페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

years, in the room of Charles Mills, Abraham Robarts, Richard C. Plowden, John Huddleston, G. A. Robinson, and J. A. Bannerman, Esqrs. who go out by rotation. At six o'clock the glasses were closed and delivered over to the scrutineers, who reported that the election had fallen on William Astell, Charles Grant, John Jackson, Campbell Marjoribanks, George Smith, and Sweny Toone, Esqrs.

On Tuesday morning, Mr Agar, the celebrated pedestrian, undertook to go, by a circuitous route, from his residence at Kensington to Blackwater, in Hampshire, and return, being altogether a distance of 59 miles, in the space of eight hours and a half, for a stake of 200 guineas. The pedestrian started at day-light, dressed closely in flannel, with light, but thick shoes, and with his legs bare. He arrived at Ashford Common (17 miles) in two hours and ten minutes, and refreshed at Englefield Green (21 miles) in five minutes less than three hours from starting. The pedestrian continued steadily at work, until he did the half of his journey, in four hours and four minutes. Af ter being well rubbed, Mr Agar pursued his Herculean undertaking, and did his seven miles an hour tolerably true, although he was much distressed in the last two hours, but he won the match in three minutes within time. This is the greatest performance of modern days.

11th.--MANCHESTER.--This town has been thrown into great confusion during the whole of this day. About a fortnight since a requisition, most respectably signed by 154 of the principal inhabitants, was addressed to the Boroughreeve and constables, "to convene a public meeting of the inhabitants of the towns of Manches

[ocr errors]

ter, Salford, and the neighbourhood, to prepare a dutiful and loyal address to his Royal Highness the Prince Regent, expressive of the strongest assurances of our attachment to his royal person, and of our ardent zeal for the support of his government."

A meeting was, in consequence, appointed to be held in the diningroom, at the Exchange Buildings, this day at eleven o'clock. In the mean time several most inflammatory hand-bills were posted up in the town and neighbourhood. One contained a copy of the address of the livery of London, and another, which was circulated with the greatest industry for many miles round, was of the following tenor :

"Now or never!-Those inhabitants who do not wish for an increase of taxes and poor-rates-an advance in the price of provisions-a scarcity of work-and a reduction of wages, will not fail to go to the meeting on Wednesday morning next, at the Exchange, and oppose the 154 persons who have called you together; and you will then do right to express your detestation of the conduct of those men who have brought this country to its present distressed state, and are entailing misery on thousands of our industrious mechanics. Speak your minds now, before it is too late ; let not the prince and the people be deceived as to your real sentiments. Speak and act boldly and firmly, but above all, be peaceable."

The merchants, fearing that the meeting would be attended with disagreeable events, announced that it was put off to another day, upon which the populace, being disappointed, immediately became disorderly, and turned the merchants out of the Exchange, throwing the tables and chairs out of the windows; and

in a few hours this fine building was demolished,

At length some troops arrived, and the riot act was read; but the magistrates could not act until an hour afterwards, in which time all the mischief was accomplished.

Died on the 11th of April, at the Pulteney Hotel, in Piccadilly, London, Jane Duchess of Gordon. Her grace was sister to the late Sir William Maxwell of Monreith, Bart. was born in 1746, and married to the present Duke of Gordon, October 1st, 1767, by whom she had, now living, one son, the Marquis of Huntly, and five daughters, viz, the Duchess of Richmond, Lady Magdalen Palmer, the Duchess of Manchester, the Marchioness Cornwallis, and the Duchess of Bedford. She lost a second son, Alexander, who died about two years ago. Her grace received the holy sacrament a few hours before her dissolution, of which all her noble and afflicted children were partakers.

13th.-LEEDS: -The following account is given of an affair at Mr Cartwright's mill, at Rawfolds, between Cleckheaton and Littletown:

About 20 or 30 minutes after twelve o'clock, on Saturday night, this gig-mill was attacked by the Luddites or Snappers; and the windows and door of the mill were assailed by a furious mob, who commenced their attack by the firing of arms and the beating of hammers and hatchets. The guard in the mill in stantly repelled the assault by a steady, firm, and well-directed discharge of musquetry from within. A regular engagement succeeded, which continued from 15 to 20 minutes, during which time, not fewer than 140 shot were discharged from within. The assailants were foiled in their attempt

to force the windows or doors, and did no other damage than breaking the glass windows of the mill. The deluded mob did not escape unhurt. Two of the unhappy men were left wounded upon the spot, and there is great reason to believe that several more received the contents of the defenders' muskets, as traces of blood were observed. The two wound. ed men were put under the care of surgeons as soon as it could be done; one of them, John Booth, a tinner's apprentice, at Huddersfield, died after having his leg amputated. Samuel Hartley, a cooper of Huddersfield, who worked with one Webb, or Webster, at the same place (and formerly with Mr Cartwright, at Halifax,) was shot through the breast; he died yesterday afternoon.

From the direction of the shot, it is conjectured that he received his wound in the act of firing into the mill, or in an attitude similar to that of firing a musket. Several hammers, masks, and a pick-lock key were left upon the premises. Both the men died without making any confession of their accomplices; but several must have been so wounded as to lead to the knowledge of them.

16th.-MURDER.On Sunday morning the village of Hankelow, near Nantwich, was alarmed by a re port that George Morrey, farmer in that village, had been murdered during the preceding night, having been found with his brains dashed out, and his throat cut from ear to ear! It was supposed that the diabolical crime had been perpetrated by some ruthless villains, who had entered his house in search of plunder, and it would appear that his wife and every part of the family affected the most complete ignorance of the awful transaction. Ŏn the assembly of a con

I

sistant he had with him, and immediately ran back to take the wife into custody.' When he entered the house, he told her the confession of the servant, and bid her prepare to accompany him to the magistrate. On this she covered her face with her apron, drew a razor from her breast, and run it across her throat, making a deep incision. Mr Mellis, of Audlam, surgeon, who happened to be there, sewed up the wound, which was not dangerous. The young man is about 19 years of age, the woman 40.

course of people, which so unusual a circumstance was likely to create, suspicion fell on one of the servant men, by distinct traces of blood from the bed of the deceased to his, which was in a higher part of the house. On examining him these suspicions were strengthened, by finding marks of blood upon his shirt. A peace officer was sent for, and the young man taken into custody. When the constable was taking him to a neighbouring magistrate, he said to the constable, "Well, I suppose must be hanged;" and on being pressed for a disclosure of his meaning, confessed the following particulars:-That the murder of his master was determined upon between his mistress and himself; that the time, manner, and circumstances of it were concerted by them; that in the night time they fell upon him with an axe, and beat him with it about the head, until they thought him dead, and in the course of their brutality struck out one of his eyes. They then left him, but were soon apprised, that he was yet living; they returned to their work of blood, and again retired, under the persuasion that he had breathed his last :- That they were still disappointed, and although the unnatural wife pressed the man to go and make a finish of his master, he said he could not resume the task; and he absolutely refused, until she found an expedient to remove his scruples, by furnishing him with a razor, to cut his throat! It was then the work was completed. He stated, that he had been urged to the horrid deed by his mistress, who wanted him to mar. her. Immediately on this confession, the constable unlocked the handcuffs with which he had locked himself to the prisoner, fastened the latter by the same instruments to an as

ry

20th.-COURT OF KING'S BENCH.

to say,

that

The Attorney-General moved for a rule to show cause why a criminal information should not be filed against the editor of the Brighton newspaper, for a gross libel on Miss Somerset, daughter of Lord George Somerset, lieutenant-general in his majesty's service, and commander of the Sussex district. The tenor of the libel was, that the editor was sorry there had been recently a faux pas in high life, which had caused great misery to two noble families; that the gentleman, who was an officer in an hussar regiment, was willing to heal the breach by legal ties; but that the earl his father, had declared, that if he presumed to marry the lady he would cut his son off with a shilling. The Attorney-General stated, that the earl was Lord Egremont, and his son's name Wyndham. aware that the court would require the affidavit of the party, denying the truth of the charge; and painful as it was to her feelings, he had an affidavit from Miss Somerset, absolutely contradicting the truth of the fact. He also knew that their lordships might expect a similar affidavit from Captain Wyndham ; but he was sorry to say, that that gentleman had acted unjustifiably in taking the

He was

[blocks in formation]

SIR F. BURDETT V. THE SPEAKER.Mr Clifford was this day heard in reply, on the part of the plaintiff inerror, contending, on three grounds, that the warrant ought not to be supported, being grounded neither on statute, in usage, nor in necessity. A ready mode of obtaining redress lay open to the house, if they had any thing to complain of in the conduct of the plaintiff, by prosecution at the suit of the attorney-general, and in that case there would have been no necessity for breaking into the house of the plaintiff with the assistance of armed soldiers. Besides, the plaintiff could not in the nature of things have been guilty of an obstruction of the business of the House of Commons, which was the only thing they had a right to take cogni. zance of, while he in fact, as was here the case, was confined to his own house. The warrant, the learned

counsel also submitted, was defective, in not sufficiently expressing the offence with which the plaintiff was charged. He was charged with publishing a libel reflecting on the House of Commons. Now, out of 22 meanings given to the word "reflecting" in Johnson's Dictionary, only two of them argued any thing that could at all be construed in an offensive sense. The learned counsel also objected to execution of the warrant, by armed soldiers breaking into the house of the plaintiff.

On this point he was cut short by Sir James Mansfield, who informed him, that having already argued this part of the case, he might save himself any further observations on it, the opinion of the court being fully made up upon it.

After the judges had deliberated a short time, the doors were opened. Sir James Mansfield then observed "We have thought it better to give judgment immediately, than to wait to look at new cases on the subject; and, after the difficult discussion it has undergone, perhaps there are none to produce.”

The learned judge then detailed the legal proceedings in the case, which are known to the public :"With respect to the proposition, that the House of Commons has no power to commit, it would be extraordinary, if, in the 19th century, their power were denied. It has been admitted, that this power has been exercised by the commons since the reign of Elizabeth, and a practice which has prevailed, and been sanctioned so many centuries, we must presume to have legal foundation. The points with respect to the ancient constitution of the House of Commons, of their sitting with the lords, and having no power to commit, are

involved in too much darkness to have any force. Various opinions have been given on the ancient state of parliament; and those opinions may be subjects for counsel to exercise their talents on. Their powers have been unquestionably to commit for contempt. It is impossible that power can be now brought into question. With respect to the libel not being ground for commitment for contempt, it is impossible for any one to say, that a libel on the whole House of Commons would not be contempt. As to the power of the house to commit, there could be at this day no doubt. The next thing in the terms of the warrant, because the warrant states, that Sir Francis Burdett, as the author of a libellous and scandalous paper, has been guilty of contempt of that house.

Various objections have been made to these words. In the first place, it is said that the warrant does not say in proper terms, what the contempt was. It is enough to state it was a libellous paper. It was a defamatory paper, and, as to stating the contents of the libel, that could not be necessary. It has been said that the libel could not be the object of commitment, because there was no obstruction. It is a singular proposition, to say that a libel, published from day to day, defaming the House of Commons, is no obstruction to that house. How can the duty of parliament go on? How can any men take a part in public discussions, if the next day they are to be traduced and libelled. There may be men, whose nerves are so strong, that they cannot be affected by such abuse; but there are also many that would take no part in public discussion, if next day they were to be held out to the public as objects of detestation. But it is not

only obstruction, but libel. It is in
this country, and every country where
there is a constituted body, necessary
that powers so constituted should be
treated with respect, in order to ena-
ble them to discharge their duties.
If they are not respected, their au-
thority goes for nothing, and the
constitution will be overturned; for,
if ever the time should come when the
members of parliament may be from
day to day represented to the people
as unequal to discharge their duty,
and accused of abusing the trust put
in them, what they did would be of
very little advantage to the country,
and it would be impossible for them
to act as a support of the crown, or
as the defenders of the people. It is
essential that they should properly
discharge their important duty, and
that they should be held in great re-
spect by those who are to be govern-
ed by them. In that view of the sub-
ject no ordinary person would doubt
that it was a libel on a body of legis-
lators, and it must be a contempt of
the orders and privileges of such a le-
gislative body. The learned judge
then expressed an opinion, that the
speaker had exercised the power of
commitment in a constitutional man-
ner, and that the warrant was not ob-
jectionable with respect to the word
"reflect." It would be ridiculous to
suppose the libel could contain any
panegyric on the proceedings of the
House of Commons. A great deal
had been said about soldiers assisting
in breaking open the window.
cannot avoid observing," said the
learned judge,
"that it is a strange
mistake, to suppose a soldier, because
he is subject to military law, ceases
to be useful in a civil capacity. There
can be no doubt, that whatever others
may do for the invasion of right, that
an act of legal power may be done by

" I

« 이전계속 »