on Dartmoor, were unfortunately lost in the snow. The master who went to look for them was also brought in insensible, and lay in that state for five or six hours, but at last recovered by constant rubbing. The farmers in the neighbourhood of Dartmoor say the snow is deeper on the moor than it was in the severe winter six years ago.-Exeter Paper.

10. On the night of Thursday the 6th, the Birmingham theatre was discovered to be on fire, and by two o'clock on Friday morning, the whole of the roof fell in, and all, except the outer walls, were destroyed. It would have been wonderful, in the present state of excitement in the country, if such an event were not attributed to the people termed "Radicals." This may account for certain reports in town yester. day, which mentioned that Mr. Bunn, the manager, had some days previous to the fire, received letters, containing threats that, if he persisted in cramming "God save the King" down the throats of his audience every night, his theatre should suffer for it. We do not, however, learn that these letters rest on any other foundation than an admitted unpopularity on the part of the manager, for what was deemed extra loyal line of conduct.

12. This day an important case came on for trial in Westminsterhall. Cullen versus Morris: the plaintiff, a householder of Westminster, complained of the defendant, the high bailiff, that he unlawfully and maliciously refused plaintiff's vote at the late election of a member of parliament. The vote had been proffered for John Cam Hobhouse,

esq., the opposition candidate, The ground of the high balliffs refusal was, that Mr. Čullen had not paid up his poor-rates. The plaintiff, a person of respectability, was not aware of that; but, on going home, and finding them in arrears, he immediately paid them, and on a subsequent day again applied to be permitted to vote. The high bailiff again rejected it, on the ground, as stated by the counsel for the defence, that, by the 20th of the king, no person could be admitted to vote at an election as an inhabitant paying scot and lot, unless he had bona fide been paying scot and lot for six calendar months before the day of election. The Lord Chief Justice summed up. It had been contended by the learned counsel for the defendant, that a voter was prevented by the 36th of the King from exercising his right of election, unless he had paid rates for six months before; but he (the chief justice) must state it to be his opinion, that as the plaintiff had paid for several years, and as during the time in which he was in arrears, he was never called on personally, nor received a written notice, he had a right to vote. Out of this question there arose another, namely-whether the defendant was justifiable in rejecting the vote. He was disposed to think, that the opinion of the learned counsel for the defendant was correct, when he stated that if the high bailiff erred in rejecting the vote, he was not liable to an action, unless some improper motive was proved. He was not to receive every vote offered without inquiry, and if he rejected any on the best of his judgment, it would be hard to punish him

for it. Chief-justice Holt, indeed, was of opinion, that if the vote of a person who had a right, was rejected, the party aggrieved had an action against the returning officer. No person had a greater reverence than he had for the decisions of that learned judge, but he thought that if ever he was wrong in law, it was on this point. The jury were the best judges, whether or not in this case there had been any improper or malicious motive. After a short consultation in the box, the jury retired, and were absent from about halfpast four till six o'clock. A paper was then sent in to the chief justice, the purport of which we understood to be an assurance from the jury that they never should be able to agree on the verdict. His lordship communicated with the counsel for both sides, and after a consultation carried on in whispers, they signified assent to some proposition which his lordship seemed to have made to them. The jury were called, and the chief justice informed them that the counsel had agreed to relieve them from the necessity

giving a verdict, by withdrawing the cause. A juror was accordingly withdrawn, and the court adjourned.

At the London sessions, the court was occupied till 2 o'clock in swearing in constables. It is the duty of the sheriffs to summon the grand jury, and to attend the court during the swearing in of that jury, as ministerial officers of the court.

The Recorder, upon looking round, perceived that the only sheriff in attendance was Alderman Rothwell. At this time there were upon the bench, besides the Recorder, the Lord Mayor, Al

dermen Hunter, Christop. Smith, sir J. Eamer, and Rothwell.

The Recorder.-Where is Mr. Sheriff Parkins? Why is he not in attendance?

An officer replied, that he was in the Guildhall.

The Lord Mayor immediately ordered the City-marshal, Mr. Wontner, to state to Mr. Sheriff Parkins, that the Court desired his attendance immediately.

Mr. Wontner, upon his return, informed the Court, that Mr. Sheriff Parkins, upon being informed of the order of the Court, said, that he was in the hallkeeper's office, in readiness to attend the Lord Mayor to the Court of Hustings, but he had nothing to do with the Court of Sessions.

The Recorder.-Tell the sheriff, that the Court orders his attendance.

Mr. Wontner a second time left the court to wait upon Mr. Sheriff Parkins, and on his return said, "Mr. Sheriff Parkins desires me to say, that if his attendance was required, an official notice should be sent to him to that effect."

The Recorder.-Go to Mr. Sheriff Parkins again, and let him know, that it is not the Lord Mayor, but the Court that requires his attendance, and that if he refuse, it is at his peril.

These messages, which were delivered in a very resolute tone, caused some sensation in the court. During the delay of the worthy sheriff, no business was done. In a very short time the cry of "Make way for the sheriff," was heard.

Mr. Sheriff Parkins walked up smiling to the Lord Mayor, and said, "Did you want to speak to me, my lord?"

The Lord Mayor.-No, sir. The Recorder (in a very authoritative tone).- The Lord Mayor has nothing to communicate to you. You are ordered by the Court to attend.

Mr. Sheriff Parkins (stooping over to the Lord Mayor across the Recorder).-I wish, sir

The Recorder (in a very loud tone)-I shall hear no altercation.

Sheriff Parkins seemed exceedingly displeased at this refusal to hear him. He made an effort to speak, but did not succeed.

The Recorder ordered that the business of the court should proceed.

Sheriff Parkins was still on his legs and looking angrily.

Alderman Hunter. You have been ordered by the Court to attend here, and you had better say nothing.

Sheriff Parkins.-Well, then, I am here.

Alderman Hunter.-Well then, sit down, and hold your tongue.

Three Frenchmen have been apprehended at Dover, on suspicion of having come from France on some bad design; one of them has been a captain in the army of Buonaparte: they are said to belong to a gang of banditti, and came over, it is reported, to rob and set fire to some houses there: they were attended by a person, one of the three, as a spy, who gave information that four others are expected across. There is a good look after them.-Kentish Gazette.

At the monthly meeting of the Literary and Philosophical Society of Newcastle, the poem entitled Don Juan, and attributed to a celebrated noble poet, was,

after much discussion, ordered to be removed from the library, as an immoral publication. As soon as this decision took place, a notice was given of a motion for the next month to restore it to its place in the library.

"The rumour," says The Sun, "that measures are in train to effect a divorce in persons of a very exalted rank, has been recently revived with more than ordinary earnestness, and seems to wear a more probable aspect. As the subject is, to use an expression of Mr. Burke, too high matter' for comment in a public print, and at all events, is not ripe enough for discussion, we shall forbear at present to say any thing more on an occasion of such interest and importance."

·

15. A good deal of discussion has lately taken place at the police offices, in consequence of overseers of parishes, during the inclement weather, disagreeing among themselves as to which ought to render the relief to a particular object; bandying about the poor wretches in consequence, "like battledore and shuttlecock," as a magistrate expressed it. One or two instances of absolute death took place while the miserable objects were kept in the streets, by the disputes of the overseers; coroners inquests, as well as the magistrates, expressed strong indignation at these scandalous inhumanities.

An inquest was held, in the Broadway, Westminster, on the body of Edward Lee, aged twenty, livery servant. The deceased having been refused admission into the Westminster Infirmary, was sent back, and after a long delay expired in

the coach he was conveyed in. The jury, after some hesitation, returned a verdict "that the deceased died a natural death;

Monday ...

Tuesday .....

11 .........

24

Wednesday..

12

Noon.

seer.

A poor man, named W. Stringer, lately perished under the following circumstances: It appeared in evidence before the coroner's inquest, held in Stratford-upon-Avon, that the deceased, in company with several other paupers, was on his way to Birmingham, and was taken ill on the road, near Enstone, in the county of Oxford, where (being unable to proceed further) he was left in charge of the overThe deceased remained there for several days, and was recovering, when the overseer came to him, and insisted upon his resuming his journey, observing he had been expense enough to them already." Deceased objected, and expressed a wish to remain another week, but the overseer was inexorable; and John Russell, the keeper of the lodging-house in which deceased was, said, "He'd be d-d if he should not go, for he would carry him out on his back." Deceased was accordingly, with some difficulty put into the waggon, the overseer observing, "he did not think he would want any provisions from there to Birmingham." A woman, however, of a more humane disposition,

66

gave him a small bottle of gin and a piece of pudding, but he did not use either, being extremely ill all the way to Stratford, where the waggon arrived at seven o'clock the same evening. Nobody took any notice of deceased, and he was left in the waggon, where at 10 o'clock he was found dead. The jury, after a long and patient investigation, found the following verdict" That the deceased was in an improper state to be removed from Enstone; and that by his removal thence, at this inclement season, his death was accelerated; and that the conduct of Wm. Smith, overseer of Enstone, was culpable in ordering such removal." Much praise is due for the interest with which the case of this poor man was taken up. The mayor caused witnesses from a great distance to be procured; and Mr. Bodkin, one of the officers of Clerken. well, went from London express to assist in the investigation.

The Bristol and London mailcoach has been robbed of several parcels containing remittances to a considerable amount, from tradesmen of Bristol to their correspondents in London. It

appears that the thieves (four in number) took their places on Monday morning for Tuesday's mail; and having entire possession of the coach, had ample time for effecting the robbery. Two of the villains left the coach at Kensington, and the other two at Knightsbridge. The coachman was a good deal surprised that all his inside passengers should leave him before they had completed their journey, and, having some suspicions, he called to the guard to see that all was safe within.-The guard examined, and finding the box under the seat locked as usual, the coach proceeded. On its arrival in town the robbery was discovered; the thieves had unlocked the box, broken the seals of the parcels, and having taken out the cash, tied them up again, and relocked the box. The money already ascertained to be stolen is between 300l. and 400l. We understand that when they were starting from Bath, the travellers were accommodated with a candle in the coach, in order to pass away the time agreeably.

18. An extraordinary trial for horse-stealing came on to-day at the Old Bailey. John Robertson, a fashionable looking man, dressed in black, was indicted for stealing a mare, the property of J. Richards, a stable keeper. The prosecutor swore positively to the person of the prisoner, as having hired the mare to go to Stanmore. She was never returned; and at Reading Mr. Richards stated himself to have encountered the prisoner by accident, and to have charged him with the theft. The prosecutor's evidence was here given as follows: "He denied having com

mitted it, said his name was Henley, and that it was a mistake, as he was not in the habit of hiring horses. The landlord also said I must be deceived, as he knew him to be a commercial traveller, who often visited his house. Prisoner then gave me an address of the house for which he said he travelled, as follows:

Mr. Hanley, at Messrs. Potts, vinegar-house, Borough.' In consequence of this, and the landlord's assertion, I did not then proceed further. The next time I saw him was on the 4th of this month, in Quebec-street, Maryle-bone-he was then walking, and I took him into custody, after telling him the cause of my taking that step. He said he was not the person I had seen at Reading, and that his name was John Robertson,' and he lived at Bloomfield Cottage, which was near the Regent's Canal. I have not the least doubt of the identity of the prisoner, and of his being the man who took the mare, and whom I saw at Reading. On the other side a host of witnesses of the first respectability, proved that Mr. Robertson could not be the person who stole the mare. Mr. Augustus Manning, a solicitor, had lately seen a man resembling the prisoner, and supposing the prisoner wore black hair and large whiskers, he believed there never was so great a resemblance. This man had been sent out in the last China fleet by his relations. Witness had been engaged in some professional business respecting it. The prisoner was then called upon for his defence, and a long written paper was handed in. It was read by the clerk of arraigns. Until the present moment he had