no such offer. The Attoruey•Getteral stated, that in 1818, an eleettoo took place, sit Barnstaple. The candidates were Sir M. Lopes and Sir 11. Thompson. On the latter being throaty out, he petitioned the lionise of Colllllllllli, eomplaininz that Sir M. Lop , z had been returned by beltway. The petition was refs.. ed ai a select committee, which ex. nmined witnes.ts. The defendant on that IN7CdSIOII made his deposition, laci n g the comersation he had with Gribble.— A bill was afterwards biutight into the Coin 1111 lns to depr,vr the Borough of Barnstaple of their elective franchise, and give it to the tieii.libouring Hundreds. The bill %scut up to the Lords, where evidence wa. also heard at the Bar in sup port of the allegations of bribery. The (10 . 1 . 111h111t, 011 that occasion made a second deposititm, in which he dmiied ss hat he had bworai in the Com 0000000 s. The House of Lords, in consequence of the perjury, not only of the defendant, but others, directed the Attorney General to proserut.. In consequence of that direct' he defendant was this day to answer fur hi, misconduct. Mr. W ham, clerk of the journals in the 1-111113 e of Com• mans, proved the presentatiMl Or a petition un the part of Sir H. Thuinpson, complitinin4 of the return of Sir M. Lopez, al.o the examination of witnesses. The shint band notes of Mr. Gurney and his 'militant were rend to prove the ansu ers given by the defendant in the Coininote, and at the lair of tile (rouse ur Lords. Mr. Adolphus then addressed the Jury fur the defendant. Ilri complained of a defect in the counts of the indictment, mid contend. d that it was difficult far a Jury to hod the defendant guilt y.—Tlie perjury arose ont of the election lit the Borough of Barnstaple; and it was rather extraordiaary, that the Attorney-Genet al, Lords and Common-, should combine to puuieh a poor brick-maker. More had bcru pressed into the information titan the prosecut would warrant. The asset 110115 of the defendant were these:— He was a freeman of the Borough of Barostaple, I lie voted for Sir NI. Lopez and Sir ii. Thompson. As well as he could recollect lie tact Juhn Gribble, the agent to Sir M. Lopez, in Wm khirtpe •Inne, w ho ii,kt:4l the deft (Mont ahi t her Ina had made up Ili. mind. The defendant told him lie had not, but lie, w ',lied to do so if lie could have satis.action.— He meant compensation for lom of time. Gribble told him he could give him nothing before the election, but would give it after. Kuril then gave his vote for Sii M. Lopez, find he was induced to vote for Sir M. Lopez, by promise of satisfaction. At a substquelit examination in the llouse of Lords, lie said, is hen Graphic ►poke to him iu Kof khouse lane, nu sutisincti nn was given. This sari Aims, the learned comm.! comended, was not sufficient to become the foun dation of a charge of wilful and concept perjury. The first deposition might he incorrect, but the defendant had three months after endeavoured to ~,,, end his ►tatement. It wits impossible for the Jury• to say, without evidence, whether the perjury nas iii the House of Lord, ur the House of COMIIIIIIIV. The Attorm•y General us' heard iu reply, and the Jury found a verdict of Guilt). Till ZING V. EDWARD!. The defendant, ;mother of the Barnstaple ♦oters, was tried upon an information exhibited by he Attorney General, charging the defendant with wilful and corrupt perjiery, in giving his evidence before the House of Lords, lunching the Lribery in the Borough of liar obtaple dui mg the last elec tion. The defendant, before the lline.e of Commons, staled, that an agent named 'A ilk inborn, offered to give him a 11. note to vote for Sir Nl. Lopez. At his examination berme the Lord., lie du tied that any such utter had been made by W ilk instill. Mr. Adolphus addressed the Jury for the defendant, and contended, that there was no proof whether Ilse defend.od had !worn falsely Is fuse the !fume of Lord, ur the llotwe of Commons. The Jury found the defendant Guilty. /LI2IG V. HARRIS. This we:: a similar prosecution. The defendant was charged with bweitilug certain mai tt.rs before the House of L i nda hich %ere false, lit bwory iu the House of eeeee hos, that \V dkingull tfleled lu n money to vote, a',d I..efore the House of Lords he ►wore no money was offered.—The Ju'y fouud the defendant—Guilty. Id AKIIIIR V. FROVD. The pleadings in this case were opened by Mr. Chitty.— It was an /ICI/ bbbb for a malicious prosecution. Mr. Gurney, a lio stmed the ease, said Mr. Harmer had broti,ht this action for the purpose of obtaining a reparation 10 for a serious This action impaled to the defendant, that lie had maliciously and %idiom cause pre ferred an iiiiiictinent, charging the plaintiff with ouvieg committed the crime of cupospithey, in conjunci ion a ill. person named Lee, fur the purpose of obtariliog money under false pretences trims a foreign Nobleman.— r. Harmer laid been an aionney of that Court not less than kl) years, and a ishing to stnud well before the dodges as well a, the pro fession, had brought that action in order to repel the imp*• ration east tor his character. It was with pain lie had to state his case, because he was obliged to autroduee the name of a pc 'soil ot dtstinuiou , not ut 'Hestia in this comitry, who a as concerned is the transaction which gave rise to the action. In ISIS a young seo inn mimed Rnbi Is, wills her father applied to Mr. Harmer, in his professional character, staling it lamentable ease. It was lepresented to him that %Mist the young a an was hum r :noire her II edit d, means wire used for her seduction by the domestic of a foreign nubleman. Overtures were made to her from lime to time, in the Hanle n foreign net chant, wliu, it Otis mill, would provide fur her with the greatest liberality. His name was mentionsd as Mr. Pickard, and in tire end hi, clitoris were successful. This young was induced to live with him in lirilgings, lime she passed for the nor of Mr. Pickard, who aas no other Ilion the timilemars.— They lived together some time, alien she became peeuant. it 14119 t h en said he w a s desirous of getting ral of bee. She was for advanced iu pregnancy, and rt•doceil to a slate or destitution. The passiou of her 'seducer had abated, and she nos *11011) al/hOOl 1011111/01s. when she mole a charge of his using mtans sat ;,e1 lid ut Is r. Mr. Harms r had ire set before seen her to tier father, oral he was 1101 /1:11/Sed to like sudden and hasty proceedings, but he thought slime. thiog ought to he dune to obtain fur her the means of sop. purl. and prevent her from I tubing to a state of piostitllllllll. —lie knew a gentlemau acquainted wills the nobleman, and he asked hint to see if any thing could he dune to pre. vent espomre. Mr. OidilsaMtb, the gemlemun applied to, stars quite sore the nobleman %mild he much oblieed to hart to stopuinieressaiy es peaces. awl begged lie would go to the nobleman. Ile had ill Mies view ait II lions. 1 . 1/1` 111/1/110/111 denied the slot) allow the memos to get rid of her ; but an the ut lie6iart relittiog 11/ the keep of rhe)oung w ur , t oiled attorney miAht confer un Site sires:,,ion. Mr. I si,ud , the defendant. author - zed Mr. Helmer to advance the young woman bl. and Mr. Harmer advanced 51. more. The de. letidattit proposed her guirig to the tiorkhouse to lie in. Mr. Dufour some tithe after applied to lours the ILI. ot:d, ash THE NATIONAL REGISTER finding he could not get that sum, requested the 51. Mr. Flood then talked of compelling the young woman to go before a mitAitorate to swear the child. Mr. Harmer not being able to get the 101. wrote a respectful note to the nobleman, and requested he might lisse his IW. He was much astonished after this, In find, without any 'previous indite, that Mr. Fraud n rot to the 1111 l 0, Clerken well, and prefect...if an indictment against aim elf aud a clergyman, for c piracy. The clergyman had no Icitoo ledge of the letter Pent by Mr. Hamer, but hearing of the case, hail written to she nobleman. The plaintiff laid notice of the indictment soon after it wilts found, and seat to Mr. Flood, stating th hr would burrender, and take his trial on the Monday following; but Mr. Ft nod said be should conduct the prosecution in the common a ay. The indictment was removed by certiorari lulu this court, and Mr. Harmer was an quitted. Tins was the plaintiffs ca , e, and the Jury %timid have to say whether the defendaiit prelerred this in dictment licionsly. If the evidence innate out a ease of unitive, the damages would no doubt compesonte the plant till tar the attack upon his character. Mr. Gooey then called John Lon rv, whn produced the indictment found by the Graad Jury ic:ionst the The g ame being rend by the 'desk tat Prim*, charged the plaintiff and another with conspiring to defi•ud the I nobleman. Al r. rgeant ['yoke asked how the family name of the no bleman wit:, spelled ? Al r. Abbott Biliti, with is g. Sergeant Peake Iheu ritsberved, Shut the name in the de claration eau spelled Is itli aj. The variance w mild alter Memnod of the name, and incite the actiou apply to a dif ferent person. The Lord Chief Justice asked Mr. Carney if he was pre pared Its prove by city 1101'3011 aho uncleistood Spanish, that both letters produced the same sound in the Spanish lan guage ? Mr. Gurney had no witness to establish that propo.ition and the misno mer being held fatal, the plaintiff was nou suited. VIIIDAY. DEC. It. PERJURY.—TIIE KING V. DREW. The defeildent was indicted for vrilful and corrupt peijory, in stating at the bar of the House of Commons, that Colonel Ba)ley, Who stood candidate at the late election fo the bormigh of Iledon, in Yorkshire, utlet ed haw 201. or 101. to Vole for hien. Colonel Bayley being ezninined in support of the prose cution, denied in the mutt positive terms, tout he ever °lf red the defendant any money, and, under all the cirt ulustances, found the detendant—guilly. TUE KING V. DOLBY. This was called use for trial. It was a prosecution by the Constitutional Association, against the defendant, is stationer, in the Strand, for the publication of ass alleged libel, entitled the DiJtionar), or Picket Companion " 'Cheer special jurors appeared in the box to try the in• dietment, when uu ohjecliun wits taken to the array, or jury si t in order by the Sherd, in hi, relurn of the panel. Mr. Scarlett challenged the airily, on the ground that John tharratt, I;,q. the Siwrill who feint lied the panel, was nw•naber of the Constitutional Asso, iistion, and consequently one of the prosecutors. Mr. (iame), a, counsel for the prosecution, denied that Mr. thirratt as as, at the time of the 1)411.1, one of the pro secutors. Mr. Se .nett then said, they must go to issue upon the question, nod the Judge nuulduppnu.t men. 1 c Lout Chief J t a ilsoledioti ly •ppoioted two of t:ie Mee special ill the box, to try the isette.— The juior, were William Mitchell, Lsq. and Francis Thad deo, 1.-11. Tlit . re tit ion nrr olsjection to the nppointmeni, the two ges. Icon. n o ere bl% urn to try o het tier JUilll Gurrat, Esq. one of the Sheriffs of London and Nlisidlestx, at the time of re tuiuiug the mood to this court, was one of the prosecutors of the M•fesoluiss. Mr, Seal lett Own addressed the Triers. Ile stated that the question wits, wlict..er Mr. liarrutt, the Stiehl!' of London, was one of the Constitutional Association, and %lather h, gave in that character a list of Special Jurors 1— It a oold peel , ,in, he sail that Aids:rump G.,rratt had (been te member of the As►ueiatiosy but had a iihdrawn his name. If he had embarked his money in the COllleru. he was still a paitner, and engaged in the partheiship transactions. The lear..ed counsel battled, that lie should prove Alderman Gar• raft Ma, a member of the `Society, by the admission of their U wn solicitor. Mr. I),:venport, the defendant's attorney, said he went to the Lrls NU Mice to 'hake inquiry who were the members einnposin; the Constitutional Association, and Mr. Mur.ay, the Solicitor fur the prorecutiuu, furni•lied hies with a liss of the persons or subscribers of a bird" 141 ling theist-eke toe Constitutional Association. JOllll tintr.dt, F, q. Aldeit Lunn, was one of the flumes ais en by Mr. Jlunay. Ile re. ceibcd the list on the *Atli tit 5l •y lust and lie behoved John Ciarittii at that twee to be our Li the Aldermen 01 the City of Daniel R,berts,aid, he was well uryu,iuted with the per 1,011 111 A Idefilldll At. At the poll for the Sheri'''. the Ja) utter MoJsuoinienday, Al.. Alderman 6./rratt Geelon' iie had been u member of the toiniittilinnal Association, tint he had cens.•d to belong to it. Toe Wednesday follow. mg, in another ,peeelt he made on the hustings he retracted that The Lord Ostler Jastice asked the µ itness the words used by A Idt rilluo (ia I t. 'l'he vbitness could not state chat was Paid. In conse (pence of some debate ou the hinting!, he retracted the de- Ciaratiiill etude ou the Monday preceding. 51r. (iirrsitt Oa , at the heAd of the poll whro lteretracted bib declaration. MI. Scarlett then meet tattled that the indictment was found on tue Willi of May. '1 lie decimation made by Mr. G. iiatl wa, in uu the day alter Mid.uwr. er day. Mi. Gurney for the pm °seem too, said, the Sheriff certainly tsar ml. tttt Molly one who rrtu tied the panel, and Mr. Sc.. richt was e titled to object to the trial n of the panel, if the $l4lllll could be made one of the prosecutors. The day after atidsomitim day, Mr. 6ai tuts declared he heal reused 10 he a tn• meter of the AihOrlilt iiiii and Mr. Gartatt was in court to slate that he was not a nietuber of Asmciatiott. Mr. ti.ir rut tits> then called. Mr. Sculietl objected to his examination, on the ground that lik u.l, 110 i 11 C1013111:1eIll 1111111'W, lac ohjtcli 4444 being to the I etuni, of which be was the author, lie could not he a looped to give evidetice on the suhj.lt t. Gulavy submitted that this being n collateral issue, the Sheila had no interest, stud stood in the situation of stay oilier », mess. Chic. Justice raid, as there was on authority on the qut•.twu, the wirer wuy WWI to consider tile witness Ili. examination It a. thciefure dispenied with, 393 Mr. Sharp was then called. He was it prosecutor. Mr. Scarlett objected to hiss as being a prosecumr ; but the Judge elbowed bim to be examined. The whores then deposed, that be was secretary to the Association, and had been present at all the meetings. lu May last Sheriff Gcrratt was ft memher. He ceased to Le member long before he became Sheriff. Croswestausioeil by Mr. Scarlett. What are you, Mr. Sharp I—Honorary Secretary to the C.lllxi it ut loam I Society. Honourable Secretary to the Society I That is not your esval business T-1 have no busiotss. You lire on your fortune, Giro ?-1 live ou the means I p isb•e4.4. Were you ever in business T— Yes. What?—ln the Nlstorbe , ter comfit trade. How long sine I—fan year% ngo. Is tint your only busmen.?.-Yes. NeAer bad any other You hat e het n two years a it hnut business ?—Yes. Y... 1 say Alderman Garratt became a member of this As•iii jai . by two coining a sul.r. liter 1— Yes. And that he teased to be a member 1— Yes. Hate You returned hunt hi, tonnes Whet h ave you dons with it?—Tire motley went into the gene's' land. Arc you treasure' T—No. VI hit is?—Alderman Atk i ns, . . ._ W hat did Sou mean bs Pay lIIg he ceased to be a member —I fete sed n lever, circulated with the mimes of the sub. scribers, ailid bis IMMO war nit among the members, Mr. Scarlett then addressed the Jury, observing that his learned friend, Mr. Gurney, by calling Mr. Sharp. hail sit etigt hened the defendant's case. He did not charge Mr. Garrett with being a member of the Association, but lie had supplied theist %hit funds. His capital had been embarked in the undertaking, and the proceeding against the defendant commenced whilst his funds were employed —lie was a prosecutor. The Lord Chief Justice summed np the evidence, and left the Jurors to say whether Mr. Garrett was connected with the pi osecntors at the time of striking the panel. The Triers delivered their verdict, and found that Mr. Garrett, at the time of striking the panel, was one of the prot cent ors. The Lord Chief Justice then directed, that further pro• ceedings upon the prosecution by the Society, against the defendant, be postponed, and the event of the issue de clared in the return of the proceedings in Nisi Prins. Mr. Thelwall, oho was in Court to defend a prosecution preferred by the Association, addressed the Judge, and stated, that notwithstanding the decision just conic to, lie should prefer going to trial, rather than remain with the prosecution hanging over his head. The Lord Chief Justice said, Mr. Thelwall might appear to-morrow, and state whether lie meant to waive the oh jection taken by the other defendants, as in that vitae the Jury might be appointed to try the cause. Mr. 'fitelwall acceded to the suggestion, and is to de clare his intention after consulting with his legal adviser. l'he King u. Benbuw, and another prosecution at the suit of the Association, were called on pro forma, but were postponed upon the same objections. Mr. Murray paid the special jurors in every prosecu tion. ILLICIT DISTILLATION. SdIOTIMI MERL) Ou Tuesday evening an illicit still was discovered and destroyed in Bridgeton, by excise officers from Glasgow. A man connected with it was taken prisoner, but a inob of some hundreds rescued him. In the fray one of the officers was severely hurt: and another, with some difficulty, escaped into an adjoining house, where he was forced to remain till the followiog morning. The audacity with which these proceedings are carried on is hardly to be credited. We are informed that the labour in this abomitiable profession is divided. Wash is made, and can be bought in any quantity, from a gallon up. wards, and distillation goes on, Irom a tea-kettle to a large still, producing altogether a quantity of spirits which few would believe. We have also heard, from authority on which we can place the firmest reliance, that in the west end of Glasgow, and a district of some miles around that quarter, while Mete are only 440 licensed hoof s hue seilitig spirits, there are 630 unlicensed which sell apirita, many of the imates of winch are brought up every three months for fine, and not one of whom, though constantly carrying on business, can sell one drop of legal spirits, because, being without licenses, they call °Maio 'toile by permit : nor have we any rea,on to be lieve that matters are better in other places. In London we observe that the seizure of sti:ls is becoming mote frequent ; and we have heard as a fact, that having become too numerous to render the trade profitable, seve ral of these pests of society have swarmed MI and lest Glasgow, and also from about Edinburgh, and are fume to London, where a 1.. ), believe they will have a wider, safer, and more profitable held for Me exercise of their Ott these points they possess, in general, cor• rect lamination. Information having been received of an extensive illegal distilery being at work in a woml in the parts:i of &tintalcoin, a party of Custom-lion,. officers at I),,rt Glasktow proceeded there early no Thursday morning, and toutni, in a plantitig in the said push, a work of unexampled extent, conducted by a band of des, Cialloe4 from Doustlartonshire, front whence they no thorn! 1:A1 been driven by the activity o: the reVel.Ue oath. els and milli:11y its that quarter. fhe officers de-tro}etl she still on the spot, together h 150 il 1.. 0f low 1,000 g'lllolla Of wash and - worts: and they al; brotspit home, and lo,lged in site Cosioni.boitse warehouse, 12 law casks, one ecpper still-brad, two copper ts aaaaa a:;41 about twilve gallons of whiskey. From the present state of smuggling in this country, a traffic so inutile to tile morals, lilt health, and e ,ospvisty of society, we think every well-disposed person will congratulate the revenue officers at every slew IflUllipll they riatain over Inch bold t iolators of the law. At IVellington market, on Thursday last, wheat sold limn 6s. 6d. to Bs. 3.1. per bushel; prone heel, mitto,o, and pork, ti,ata 3d. to 4itl. per lb.; good potittoer. 40. per bag or eight seine pound►; and turnips Ss. fog duce bushels.