The Extraordinary Commitm...
The Times, 1824-09-06T00:00:00

A report, wvcni it is propet to rectitr, nas for some itays prevailed in this neiglhbourlhood, respecting the release of the unfortunate nen committed to Aylesbury gaol, on the groundless charge of collecting monev undcr false pretences. It han been stated that the order frnim the committing magi trate for their liberation was not received umtil the day before the expiration of the term for which they wcre corn- mitted. This statement is founlted in mistake. They were comi- mitted to prison on Fritday, thle 30th of Julr, for a mo tth's confine- ment and hard labour; anid had the term to whicll they were sen- tenced been limited to a lttnar monitlh, the rumnour, which probably proceeded on this calculation, would have been correct. The sentence, however, as we stated in our first notice of thie case, expressly specified that the men should be confined for one caletndiar month. The dav, theref-ore, on which the term for which they were corn- initted expired was on Monday, the 30th of Auvzust. The order for their release was received on 1W edlnesday,the 25th, and that forenoon they were dischargetl ; so that they obtained their liberty five full days, at least, before the term of their sentence had expired. Another report relaLive to these men it miay be also proper to notice, though we cannot speak of it with so mucl certaintv as of the above. It is understo;d that they expressed some reluctance at leaving the place of their confinenment. According to one construc. tion of their expressions, they were averse to receive their liberation a.S a boon; according to another, they were unwilling to leave un. finished the work they had undertaken-the manufacture of some lit shoes. With tleir treatment in the gaol, so far as its regulatiriis would allow, we have reason to believe thee testified their satisfiac tLan. After tlheir case had been submitted to the Adjourned Ses- sions, they had obtained, besides the otlier favours m entioned in our last, the liberty of applying to their own use the contributions thev received from* their friends. The only pOillt on which we can learn they expressed any iissatisfaction relative to their treu- ment in prison, was one iu which the gaoler had no concern. It will be recollected that it was stated in the memorial presented in their behalf to the Hon. R-.rnsitb,- our- County illember, that when they were taken into cLstody, the money they had collected for aid to defray the expense of erecting their meeting-house was taken from them. This money, it appears, amounted to 51. 10s. 10 [d. Who could imagine that out of this amount such a sum as 21. cou!d be ex- acted and deducted, according to late R Were it no for extraordinarv acts wlhich come before the public under thic direction and sanction of extraordinary acts of Parliament, we should generallv remain un- acquainted with the statutes that are passed. It could not readily be supposed that monies found upon the persuns of convicted vagrants are taken from them, and directetd by the Vagrant Act to be applied, as far as they may extend, to defray the expense of conveying them to gaol. It could not be easilv conceived tbat vagrants, who tramp on foot about the country, hisve been assumed by the franers of that act to be occasionally possessed of such well-filled bags, as to enable the constable to furnish them with a vehicle to convey themn to the place of their confinement. But so appears to be the case. The money found on tbese unfortunate men being sufficient, they vwere acc;mmodated witlh a gig. low they fared on their way, or what is the customary fee to their conductor, we have inot ascertained. The expense, however, charged for their journev was enough to provide them with a respectable vehicle, and witm sum ptuous fare. The distance from Newport-Pagnell, the place at which they were taken into custodr, to Aylesbury gaol, to wlhich| they were commnitted, is about 22 mnles; and the charge for their con- veyaRce was no less than 21. On quitting their place of confinement instead of receiving, as they expected, the full amount of the mo- ney taken from them (61. lOa. 1 lO.), they were presented with that part only which the constable had left in the gaoler's lhands, 31. lOs. lOad. At this hard measure they appear to lhave mnurmured. but at length theysubmitted to receive what was left, and to retire. This neasure adds another strange feature to their extrusordinar case; for the money taken front them was not, as had been assut their own, but that which they had collected; on account of others, for a lawifti and laudable purpose, and which legally wVs the ro- perty of those by whom they were deputetd to solicit the contributions of the public.-Bucks C/ronicle. TILE EXTI IORDIYA.ARY COMMIRTMENT UNDER THE NEW VAG.RANT ACT.