The Statesman.
London, England, 1821-07-31 00:00:00

E SEVEN PENCE.

half measure, hut littlegoOd would be done by it, ss
much of the damage and risk in going through the
bridge would remain. lie was, therefore, in favont of
a new briirge.
Mr. (hz.LowAy was convinced that the water-way
might be so materially widened as to answer all the
purposes to be required from a new bridge.
Mr. CALTHORPS supported the amended motion.
Mr. Jury was for the repair of the present bridge.
even if such repairs were not to last more than 20 or 314
years.
Mr. DARNFORD RIB persuaded of the stability of the
bridge.
Mr. Otnitax wad of opinion, that if the House of
Commons were determined upon a new bridge, the
City Funds should be given up to them, and that, with
the disposal of them, the whole responsibility should
be given. By the removal of the dam which the pre-
sent bridge formed, more damage might be done in
one night, and more property destroyed, than would
build six new bridges ; but by the measure which lie
supported, every thing would be done step by step,
with the power of first trying the experiment before
they put it in full executiou.
Mr. Alderman Wool, pledged himself that the in-
terest of the money to be raised to blind a new
might be paid from the funds of the Bridge Mingo
Estate ; and also that from these funds the princiiial
itself would be paid in thirty-years. Tlie City .if
London, lie said, would derive immense benefits from
the erection of a new bridge; and that in consepi-ei
of the measure, the wharfs above the bridge mot: I
have ten times the business they now had, and th,.
saving in e.irtage would he immense.
After souse fuither observations, the Resoltitio•!‘
(fur whicii see Advertisement) were put, when tho-e
proposed by Mr. Oldham, for altering and re7.4iri.l2;
lie bridge, were carried by a considerable tu y.

STEPHENS v. BROADEN.
-
TO THE EDITOR OF THE STATESMAN.

Str.—The reliance which is justly plAred on Ilia
impartiality of the public press. sanctions me in t!t.?
hope that, when, through its means, au tujit‘ticeVte
lime been done to an individual. the sante source ti; ill
be open to his justification ; in the case, enti;leil a.*
aItOVP, a report of which appeared in your Pape: if
Frilty last, a strong impression has been made to th ?
prejudice of the defendant; it is hardly necessary t •
remind you, I believe, mainly through the ingen:oi;•
and eloquent appeal of Counsel, and not from any pl.
sitive fact which was adduced in evidence before the
Juiv. It may lie said, that the defendant's legal .11.1- •
viser might have rendered nt.gatory the powerful effect
of tit it appea', by calling a witness to disprove its ag-
gravated features ; this is tree, and the means for so
11.4t14- %%ere fully in Isis possession. Th ahe did apt
do most be ascribed to what he conceived to be a
prop r exercise d discretion ; the result, however, Is is
proved that he might have adopted a m )re eligiirle
course, and with a view to do itoparial justice, I feel
myself called upon, and I am the only witness who
Wa., present at the assault, to state correctly the fact,
as they oc, urreil, and to add, that I was then, and it:II
now, prepared to swear to their truth. I am per:nude 1
the value which you must attach to the reputAtion of
a fellow•ritizett, smarting und.er an implttat• of bra-
es ity which is alto ether (*.reign to Isis nature, i 1
iu.l tier you to insert the fol:owing statement of titAt
wiliest I could h ire proved, hail I beet, called :
First, Then; Sir, I conlil have sworn that the assault
wls nut the roll-Vow lel, premeditated, planned thing
• h.cls Mr. Phillips described iu his opening speech, Lett
that it took place within three quarters of an hour from
the. time the 11, fend.cit was hi:Lamed of the slander, of
•rhich lu had been the victim.

Secondly, '1 hat when the defendant charted plaintif
+vith having called hilts an informer at a public meeting,
lie did not Inert it with a direct denial, but began to gl
tutu an explanation of the rircninstance.
Thirdly, That the plaintiff received only three or fo.te
blows from the thin part of the whip, which is a com-
mon chaise-whip made of lance wood (and far from A
t. 4ek our), and which was previously broken and tiel
• nth string, and that the cut of the. head was o+0:1
produced by the stick breaking in a sharp splinter+, I
way.
Fourthly, That the bret-end of the whip was nevi
used at all, and this part I consider very important to 1+ •
made known, to do away !be idea of that brutality
existed only in the brief of Mr. Phillips.
Fifthly, That the affray altogether did not last half
minate. and that the blood on Mr. Stephen's face was
not seen until after the assault was over, and the
slant defendant saw It, be expressed his concern, and of-
fered him water and towel, with a private room to wash
himself, which the paintiff accepted.
Sistlily, That the plaintiff received no apparent I-1.
jury, but the cut ou his bead, and that the coach wis
tonicared fur him against his own inclination and
awl it was with a good deal of Persuasion that he agree
to step into it ; and also, meresy because, as bis necli-
cloth teas bin he would have appeared particular
in the street, noel:et:muse he -was unable to waik
honer.
Seventtify; That 11r. Stephens was in the defendlnes
house full 4.ltour and a quarter af*er the assault took
place, talki the business over, ateli waiting to see is
Mr. Taylor 'and myself could persuade the parties to
some arrangeitielg ; mid when lie left, he declared he
w mid go to Mr. asssbus Mayhew, his Attorney.
Eiglithly, That 1 never interfered with the horse-
whipping ; that it-was so inataataneols. I had not time
to do en. and, of deurse, wren:h away the whi;s
from the defenliatik, exciainiing, 't Hood Owl, Sir, whit
are yon at ? 410 yortinteral murdering the wan?" that
no such circutrietance ever took place.
nese facts, Sir, I could have established heyontl
=contradintiegp; was there for the purpose. As
bad been misrepresented, Mr. 'tropic:a
was ,Bore amines in have all the facts of the case wade
prititi+.• than any regard to pecuniary circumstances.
I also wish to state, that there were several persons in
Court who knew Mr. Brogans, for Tears, and could have
alieukett as to his general conaluctfor benevolence and
kindness of heart ; who ennui have spolien both as to
public and private enti.het; who could have inform-
ed the Jury that the defendant, who hal been described
as tt savage, was the very reverse; that in his own esta•
blisliment in the counting-house, he has three persons

•
in his esapigyaboot who have been in his service, one for
eleven cede, oar siKtreti, awl the other twenty.two
rear.; his dotoesoic gervalts wt.! four, une seven, and
Ylla Otter litfitto years. to his ouln;ifil:tory, a iluz.:o