mentions the addition of twelve Cardinals to the sacred college :They are, 1. Francis Bertazzoli, bishop of Edessa. 2. John Francis Falzacappa, bishop of Ancona. 3. Antonio Pallotta, auditor-general of the sacred chamber. 4. Francis Lerlupi, auditor of the sacred rota. 5. Charles Maria Pedicini, secretary of the propaganda. 6. Louis Pandolf, secretary of the consulta. 7. Fabricius Turriozzi, assessor of the holy and universal inquisition. 8. Hercules Dandini, bishop of Osimo and Cingoli. 9. Charles Odelaschi, auditor of his holiness and archbishop of Ferrara. 10. Antonio Frosini, prefect of the sacred palaces and major-domo of his holiness. 11. Thomas Riario Sforza, master of the chamber to his holiness. 12. Viviano Orfini, deacon of the sacred chamber.

The above list is entirely composed of Italians; the most of them make part of the household of the pope, are employed in Rome in different offices of the government. 13. CHELMSFORD. Felix Reynolds was indicted for violating the person of Mary Totham, spinster, at Harwich, on the 26th of February; and Timothy Quilligan, Francis Fitzpatrick, and John Butcher were indicted as acces sories to the same fact.

The prisoners, all of whom were under the age of 23, were privates in the 58th regiment, quartered at Harwich. The prosecutrix, a girl of 18, of prepossessing appearance, was servant in the family of Mr. Stewart, a pilot, at Harwich. A young seaman named Finch was paying his addresses to her, with the approbation of her friends. In the evening of the 26th of February, she was walking with her lover on the esplanade, at Harwich, when they were accosted by

the prisoners, two of whom laid hold of her and hurried her off towards the barracks, leaving the others to secure Finch, who, hearing her shrieking for help, struggled to follow his sweetheart, and protect her from violence; but finding his efforts unavailing, he returned to the town to procure assistance. In the mean time, the unhappy girl was forced to a hollow place near the barracks, and in spite of her efforts, was forcibly violated by all the prisoners, who successively accomplished their diabolical purpose. The prosecutrix spoke with certainty as to the identity of the prisoner Reynolds, and other evidence was adduced to show, that the remaining prisoners had been absent from barracks at the time the transaction took place, and shortly afterwards returned and hurried to bed. entertained of their identity. The case in its details excited universal horror. The unhappy prosecutrix was deeply affected, and her situation produced general sympathy. The prisoners (who were defended by Mr. Jessop) said nothing.

No doubt was

Mr. Baron Graham having sum med up the evidence,

The jury immediately found the prisoners Guilty-Death.

14. STAFFORD Sir George Jer ningham, bart. v. Beech. This was an action of trover by sir George Jerningham, the proprietor of Stafford-castle, and of large estates in its vicinity, against the defendant, a timber-merchant, in the borough of Stafford, to recover the value of an ash tree and two alders, his property, which had been wrongfully converted to the defendant's use.

In December last, a person, calling himself the hon. James Stamp Sutton Cooke, arrived in

Stafford, and, on behalf of his brother, to whom he gave the title of lord Stafford, laid claim to the estates, of which sir George Jerningham and his predecessors have been in possession for more than a century. He soon interested a number of the populace in his cause by the boldness of his measures and the liberality of his promises. He appointed gamekeepers to the manor of Forebridge, in which Stafford-castle is situate, and by a manœuvre obtained a few hours possession of the castle itself, which is usually open to the inspection of the curious. Notices were issued to the tenants of sir George Jerningham, requiring them to pay their rents only to Mr. Cooke, the authorized agent of his brother, and threatening them with distresses, in case they should refuse to comply. In order to induce them to attorn to the new claimant, leases were offered them at low rents, on the payment of a premium, and a day appointed to receive the rents in arrear, half of which only were required in consequence of the pressure of the times. On these representations, some of the tenants actually made payments, and receipts were given them for the sums. In the mean time, Mr. Cooke proceeded to employ men to fell timber on several parts of the domain, which they did, attended by a rabble, and, in the whole, felled between 70 and 80 trees. Although a hand-bill was issued, and served on all timber-dealers in Stafford, not to purchase any of these trees, the defendant and others became possessed of some of them, and obstinately detained them from the

owner.

1 The defendant in this action was one of the persons who were

thus deluded. It was proved, that two alder-trees and one ash-tree, cut on the lands of sir George Jerningham on the 14th of January in this year, were conveyed to his premises, and that he refused to deliver them up when demanded by the agents of sir George Jerningham. The value of the trees was proved to be 2l. 15s.

The judge, in his charge to the jury, expressed his strong reprobation of these proceedings. To try a claim of right, it would be enough to cut a twig or take away a clod of earth; and therefore this system of depredation and violence was entirely without excuse. The only doubt in the case was, whether the conduct of the defendant did not amount to felony: to this point the evidence did not quite come, but it was extremely near it. If trees were wrongfully severed one day, without a shadow of excuse, and taken away the next, the parties who lent themselves to such a taking would have to answer as felons in another court.

The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff Damages 2l. 15s.

CHAMBER OF DEPUTIES.Sitting of March 15.—M. de Frenilly denounced the following extract from the Journal du Commerce of the 11th inst. :

"The urn of the chamber of deputies, now become the faithful organ of the council, will only be the responsive oracle of the minister's pleasure. What a spectacle do the public sittings of the legislation exhibit! the sorrow and shame of France. Where would be the limit to taxes, when voted by those only who derive from them salaries and pensions? If the maintenance of the charter were abandoned to those who exclaim against it as odious, and whe

reproach it with having consecrated usurpations, who could have at once faith in its duration, and in the security of the domains, which it has especially guaranteed?

"Finally, the doctrine on which the expulsion of M. Manuel is grounded, tends to destroy the rights consecrated by the charter, and consequently the moral obligation of subjects. It infringes the privileges of the chamber of peers as well as the prerogatives of the Crown; it ruins public liberty, and consequently the monarchy. It would therefore be of urgent necessity to dissolve a chamber, which pursues such a career, and to renounce electoral combinations, which have produced such a chamber.

"Such a text," continued M. de Frenilly, "requires no comment. I now submit to the chamber, that this libellous extract incurs the penalties of the 15th article of the law of the 25th of March, viz.: An offence against the chamber may, on being denounced by one of its members, be indicted before the ordinary tribunals: or the accused may be summoned to the bar: in which latter case, if the offender, after having been heard in defence, should be adjudged guilty, the assembly shall forthwith ordain the infliction of the enacted penalty.' Either of these courses of proceeding being at the option of the chamber, I demand that the chamber authorize the indictment of the editors and proprietors of the journal in question before the tribunals."

M. de la Bourdonnaye expressed his opinion, that the chamber, by adopting the course of citing the offending parties before the ordiVOL. LXV.

nary tribunals, would prejudge the question.

The hon. member was called upon to move an amendment, but he declined.

The president read the 15th article of the law of the 25th of March. When he came to the words "shall be summoned to the bar," several voices on the right cried, "Summon them to the bar! Summon them to the bar!"

M. André d'Aubières expatiated upon the insolent invectives, which had been levelled against the majority of the chamber by certain journals, who were the organs of an opposition which had voluntarily absented itself. They (the right side) had been held up to public hatred as enemies of the charter, and as partisans of absolute power. He (M. André d'Aubières) demanded, who were the greatest enemies of liberty, they who violated the charter by not fulfilling their duty towards their constituents, or they who discharged their duty as faithful deputies? Who were the partisans of absolute power, a constitutional majority who defended the prerogatives of the chamber, or a minority evidently unjust, since they place themselves in revolt against the very principle of law, which recognizes that the majority decides. He concluded by voting for summoning the offenders to the bar.

The keeper of the seals considered, that an indictment before the ordinary tribunals would be preferable, as the most impartial course of proceeding; inasmuch as the chamber would not be a judge in its own cause.

Several other members briefly addressed the assembly. M. Bazire dwelt upon the inconvenience of such a proceeding, at a time when

D

the chamber was deprived of the presence of a great number of its members.

A voice on the right-" Give yourself no uneasiness; the gentlemen of the left side will return, to be present at the proceedings against the offenders.”

The assembly decided, by a strong majority, that the editor of the Journal du Commerce should be indicted before the ordinary tribunals, for the publication of the article above extracted.

EAST INDIA COLLEGE. The following is the bishop of London's decision on an appeal lately presented to him:

"The bishop of London, appointed visitor of the East India college by the statutes thereof, has received the appeals of Flint, Lawrell, Rowley, Taylor, and Watts, late students of the said college, complaining of sentences of expulsion therefrom, pronounced against them by the college council. He has likewise received the answers of the college council to the said appeals and complaints, and also the replies of the appellants to the said answers.

"Having duly weighed and considered these several documents, the visitor finds himself compelled to declare his conviction, founded in no small degree upon the admissions of the appellants themselves, that they have all of them been parties to a conspiracy, originating in the most erroneous and unwarrantable notions respecting their own relative situations in the college, and pursued by a series of gross and contumelious outrages, committed against the governing members of the society, for the express purposes of annoyance and intimidation.

"The visitor, attending to the

general nature of the institution, and likewise to the particular body of statutes, under the authority and observance of which it is to be conducted, pronounces his judgment, that the several appellants have, by a course of misconduct totally inconsistent with all academical discipline and subordination, and utterly subversive thereof, justly incurred the penalty of expulsion; and he therefore affirms the sentences pronounced to that effect by the principal and profes

sors.

"He directs the college council to insert a copy of this his decree in their proper registry.

(Signed) "W. LONDON, Visitor. "Attested by me,

(Signed) "CHRIST. HODGSON, Notary Public. "London-house, March 18, 1823."

COVENT-GARDEN THEATRE.A new tragedy, entitled Julian, was performed: it is from the pen of Miss Mitford, who is already known to the literary world as the authoress of some poems. The scene is laid in Sicily, and the action of the tragedy arises from the virtuous opposition of Prince Julian to the ambitious designs of his father, the Duke of Melfi. The latter, who is uncle to Alfonso, the rightful heir of the Sicilian crown, is, on the demise of the prince's father, constituted regent of the kingdom, and guardian of the young monarch. Under the pretence of conducting the prince to Messina, where it is proposed that his coronation shall take place, Melfi inveigles him into a solitary pass in the mountains, where he attempts to murder his kinsman and his sovereign. At this crisis, Prince Julian, who had ridden from Messina to meet the caval

cade, is attracted to the spot by the cries of Alfonso; he interposes at the moment when Melfi is on the point of slaying the youthful king; and, ere he has had an opportunity of seeing the face of the traitor, whose arm is uplifted against his sovereign, he plunges his sword into the side of his father, whom he recognizes as he is sinking to the earth. He immediately flies from the scene of blood, accompanied by Alfonso, who travels with him in the disguise of a page. The dreadful reflection that he has slain his parent preys on the sensitive mind of Julian, and during eight days delirium usurps the seat of reason. The play opens with his recovery; and one of its best and most powerful scenes is that in which his bride, Annabel, draws from him, by her passionate endearments, the cause of his strange and sudden malady. Peace revisits his breast, when he learns that he has only wounded, not destroyed his father: but his happiness vanishes, when he finds that his father, still obstinate in evil, has propagated a report of the death of Alfonso by the hand of an assassin, and has assembled the barons to witness his coronation as next heir to the crown. Julian, whose loyalty is inflexible, vainly endeavours, in an interview with his father, to dissuade him from his guilty design. The unexpected appearance of the young king, whose death had been so confidently reported, excites the suspicion of the nobles. One of them, Count d'Alba, who has received secret intelligence of the attack which had been made on Alfonso, arrests Melfi on a charge of high treason; and calls on Julian to bear witness against his father. This he indignantly

refuses; and he declares, that whatever blood was spilt when Alfonso was attacked, was shed by his hand. Melfi, when arraigned, admits, in a fit of frenzy, the truth of every charge brought against him. He and his son (whose ambiguous declaration is looked upon as confession of guilt) are banished. The character of the Count d'Alba is now brought prominently forward. His great object in removing Melfi and Julian from Sicily was, that he might have an opportunity of assailing the virtue of Annabel, whom he had long loved. He contrives to have her inveigled to his castle, where he urges his suit, but is indignantly spurned. Julian, while weeping over the dead body of his father, whose mental conflict has caused his wound to burst forth afresh, and thus occasioned his dissolution, is informed of the perilous situation of his wife. He hastens to her place of confinement, gains admission, and tells her that his life is forfeited, the hour, at which he should have quitted Sicily, having elapsed. There is, he observes, but one way in which she can escape dishonour, and he prepares to kill her. His resolution fails: but, while he is yet parleying, Count d'Alba enters with a number of soldiers. Annabel rushes forward to protect her husband, and receives a fatal wound. assassins quit the prison; and Julian, having thrown his cloak over the dead body of his wife, covers himself with a garment which one of the murderers had left behind him. D'Alba, ignorant of Annabel's death, and exulting in the supposed success of his scheme, returns to the prison. He mistakes Julian for one of his followers; passionately demands

The