THE N . wrongs.—The law in case of private wrongs will not suffer the • outer door to be broken open ; but in the vindication of a public wrong it does. It was so held by Justice Coke, in 13 Ed. 4 fol. 8. It is so stated by Dyer, by Foster; and it it *0 held in Semaine'a case, as reported by Coke, who says, the door cannot be broken open unless in the nut en's case, or for a contempt. If therefore it can be done in the case of a coo = committed against a Court oa Law, surely the House mons, which is a su perior Court, will not be degraded in its right blow a Court of ordinary jurisdiction. There seas also anothemalte, 13rigs's case, of which only a short note appeared in the Ildeks, in which it is stated, that in an attachment for a contempt, the Sheriff may break the outer door. It had been suggested, that this might be founded on a breac Is of the peace ; bait ha had caused diligent in quiry to be made at the offices, and he found that this attachment issued in a civil case. He had thus referred to the opinions of • the Judges ofthe law, confirmed by a stream of authorities; and the result he trusted was, that the Court would think there ought to he judgment for the defendai t. Mr. HOLROYD briefly replied to the several observations made by the Attornev-General, still maintaining the principle which he had originally supported for the plaintiff. Lord Eeerae BOROUGH said, that it was certainly a matter altogether of great import ; but great as the import was, it was not necessary to consume any snore time beyond this day upon it. If a doubt of any kind remained on his mind upon the sub ject, a furthei• day would be allowed for the discussion • but; in truth, his mind was completely and clearly made up thereon.— This, said hts Lordship,' is an action of trespass (here his Lord ship repeated the whole of the proceedings as they appear In the pleadings), and to the plea of justification the plaintiff demurs; and the points that arise for discussion upon this demurrer are these :-,-First, Whether the House of Commons has authority in cases of breach of privilege to commit. Secondly; whether having that authority, it id well executed. And, Thirdly, whe . titer the means used to exercise that authority art justifiable by law. On these three several points his Lordship argued with his natal precision and comprehension, and in a most eloquent and argumentative style. He observed, that all that was urged ie respect to Sir Olando Bridgman in a former argument, and all that was advanced concerning '1 horpe's case, did not apply to this. The 49th of Henry the set, gives the Parliament dis tinct privileges, and before that time evert, and down to the esent day, th is right had been exercised. Their privileges are inherent In the Legislature, and cannot be taken from them.— . He observed, that Ferrar's case, Compton Dyer's civic, Went worth's case, and Hall's case, all justified tie power in the Commons. But that which, his Lordship contended, put it beyond the reach of controversy, was the Statute of the Ist of James I. chap. 13, which, he maintained, expressly gave Par liament the power of committing for breach of their privilege. Even Lord Holt laid it down in the case of Ashley and White, as it was also laid down by him in the case of the Oue(n and Paley. In Shaftesbury's case the like doctrine was held, and was not by Lawyers doubted: a His Lordship noticed the several rases from the earliest turtles down to the case of the King and Flower, where, although the Courts had refused the writ of Habeas Corpus to persons so committed, yet abase persons were never told by the Court so committing theritiligthottgh they were refused their writ, yet that they might bring their action for the refusal; no one would ever expact aach an absurdity. in this part of his observations, he noticed the case of Brass Crosby, who, although committed by the Commons, and being refused his rit ofaHabeas Corpus, never thought of bringing an action against any of the Judges who refused him ; and he was refused it in all the Courts. The next point then was, if the House has the power, has it in this case been well executed ? He thoualit it had. The warrant against Sir Francis was in the nature of an attachment for con tempt; and in all rases of attachment, the 011icer' executing it, has a power to break the outer door, if refused admittance. in short, in every point, and every way which he had considered the subject, he was or opinion that the artinn could not be sustained, and that the plea of the defendant was a good plea. Mr. Justice Gamin and Mr. Justice BA If L F.Y concurred, Mr. Justice Ba v Lear add;ng, that in the cage of the King P. Paton, in which Lord Hotar differed from the rest of the Judges, he did not deny the right of the House of Commons to commit for a contempt ; but they haring stated a fact on the face of their war rant, which. he thought did not amount to a. colnenv, htr therefore thought the pers'n committed entitled to he dis charged. • Judgment for the Di fendant. THE KING V. JAMES PHILItS, JOHN BARFORD, A ND JOSEPH ESTON. These t!of,m(lants were br•ffight tip for jittlgrnent, baying !wet: convictil.; at thr last Maiditoil.• A3slzes, (Alarging, that Phi lip, a revenue offteur, and the two other. his assistaats. RECI STrit. 319 had made a seizure of run-goods and released the same fur money, contrary to the jaw, anAkelefraud of the Revell". Frain the minutes of the Lea J kftige's notes who tried Use- - cause, it appeared, that Joseph Finn, a servant behitoug tq- Captain i.e Blanc, of the Marquis of Ely East Indianian, w. coming up from Deal in a post-chaise to London, alai at t bottom of Shooter's 1 Lill, the carriage was stopped by the d fendants, one of whom burst open the door, ji!mped in, an seizing a •bundle, containAsatne silk East India bundanils calling out to his comrades er eta prize." That they insisted upon seizing Qie carriage and horses as well as the smugg!ed goods,- but in travelling along, one of them in the carriage along with Finn, the other following, they demanded of Finn whether he had any money ; he produced thirty-live dollArs and four guineas, which they agreed to take, and to release him and the seized goods, &c. Mr* Justice GROSE proceeded to pass sentence upon the three defendants.—Phlllvs and Esinn were sentenced to two years imprisimmentin the jail of Xlaidstone, and Barford to foul teen months' imprisonment in the same jail, in consequence u: having been already in conFnement nine months. ROYAL LANCASTERIAN EDUCATION. At a meeting on Saturday se'nnight of the Dukes of Kent ard Sussex, Lord Erskine ! &c. at Mr. Lancaster's School, in the Borough road, fur Fducating the Poor at a very reduced rate. and afterwards at the Freemasons' Hall, where the Duke of Bedford presided, and at which meeting it was approved and sanctioned by the above, and a great number of other distin guished characters,as well as with the patronage of their Nlaj, de^., the Prince Regent, and the whole of the Royal Family, the superior -excellenct• of Mr. Lancaster's system of educating the poor. Friday was the day appointed for celebrating the same by the Royal Family, and the most prominent part ."'f!he distin guished characters of the nation,.by k/Ining tokether at the Free mason's Hall, his Royal Highness the Duke of Kent in the Cle;ir surrounded by his Royal Brother the Duke of Sussex, Lord Keith, Messrs. Jackson, Wilbraham Bootle, Brougham, Smith Horner, &c. &c. The Rota! Duke in the 9:.air acquitter! himself with the most tr:spropriate diguity, yet with the greatest affability and earnestness, the cause of religion, morality, edsi , cation, and the good of the poor. His Royal HiAiltness's toasts were all new, and tending to impress upon the minds of all those present thelunda eentai principles ol Christianity,in Imre ksitit on the minds of alt these present the necessity of doirg good, espe •cially to the rising genet ation, by giving them education suit dent to enable, them to read their Bibles, in which he war strongly Nlcked by his Royal Brother the Dt.ke.of Sussex, who stated fiat he was prejudiced against the lib/Amnion, sal ht made acquainted with the principles upon whic.h hie worthy fri .nd Mr. Lancaster conducted his schools was gentral toleration, and -upon which the Government of this country .stood. The Duke of BEDFORD stated his and Lord Somerville's con duct in supporting Sir. Lancaster's system fur the good of the poor. Mr. W. SMITH spoke highly of the system and the Royal Family, who by their aid had enabled the wet thy and highly to 'be acanirt!d clu.racter to bring it to the state it now was. - There was rear I ,GOOI. subscribed at this meeting to the cause. FUNERAL OF R. CUMBERLAND, On Tuesday the remains of this elegant Dramatic Author were removed from his re.idence to the Collegiate Church ot St- Peter, Westminster, in the following of der : THE HF.A With the usual Attendants, Four Mourning Coaches, drawn by four Horses ea: h, contain log his Relatives MI Frietids. Men with Sites. Six Gentlemen's private Carriages closed the procession. On their arrival.at Poet's Corner, the different Of!icers in in their robes, together with the Dean, and the . Chapter his son, belonging to the Abbey, escorted 'cite corpse into the Church, chaunting the Choir for the burial of dead, liod pro , ..e.edf:d to the grave near the shrine of Garrick; and on the oiiicers' resting the enrp.e, the company were conducted td tl.o pews; after which the Dean read au Lulogium on his de;iartt4l. friend, With great feeling and emotion, ilescalting on his lit-t— -ray, attainments, and the excellent qualities witk which he Lad Leo' posocsecd. The fuwrai service being ended, the body was depneted iti the ground ; when the company kot into tit... ir cart proceeded slowly to their respective homes. Sterral of the performers bolote:irs to the Theatre) attuudeti die ceremony. ,;op $