half-past two), the keeper heard a noise which alarmed him, but he thought it might be a patient up stairs, who is sometimes very high, as he termed it; however, he ran up stairs, and when about half way distinctly heard the report of a pistol. On entering the room it was full of smoke, and the first thing he saw was Captain Miller lying on the floor in the agonies of death: he attempted to lift him up, but he instantly expired. A pistol lay within two feet of him. About five or six feet from Miller lay Fleming, on his face, and the vital spark had left him also. Another pistol lay about the same distance from him, and a three edged sword on the bed close by. On a more minute examination, in which Mr. Rich, a surgeon, attended, it appeared that a pistol had been fired by Fleming at Miller, who had been sitting in a chair at a table in the act of writing, having his spectacles on, and a pen in his hand; that Fleming stood behind him, as the ball had entered a little below the left shoulder blade; that the pistol not having had the immediate effect intended, Fleming made use of the sword, and pierced his friend in the body, as many as seven or eight times, and then, with another pistol, shot himself through the head. It might naturally be inquired, how came these destructive weapons in the room? It appears that at the time Captain Fleming was brought to the Asylum, all his trunks, &c. were deposited there, and the keys given to the proprietor, who, on his patient being pronounced sane, returned every thing to him again,

without ever having examined the contents of his trunks, in which, unquestionably, lay those deadly weapons. Fleming wrote two letters on Saturday the 12th inst. and left them in a drawer in his bed-room, addressed to the Rev. Mr. Gale, a visiting magistrate of the Asylum, which alone were sufficient to prove his insanity.

13. The University Debating Club, held at the Red Lion inn, in Cambridge, having been dissolved by the personal interference of the Proctors, by command of the Vice-Chancellor, a petition against this interference, signed by several Masters of Arts and Noblemen, as members of the club, has been presented to his Royal Highness the Duke of Gloucester, as Chancellor of that University.-Evening Paper.

14. From a Liverpool Paper.Last week Mr. John Wright, who has of late delivered religious lectures, and held meetings for worship on Unitarian principles, in the Long Room, Marbie-street, (a place which has been frequently occupied by different denominations of Christians during the last 23 years), was summoned, on three informations, to appear before the magistrates, on the charge of holding meetings for worship in a place not duly registered. Mr. Wright attended at the Town Hall on Saturday last, at the appointed time, when the Mayor (John Wright, Esq.) and Alderman Nicholson took their places as the sitting magistrates. They were afterwards joined by Alderman Sir W. Barton.

The first information was then read, relative to a meeting for worship

worship being held in the Long Room, on Tuesday the 1st of April.

The informer on this charge was Reece Davies, of the Liverpool Courier Office; who, being sworn, gave evidence of the statement in the information.

The second information was then read, which made a similar charge for Sunday the 6th of April.

The informer on this charge also was Reece Davies; who, being again sworn, gave evidence of the statement in that information.

The third information was then read, which made a similar charge for Tuesday the 8th of April

The informer on this charge also was Reece Davies; who, being again sworn, gave evidence of the statement in that info; mation.

In answer to some questions from the bench, and Mr. Statham, town clerk, as to the nature of the prayers, &c. Reece Davies stated, that they were similar to those usually made in other chapels.

Mr. Wright then being called upon for his defence, stated, that in a life of more than fifty years, he had never knowingtly violated any of the laws of his country. He had reason to believe that the room in which his meetings were held was duly registered, as it had been used for worship about twenty years: and indeed, he eonceived, that if the place were not registered, yet, as he had always been informed that it was, he could not be supposed to have offended against the statute, as its penalties

were directed against those who knowingly hold meetings for worship in places not registered. He then produced some written evidence from a most respectable quarter, stating at what time, and by whom, and for whom, the place had been certified to the Bishop's Registrar at Chester. There had not been sufficient time allowed to procure a certificate from Chester, but he doubted not he could do so in a few days. The bench then agreed to adjourn the business to that day week, when the official evidence was to be produced.

The penalty incurred in this case would be, not exceeding 201. on each information, nor less than 20s.-one half to the informer.

During the above examination, Mr. Wright, alluding to some disorderly conduct in the Long Room during worship on Tuesday the 8th, stated, that the individual whom he meant to charge with that disorder had refused at the time to give his address. He had since learnt, however, that his name was Scott, and he would now ask Reece Davies whether he knew that person. Being answered in the affirmative, he farther demanded his full name and address: when Scott himself being in the court, was required to give it-which was, James Scott, of Liverpool, merchant, No. 11, Clayton-square. Mr. Wright then declared his intention immediately to prosecute him, under the 12th clause of an Act 52 Geo. III, for disorderly conduct during worship on the above evening.

The business on which Mr. Wright was summoned being now

for

for the present concluded, Mr. Wright was about to depart, when Mr. Statham rose and informed him he had now to bring forward a charge of a more serious na

ture.

Mr. Wright. I was summoned for a particular purpose, which I have attended to, and am not bound to attend to any other business.

Mr. Statham.-Sir, this is an information upon which you will now be taken into custody. You are charged with blasphemy.

He then read an information on the evidence of James Scott, (the identical person Mr. Wright had just stated his intention to prosecute for disorderly conduct,) which, being duly sworn to, charged Mr. Wright with having expressed and conveyed to his hearers the idea "that a belief in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity was absurd and ridiculousthat it was folly to believe in what was called the atonement of the death of Jesus Christ, as it was impious to suppose that a good being would take an innocent victim to atone for the sins of the wicked-that as the idea of the soul surviving the body was an absurd and ridiculous mental delusion, that the idea of a future state was equally so." Mr. Statham then informed Mr. Wright, that his proceedings had been watched; that the Mayor had sent persons for the purpose to the Long Room every evening, since he had advertised his meetings in the Liverpool Mercury of the 28th of March; and that it was at the Mayor's instance that the informer on this charge (Scott)

had now attended to give evidence.

Mr. Wright. Why, Sir, the sentiments I delivered are legal by Act of Parliament; and the last charge is an entire falsehood, and contrary to all my sentiments.

Mr. Statham.-That you must show in another place. You must give bail for your appearance at the next Assizes at Lancaster yourself in 2001. and two sureties in 100l. each. [Mr. Wright was then placed in custody of the constables, and put to the bar as a prisoner.]

Mr. Wright.-But, Sir, I must know under what law I am charged with this.

Mr, Statham.-Under no particular Act, but under the law of the land.

Mr. Wright.-Under what law of the land ?

Mr. Statham.-Under the common law.

Mr. Wright.-Under what common law? Have you never seen the Act of Parliament, lately passed, which tolerates the exercise of religious opinions, which were before not permitted?-To this no answer was given.

Mr. Wright.—But if I be arrested, and held to bail, contrary to the provisions of an Act of Parliament, can I not claim indemnity?

Mr. Statham.-You can adopt what steps you think proper.

Two friends of Mr. Wright, who happened then to be in the court merely as spectators, offered themselves as the required bail. One of them (Mr. F. B. Wright) in describing his resi-

dence,

dence, stated, that it was near Anne's Church. The Mayor and Mr. Statham instantly asked was it not Saint Anne's Church? Mr. F. B Wright said he had spoken of it in the usual way, and had casually omitted the word Saint. He did not know of such a Saint in Scripture, nor did he believe such an omission was criminal. Mr. Statham said, "Sir, I suspect you purposely omitted the word." Mr. F. B. Wright here claimed the protection of the Court.

Mr. Wright. I have now, Mr. Mayor, offered my bail, and of course claim my liberation.

Mr. Statham.-You must give twenty-four hours notice of your bail, and inquiries must be made into its sufficiency. Bail is not a matter of course. You may be kept in custody a week, Sir, for aught you know.

Mr. Wright. I am certain, Sir, that if a short time were allowed, so that this business could be made known out of doors, I should have bail offered which the Mayor must know would be sufficient.

Here another friend of Mr. Wright stepped forward and said, Mr. Mayor, if only a few minutes be allowed before you leave the hall, I am sure I can produce for Mr. Wright the most respectable bail to any amount.

Time was allowed. Mr. Wright was removed in custody to the Jury Room, having objected to be sent down amongst persons charged with crime; and, in about fifteen minutes, Mr. Wright's friend returned with two gentlemen, whose surety was not a moinent objected to. Mr. Statham asked them if they were acquainted

with the nature of the charges against Mr. Wright. He then read the information. One of the gentlemen remarked, that with Mr. Wright's religious creed he was not acquainted, but on his integrity he would venture his property. The other observed, that he agreed in the sentiments imputed to Mr. Wright, with the exception of the last, which he did not believe Mr. Wright ever espoused.

Mr. Wright was then liberated, and his departure from the Hall was only impeded by a number of other friends, eagerly pressing in to offer themselves his bail.

18. Came on at Holyroodhouse, Edinburgh, the election of one of the sixteen peers, in the room of the Earl of Rothes, deceased. The Candidates were the Marquisses of Tweeddale and Lothian. Present-Marquis of Tweeddale, Marquis of Lothian, Earl of Moray, Earl of Home, Earl of Haddington, Earl of Wemyss and March, Earl of Findlater, Earl of Leven, Earl of Marchmont, Lord Gray, Lord Torphichen, Lord Elibank, Lord Rollo. Total 13. Proxy-Lord Belhaven to the Earl of Wemyss and March.

There were also 37 signed lists from peers.

After the votes were called, the Marquis of Lothian was declared duly elected; there being for the

Marquis of Lothian. 33
Marquis of Tweeddale 18
Majority. . 15.

The following noblemen voted for the Marquis of Lothian :

Duke of Buccleuch, Duke of Atholl, Duke of Montrose, Duke

of

of Roxburghe, Marquis of Queensberry, Marquis of Tweeddale, Earl of Morton, Earl of Caithness, Earl of Moray, Earl of Home, Earl of Strathmore, Earl of Kellie, Earl of Haddington, Earl of Dumfries and Bute, Earl of Elgin, Earl of Findlater, Earl of Leven, Earl of Balcarras, Earl of Aboyne, Earl of Dunmore, Earl of Marchmont, Earl of Glasgow, Earl of Portmore, Earl of Hopetoun, Viscount Arbuthnot, Viscount Dunblane, Lord Forbes, Lord Gray, Lord Sinclair, Lord Somerville, Lord Napier, Lord Forrester, Lord Elibank. Total 33.

For the Marquis of Tweeddale: -Duke of Gordon, Duke of Argyll, Marquis of Lothian, Earl of Errol, Earl of Eglington, Earl of Cassilis, Earl of Lauderdale, Earl of Kinnoul, Earl of Wemyss and March, Earl of Kintore, Earl of Aberdeen, Earl of Stair, Earl of Roseberry, Lord Torphichen, Lord Blantyre, Lord Reay, Lord Belhaven, Lord Rollo. Total 18.

18. On Friday two gentlemen appeared, by appointment, before the magistrates of London, in general quarter sessions, at the sessions hall, in the Old Bailey, as members and officers of the Academical Society held in Chancerylane, and produced the books of regulations, list of members, &c. together with a petition for a license. The magistrates present were the Lord Mayor, with Aldermen Sir John Perring, Sir William Domville, and Joshua Jonathan Smith. Their petition, which was duly presented and read, prayed for a license, "for the investigation and discussion of philosophical, literary, bistorical, and poVOL. LIX.

litical subjects, as heretofore," at the rooms of the society.

Some question arising upon the word political, the following discussion took place :

Lord Mayor.-What class of political questions forms the subject of your debates?

Petitioners.-Politics generally, my lord, under the restrictions specified in the books in your lordship's hands, and subject to the approval or rejection of a council. We are ready to produce our books, and give any information that may be required.

Alderman Smith.-This is too general; it would admit unlimited discussion, and open a door to debates of the most improper tendency.

Petitioners.-Reference to our list of members, and printed rules, will remove all fear of abuse. This society has existed above nineteen years, with unimpeached character; and was licensed by the magistrates of Hatton-garden, under the former act, with no hesitation, and with the single doubt whether it came within the provisions of the statute. No persons are eligible but members of universities or inns of court, and many of its members have been, and are, members likewise of the house of commons.

Lord Mayor.-In short, it is a school of oratory?

Petitioners.-Yes, my lord, private application was made to the law officers of the crown for exemption, but we were referred to the sessions, as a matter of course. Your worships will observe, that a license will not protect us from the consequences of its abuse.

D

Our