The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1832-12-18 00:00:00

Matto by Teittction.

a:tLE of WINs TANLE IS' ROOMS.
By Messrs. T. WINSTANLEY and SON,
On TRUILSDAY next, the 20th, and FRIDAY, the 21st instant, al
Eleven o'clsck precisely each day, at their Rooms, Church.
street,

A dE NERAL Assemblage of modern and excellent
HO Li SEHOLD FURNITURE, including the Ayell-ma-
nulactured Stock of a Cabinet-maker, removed fo he conve-
nience of sale, and which comprises a hands e Winged
Wardrobe, a Secretaire and Bookcase, several ets of Dining,
room Chairs, Sofas, Couches, and Loungi airs, lofty Four-
post Bedsteads, Pedestal and other Side • ds, sets of Dining
Loo, Pembroke, and. Card Ditt a modern Rosewood
Cabinet Circular Loo Table, Chairs, and other Articles of
.Fancy Wood.
A line-toned 61 octave Cabinet Piano Forte, in a handsome
Rosewood Case.

The Scold-hand Furniture is principally modern and in
good condition, and consists of Fourpost and Camp Bedsteads,
.with hanusome Morine and printed Calico Hangings, Goose
'feather Zeds, Mattressess and Bedding, the Usual Articles for
Bed Chambers, a variety of Carpets, Window Curtains, an
Eight-thy Clock, Fenders, Fire-irons, tkc., with an Assortment
of excellent Mahogany Articles, a large and handsome Chim-
ney Glass, a variety of modern China and richly-cut Glass,
some Kitchen Requisites, &c.
The - who.e may be viewed To-sionnow, (Wednesday,) the
19th, ami Cataioues had. '
- - -

Law ENTELLEGEN'CLe.

ROLLS' COURT, FRIDAY, DEC. 14.
PIERCY r. ROBERTS.

In this case a question arose as to the power of an assignee
of a bankrupt to commence proceedings under the provisions of
the act, without- the consent in writing of the creditors, or a
majority of them. His Honour had consulted three of the law
judges on the subject, but as the point depended on several
conllicting-authorities they could give him at once no very de-
Cided opinion. Ile iherefore requested them 'to look into it
when they had an opportunity, • and if they changed the impres-
sion they then entertained, Which coincided with, his own, they
should communicate with him. Not having heard from them,
he was at liberty to state their opinion, that the defendant, the
debtor to the bankrupt, was not at liberty to take advantage of
the objection, and that the suit had been instituted without the
licence of the creditors. The debtor was protected by the suit
instituted' by the assignees, whatever should be the event of it;
and ii it failed, he was exonerated fi-om the debt. The written
licence required by the statute was only for the protection of
the creditors against the wanton waste of the bankrupt's estate;
so that if an assignee thought proper to institute a suit, he un-
del took it at his own risk, and rendered himself liable, if it was
improvidently conducted, • not only to the costs of the suit, but
to indemnify the estate against all other expenses.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, GuILDHALL, DEC. 13.

GOBLE v. KING AND BAIINETT.—This was an action by the
plaintiff, a naval officer, to recover from the defendants, who
were formerly navy agents under the firm of Barnett and King,
the value of certain Colombian and Peruvian bonds alleged to
be deposited with the firm.—Mr. RICHARDS stated the plaintiff's
case. The Colombian bonds were bought for the plaintiff, and
delivered to him at the time of the purchase by the broker, but
the Peruvian bonds were purchased for the plaintiff when he
. was in the country, and kept by the defendants. Afterwards
the plaintiff, wishing to borrow money, wrote to the defendants
in IN ovember, 1828, that he would forward to them the Colom-
bian bonds, and that they already held his Peruvian bonds. On
the 11th of June, 1829, these Colombian bonds were deposited
with Barnett by the plaintiff at Portsea for the purpose of ena-
bling Barnett to attend a meeting of the bondholders, and a
receipt signed by Barnett, for himself- and King, was produced.
—Mr. Serjeant COLERIDGE, for the defendant, contended that
this receipt was a fabrication, that the bonds were deposited
solely with Barnett, who had converted them to his own use;
that they had never been deposited with or in the custody of the
firm of Barnett and King, as navy agents; and that King had
no knowledge of the bonds. '1 he partnership was dissolved in
March, 1831, because King thought that Barnett had made
away with some of the partnership property, and shortly after-
wards Barnett failed, and any claims between the plaintiff and
Barnett must be settled with the latter gentleman's assignee.
It was inconsistent with the business of a navy-agent to deal in
foreign bonds, and Barnett hail no power out of the scope of his
business to effect his partner King.—Mr. Grant, a stock-broker,
and Barnett, were examined, and a long correspondence be-
tween the plaintiff and King was read, and Mr. lircunitos re-
plied, after which--Lord LYNDHURST said, the questions for
the jury were, whether the deposit of the Columbian bonds on
the 11th of June, 1829, with Barnett, at Portsea, was a genu-
ine transaction, as described in the receipt; and if so, whether
the transaction was in the ordinary course of the business of the
firm of Barnett and King, for in that case the receipt of . docu-
ments by one. partner would be a receipt by both; and the sub
sequent fradulent conversion of the. bonds by Barnett to his own
use would enable the plaintiff to support the action. The de-
fendant contended that the receipt was collusive and not writ-
ten at the time it was dated, but at a subsequent period, after
the correspondence between the plaintiff and King, in which
King denied that he had the bonds, had terminated; and if they
thought that a fraud of so atrocious a nature had been com-
mitted, they would find for the defendant King, but they should
not do so on light grounds. With respect to the nature of Bar-
nett and King's business, it appeared that they had bought and
sold Loth English and foreign stock, and also lottery-tickets,
on account of the plaintiff, and that the books were kept at the
counting-house by King himself. After the dissolution with
Barnettt, King denied in his letter to the plaintiff all know-
legde of the bonds being deposited, and agreed with him that
there was something very strange in the affair, and requested
an explanation. lone, however, was given until the plaintiff
put the affairs in the hands of his attorney, and the defendant
inferred that in the interim the receipt was fabricated. As to
the Peruvian bonds they were, always in the possession of the
firm.-

The Jury without hesitation found a verdict for the plaintiff—
Damages, £B4O Bs. being the pr.)ceeds of both kind of bonds.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, GUILDHALL, DEC. 14.
(Bcfore Lord Lyndhurst and a Special Jury.)

HAROREAvEs AND ANOTHER V. TILE LONDON ASSURANCE

COMPANY.

This was an action by the owners of the ship Thomas, for
a total loss on a policy of the ship from Portsmouth to Cork.
Messrs. F. Pollock, Creswell, and Maule were for the plain-
tiffs and Sir J. Searlett, Sergeant Coleridge, and Mr. Richards,
for the defendants. _

Mr. F. Pollock stated the plaintiffs' case. The policy was
effected on the 3d December, 1830, by Mr. Deane, one or the
plaintiffs, at Cork, with Mr. llawkes, the company's agent
there.. The Thomas, which was entered in Lloyd's books as
I No. 2, signifying a ship of the third class deficient in mate-
rials, sailed fr,,m the Mother-bank, near Portsmouth, on the
25th November, 1830, laden in ballast with 40 tons of iron and
copper, and 120 tons of warn, being ballast similar to that with
which she had performed previous voyages. Shortly alter she
had sailed there were heavy winds, and for the space of 36
hours the ship endured a storm, which so much damaged her
that the crew were unable with the pumps to keep down the
water, and the ship'was filling so as to be in a very dangerous
state, and it was fortunate for the crew that on the 27th No-
vember they met the Julius Caesar, which took them on board,
but was unable to save the vessel, which was necessarily aban-
doned, and has not since been heard of.
The Captain and several other witnesses fully proved the
case.

Sir James Scarictt said, that he resisted the plaintiff's claim
upon two grounds,—first, there was a suppression of a letter,
which amounted to a misrepresentation of the circumstances of
the ship at the time of the insurance; and, secondly, the ship
was not seaworthy. With respect to the first point, when the
plaintiff Deane effected the insurance he stated, in a letter to
the company's agent at Cork, that the ship was safe on the 21st
of ;\ overalicr, but he omiCcd to state that he had received a let-
ter, dated the '.i.sth of November, in which there was a charge
for the pilotage of the vessel. This was in spirit a very essen-
tial misrepresentation, for had the agent been aware that the
1 humus had actually sailed on the 'Lath, he would have known
that the voyage must have been attended with considerable
danger, because, otherwise, the Thomas would, in due course,
have arrived on the Ist of December, being two days before the
insurance was made. Mr. Deane could not help apprehending
the danger, and ought not to have concealed the facts which
caused suchl well-grounded apirrehension. Upon the second
ground, the Thomas was 429 tons burden, it was raised 6 feet
in the middle, and a new deck was formed, which rendered a
greater than the usual proportion of ballast necessary for her
safety. The usual quamitv is about one-third of the burden,
hut for this ship thale should have Leen at least 210 tons. She
only drew 11 feet of_wator, hut ought, from her peculiar con-
sti uction, to have drawn upwardS of 13 feet. 'f he ballast was
not only deficient in quaa,s-. but bad- in its kind, for loam ab-
sorbed the water and impeded the working of the pumps. In
addition to this, the ship.was badly provined with every thing,
with men. with tord3ge, with tails, and vi-as so deficient in nil

that their lights were all exhausted, and they could not in th'
night-time use their compass. The ship, too, had been We;
perly abandoned on the 27th of November, for she was seen 0,1.,
days afterwards, on the 2d of December, floating and safe,
the Waterloo.
To prove these facts the letters were called for, and produce4n
and the pilots and some of the crew were examined, ane
sailor from the Waterloo stated that he saw the Thomas on tsii
2d of December; but this witness, on cross-examination, s
she was in a dangerous state.
Mr. F. POLLOCK, in reply, said that the plaintiffs' collo
in opening his defence, had stated that he should rely 00 the
points, misrepresentation and unseaworthiness, but that tbe
latter point had spread-into such a multiplicity ofheads, tha .0g
Should have had to expend a considerable time in answeribe
them, had not his learned friend himself shown how littlehir
relied upon them when he endeavoured to prove that the
was floating and safe on the second of December, a defel:t.
totally inconsistent with all those various points of unseawart
ness on which so much reliance had been placed. 4.; A
Lord LYNDHURST said, the two points for the considera''°of
of the jury were, whether there bad been a wilful suppressi,°°f
a material fact, and whether the ballast was sufficient and °the
proper kind. If they thought that Deane had receive
letter containing the item for the pilotage, before the insur."o4
effected, effect, and that that letter would make him aprehe
additional danger such as he ought to have communicated, °rite
they thought that the ballast on board, which was nearly the
as former voyages had safely been made with, was insutfiele° the
account of the constructiou of the ship, they would find f°1;,,,,;
defendant; but if they were not satisfied on either of t'
points, ten their verdict woud be fr th piniff.
The Juhry deliberated aboutl ten mionutee la
s, andt then four fot
the plaintiff—Damages £2OOO.

• •
TUE SI'EA KER.—We understand Mr. C. W. Wynne «illfr
proposed as Speaker of the new Parliament; it is an office e 0
which his experience and knowledge of Parliamentary busili,„
amply
.qualify him.---We have sonic reason to believe, howcsie
that ministers have solicited the late Speaker in the King's na
to resume his office... Atlas..
.pf
It isiannoUred that his Majesty, with the kind considerations,
saving to the country, for the present, the late Speaker's ret
inn pension of £.4,000 per annum, has made it his personati,b
.quest 10 MannerS Sutton that he would resume the `'tfy,
oilice in the new Parliament :. -and that such is, conSeVen
to be the case.—London Standard. ut
NIAGARA.-A curious prospectus has just been put intvta.
hands, for buildjng a city on! (or near) the Falls of Mar
„Jig
it is proposed to call it " the City of the
Gazette.

Ja
SHOCKING AccinENT.—An inquest was held on Mo,ei
bir.
evening before Mr. W. S. Rutter, on view of the body of 1.0
Lyons, a workman empoyed in the chemical works Of Moil,/
Macidocks and Sou, at Beswick, whose death was occasion,'
his failing into a pan of boiling alum liquor. A fellow wrc,i,,
man stated that as he was passing the pan containing 011,00
ing liquor, about half-past five on Saturday afternoon, he''',,lo
a splash as if some one was falling into it, and on looking argd
saw through the steam the hands of the deceased held 11P,bi,s'
heard him cry out for assistance. He immediately exerted .op;
sett' to rescue the unfortunate man from his dreadful eit"3,j the
but in so doing was very near sharing a similar fate. N1.10,,„'*- the,
greatest difficulty, however, he at length drew him ft°';,rea
liquor' and he was conveyed to the Infirmary, where he line t $
until Sunday morningabout one o'clock, when death• )ciiital
period to his excruciating agonies. A verdict of acti°
death was returned.—Manchester Herald.
PLAIN QUESTIONS TO PLAIN UNDERSTANDINGS.—`' aOf
to war with Holland ?—To engage in war of attack. %vet'
defence—to crush the most popular king in Europe—t° 'O'
whelm a loyal, a united, unoffending, Protestant nation• twit
what reasons pray ?—To keep the French ministry (10'
places ; and to cover, at home, the results of a blun6eirlects
mineering, unsuccessful negociation. What will be the !„ oot
of a Dutch war ?—Stagnation to our trade—interruption be
manufactures—idleness to our workmen—starvation to °live
bouring poor—increase of the national debt—new taxes t° ittr
whelm us—the guilt of war of aggression, unnecessall'
principled, unchristian !—Glasgow Courier.
I Vof
i
GENERAL MEETING OF THE MINING INTERF,sT.----!toO
suance of a resolution passed at a meeting of the Conan" beh'
Lords and Adventurers in Tin, Copper, and Lead Mines' coil'
at Truro, in November last, empowering the Chairman Friday
vene a general Meeting, to be held at Pearce's Hotel, on eOa
the 7th of December; the meeting accordingly took ofFriday. Earl Falmouth having been called to the c alt;gs
ter a Pew observations his Lordship submitted to the iris drab
series of resolutions which he stated the Committee had eetir
up, and which he begged to read seriatim, to afford an)'
man present an opportunity of amending them. No !," as,
ment having been proposed, they were unanimously carriesting
on a resolution passed for that purpose, a Committee, con,l„otY
of Earl Falmouth, Lord de Dunstanville, the four tiujibio,
Members, J. Tremayne, Michael Williams, L. C. Daso
T. Austin, and J. Came,.Esqs.,. was appointed for the pinto
of preparing a memorial embodying the resolutr!:
the
be presented to government as early as expedient atot,r;
meeting of parliament.—The meeting was addressed by
Viviaa, Bart. and Mr. S. Moyle of Bosvigo, both deFTe„ the
the introduction of foreign copper ore as tending to in/I.loo'
interests of the county of Cornwall, and stop the tor "to the
many of the deep mines.—Thanks having been voted vat)
Committee and the Chairman for their efficient serviees,„ieet;
Falmouth acknowledged the compliment to both, and the;te6o
ing at a very late hour adjourned.—Mr. H. Willyani 41,e t.
that he had a memorial to present to the Committee re•a`butofic
their taking into consideration the subject of Speltre—: 1%,
the day had too for advanced to bring it under their neticiptea
did not presss it, but hoped some future day would be apt°
to take the subject into consideration—Corn/twit Gazette- le
CURIOUS TRIAL IN INDIA.—At the court of Nizainot
lut, at Calcutta, in the first session of the present year, 'set;
ramoony Malo was indicted for the muider of o°4e-dol
It appeared that the prisoner had in his residence an tioats
Kale°, to which he had been in the habit of sacrificing,per
for several years past. On the 6th, August last, die Pri a de'
being about to sacrifice a goat as heretofore, requested se,
ceased to hold the hind legs of the animal, who, in doiol,
was obliged to stoop his head downwards. Whilst he d (rota,
that position, the prisoner at one blow severed his pea uoia`
his body.—The prisoner admitted the fact, and the citnYiten'
remaining for consideration, whether the act was loon}-,
tional or accidental. Three women, Mussumat Koorawfhe
Bubliea, and Moochurnee alone witnessed the seetle'vbing
first was within two or three yards of him at the time, wa °site
the sacrifice,. and the other two were standing at the ePPii
side of a little creek, awaiting to set up the shout usef the
such occasions. The goat had been tied at the side as is
stocks, which being too small to put his head throulsl,, one:
usual, the deCeased iaid hold of the hinder legs. The Pt,' well
came up with the sacrificial adze, a most powerful instea left
and, as before stated, instantly despatchedthe man, a" f the
the goat uninjured. The women on the opposite sidc,%fay in'
creek seeing this were so frightened that they ran ,a,ovrevei,r'
stautly, and, saw no more. Mussumat Kooramoony:
remained. She adds that the prisoner, after decapitatnioe
and
deceased, took the head up, and carried it into the he"sd th
placed it before the idol. The commissioner
witness minutely as to the prisoner's conduct and'inatitef;
the moment. She declared that she perceived not the slipris.
ser ,it
alteration of his usual demeanour, no appearance 01 100
or agitation, and that he took up the man's head and p d beet;
before the idol as collectedly and deliberately as he bairoar,
accustomed to do when sacrificing. a goat. These e,soo:
stances appear to be decisive of the intention of the Prliaol
question:oer a,
The fact of taking up the head and placing it before ttre that Pe
admitted by the prisoner, and it seems quite imp9ssib Pi;
man having committed such an act unintentionally e 0 bee
bee
so deported himself. The horror with which he must leas
agitsi
struck would have com.pletely__paralyzed him • extrenros sa
tion and distress of mind, followed by ample' 6enfessi°o;oni
appeals to the bystanders to testify his innocence, and ratti,
out how the accident occurred, would have been the the
Bat
result of unintentionally killing a fellow-creature. esri
present instance there is nothing of the kind; not ala-ittheti,
mon of regret, nor of surprise, or any attempt to esP
the matter happened. The prisoner, on his first exatnaccoamA
said th it he was insensible at the time, and could not_tdr
for it. He stated that the blow was accidental, as he X, el
it for the goat, and that he asked the deceased to hold proveot
because there was nobody else to do so, although it waswith°
that for eighteen years_ before he had killed the goats,,oeresil
any assistance. His defence before the court was tan
He there stated that he thought he had killed the g0:70, et
that when he took up the head, and laid it before the
O.' that:),
thought it was the goat's head; but that on discoverin7i, scae,
was the head. of Oodye Seel, he ran out, filling the ,listrathe
lamentations, and requesting to be taken before a n'ae', as tit
This latter statement was all condradicted by evidenc:i'f: b
neither showed signs of regret, nor surrendered hire! afte.ro
was actually captured b a ruse de guerre. The con-11;404,
patient consideration of all the circninstances, and c'ects',,
the substantial evidence that went to contradict the ..„1,1016",,
statements of the priscner, found him. uilty of wilful ' e$
and he was, 'in conformity with the terms of his sentence,
cuted at Furreedpoor. •

kv,
ha
Pr

;70;0
revO,

GREAT GEORGE'S STREET BOOTH.

4'o THE EDITOR OP THE LIVERPOOL ST.INDAR D.

„n of
31jb

.01(
gag'
7riitg

THE ELECTION.

A SANDONITE

TO. THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STAYDARD.

5 14
.00
jot

pleased to favour me with a small space in your
4kluable columns, whilst 1 Make 'a few remarks upon the re-
' peat Election.—And first, Sir, let me offer. my warm congratu-
lations to the inhabitants of this great town, upon the return of
oDe of whom I feel that I cannot sayall thatl would wish, or
that he deserves. lof course allude to our able, attentive, and
Member
Representative,- Lord . Sandon. Of our other
. exnber, Representative I cannot. call him; I will only say,
41flat, independently 'of numerous other objectiOns generally
felt towards him, his conduct in voting with those few choice
dPirrts who disgraced themselves by supporting Hunt's motion
hr inquiring into the Manchester affair, thirteen years after it
ad
taken place, and with the ruins of ihistol smoking before
`L'etn, has earned for him the constant and cordial Opposition
Ala- numerous and respectable portion of his felloW-townsinen.4'
me to add that he and his friends affect to sneer at the
"terehants of Liverpool, and at the West India body in par-
eular. I would advise him to get his brother to refer to his
'edger,. and then to say whether, without their aid, Mr. EWART
Would have been even the briefle'ss 4arrister which he was, so
, rtig as he honoured the circuit with his presence. 'the libera--
itY of the self-styled " Liberals,"- is so notorious, that I need
liberality
to allude to it. I will, however, ask, whole was their4berality when they assailed every supporter of LORD SANDO.N
41.4,1 SIR HOWARD DOUGLAS not only with insulting language,
as I can feelingly testify, with mud and stones, and blud-
? Where was their liberality when they so grossly in-
-Belted their former Representative, whose age, if not his scr-
l'iees; one would have thought might have been his protection ;
44(.1 when one of their leaders addressed GLINERAL GASCOY/iE,
ill a manner which he dared not have used to any of his fellow
illerchants, and of which the poorest and most uneiucated burgess
Ivetild have been ashamed ? These gentiemen-can by no means
4(l'tlit, that, any one one who ventures to-differ froth them can'
a 0 80 conscientiously. I will now briefly remark upon those
:40 have recorded their votes at the Election which has just
their votes,
Although I have solicited a great many people' for
votes, I can solemnly assert that I have never, in any way,
thatupon any person voting as I wished. Now, however,
'oat the Election is over, and knowing, as I well do, that none
11. the Liberals will patronise any one who is not of their
:474e, I think it my bounden duty. to give all the snpport iii
'Y power to those who have supported what I consider to be
111 Y interests, and those of this town mid of the country. Sup-
1148e, for example, that I am a West India Proprietor, and
feelL convinced that the return of persons pledged to vote for
t
iMmediate abolition of slavery will be of serious injury to
'"
and my family,--that such a measure, if carried into effect,
would
destroy my property, and take from me the means
44% I now possess, of paying my different tradespeople
or the articles with which they furnish me : thinking so,
11 it not natural, nay requisite, that I should give encoulage-
41t ellt to those persons who hold the same opinions as I do„.
81)ecting, the merits of particular candidates ? I feel that any
an of common understanding will answer me in the affirma-
I will conclude with a single observation upon promises,
41aLly persons expressed their regret that, not being aware
that a fourth candidate would be brought forward, they had
Atomised their votes to two of the candidates who had been
°4le time in the field,—l, therefore, hope that they will be
mere
t cautious for the future, and take care not to promise
heir votes to any candidate before the immediate eve of an
election. Yours, &c.

A BURGESS.'
4,1). S. Of Mr. THORNELY, the defeated candidate, I have
hvoided speaking, upon the principle of "de mortuis," &e. I
h 4" never heard that his abilities are very great; that his
'l'etensions arc so, is beyond all question. '
Cluere.—Can he be called a fellow-townsman, who has lived and
Dclit his money out of Liverpool, almost every a he was born

ticji:HE DOCTOR.—A wag was rallying Dr. —on his want of
4el'l, which the doctor took raiser gravely. "My patients
ishfsver complain of me," he said. "l'hut is exactly what I
"Ilid have supposed," rep.ded his tormentor.
1:0211E CHURLISH MAN will necessarily think worse of human
oi,;'llre than it deserves. As there are some flowers which never
141:1 but when the sun shines upon them, so there are many
itb,lllkiB whose good qualities must be drawn out by-sympathy
ndness. *

CORRESPONDENCE.
41 rAcK UPON SIR HOWARD DOUGLAS, AT THE

SIR,—In the Journal of Saturday last, in an article signed
:` pick Liver," there appears a statementof au incident which
Is said to have taken place at the Booth in Griat George's-street,
relative to certain expressions used by Sir H. Douglas, upon
The bribery loath being administered to one of the Electors.
4s I happened at the moment to be standing next to Sir How-
4rd, and beard distinctly every thing which transpired, I
:think it but clue to that gentleinan to state the real facts as
they occurred, and which I now do unhesitatingly.
The elector appeared to be a superior and respectable ship-
.Wtight, and had, in my presence, tendered his vote a few mi-
,zliftes previously, but,'in consequence of Mr. Thornely's repre-
''entatives obliging him to take the bribery oath, he manifested
the greatest possible contempt and indignation, and said he
Wouid not vote; and retired. " Some of his friends then, I pre-
:"le, apprised him that this_wa.s exactly the. purpose-Mr. T.'s
.`rends wished, to effect, in order to gain time ;• for, very shortly
afterward, he again appeared at the booth to vote, and submit-
led himself to the regulations insisted upon. It was when he
had voted -that Sir H.. Douglas addiessed the elector, (and in
a'l the elections I have seen I never -knew this right to be ques-
tioned,) thanking him for his vote,' and added; " I would not
••
have obliged you, my man, to tale an oath. I would not have
.doubted the vote of any Englishman." To this the elector
answered,' "They only uo it, Sb', to gain time; and-p:eveut our
:getting "pp to vote. but what is that they would not do,
the infidels " I will tell you, My man," answered Sir Hew-
", " I will tell you what they have done. -Whist Iwas per,
"everingly engaged in au active and honourable 'canvass, their
tarty have thrown asione at hit Me: on.the shotiluer, and
.:k4oc.kedr me down; in my own carriage." • Upon this, the
'll,ornelv party and some of Mr. Lwart's party, rushectfotwatd,
'540 of whom advanced close to bit H., 'ioadly.ana.veheineutly
Protesting against . the remarks of bir. It.; . and whist one
aC'eused him of havingsralled Mr. lhornely an 'infidel% another
accused him of haying said that Mr. T. had stoned him. To
both these Sir H,. _coolly but bravely (lot: the raze of the party
,/'l3tild have intimidated most Men) ri.-plied, '"I did not say Mr.
WaSan infidel: It was-the elector who said so. I did
not say it was Mr. T. who threw.the stone at me : I said it was
his party." Nothing, however, scented sufficient to Satisfy the
l'iOlent excitement thus created, and I was leally• apprehensive
,I§ome Terminal. injury to Sir -IL With the assistance of .Mr..
°lassey,. by degrees order
.was restored, and Sir kioivard re-
: .4aitiued some minutes longer in the booth before he retired. •
t'hes'e are the plain facts, and. I leave, yourreaders•to draw
their 'own concaisions, whether an honorable 'Minded man,
-even theopponents of Sir Howard admit him to be, was
likely in an open court to commit himself by calling Mr.
" an infidel," or to say that that gentleman himself'
4a4t thrown the stone at him.—Y ours, &e.
..

MR. EWART'S SPEECII ON THE LIVERPOOL
HUSTINGS.