■ ~~ .. ~; k - , .•;.• 7 -~~~' 62 ( Parlsement miaowed draw, pale 69. ), demur to be as clear as possible ; lie should not designedly involve his stateint tits in obscurity ; in the first place, he should . advert to the state of the Revenue and Car espi'nditure of the last year; bet the paper from whieli he sli old state his figures bat atreedy been submitted to the House. The Revenue was 64 millioue odd, the expenditure 49,400,0d01.; leaving a !stir plus of 4,900,0001. For the nest year he ealeu :tied on 3 Re venue of 67,000,0001. ; the expenditure 49,000,0004—the Revenue would be increased by pay from the Commissioners of lialf pay. Hailing detailed theiteine of eapenditure, amounting to 49 minims, be ststedtlist 33 millions arose from permanent eliarges for the debt, cud millions odd for the current ex peneee. Ile calculated on a surplus of 7 millions, which it was desirable should be maintained ; 5 millions towards paying off the debt, sad upwards of millions for relief from mare.— (Hear.)—The taitea to be relieved were 'milieus oldie Assessed Taxes.—(Hear, beer.)-11e thonght he should show that the language of the King's speech was justified. The House would be aware that the reduetion of expenditure ought to precede that of income. Last year relief bad been afford.al by convert lug the fives into fours, the reduction of the malt tears ; but reduction of macs was hardly contemporaneous with the se duction of expenditure ; the saving of expence could not be iminediaiely effected. So that the revenue snotained a loss by such operetions to the amount of 1,73140001. But for sorb •itect /here would have been a surplus of above 9,000,0031., be, however, did not reAlet the reduction of taxes ; nn the contrary, he thought such reduction ought to be carried fur ther.—(Hear.)--As to the produce of the present year, lie cal valated that the Reverter would amount, outwit . standing the reduction, to u much as that of lest year Customs 10,500,0001. deducting the teenage duty. That bad been repealed. The Eseisalast year was 27.203,0001. The reduction of last year would affect this branch—but still he calculated with the full operation of the reductions, he expected 26.000,0001.; Stamps 6,000,0001. • Post-horse L 400,0004, Assessed Taxes rad Land Tax last year were 7,2179671. The Hearth Tex had been reduced. The Land Tat he ealoalated at 1,200,0001. Ito took the probable receipt of the Revenue for this year at 62,000,0004 deducting what would be obtained from the Peti oles Commissioners. The receipts of last year were great,. sad he believed those of the current year would be equal ; for oar Maio, relieved from the antiquated trammels, would be still Mere benefitted. Ealended markets were opening to us is all .parts of the world, and they were gradual' and secure. Other ports of the world oould not be benefitted without im profit% oar noodition. "A. wide and uoboonded prospect . ' opened upon the country, and he thought that " shads-Iwo, clouds, and Witness," no where rested uprin it. He felt fully assured of the prospect respecting the prodbee of the Revenue ; and that imeresse Ives .proof of the additional comfort of the peoples in g I. On all the essential articles, beer, bricks, •tobasteo..Hritish spirits, tea, &c. there was an increase, as • compared with the average of the preceding three years. That Shot also warranted him in thinking there would he no reduc-. tiocs. There were agitations and ,editions before, but now there war order. They beheld tranquillity, peace, and internal comfort, and they proved All improved condition in the people. The Saving Banks were further proof of it ; those might put money ie them who ought not ; hut the majnrity of the depts. %Hors consisted of the humbler cl re spect to the expence of collecting the Revenue be ealculated on considerable reduction.-e(Hear, bear.) --Many bad already taken place. In 11121 they were loos than preceding years, affording proof of the exertions of ministers, The collection of the Customs had been 1,300,0001.; they had beets reduced to one million. The redactions might be extended to Ireland with great effect and advantage ;—(heari—and he appealed to the reports of the Irish Commission. The Government had not bees backward to carry into effect the recommendations ; and there would be a reelection of patronage as well as of expence. He Mien detailed the items of the present year's expenditure, aruountieg to 49,71)0,0001. and Ise thought the Government bad .effected all the reductions that were possible. But ell Administrations were charged with extravagance and prolli. Ivey ; yet all .charges ought not to be considered as well founded. Notwithstanding the increase oldie Navy, there was in the Army, Navy, and Ordnance, a diminution of 470,0001. Tile tight hon. gentleman then described the mode in which re lief from taxes, to the extent of two millions, was to be effected. The reductions would be in the Assessed Taxes. It was pro- • posed to take off 50 per cent, or one-half of the Window Tax ; and to take off entirely the assessed taxes oc servants and ore • essiocal gardeners, small horses, &c. Suet. reductions, it was calculated, would afford considerable relief to agriculture. 'fbe Howse Tax was to remain. He also stated, dint the as sessed taxes in Ireland, which produced a very man ponies • of revenue, were to be reduced ; and it was in contemplation to afford some relief to the distilleries in Ireland. Mr. MABERLY said, that instead of giving relief to the extent of two minions, relief to the amount of five millions might be afforded, and that would be accomplished by doing away with the Sinking Fund, towards which the surplus of five mil lions had been set apart. He embodied these opiuious in a long Resolutiim. Mr. BARING did not agree with the proposition to do away with the Sinking Fund. Its principle was good. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that at no distant day lie should have to ',mouse a plan fur simplyliing the Sinking Fund.--{}fear.) Mr. 31,1 BERLY's Resolution was not pressed, so that the original pro forma Reaulutiou ass agreed to.—Report oo hlonday. The remaining Orders having been disposed of, the Home adjourued at Eleven o'clock to Monday. • . 7 1 . T . V . I Z 1110.11 TUESDAY NIGHT'S GAZETTE. BANKRUPTS. W. Armstrong. Great Queen Street, Lincoln's Inn Fields, auctioneer. Solicitor, Mr. Brooking, Lombard St.cet. G. Capes, Burton upon Humber, draper. Sol. Mr. Hicks, Gray's Inn Square. W. Barrett, Cardiff, innholder. Sol. Mr. Peacock, Lincoln's Inn Fields. 11. 11. Ilugher, Shottisham, Suffolk, apothecary. Sol. Mr. nosh. Crown Court, Threatlneetllc Street. .1. Ward, Lowestoft, twine spinner. Sol. Mr. Van licythuszn, John Street. lledfurd Bow. ./. Earl. jun. and T. Lee. jun. Birmingham, merchants. Soli. Messrs. Norton and Co. Gray's Inn Square. T. Inee, Yedingham, Yorkshire, horse dealer. Sol. Mr. Hicks. Gr iv's Inn square. A. Thomson. Liverpool. merchant. Sol. Mr. Bawling" Liverpool. W..Fortl. Walworth Road. linos Araper. Sol. Mr. Downes, W am ival's I nu. DIVIDENDS. Feb. eft. F. Birminahamrfhaeles Sues,. City Rwad, common brewer—March 14. J. Tenant. Liverpool, meechant—t2. T. and J. Perry. Reading. ironfoundere—ig, W. Rae.. Bristol. snip uwaer—l4. M. Rebuts, MiadlfireWr 4 greCer--14, W. Car. Lan. Bristol, amt.= • • / LAW INTELLIGENCE. w rompirr. was. 10. BREACH OF PROMISE OP MARRIAGE. 4.klele e. lIICADoWCROFT. This was as action brought by the plaintif f , who is the pro chain simi.of • Miss flatboats Hale, • minor, to receive cool ,pensation is damages from the defendant, on attorney in Gray's Inn.square, for the oonperforinaisce of a prowiee of marriage, which, as was alleged, he made its August, 1820, to Miss Hale. Searleit and Mr. Charles Phillips conducted tbe caselor the plaintiff; and Mr. Cooper and Mr, Broderick for the de fendant. Mr. Searlett having slated the wise for the plaintiff, which he was instructed he could prove, called Sarah Harrison, examined by Mr. Phillips.—l 'know the plaintiff and defendant; I first knew the plaintiff in August, 1820, and 1 went to live with her as servant in September, 1820 ; Ito August die plaintiff lived in Cook's. row, St. Pancras, hat in September idle used in Camden-street, Somers Town ; she then reinor,3l to the rale of health at Hampstead, where the defeodaid t ok a cottage for her, and in the year 1820 fre quently came to see her ; she was very young, not seventeen years of age until homey. 1821 ; the defeurlant sometimes came to see her at Somers Town three times a day, arid if he were absent • day or two, ke was -sure to write ; his sister Mary Anne was then at school at Hampatead ; after the first work or two that she was at Jolampstead, the defendant did not come so fiemiently as before. Oise day as I was taking omit coals into the parlour, I heard her pressing him to perform his promise to marry her, and he said," shall be my wife ; you are my dear little wife:;" and he looked at me, and said, "At least, it shall be so soon. " I looked at him, arid thought be would not mercy her ; I thought hint • rogue. because I thought be bad seduced her, and brought her to that place. On one occasion the defendant told the plaintiff that his sister was walking on Hampstead-heath ; and the plaintiff said. "Oh, dear William, why don't you introduce Mary Anne to me, end let'her stop here ?" But he said, " I most lest take my dear little Hannah to Hatopstesd Church." The plaintiff Zile■ removed to Clarendon square. In March, 1821., I saw the plaintiff sitting 51mo the defendant's knee, sod she was urging hint to perform Isis promise. end be said, " By God. you shall be my wife ; bat, my dear little Haunch, you most have patience, I can do nothing yet awhile '•" sod Joe said something about his onole. When the plaintiff sod d retuned to Hsanpstesd from London one day, we found the defendant there, 'sad we saw the letter-box open upon the table, and we also saw the li der-box, and • candle on the table, and a -quantity of burnt paper in the grate ; and the plaintiff said, " Oh, dem. William, whet have you done with my letters ?" lie gave her one from her sister, and some tradesmen.' hills, and said, " I have burnt these foolish letters, but I shall write you more ;" I have read a gcrid many of the letters which were burnt, hat I remember particniarly the contents of two of them, which were dated the 10th August, 1820, and the 2nd September, 18:0. In the first, he said he would perform his promise of marriage between the 10th and 13th of that month, as Le was satisfied that he was her seducer ; and in the other letter, that he was obliged to go into the country for a few days, but that he would marry her in the course of • fortniAbt. The plaintiff appealed exceedingly attached to the defendant, who told me to accompany her whenever she went oat, and I did so. Ile always visited her in Clarendon-square, until she went to her sister, who keeps a school at Blackheath. She remained at Ler sitter's for some time, and then she came to town, and took lodgings neer him, at 7, Staple lan. buildings, Holborn, where he visited tier four or five times. I remember the plaintiff going afterwards to ale attorney, Mr. Pearson, and hoeing her letters with him. Cress-eaemieed by Mr, Cooper. —When the defendant said, My dear little Hannah, you shall be ray wife." I can't say that he was iiitoxicated ; I w ou't sweat that he was sober. This took place after dinner, I have been sent out for wine by the defendant. I used to read the plaintiff's letters. George Edmund Shad well proved the letters produced were ile the band-writing of the defendant. After the death of the defendant's .trackt, he told witness that his uncle died worth 60,0001. and that his pert of it, wbeu his uncle's affairs should be settled, would alumna to 8 or 10,0001. Robert Reeves preyed other letters, which were produced, were in the hand-writing of the defendant, Ten or twelve letters were Bien pat in sad read. 1a these letters the defendant professed the greatest friend ship for the plaintiff, told her " to keep up her spirits until the wiled blew over; that be would, Vibe weal to school to her ' sister, expend 1001. a year on her improvement." But in none of the letters was there a distinct promise of marriage. Twoor three other letters were read. 15 ooe, the defea dant complained of the plaintiff • loitering ablest the streets ; and is another he said, if the plaintiff did not give a fair ex planation about the letter signed " B." and wished to separate front the defendant. he would nut throw any obstacle in the way. Mr. Cooper addressed the Jury for the defendant, and con tended at ronaiderable length, that it could not be inferred from any of the letters that the defendant ever promised mar riage to the plaintiff. The Learned Counsel also contended, that Harrison was undeserving of credit, sod that if the de fLndaut had in his letters of August and September, 1820, pro mised the plaintill• marriage, it was not at all likely, after hrviug destroyed this letter, that ho should (especially when be professed so flinch regard for the plaintiff) not say a word of marriage in the fourteen letters produced. Ilis Lordship summed tip, awl the Jury having retired • for about a quarter of an hour, found a verdict fur the pLaiatig— Damages, 5001. TIIURsDAY, ►EB, 10. ANONYMOUS SLANDCII.-SIR DAVID OtiILBY V. CH ANNON• This action was brought by Sir 11. Ogilby, an oilier in his Majesty's service, and Lady Elizabeth his wife, against John Channon, and Eliza his wife, to recover damages for ►lander. The declaration charged the wife of the defeadant with tieing the writer of four anonymous letters, to as many persons, with intention to injure the honour mid reputation of Lady Ogilby. —The letters were all without dates, except the date of the Post mark. The first was addressed to Baroness Nolekeos. The second, to Lady Paboo; the third to Lady Desunges; the fourth to Jam Lewis llesaoges. The letters, with some slight variation, cautioned the parties to beware of the woman Lady Ogilby. who .e ished to cute into society, after loosing in the back ground many years from a good cause, having been known to be use companion of disgusting characters; her ob ject was to take away people's characters, married or ►ingle. The writer expressed fear that she had done so with two or three respectable families. Her intriguing sister went with tier. Sir David Ogilby was described as generally melding disgraceful tales of people, who would not notice bin. it was a shame such people shoul& go into respectable eessiety.—The letters were all signed ♦ Friend le Morality." Mr. lioarlitt Ilveribsit the rutin bra perermee of Whims sad fortune, nod imputed the writing of the above slander to • wealiciees feeling on the part of Mrs. Cimino's, in congealment/ of a refusal, on the part of Lady Ogilby,. to introduce her*t the drawing+ooa+•in April, lt^22. he letters were la ritteu i• a feigned hand, but certain peculiarities in the composition would leave the Jury no toom to doubt Mrs. Cloannou ass* the writer. A great number of witnesses were examined in support of the plaintiff 'a case. Some who hail seen Mrs. C.'s writiog de clared the letters to be her hand disguised. Sir F. Deranges and Baron Nolekens were, however, of opinion it was not her writing. The Solicitor-General addressed the Joey for the defendant, end vaned Sir Hobert Steele, Lady Steele, Lady Lille, Sir F. Shuckhorough, Lady Chailutte Denys, Miss Denys, and others, who expressed their strongest conviction that it was not the hand verities( of Mrs. Chenuon. The Lord Chief Justice, in his charge to the Jury, said, this case proved bow much it would he to the advantage of themselves and others, if. .parties eiving anortyruoce letters would put them in the fire the moment they came to heed.— In most instances anonymous writers might furnish some truth, but in general the greater part of their information was false. His lordship left them to say whether they believed Mrs. C. wrote the letters. If they did not believe her to he the 'inter, they most find for the defendant. If, on the contrary, they should he of opinion she had circulated the slander, they ought to give damages suitable to the injury the plaintiff had sustained. The Jury found a verdict for the defendant. FRIDAY, EEO. 21. MIIK KING V. ALLEN. This was an information filed ex officio by the Attorney-Ge neral, against the defendant, a widerman, for so assault on a oustonr house officer named Oiled!. It appeared from the statements of the witnesses for the pro seeution, tbat'ColseN was in the service of the customs, as a preferable waterless's. On the Sib of September last, the Lord Melville steam packet arrived off the Tower stairs, in the river Thames, from Calais. Colsell, having gone on board with other dicers, was stationed to prevent pawners from leaving the vessel, except by the gangway, so order that an opportunity might be afforded of ascertaining that ► h ey did not convey suagglad goods ashore. The defendant with other eat/rates. came is his boat alongside the v I, in-order to bring yiassea gers oa shore, and came on the deck near the bow. Cohen put his hued on Allen's shoulder, and told him he bad orders to &Howie* person to go oat except by the gangway. What," said Allen, are you going to stop me, when you are nothing but a b--y extra man t and put his Est towards the face of the officer. Colic!l then went to fetch assistance, and Allen seised the opportunity to get on board bis boat with three pas sengers, whom be had agreed to take ashore. Colsell fol lowed, ■nd observed there was no name painted on the boat, sad accordingly seized it, node, ST Geo. 111. cap. 22, sec. 2. and marked it with the broad arrow. Allen attempted to push Colsell held by the steam-boat to prevent bum ; hut Allen succeeded in striking out, and Colsell, if be had uot been saved by another boat, would have fallen into the river. The defendant denied that be assaulted the olhirer ; alleged that be did not conceive the boat liable to seizure, because there was a by law of the Watermeo's Company, allowing eight days for the painting of the name, which had not elaps , d since this boat was completed ; that the boat was not his own, and therefore be had no interest in preventing the seizure ; that he merely begged to be allowed to take his passengers on *here, and afterwards actually brought back the bunt to the Castoes house oil oers. The Lord Chief Justice suggested, that if the defendant proved that to restored the boat, their ought scarcely to be any farther proceedings against him. The Solicitor-General said undoubtedly he would pray no judgment. The Jury then found the defendent guilty. He was inform ed that no judgment would be prayed against list, but be must not rely on the rules of the Watermen's Company, which were contrary to the words of an act of Parliament. The deiced. ant bowed. and left the court. AIDS HARRIET WILSON, S. SIR HENRY WRIGHT WILSON, ENT. This was an action by Miss Harriet Wilson against Sir H. W. Wilson, to recover the arrears of an annuity of 2001. which be bad agreed to pay her is consideration of ber quitting the satiation of governeas, which she held in Lady Sandwich's fa.ily. The Lord Chief Justice suggested the propriety clf • re. ferrite', but the proposal was not accepted. Mr. Gamey rose to state the case of the pkiatiff, wham Ist was singularly bard. She was a young lady of excellent talents, which had been matured by education, who had been engaged as governess in the families of Mr. Miley Addington and of Lady Sandwich, where she bad acquired the admiration and the regard of all who knew her. The defendant sought her out, and ascertaining that she was nearly related to him, expressed his desire to remove her from a situation which he deemed dero gatory to himself, and olfered to pay her 501. per quarter if she would leave it. She complied with liis wishes, but he bad since refused to fulfil hie promises, and had thus deprived her of the means of honourable subsistence, sod rendered her des titution more afflicting by the hopes which he had led her to che • fish. The Countess of Saodwich stated, that Miss Wilson had bees governess in her family, and bore the most honourable testi mony to her talents and virtues. She parted from her with great reluctance, at the earnest request of Sir H. Wilson, and because she conceived the change would be for her benefit She continued to receive the visits of Musa 'Wilson op to the present time. Mr. Riley Addington said, that the plaintiff had conducted herself in all exemplary manner, and h,.d manifested great te lent as a governess i■ his Cattily, and bad, in return, been treated with great respect and affection. A number of letters horn Sir Henry Wilson to Miss Wilson were then put in and read. The earlier letters were lull of expressions of affectionate regard, and contained allusions to the promise of 21001. a year. There were also letters to Lady Sandwich and Mr. Riley Addington, speaking of the plaintiff' in high terms, and containing similar allusions. Mr. Scarlett submitted, that the promise, eves if established, was riedesepatiosi, as it was the mere voluntary act of the de fendant's bounty. Mr. Gurney contended. diet the letters sufficiently mani fested that the plaintiff had been induced by this promise to resign a situation more truly valuable than the defendant's protection, and that this formed a sufficient coasidetatima for the promise. The Lord Chief Justice ruled that the letters could only be taken as evidence of a parole enntrset for su annuity, which was void under the statute of frauds. The plaintiff mast, therefore, be nonsuited. The plaintiff was accordingly oonsuited. Lord Ellenborough, Lady Sandwich, and Lady Harriet Wee tape, sat no the beach ►eside the Loed Chief Justice &grin the trial.