all born in Bedford; that both his sons had been admitted into the charity school, the eldest having attended the writing-school and the youngest both the writing and the grammar-school; that his two eldest daughters were married, and that they had both received the marriage-portions of poor virgins. It appeared from this deponent's affidavit, that no Jew had ever been admitted into the hospital or alms - houses. There were also the affidavits of Joseph Lyon, Godfrey Levi and several other persons, to the same effect; and the result of all their testimony was, that as far back as 30 years ago, a few of these children had been admitted into the school, but that none of the Jewish nation had ever participated in the benefit of any other parts of the charity. The first affidavit on the other side was that of Dr. Bryan the master of the grammar-school. He stated, that each boy attending the grammar-school was taught the Latin language, and that when he had made some progress in the study of Latin he began to learn Greek; that in studying the latter language, the Greek Testament was the book chiefly read till the boys had acquired considerable proficiency in the language, and that every boy in the school was instructed in the Christian religion. He said, that on his appointment in 1811, he found Nathan Joseph, the son of Michael Joseph, at the school; that the said Nathan Joseph learned only the grammar of the Latin language, was not more than a year at the school, and attended both the writing and gram

mar-schools; that he was required to dispense with this boy's attendance at morning and evening prayers, it being contrary to his religion to join in Christian worship; that he was also required to dispense with his attendance every Saturday, that being the Jewish Sabbath; and that he complained of the boy's frequent absence to his father, who said it was necessary on account of his being of the Jewish faith. The next affidavit was that of the writing-master, who deposed, that no Jewish boy had been admitted into the writing-school since his appointment in 1814; that all the boys in his school were instructed in Christianity, read the Bible and New Testament and learned the Church Catechism. There were also similar affidavits by the masters of the hospital and of the preparatory school. With regard to such regulations for the conduct of the school as rendered Jewish boys inadmissible, his lordship remarked, that there was nothing either in the charter or in the acts of parliament that prevented the wardens and fellows of New College, Oxford, who were the visiters, to make whatever regulations they might think conducive to the benefit of the school; and he apprehended that if in the exercise of their visitatorial authority they made regulations that excluded Jews, their decision must be submitted to. If the school consisted partly of Jew boys and partly of Christians, he did not think it possible that two such systems could go on together. It was impossible that a Jew boy could comply with the regulations made by the visiters

for

for the purpose of carrying on the grammar-school in such a manner as to preserve the boni mores of the scholars, which the charter declared to be one of the principal objects of the school. Then, as to the hours of attendance, and the morning and evening prayers, how was it possible for a Jew, acting conscientiously, to allow his son to comply with these and various other regulations, which it was unnecessary for him to enumerate? On the whole, he could have no doubt that Jew boys were not admissible into the grammar-school. The next point to be considered was, whether Jewish girls were entitled to the provision made for poor maids. The primary object of the charity being instruction in the Christian religion, was there any thing to warrant him in saying that it ought to be applied to other purposes? He could not believe that the acts of parliament contemplated the admission of Jewish girls to this charity, because, in mentioning the regulations with which the candidates were to comply, it was directed that each of them should give in her Christian name and her surname. He was aware it might be said that a Christian name did not necessarily mean the name by which a person was baptized, but it was used in contradistinction to a surname. This he was ready to admit, when the distinction was applied to the names of a person professing the Christian religion; but still he thought that a Christian name was something that did not belong to a Jew, something to which a Jew could not lay claim. He, therefore,

could not consider the Jewish girls entitled to become candidates for the portions of poor maids. As to the right of admission into the alms-houses, it was evident that such a thing was never contemplated by those who framed the act of parliament, for there it was directed that the persons enjoying the benefit of this charity should go to a place of public worship on Sundays, or be expelled from the institution.

Mr. Heald begged to remind his lordship that the point here was not whether Jewish poor maids were to be admitted as candidates for marriage portions, but whether they were entitled to become candidates for apprentice fees.

The Lord Chancellor was perfectly aware of that, but the principle was precisely the same in both cases. both cases. The regulations prescribed by the act of parliament for casting lots, &c. were precisely the same in the one case as in the other, and therefore he did not think it necessary to go into the details of them all. It was his opinion that the Jews were not entitled to participate in any part of this charity; but that judgment being founded on a petition which had been argued, he did not mean that the order should be drawn up for a fortnight, in order that the parties might have an opportunity of communicating to him any remarks that they might think of importance.

His lordship directed the costs of the trustees to be paid out of the estate; and in answer to an application from Mr. Heald, for the payment of his client's costs

also

also out of the estate, he said he must dismiss the first petition. In a case of summary jurisdiction like the present he could not give costs unless the act of parliament had authorized him.

COURT-MARTIAL.

At a court-martial held on board his majesty's ship Conqueror, in St. Helena-roads, on the 30th day of August, and continued till the 2nd of September, to try Mr. John Stokoe, surgeon of the said ship, for improper conduct with regard to certain particulars relative to his intercourse with the French prisoners detained at the island of St. Helena, and on the following charges :

1st. For having, on or about the 17th of January last, when permitted, or ordered, by rearadmiral Plampin, commander in chief of his majesty's ships and vessels at the Cape of Good-hope and the seas adjacent, &c. to visit Longwood for the purpose of affording medical assistance to general Buonaparté, then represented as being dangerously ill, communicated with the said general or his attendants upon subjects not at all connected with medical advice, contrary to standing orders in force for the govern ment of his majesty's naval officers at St. Helena.

2nd. For having, on or about the said day, on receiving communications, both in writing and verbally, from some of the French prisoners at Longwood, taken notice of, and given an answer to, such communications, previous

to making the same known to the commander in chief, contrary to the said standing orders.

3rd. For having, in pursuance of such unauthorized communication, signed a paper purporting to be a bulletin of general Buonaparte's health, and delivered the same to the said general or his attendants, contrary to the said orders and to his duty as a British naval officer.

4th. For having, in such bulletin, stated facts relative to the health of general Buonaparté, which did not fall under his, the said Mr. John Stockoe's, own observation, and which, as he afterwards acknowledged, were dictated or suggested to him by the said general or his attendants, and for having signed the same as if he had himself witnessed the said facts, which was not the truth, and was inconsistent with his character and duty as a British naval officer.

5th. For having, in the said bulletin, inserted the following paragraph:-" The more alarming symptom is that which was experienced in the night of the 16th, a recurrence of which may soon prove fatal, particularly if medical assistance is not at hand;" intending thereby, contrary to the character and duty of a British officer, to create a false impression or belief, that general Buonaparté was in imminent or considerable danger, and that no medical assistance was at hand, he, the said Mr. John Stokoe, not having witnessed any such symptom, and knowing that the state of the patient was so little urgent that he was four hours at Longwood before he was admitted to

see

see him, and farther knowing that Dr. Verling was at hand, and ready to attend, if required, in any such emergency.

6th. For having, contrary to his duty, communicated to general Buonaparte or his attendants, information relative to certain books, letters and papers, said to have been sent from Europe for the said persons, and which had been intercepted by the governor of St. Helena; and for having conveyed to the said general or his attendants, some information respecting their money concerns, contrary to his duty, which was to afford medical advice only.

7th. For having, contrary to his duty and to the character of a British naval officer, communicated to the said general Buonaparte or his attendants, an infamous and calumnious imputation cast upon lieutenant-general sir Hudson Lowe, governor of St. Helena, by Barry O'Meara, late a surgeon in the royal navy, implying that sir H. Lowe had practised with the said O'Meara to induce him to put an end to the existence of the said general Buonaparte.

8th. For having disobeyed the positive command of his superior officer, in not returning from Longwood on or about the 21st of January aforesaid, at the hour especially prescribed to him by the rear-admiral, there being no justifiable cause for his disobeying such command.

9th. For having, knowingly and wilfully, designated general Buonaparte, in the said bulletin, in a manner different from that in which he is designated in the act VOL. LXI.

of parliament for the better custody of his person, and contrary to the practice of his majesty's government, of the lieutenantgeneral governor of the island and of the said rear-admiral; and for having done so at the special instance and request of the said general Buonaparte or his attendants, though he, the said Mr.John Stokoe, well knew that the mode of designation was a point in dispute between the said general Buonaparte and lieutenant-general sir H. Lowe and the British government, and that by acceding to the wish of the said general Buonaparte, he, the said Mr.Jolin Stokoe, was acting in opposition to the wish and practice of his own superior officers, and to the respect which he owed to them under the general printed instructions.

10th. For having, in the whole of his conduct in the aforesaid transactions, evinced a disposi tion to thwart the intentions and regulations of the said governor and of the said rear-admiral, and to further the views of the French prisoners, in furnishing them with false or colourable pretences for complaint, contrary to the respect which he owed to his superior officers, and to his own duty as an officer in his majesty's royal navy.

The court having heard the evidence in support of the charges, as well as what the prisoner had to offer in his defence, and having considered the whole with the most minute attention, is of opinion, that his conduct (with respect to certain particulars relative to his intercourse with the French prisoners detained at St.

R

Helena)

Helena) being improper,is proved; that the 1st charge is proved; that the 2nd charge is proved; that the 3rd charge is proved; that the 4th charge is proved; that the 5th charge is proved; that the 6th charge is proved; that the 7th charge is proved; that the 8th charge is proved; that on the 9th charge it is proved, he called general Buonaparte "the patient;" that the 10th charge is proved. The court do therefore adjudge the said Mr. John Stokoe to be dismissed his majesty's service; but in consideration of his long services, recommend him to the consideration of the admiralty for half-pay.

LANCASTER, SATURDAY, SEPT.11.

Conspiracy to raise the Wages of Weavers at Blackburn.-This was an indictment against James Watson and Laurence Moss, for a conspiracy to raise the wages of those employed in the art, craft, or mystery of weaving.

John Kay was a constable, in September last, at Blackburn. There were meetings about the beginning of September. There was a meeting on the 7th at Blake ly-moor, within the town of Blackburn. There were about 2,000 persons, the greatest part weavers. He saw them come in procession into the town, four or five or six a-breast. He saw the defendant, James Watson a weaver, amongst the crowd. He heard him speaking to the people around him, and advising the weavers to stick true to one another and they would come to the point; that they had got their wages at Bolton, and he

had no doubt they would get them there; that in Bolton they had got 7s. in the pound. Defendant desired them to go home peaceably and quietly, and to come the next day, clean washed and with clean shirts on. On Wednesday the 9th, a great many more met than on the Monday. He should not wonder if there were 4,000 or 5,000. There were women and children. Women were employed in weaving there. On the Friday morning there was another meeting. He only saw the defendant in the street.

Cross-examined by the defendant.-Witness was not on the Moor on Wednesday. He always heard the defendant advise the people to be peaceable and to keep within the law, and not so much as touch the hem of the garment of the law, and to disperse quietly; and if they saw so much as a dog battle in the streets, not to meddle with it. He heard him say the laws of England were the best in the world; he never saw him but sober and industrious, and never knew him connected with any bad company.

David Hogg lived at Blackburn in December last. He was at a meeting on Monday the 7th, and saw James Watson standing with several others on a heap of earth. One spoke, and called out, "Preston delegate." One went up to the place where Watson was, and Watson went away. That man that was called to said he came from Preston that morning. James Watson came again, and wished them all to go peaceably away, and not to hurt the hem of the garment of the law.

He