1 SEPTEMBER 1832, Page 3

STEAIM-VESSELS.—The master of the Gravesend steam packet was charged at

the Thames Police Office on Tuesday with propelling his

vessel beyond the legal speed. The complaint was laid under the 42d by-law of the Mayor and Aldermen, by the Watermen's Company.

Mr. Ryland, who appeared as their counsel on the occasion, said— If these proceedings failed in suppressing the nuisance, the Watermen's Com- pany would give the proper notiees, and wake an application to the Legislature an the next session to pass a law to prevent steam-vessels coming into the Pool at all; where great caution was necessary to prevent accidents, owing to the large mass of property and the number of persons, watermen and lightermen, always floating about the river.

The facts, which were not denied, were sworn to as follows— On Monday the 14th ult., the Essex left Fresh Wharf, London Bridge, and she was exactly eight minutes proceeding to the London Dock entrance at Wapping — a distance of 1 mile and 25 poles, including stoppages. She stopped twice between London Bridge and the Dock entrance, and each stop- occupied a minute. From the Dock entrance to the King's Arms, Lime- ease Reach, a distance of 2 miles 3 furlongs and 32 poles, the Essex was fif- teen minutes, making the whole distance of Smiles 4 furlongs and 17 poles in the space of twenty-three minutes, or about twelve miles an hour.

Mr. Ballantine gave judgment against the Captain of the vessel. He said— It was not possible for a steam-vessel to navigate the river between London Bridge and Greenwich without doing some damage to the boats on its margin, which were tossed about by the slightest swell, and of course more or less in- jured; and there was no remedy for the evil but to keep steamers out of the Pool altogether. If a boat was injured, the poor waterman had to pay for the repair of it out of his hard earnings ; while a portion of the public were deprived of the use of the Thames as a public highway, and were afraid to venture upon it lest they should be wetted or drowned by the swell caused by the paddles of a steam-vessel. He must declare that he saw no mitigatory circumstances in this case. If the defendant had tried to conform to the law, he should not have been disposed to inflict the highest penalty, but here it was proved the vessel was pro- ceeding at more than double the speed allowed by law. He therefore felt him- self called upon to inflict the full penalty of 5/. and costs on Captain Hallsey, for going beyond the legal speed of five miles an hour ; and, as he was certain that could not be done without endangering people's lives, he called upon him to find hail, himself in 100/. and two sureties ta 50/. each, to keep the peace for the next twelve months, and to manage his steamer so as not to place the lives and property of his Majesty's subjects in danger.

Notice of appeal to the Sessions was given by the solicitor for the Captain a the Essex.

The case of the Essex disposed of, Mr. John Barrett, the owner and master of a sailing barge, of twenty tons burden, laid a com- plaint against the Brilliant Gravesend steam-vessel, for swamping bis barge, containing eleven tons of salt. Mr. Barrett said, that about half-past eight o'clock on Saturday evening, he was proceed- ing towards Barking, and when off the Orchard House, Blackwall, he met the Brilliant coming up at the rate of eleven or twelve miles an hour, and she had no sooner passed than the heavy swell which she caused washed over his barge. He and his boy had scarcely time to jump into his boat, when two waves dashed over her and she sunk. He was afraid lie should not recover the barge, and he was a ruined man. The cargo of salt was of course gone. Mr. Ballantine--" Can you swear the.vessel was going at the rate of snore than five miles an hour ?"

Mr. Barrett could swear she was going at snore than double that. speed.

:Mr. Ballantine—" You shall have a summons."

LEVY THE Bem.—This person, whose exploits were sung in the streets, and were the subject of an action for libel two or three years

ago, was indicted on Thursday, at the Middlesex Sessions, for a gross

and scandalous assault on a respectable ;flurried lady, the wife of Mr. Stevens, formerly Registrar of the Supreme Court in New South

Wales, from which office he was driven by Gemini Darling. Mr. Stevens is now in London, seeking, with a singular vanity of expeeta- ton, redress from Government for the injury sustained from the act of

Government functionary. fie had become involved in difficulties, or was alleged to be so—which, for the purposes of oppression, is, in

English law, the same; and a writ issued against him was intrusted

to the care of Mr. Levy, who proceeded to execute it at Mr. Stevens's lodgings, 7, Smith Square. At the trial, Mrs. Stevens gave evidence to the assault— She occupied the first floor, and made a practice of dressing herself in the room that opened upon the stairs, because there was a fire in it, and she was of infirm health. In May last, her servant, on bringing her some warm water, informed her that a person bringing a letter fern a Mr. Andrews wished to see Mr. Stevens. Whilst she was delivering this message to her husband, who was in bed in the inner room, Levy rushed into the outer room in spite of the ser- vent, who told him that there was a lady undressed in it. He threw down the servant both by pushing and striking her. Mrs. Stevens, seeing a man in the front room, endeavoured, as she was without dressing-gown, shoes, or stockings, to retreat to the bed-room ; hut he rushed forward towards the bed-room, at the same time pushing her violently, and striking her, so as that she must have fallen on the floor, had it not been for a sofa. She then told him that if he had


the feelins of a man he ought to retire ; the blow was one that hurt her. Her husband was in bed, and no attempt was made to conceal him. flehad a petition to the House of Commons relative to a dispute with General Darling. He was about the House every day, and constantly coming backwards and forwards ; so that there could be no difficulty in arresting him at any time. She had no dress- ing gown on, and was not aware of making any attempt to shut the bed-room door. She was certain she did not lock it, as 'there was no key to that doer. The servant did not deny Mr. Stevens. When he was arrested, he went quietly with the officer. He was discharged on a Judge's order. Margaret Kibb, servant to Mrs. Stevens, said, she did not deny her master to Levy. She did not know the prisoner was a Sheriff's officer ; he never said so till after he had struck her. The bed-room door, she believed, v.-a, shut in the scuffle between her mistress, Levy, and herself. She did not shut it. She was not near enough to do so. Mr. Stevens said, he never once secreted himself; he could be seen in every part of the town, as all his friends could testify. He had been arrested twelve months before, on the suit of a person named Hebb, and had been confined in Levy's house fourteen days, as the Judges were at the time out of town. On thew return, an order was instantly granted for his discharge. He parted with Levy without having had any personal quarrel with him. During the fourteen days he remained in his house, he paid loins a guinea a day, besides expenses. To Gombert, at whose instance this last warrant was issued against him, he did not owe a single farthing ; on the contrary, Gombert was his debtor.

A fellow named Johnson, with an alias of Davis, a Jew, was pro- duced by Levy, for the purpose of endeavouring to give a different colouring to the affair. He swore point-blank contrary to every weird of evidence given by the three witnesses for the prosecution. The Chairman in summing up, said that Levy, in the outset, ought to have thrown himself upon the mercy of the Court, instead of calling such a witness as Davis, who only made the case ten times worse than it was. When the law was infringed by a person who had the execution of a most vexatious part of it, that person did not deserve, and ought not to expect, mercy at their hands. The Jury found the prisoner Guilty of the assault. There was a secoud indictment against Levy for an assault upon Margaret Kibb, the servant. To this he pleaded Guilty. What was the punishment inflicted on the officer, for a gross and in- famous outrage, aggravated ten times by the defence made to it ?—A fine of twenty pounds for striking and knocking down Mrs. Stevens, and one shilling for striking her servant'! The gentleman, who charges a guinea a-day besides expenses for permitting his prisoners to remain in a grated parlour instead of a grated prison, wrote a cheek on his banker for the amount, and walked out of the office.

MANSLAUGHTER.—On Wednesday sennight, about two o'clock, there was a rowing-match at Kew Bridge, upon which occasion it was intended to fire a salute of twelve small cannon, whieh were ranged in a brick-field on the bank of the river. Eleven of the cannon were

loaded by a man named John Webb ; and upon the first being fired by a man named Fulcour, it burst, and Webb, who was standing at least twenty yards from the piece, and about thirty or forty persons standing between it and him, was struck with a portion of it, and immediately fell. He died on Wednesday last. The case was examined at the Coroner's inquest held on the body on Wednesday night. Mr. Henry Hughes, oil and colourman, at Old Brentford, deposed that he procured the twelve cannon in question from Mr. Robert Carr, of Grosvenor Street, Millbank, iron-founder. They were made to order. He sent a pattern. About a forni;ght ago, in proving four of the pieces, one burst, and it was sent back to Mr. Carr: he returned one, as was supposed, in its stead ; but from subsequent examination it appeared that it was the same gun, having been patched up at Mr. Carr's factory. The same piece burst under the touch-hole on Monday.

There was .a fissure in the cannon which burst underneath the touch-

hole, which fissure had been filled with lead; the bore was "all on one side ;" the cannon, in fact, had not been bored in the usual way after being cast in the solid, but had been cast just as it appeared. Mr. Hughes said he had applied to Mr. Carr upon the subject; and Mr. Carr admitted that he had tried a great number of the same sort of guns of his own manufacture, and that about two out of every twelve had burst. The remains of the piece and its carriage having been brought into the inquest-room, the Coroner, after an examination, said, the gun was made of materials of the very worst kind, and that the man who constructed it ought to be indicted for daring to put such a thing into any one's hands. Others of the cannon supplied by Mr. Carr were then, by order of the Coroner, examined ; and they proved to be of the same construction, and of the same kind of material, all equally de- fective.

The Coroner, in his charge, observed, that any thing more repfehen- sible than sending out such instruments to be used by inexperienced persons, could scarcely be imagined. There could be no doubt, that if the deceased had sustained an injury short of death, Mr. Carr would have been subject to heavy damages in an action at law. If the Jury were of opinion that the accident was attributable to culpable negli- gence on the part of Mr. Carr, their verdict would be one of man- slaughter; otherwise they would give a verdict of accidental death, *nth such observations as,they might think it proper to make.

The Jury, after ten minutes' consultation, returned a verdict of " Mans/aughter" against Mr. Robert Carr; and a -warrant was issued by the Coroner for his apprehension and committal to Newgate for trial, and the witnesses were bound over to prosecute. Acttrious but not uncommon specimen of civic prudence accompanied the verdict. . One of the Jury said, he was quite satisfied upon the

evidence that they could not come to any other conclusion ; but he felt some difficulty upon the subject of the expense that a prosecution would entail upon the parish. Perhaps, looking to the monstrous expense which a prosecution entails in this country, the difficulty of the juror is not to be severely blamed ; but, of all the libels on the Constitution, was a more severe one ever published than such a difficulty implies? Such is the state of English law, that a plain man doubts whether the greatest atrocity were not properly passed over, rather than incur the charge of prosecuting it. If even a parish may properly hesitate in such cases, what is to be expected where an individual only is con- cerned?

HURRIED INTERMENTS.—We made a few remarks last week on the absurdity of the orders so inconsiderately issued, and, as all inconsider- ate orders are, so promptly enforced, for the interment of persons who are said to have died of cholera. The following Police report ex- emplifies the subject so completely, that it is quite unnecessary to add a word of comment.

On Tuesday, Mr. Dix, the Assistant-Overseer of the parish of St. Giles-in- the-Fields, came before Mr. Roe, of Bow Street, and stated that a person had died of cholera in the Seven-Dials, and the parochial authorities, in obedience to the instructions of the Board of Health, had intimated their intention of causing the immediate removal of the body for interment. The relatives, how- ever, had declared that they would resist the burial; and under these circum ' - stances the parochial authorities were desirous of obtaining the assistance of the Police, in order that the body might forthwith be removed for inter- ment.

Mr. Roe directed Dodd, the Inspector of Police, to proceed immediately with a sufficient number of the force, and attend the parish officers in the execution of their duty, in order to prevent any breach of the peace that might take place. The Magistrate further directed, that if any persons resisted the law, they should be at once taken into custody, and brought before him in the morn- ing, in order that they might be dealt with by fine or otherwise. -The Inspector, upon receiving these instructions left the office ; and shortly after, Mr. Thomas, the Superintendent, attended before Mr. Roe, and said he understood that he had given some directions to his men respecting the removal of a person who had died of cholera.

Mr. Roe replied, that he had directed a sufficient number of the force to at- tend the parish officers, in order to see that there was no breach of the peace. Mr. Thomas said, that the instructions of the Police Commissioners were, that the Police force should not interfere in enforcing the burial of persons who died of cholera.

Mr. Roe immediately directed Ellis the officer to proceed, without delay, to the parish authorities of St. Giles's, and say that it was his desire that twenty special constables, chosen from the inhabitants of the parish, should be sum- moned forthwith and sent before him, in order to be sworn in for the purpose of enforcing the burial of the deceased. The Magistrate also directed that the principal officers under his immediate control should attend the special con- stables, and direct them how to act.

After the lapse of about half an hour, the'Beadle of St. Giles's conveyed a message from Mr. Dix to Mr. Roe, stating that every endeavour had been used to procure the householders to act as special constables for the occasion re- quired, but without effect. The Beadle said, there appeared to be a great unwillingness on the part of the inhabitants to act. He had been to the -house where -the body lay, and had seen that the coffin in which it was contained was properly secured and pitched over.

Mr. Roe said that men must be procured at any rate, and that the body must be immediately buried. He directed that the watermen of Strand Lane should be applied to, and that 58. a man should be given to them for their trouble.

On these terms, between twenty and thirty men were speedily collected ; and having been sworn in as special constables for the occasion, were placed under the direction of the principal officers, and proceeded to execute the task assigned to them.