Some of the jury appeared anxious to argue the point with his lordship, but he cut them short by saying that it did not become the diguity of the bench to be reasoned with in such a manner. If the jury had any difficult point in which his assistance was necessary, he should consider himself bound to give it. He had already made them acquainted with the law of the case. The facts were entirely for their consideration, and it was their duty to pronounce such a verdict as their consciences should direct.

The jury, after deliberating for a few minutes, returned a verdict of guilty upon the second count generally; but again strongly recommended him to mercy, not only upon the ground of the security before alluded to, but also upon that of his having a wife and large family dependent upon him. There were three other indietnents against the prisoner, but the prosecutors now declined to proceed on them.

Hunton being asked by the recorder, in the usual form, if he had any thing to say why sentence of death should not be pronounced, delivered in reply, the following address.

"I have but little to add to what I have already said in this court, except that, in all my transactions with my prosecutors, the idea of fraud or of injury to them never once entered into my mind; on the contrary, they know that I have endeavoured successfully to promote their interests, though at the expense of my own; and though I am convicted of having violated the law, yet, having given ample security to my prosecutors for the performance of my engagements with them, I hope I may be

permitted to express that I am not conscious of any moral or wilful guilt with respect to them. I have lived more than half a century with a character hitherto of unimpeached integrity, of which ample testimonials can be produced. I have endeavoured conscientiously to discharge the duties which I owe to society, and have maintained and educated a numerous family, still under my care, with credit and reputation. I have now attained that period of life when I might have reasonably expected to have received some reward for my exertions; but a series of misfortunes and of losses, to an amount exceeding the usual lot of man, have entirely destroyed those expectations; and having given up all my property to satisfy the claims of my creditors, until those claims are adjusted I am entirely destitute, and have hardly any property left which I can now call my own. If these circumstances are any alleviation for my having violated the law, or if they form a plea for the mitigation of punishment, may I earnestly entreat, for the sake of a most worthy and truly deserving wife-for the sake of ten most affectionate, most dutiful children, most of whom are in the early stages of life;-all of them innocent participators in and sufferers by my misfortunes, but whose heads will be lowered down to the very dust, if, in this period of adversity with all their prospects of happiness destroyed, the extreme punishment of the law is inflicted on me, and the life of the husband and father, now almost their only consolation, be taken away. For the sake of these, may I most earnestly entreat, that, when the sentence now to be pronounced is laid before the king

and council, these alleviating circumstances may be mentioned, -that the peculiarly defenceless situation in which I have been brought to trial, and especially that the very kind and very humane recommendations of both the juries by whom I have been tried, may also be communicated; and that I may be recommended as a suitable object of the royal clemency, -that I may be permitted to live the few remaining years which may be allotted me, until it may please Divine Goodness, in his infinite mercy, to call me from this state of probation in the regular course of nature; and that a life, which, though passed in a humble sphere, has, I trust, been of some use to society, may not be cut off by the most appalling of all deaths -by the hands of the executioner." Sentence of death was then passed on him, and on the following criminals who had been capitally convicted at the same sessions, viz. two, for cutting and maiming with intent to murder; three, for stealing in dwelling houses to the amount of above, £5; five, for robbery; one, for uttering a forged order, and one, for uttering a forged receipt, for money; seven, for house-breaking and larceny; four, for burglary; and one, for being at large before the period of his sentence of transportation had expired-being in all twenty-five.

5. COMBINATION. At a meeting of magistrates held at Dobcross, Lancashire, Amos Platt appeared to answer to a complaint against him for neglecting and deserting his work. His employer, Mr. J. D. Whitehead, of Oak View, stated, that he engaged the defendant, on Monday last, to work for him; that he left his employment the same day, and, on being

remonstrated with, refused to return. Platt, in his defence, acknowledged that he had left his work, but stated that he had done so in consequence of some persons threatening to take away his life if he continued in that situation, which belonged to a person who was in the "Union," and had a large family to maintain.

Being questioned who the persons were who had menaced him, he professed entire ignorance of them, and was very reluctant to make any communication on the subject. The magistrates having asked Mr. Whitehead, if it was his wish that Platt should return to his employment, or be committed for neglect, Mr. Whitehead said, he should prefer the former, and would, to the utmost of his power, protect the defendant from any violence; but if he refused, he must press for a commitment, as it was high time that some check should be put to the proceedings of the Union. A boy in his employment had been assaulted, and nearly killed by a number of men, because his father had not joined the Union. Platt was then ordered by the magistrates to return to his work, otherwise he would be committed to prison for a month, which, after considerable hesitation, he at length consented to.

After this case had been disposed of, the overseer of Saddleworth appeared upon a summons which had been taken out against him by a person who stated that he was out of employment, had a large family to maintain, and, on making application for relief, had been refused. The overseer, in reply, said, that the complainant belonged to the Union, and might have employment, if he chose to relinquish that association. This being the case, he did not

consider himself authorized to grant any relief. A law agent appeared on behalf of the complainant, and contended, that the overseer was bound either to grant relief or find the man employment; but acknowledged, on the question put from the bench, that the Union had employed him to appear for the complainant. The magistrates expressed themselves in very strong terms of disapprobation of the conduct of the Union, which amounted to a conspiracy; and said, that, in their capacity of magistrates, they should oppose every thing which emanated from such societies. They then signified to the overseer their approbation of his conduct, and refused to grant an order. This combination arose from a few of the master manufacturers, taking advantage of a temporary stagnation of trade, having begun to pay their work-people in kind instead of currency; in consequence of which the latter formed themselves into a union, and raised a fund for the purpose of prosecuting those masters who were guilty of such illegal proceedings. So far the thing was good, and was encouraged by a number of the respectable manufacturers and other inhabitants. But this state of things did not long continue. A number of designing persons from a neighbouring township came amongst them, and represented how formidable they might render themselves to their employers, if they became masters of a considerable fund. In consequence of this mischievous advice, they formed themselves into a union, for the purpose, as they expressed it, of equalizing wages-began to hold lodges, or secret meetings, in different parts of the township-and bound themselves by a secret oath

to abide by the rules of the society, and not leave it on any account whatever. These proceedings were carried on for some time unknown to the manufacturers; but, the fund having increased to upwards of 1,000l., the united workmen began to exult in the success of their plan, and no longer made a secret of their intentions. Their employers, alarmed at the attitude which the combination had assumed, immediately formed a union amongst themselves to counteract its effects, and came to a resolution not to employ any men who continued in the Union. The natural consequence of this was, that the men, sooner than renounce the Union, left their employment, and nearly the whole manufactures of the place were stopped.

10. LORD MAYOR'S DAY.-The pageants and hospitality of this annual festival were distinguished, this year, more than ordinary by pomp and abundance. The procession started from Guildhall about ten minutes past eleven, and it occupied three-quarters of an hour in passing the Royal Exchange. The whole of the parties engaged in the procession had not embarked till half-past twelve. The procession did not reach Westminster, where the usual ceremonies were performed, before two o'clock; nor was it able to return to Guildhall until near five o'clock.

The aquatic and cavalcade arrangements were provided with more than usual show and expense. At the dinner, in Guildhall, every part of the hall and adjoining courts and offices was appropriated for the reception of company, and, at seven o'clock, from seven hundred to eight hundred persons sat down to a sumptuous repast.

At the principal table sat the

lord mayor, the late lord mayor, the duke of Wellington, the lord Chancellor, the earl of Aberdeen, lord Ellenborough, the lord Chief Justice of the court of King's Bench, Mr. Justice Bayley, Mr. Justice Gaselee, Mr. Baron Garrow, Mr. Baron Vaughan, Mr. Peel, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Speaker of the House of Commons, lord Mountcharles, lord Lowther, Mr. Herries, Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald, sir George Murray, Mr. Arbuthnot, and several other members of his Majesty's government. At the other tables was a full attendance of the civic authorities and their friends. The bill of fare on this occasion was the following: two hundred tureens of turtle, sixty dishes of fowls, thirty-five roasted capons, thirty-five roasted pullets, thirty pigeon pies, ten sirloins of beef, fifty hams (ornamented), forty tongues, two barons of beef, ten rounds of beef, fifty raised French pies, sixty dishes mince-pies, forty marrow-puddings, twentyfive tourtes of preserves, twentyfive apple and damson tarts, ninety marbree jellies, fifty blanc-manges, ten chantilly baskets, four fruitbaskets, thirty-six dishes shell-fish, four ditto prawns, four lobster salads, sixty dishes of vegetables, sixty salads. Remove-fifty roasted turkeys, thirty leverets, fifty pheasants, two dishes pea-fowl, twenty-four geese, thirty dishes of partridges. Dessert-two hundred pounds of pine-apples, one hundred dishes of hot-house grapes, two hundred ice-creams, sixty dishes of apples, sixty dishes of pears, fifty savoy cakes (ornament ed), thirty dishes walnuts, seventyfive ditto dried fruit and preserves, fifty-five ditto rout cakes, twenty ditto filberts, twenty ditto pre

served ginger, four ditto brandycherries.

WAGERS.-King's Bench, Nov. · 10.-Huson v. Horsman.This action had been brought to recover a wager-deposited on a trottingmatch, and was tried before Mr. Justice Bayley, at the last York assizes. A motion was now made, on the part of the plaintiff, for a rule nisi, to set aside the verdict obtained by the defendant, and for a new trial.

Lord Tenterden, without entering into the merits, said he wished the learned Judge at the assizes had refused to try the cause.

Mr. Justice Bayley was glad to hear that observation from his lordship. He had in the outset expressed his disinclination to try the cause, and had ordered it to stand at the bottom of the cause list; and he should not have tried it, if the other causes had occupied

the whole of his time.

Lord Tenterden said, he had long been of opinion that the time. of courts of justice ought not to be occupied with such actions as these. -Rule refused.

LIBEL. Soames v. King,This was an action of libel brought by the plaintiff to recover compensation for an injury he had sustained in consequence of the publication of two letters written by the defendant, and which, it was alleged, were false and malicious, and had been the direct means of preventing the plaintiff from being elected an elder brother of the Trinityhouse. The case had been tried before the lord chief justice, dur ing the sittings after last Trinity term, when it appeared that the plaintiff and the defendant were both sail-makers, carrying on business in Ratcliffe-highway, and that the former, in consequence of the

death of one of the elder brothers of the Trinity-house, had become a candidate to fill the vacancy occasioned in the establishment by that circumstance; but that, contrary to his expectations, he was unsuccessful at his election, and was rejected. Upon inquiry he found, to his no slight astonishment, that the defendant had circulated among the electors a number of miserable verses contained in the two letters complained of, in which his character and reputation were attacked in a violent and scandalous manner. The handwriting of the defendant and his publication of the letters had been distinctly proved at the trial. To prove his malicious intentions,, a person of the name of Ashton stated, that, several months after the alleged libel had been published, he met the defendant at Lloyd's coffee-house, when, in the course of conversation, he said, "the Soames's are perjured scoundrels, infamous blackguards, and I will thrash them within an inch of their lives." The defendant denied that the libel had been written or published by him, and called witnesses to prove that the handwriting was not his; but, as their evidence was not satisfactory to the jury, they returned a verdict for the plaintiff, damages, 4001.

written. It would have been different, he contended, if the conversation proved by the witness had taken place before the publication. Upon the second ground, he insisted that very little, if any, injury had been sustained by the plaintiff, as he had since been elected an elder brother of the Trinity-house, and had consequently, fully established the uprightness of his character, and that therefore the amount of the verdict was far beyond the extent of the injury sustained.

The Court, however, was clearly of opinion, that the evidence of Ashton was admissible to prove the quo animo, although it was perhaps unnecessary, as it appeared that the conduct of the defendant had been most malicious and wicked, so much so, that the court would not have considered the verdict too much even if it had been for a much greater amount.-Rule refused.

11. FOG IN LONDON.-On the night of Tuesday the 11th many accidents were occasioned, and some of them nearly fatal, by the prevalence of a very dense fog. In the City-road the wheels of a van came in contact with a post, the driver being quite unable to distinguish the road, and pitched a man who was sitting in the vehicle, on his head, and seriously injured him. The horses took fright, and ran as far as the Angel, at Islington, where a female had a very narrow escape. She was sitting on the luggage of a gentleman just arrived from the country, and the wheel of the van crushed one of the boxes, and grazed the female's leg. A watchman directed his lantern, which had a reflector, to the horses' heads, and they turned away, otherwise the female must have