put a
question to Lord Morpeth, as to the claim of the clergy in
Ireland to payment of the instalments of the loan.

NEW WRIT FOR LUDLOW.

The Earl of DARLINGTON then renewed his motion of
Monday night, for the issuing of a writ for Ludlow, stating
that if he could find three members to support him, he should
persevere, and stop all other business till that motion was
decided.

Mr. STANLEY again said that he wished the subject to be
deferred until Lord J. Russell was present. He thought
that this was an instance in which the issuing of the writ
might fairly be postponed, bribery and treating having been
proved to have taken place to an alarming extent at the last
election for Ludlow.

Mr. HORSM AN having moved that a select committee be
appointed to inquire into the extent of bribery and corruption
that prevailed at the late and previous elections for the bo-
rough, and that pending the inquiry the writ be not issued ;
The house divided, when the motion was lost, the numbers
being—for it, 130; against it, 216. Majority, 36 against the
amendment.

Mr. WARBURTON then moved that the further consideration
of the subject be deferred until Thursday next, to give time
for the presence of Lord J. Russell in the house.

After further struggles, the subject was again postponed,
the understanding being that no public business should be
proposed before Thursday. The house accordingly adjourned.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—MONDAY.
The House of Lords did not meet this day.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MONDAY.
Many petitions were presented, one of which called forth
conversation as to the printing petitions containing objec-
tionable matter, attention being directed to the subject by
Lord Stanley. He made no motion on it, in consequence of
the understanding that no public business should be brought
forward till Thursday.
Mr. HAMILTON stated, that, in committee on the sale of
beer bill, he would move the insertion of a clause to reduce
the amount of duty froth five guineas to two guineas.
Mr. FRESRFIELD gave notice that he would move for the
return of the copy of the warrant appointing Mr. Serjeant
Curry a Master in Chancery.

Mr. ESTCOURT stated that on Monday next he would
move for leave to bring in a bill to amend certain parts of
the enclosure act. _

Mr. BAINES moved that the house do adjourn.
Lord STANLEY said he wished it to be understood that the
Ludlow writ would come on the first thing on Thursday,
taking precedence of the Cambridge.
The SPEAKER. observed that it was a matter of privilege,
and therefore would, of course.
The house then adjourned.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.-MONDAY.

THE QUEEN 17, FEARGUS O'CONNOR.

This morning having been specially appointed to pro-
nounce judgment on Mr. Feargus O'Connor, for publishing
a seditious libel, the Court of Queen's Bench, and all the
avenues leading to it, were crowded at an early hour. The
back seats of the court were in a moment filled by the lead-
ing radicals of the metropolis, who appeared to take a deep
interest in the proceedings. The gallery was also crowded.
Mr. O'Connor arrived some time before .the learned judges
entered the court ; he looked very unwell, and seemed con-
siderably agitated.
On their lordships taking their seats, the case of the Queen
v. O'Connor was called on. _ _

Mr. O'Connor said, before he addressed the court in miti-
gation of punishment he wished a number of additional affi-
davits to be read.

The Attorney-General did not wish to take any step which
would operate injuriously to the defendant, but he thought
it was not to read additional affidavits.
Loid Denman.—Such a practice in some cases might lead
to inconvenience, but perhaps it would not in the present
case.

The Attorney-General was in the hands of the court.
The affidavits, amounting to upwards of 70, were then put
in, but only about 20 were read, the remainder being to the
same intent and purport. They in effect stated that the
speeches of the defendant were not calculated to promote
sedition or breaches of the peace; but on the contrary, to
promote good order amongst the people. Some of the affida-
vits also stated that the defendant was most particular as to
what articles were inserted in his newspaper, the Northern
Star, and he gave the most positive orders, and showed the
greatest anxiety that no libels or seditious speeches should
appear. The reading of the affidavits occupied nearly an
hour. At the conclusion,
Mr. O'Connor said, having placed these numerous affida-
vits before the Court, he wished previously to speaking in
mitigation of punishment to thank their lordships for the
courteous indulgence they had shown in postponing his
case on two occasions. In now addressing the Court
he was aware of the difficulty he had to contend with in
confining himself to the subject matter under the considera-
tion of the Court. It was quite true he had been found
guilty at York on an indictment tried before Mr. Justice
Coleridge, and he was convicted of what .was called a libel.
The learned Judge on that occasion most impartially
summed up the evidence, and impartially commented on
the speech which he (Mr. O'Connor) made. His lordship
told the jury that they might find the defendant guilty
on some of the counts in the indictment, and if they thought
proper and right acquit him on others ; but notwithstand-
ing this, the jury without scarcely any deliberation—
in fact, in the most indecent haste—the • Foreman said,
"We find the defendant guilty on all the counts
in the indictment." Under such circumstances, he had
an undoubted right to call upon their lordships to arrest
judgment, and grant a new trial. If only one count in the
indictment had been found in his favour, it would be suffici-
ent for him to hang a peg upon in moving for a new trial ;
but, in the present case, their lordships would bear in mind
that his (Mr. O'Connor's) liberty was at stake. He stood
before the Court that day to defend his honour and his cha-
racter, and fearlessly contended that the speech for which he
had been convicted was not libellous, but, on the contrary,
calculated to promote peace and order, and worthy of appro-
bation rather than censure andspunislunent. Mr. O'C. then
remarked on the facts stated in the affidavits, and on observ-
ing on the speech for which he was indicted said, it had
been erroneously reported. He denied recommending phy-
sical force, and advising that those who opposed the people
should meet with a warm reception. Mr. O'Connor, after
proceeding at great length in his observations on the circum-
stances attending the events which gave rise to the prosecu-
tion, indulged in a most bitter invective against the present
whig government, who, he declared, had instituted proceed-
ings against him solely because Daniel O'Connell who it was
well known was their master (and whom they dare not offend)
had commanded them to do so. O'Connell had denounced
him (Mr. O'Connor), and that was sufficient motive for his
being prosecuted. The defendant addressed the court for
upwards of two hours, but we are unable, from want of
space, to give more than the above outline.
The Attorney-General addressed the court on aggravation
of punishment, at the conclusion of which
Their lordships consulted for a short time, after which
Mr. Justice Littledale pronounced the judgment of the
court. His lordship remarked on the dangerous and inju-
rious tendency of the publication of which the defendant had
been convicted, and concluded by saying that the sentence of
the court is, that you, Feargus O'Connor, be imprisoned in
the custody of the gaoler of York Castle for the space of 18
months, and at the expiration of that time you find security
for your good behaviour for two years, yourself in the sum of
£3OO, and two sureties in the sums of £l5O each, and you
be further imprisoned until such sureties are entered into.
Mr. O'Connor said, be understood York Castle at the pre-
sent time was very full of prisoners, and as he was in a bad
state of health, he trusted their lordships would not send
him to York, but order him into the custody of the marshal
of the Queen's. Bench prison.
Lord Denman said inquiries should he made as to the al-
leged crowded state of York Castle, and in the mean time the
defendant would be kept in the custody of the marshal of the
Queen's Bench.
Mr.-O'Connor was then taken from the court in custody
of the tipstaffs, and removed in a hackney coach to the
Queen's Bench prison ; he was followed by the crowd, who
had congregated in the court and neighbourhood, and when
the coach drove off, loudly cheered, but no attempt was
made to rescue him from the officers.

FRESH Roms.—A passenger, in rather a long voyage,
who could never keep his feet, but was perpetually rolling
about the deck, complained to the captain of the hard bis-
cuit, and the absence of " soft tommy" (bread). " Why,"
replied the captain, " you ought to be satisfied, for you have
fresh rolls every minute." _

When Sir Thomas More was at Bruges, some bola doctor
offered a challenge to the world, to dispute on any given sub-
ject.. More readily accepted the challenge, and proposed the
following question :—Whether beasts taken in whithernam
can be replevied ?"' This question, touching a point of our
municipal law, abashed the sophist who pretended to univer-
sal knowledge, and who at once withdrew from the field.

'cr-ebippinff fittrlltgenrr.

WEDNESDAY, MAY 13.—Wind E.N.E.

.ARRIVED.—Regina Victoria, Bassine, and Paquetta de Trieste,
from Trieste—Myrtle, Carter, from Lisbon—Pomerania,
Brandt, from Danzic—Adolphinc, Martina, from Lubeck—Adelaide,
Peterson, from Neustadt.
SAlLED.—Heywood, Keyzar, for Africa—Britannia, Nolam, for
Belieze—Commerce, Julius, for Havana—Jeannette, Colby, and
Louisa, Hobson, for Baltimore—Napoleon, Sherrman. for New
York—Manchester, Jarman, for Philadelphia—Vittorioso, Bream,
for Gen6a—Marina, Cock, for Odessa—Diligencia, Mesquite, for
Lisbon—lsabella. Sloan, for Santander—Chieftain, Porter, for
Dordt—Alida; Deddes, for Dordt—Wigerdina, Sluit, and Agatha,
Dc Groot, for Rottezdam—Twende Sostre, Thursoe, for Svenberg.

Peruvian, Whitelegg, and John Campbell, Midgley, hence at
Bonny
John Lilly, . hence off ditto
Rocket, Bishop, from Africa, at St. Helena