IlLbe _Metropolis.

The Anti-Corn-law League met once more in Co vent Garden Theatre, on Wednesday ; when there was a very full attendance, for the purpose of hearing Mr. Villiers report progress on his Repeal motion in the House of Commons. Mr. G. Wilson was in the chair ; and adverted to the division in the Commons on opening the business. He con- gratulated the friends of free trade on the advance their principles had made.

This year the minority who voted with Mr. Villiers was 126, and last year there was the same number. Here, however, was the proof of their progress. In 1842, Mr. Villiers, for the first time, put the total and unconditional repeal principle before the House of Commons : on that occasion 92 voted for him, whilst 395, a great majority of the whole House, voted against him. Now his minority was increased by 34, and their majority was reduced by 65; leaving them, by their own showing, a has majority than they had in 1842 by 100. But upon this occasion, although the number in the minority was the same as last year, they had 28 new votes in favour of the motion, and 32 who supported Mr. Villiers in 1843 were unavoidably absent; leaving their strength in the House, including pairs, very nearly 170. There had been no general election, and no means of operating upon the Members except by reason and argument ; yet in two years the minority had nearly doubled its numbers. Mr. Villiers also analyzed the division, and showed that 28 Members who had not previously voted for free trade had supported his motion for the abolition of the Corn-laws. He repudiated the notion that the majority against him and the declaration of Sir Robert Peel had settled the question and secured protection to agriculture. Sir Robert Peel might stick to the sliding scale, but would the people stick to Sir Roberti' The agriculturist who would lay out a shilling on the land in the hope that the sliding scale could he persevered in must be an arrant fool. Monopoly had no spokesman in the House to advocate, no public opinions out of doors to support it ; and in that position its disciples were compelled to run back to Sir Robert Peel, and eat humble-pie at his hands. Mr. Cobden thanked Mr. Villiers, in the name of the League and the country, for the consistent and steady course he had pursued. The Duke of Richmond in the House of Lords, and the Squirearchy in the Commons, said the agricultural population were as one man to resist the League ; the assertions were not true, and those who made them knew they were not true. They tried by making such assertions to keep up their courage, like a schoolboy whistling as he passed by night through a churchyard.

The agriculturists were avowedly in the greatest distress; and what did the landowners tell them to do for the purpose of remedying it? What they re- commended was, that the agriculturists should petition Parliament to let matters remain exactly as they are. (Cheers and laughter.) The League had assembled that night as for a sort of leave-taking, as their weekly meetings were drawing to a close. They would leave, however, with the utmost confi- dence that they had given the question of free trade an impetus not only in Europe and America, but throughout the whole world. He entreated all sup- porters of free trade in corn not to connect themselves with any particulae party ; as there never was a period where the Parliamentary opposition to the Government had so little sympathy from without, because there was but little distinction between the party in and the party out, and the measures pressed upon the Government did not interest the people. (Loud cheers.) Mr. Bright alluded tauntingly to the aristocracy being obliged to lean for support on Sir Robert Peel and Mr. Gladstone, the sons of men who had raised themselves to affluence by their industry and by the ex- tension of commerce. Neither of them could boast that

" his blood " Has crept through scoundrels ever since the flood."

Yet these were the men in whose hands the aristocracy placed what they called the interests of the nation. It was difficult to say which party stood in the most disgraceful position—the men who relied for safety upon those whom they despised, or the sons of men who, owing their all to the operations of trade and the extension of commerce, aided the aristocracy in their opposition to the extension of both.

Mr. Bright then attacked the editors of the Standard and Herald, in an abusive and personal manner, for having endeavoured to stir up the manufacturing classes against the owners of factories.

The Chairman announced that the League would not meet again until Wednesday the 7th August, which would be the last night of their reassembling for the present season. Before breaking-up, be called on them to give three cheers for Mr. Villiers, Mr. Cobden, Lord Ducie, Lord Howick, and the other noblemen and gentlemen who had taken part in their proceedings. The call was eagerly responded to, and the meeting broke up.

What is called a meeting of " the inhabitants of Westminster " was held in Covent Garden on Monday, to reprobate the O'Connell prosecution, and to petition Parliament for the release of the State prisoners. The High Bailiff took the chair Mr. Thomas Duncombe was the chief spokesman ; among the other speakers were Colonel Rawdon the Member for Armagh, Mr. Feargus O'Connor, and Dr. Wade. The Members for Westminster were not present ; and Mr. Duncombe pointedly alluded to the fact.

A large meeting was held at Saville House, Leicester Square, on Monday evening, for the purpose of considering the conduct of Sir James Graham relative to the breaking open of letters sent through the Post-office. Resolutions for supporting Mr. T. Duncombe, and of thanks for the fearless manner in which he had brought the subject for- ward, were passed unanimously. A resolution denouncing the con- duct of Sir James Graham was no less heartily carried; and a petition to the House of Commons agreed to.

A meeting in opposition to church-rates was held at Greenwich on Monday ; at which Admiral Dundas, the Member for the borough, pre- sided. A resolution condemning church-rates, especially in Green- wich, was passed, and another for the formation of a Greenwich Anti- Church-rate Association.

The writs of error in which Mr. O'Connell and his six fellow-pri- soners are plaintiffs came for hearing before the House of Lords on Thursday morning. Ail the Law Lords, with the exception of Lord

Langdale, were in the House. Lord Chief Justice Tindal, Mr. Justice Patteson, Mr. Justice Williams, Mr. Justice Coleridge, Mr. Justice Colt-

man, Mr. Justice Maule, Mr. Baron Parke, Mr. Baron Alderson, and Mr. Baron Gurney attended. Sir T. Wilde, Mr. M. D. Hill, Mr. Kelly, Sergeant Murphy, Mr. Crompton, Mr. David Leahy, Mr. J. W. Smith, Mr. Close, Mr. Peacock, and Sir Coleman O'Loghlen, appeared as coun- sel for the plaintiffs in error ; the Attorney-General, the Solicitor- General, the Attorney-General for Ireland, Mr. Waddington, Mr. Napier, and Mr. Smyly, for the Crown. Considerable time was occupied in arranging the course of proceed- ings, and how many counsel were to be heard. Sir Thomas Wilde said the defendants had brought separate writs of error, and were re- presented by separate counsel : he proposed that four counsel should address their Lordships, and they would as much as possible direct their observations to separate poiuts. The Lord Chancellor reminded Mr. Sergeant Wilde, that the Circuits are fixed for Wednesday next: there- fore there were only four days for considering this question, one of which would probably be required for deliberation by the Judges ; consequently, unless the arguments were brought to a close in three days, the case would necessarily remain over till next session. Ser- geant Wilde said, he and his learned friends would do what they could to shorten the case ; but he gave no hope of being able to bring it to a close within the time specified : anxious as they were to hasten it, the ends of justice were paramount in their consideration.

Sir Thomas Wilde then opened his case. The first of the writs of error contains thirty-four reasons why judgment should be set aside ; most of them founded on the objections raised by the counsel of the pri- soners during their long trial. They turn upon nice technicalities of the law, of little or no interest to the general reader; consisting of ob- jections to the mode of swearing the Jury, to the vagueness of the charges in the indictment, to the form of the judgment, and to the con- tinuance of the trial after the end of term, and such like. To these ques- tions Sir Thomas Wilde adverted in the course of his speech, which lasted upwards of five hours. He particularly dwelt upon the point that the indictment, containing eleven counts, had failed to show several of the acts alleged to be unlawful—such as the assembling together in large bodies to obtain a repeal of the Union. Sir Thomas Wilde concluded his argument at five o'clock ; when the further hearing was adjourned till Friday.

On Friday, the case was resumed by Mr. Peacock, who appeared on behalf of Mr. D. O'Connell. He confined his argument to the judgment. It had been given against the defendants for a greater number of of- fences than they were charged with in the indictment ; it had been en- tered wrongly ; it was bad as regarded the recognizances the parties were called to enter into; it was bad in not havinggiven judgment of acquittal on those counts of the indictment on which the defendants had been found not guilty ; nod, finally, he contended that their Lordships had not power to amend the judgment, but that it must be reversed, and the parties discharged. On these points Mr. Peacock entered at length; being frequently interrupted in the course of his argument by remarks and questions by the Lord Chancellor and Lord Campbell. Mr. Hill, who appeared for Messrs. Steele and Barrett, addressed their Lordships in support of the objections that the witnesses had not been sworn in open court, and that the challenge of the array by the defend- ants had been disallowed. The arguments on these points were con- tinued till five o'clock ; and as Mr. Hill could not promise to conclude in a few minutes, their Lordships adjourned till this day.

The Court of Queen's Bench was occupied on Monday and Tuesday with an action brought by Mr. Kinder against Lord Ashburton, the Honourable Francis Baring, and Mr. H. St. John Mildmay, for a con- spiracy to inflict an injury on him with respect to the Parras estate, purchased by both parties in Mexico. This estate occupied 8,000,000 acres, extending from one side of the coast of Mexico to the other ; and in 1825 it was purchased by Mr. Francis Baring for the house of Baring, and Mr. Holdsworth for the house of Staples and Company of Mexico, of which Mr. Kinder was the principal partner ; the price agreed upon being one million dollars. Mr. Baring and Mr. Holds- worth each paid 100,000 dollars down, and agreed to pay the remainder by annual instalments. To pay this sum, Mr. Holdsworth had ex- pended the money left by Mr. Kinder, who had proceeded to London, to pay the instalments of the Peruvian Loan, fur which he was con• tractor ; Mr. Kinder was consequently unable to pay an instalment of the loan and to meet his other engagements. Messrs. Baring had early discovered that the estate was a bad bargain, and were willing to forfeit what they had paid to get rid of it ; and to escape their engagements with Staples and Company, it was alleged that they bribed some legislators of Mexico to pass a law preventing aliens holding estates in that country. The law was passed in March 1827. The conspiracy with which the defendants were charged was this bribery to get a law passed in Mexico to injure the plaintiff. Such were the statements of the plaintiff. A vast quantity of documentary evidence was read, and Mr. Kinder was examined. In his cross-examination, he admitted that he owed the house of Baring 16,0001. at the present moment, the balance of an account due to them on the 10th May 1825.

Mr. Kelly, for the defence, said, the plaintiff had no case to go to the Jury. So far from his having been injured by the Barings, they had treated him well : as to the annulling of the contract for purchasing the Mexican estate, instead of tending to his ruin, it was the only thing that could give Mr. Kinder a hope of retrieving his affairs, which, it was now manifest, were in a state of embarrassment before the existence of this contract was known in this country. With respect to the bribery, the Barings had erred in not saying at once that they had not authorized

it. Their agents in Mexico had done it, on their own responsibility ;, but it had not been done with a view to injure Mr. Kinder, as he at first had shown as great an inclination to get rid of the estate as the Barings had. This action was but a had return for the forbearance which had been exhibited towards Mr. Kinder with respect to the 16,000/. debt. Lord Denman summed up ; and the Jury, after an hour and twenty minutes' deliberation, gave a verdict of " Not Guilty."

The famous case of the horse Running Rein, which was in first at this year's Derby race at Epsom, came on for trial at the Court of Ex- chequer on Monday. The question for decision was, whether Running Rein was a colt foaled in 1891, whose sire was the Saddler and whose dam was Mali. Colonel Peel, the owner of Orlando, the second horse, had claimed the stakes, on the ground that Running Rein was not the horse represented; and Mr. Wood, the owner of Running Rein, brought this action against the Colonel. Mr. Cockburn, who conducted the plaintiff's case, gave the pedigree of Running Rein, and his whole his- tory. Among other things Mr. Cockburn mentioned, that in October 1843, Running Rein won a race at Newmarket ; that he was objected to on the score of age, but eventually the stewards had decided in his favour. The horse was originally the property of Mr. Goodman ; and Mr. Cockburn said, it was because suspicion attached to some transac- tions of Goodman, and because certain parties had betted heavily against Running Rein, that opposition was raised against Mr. Wood re- ceiving the stakes. He made a bitter and acrimonious attack on Lord George Bentiock ; who, he asserted, was the real party in the cause. Witnesses for the plaintiff described the horse at different periods of its career : it was of a bay colour, with black legs, and a little white OW the forehead ; its heels were cracked ; and in 1842 it broke the skin on one leg, which left a scar. George Hitchcock, a breaker of colts, em- ployed to break Running Rein in October 1842, was cross-examined to this effect- " 1 know George Dockeray the trainer. I never said to Lim, 4 Damn it, this colt has been broken before; here is the mark of the pad on his back.' I showed him the mark, but I never said these words, or any words to that effect. I don't know »by I showed him the mark. It was not big enough for the mark of a pad, and was not in the place for the saddle to make it. I told.Lord, George Bentinck the same. The mark of the pad never wears out. I recollect being asked, in the presence of Mr. Smith, what bad I there ? and I recollect. answering, a four-years old. I have not the slightest doubt of it. Mr. Smith struck me for it. I did not say afterwards that 1 had forgotten all about the horsewhipping, and that the marks of the pad had worn out. I never said, either, that somebody had behaved very well to me."

At an early period of the examination of witnesses, Mr. Baron Alder- son, before whom the case was tried, expressed a wish that he and the Jury should see the horse; and Mr. Cockburn said he had no objection. On the cross-examination of William Smith, a training-groom residing at Epsom, it came out that the horse had been smuggled out of the way, that it might not be seen by the defendant's agents. The Judge, ani- madverting on this, and on the evident lying of the witness, said it would be better that the horse should be seen by him and other patties. The Solicitor-General, who appeared for the defendant, was anxious that the horse should be seen by veterinary surgeons. To which the other side objected ; maintaining that the mark of month, by which. alone these surgeons could judge of the age of a horse, was a fallible criterion.

On the conclusion of the evidence for the plaintiff, the Solicitor- General, in addressing the Jury for the defendant, denounced the case as a gross and scandalous fraud on the part of the plaintiff. The case. of the defendant was, that the horse was not Running Rein at all, but a colt by Gladiator, out of a dam belonging originally to Sir Charles- Ibbotson ; and that "t it had the name of Running Rein imposed on it, being originally called blaccabeus, and having been entered for certain stakes under that designation. But his allegations were against Good- man, not against Mr. Wood : the former had entered into a conspiracy • with other persons to run horses above the proper age. The Gladiator colt had been entered for races under the name of Maccabees, before Goodman purchased him ; and to run these races while the colt was in training for the Derby, for which he was entered under the name of Running Rein, Goodman hired an Irish horse, which he disguised to re- present Maccabeus, though a year older than that horse. The Gladiator colt, the soi-disant Running Rein, when he ran for the Derby in 1844 was four years old ; the race being for three-year-old horses. After hearing some evidence in support of these statements, the case was adjourned till Tuesday.

On Tuesday morning, before the examination of witnesses was re- sumed, the Baron De Tessier made a communication to Colonel Peel ; and it was whispered about the court that Mr. Wood had given up the case. When Mr. Baron Alderson took his seat on the bench, a con- versation ensued between Mr. Cockburn and the Judge respecting the production of the horse : Mr. Cockburn asserted that it had been taken away without Mr. Wood's knowledge, and thus it was out of his power to produce it : he felt it would be vain to strive against the effects which must be produced by the non-production of the horse, after the remarks of the learned Judge on that point. After some more conversation,. however, the case proceeded; and two witnesses for the defence were examined ; whose evidence went to prove that Running Rein was in fact the Gladiator colt. Mr. George Odell, a horse-dealer at North- ampton, said he would swear to that fact : the colt had two marks on one leg. Mr. Baron Alderson remarked--" Now, if we could see the horse, that would prove the case. Who keeps him away ? It is quite childish to act in this manner." Mr. Cockburn now stated that Mr. Wood was convinced that he had been deceived, and gave up the case.

Mr. Baron Alderson then briefly addressed the Jury, " with much warmth, and in a most emphatic manner "; directing them to find a verdict for the defendant ; observing- " Since the opening of the case a most atrocious fraud has been proved to have been practised ; and I have seen with great regret gentlemen associating with persons much below themselves in station. if gentlemen would associate with gentlemen, and race with gentlemen, we should have no such practices. But if gentlemen will condescend to race with blackguards, they must expect to be cheated."

The Jury of course found for the defendant. Mr. Cockburn stated. that he bad received a courteous communication from Lord George. Bentinck respecting the attack that had been made upon him ; and complaining that he had not been put in the witness-box, that he might have defended himself. Mr. Cockburn excused the attack, on the ground that he bad been instructed to make it ; an excuse which Mr. Baron Alderson thought perfectly valid I Lord Huntingtower's case came before the Court of Bankruptcy on Thursday; when Mr. James said there was every prospect that at the next hearing the bona fide creditors would have a fair offer made them through his Lordship's friends.

In the Central Criminal Court, on Monday, a Jew named Saltiell was convicted of bigamy, and sentenced to a month's imprisonment. His second wife knew that the first wife was alive when she married him ; and the first claimant of his heart was aware that he was about to marry another lady, before he was wedded for the second time, yet made no objection to it.

James Cockburn Belaney, charged at the Thames Police-office with murdering his wife, was on Saturday remanded till August 7th ; the Solicitor of the Treasury not being sufficiently prepared to proceed with the case at the July sessions.

Dolmas, the murderer, who was to have been executed last Monday, was respited on Saturday, till next Monday. On Tuesday afternoon, and again on Wednesday afternoon, Dr. Sutherland and Dr. Monro, by order of the Home Secretary, went to Horsemonger Lane Gaol to in- vestigate the prisoner's state of mind; the friends of the convict having alleged that during the last two years he has been subject to fits of men- tal aberration, an effect of his severe chemical studies.

On Thursday, Dalmas was reprieved during her Majesty's pleasure ; Dr. Sutherland and Dr. Monro having had an interview with the Home Secretary and laid a report before him.

A declaration made by Fletcher, that to the best of his knowledge and belief Barber " had no guilty knowledge that the will of Anne Slack was a forgery," and that he had no guilty knowledge of the other cases of forgery, has been submitted to Sir James Graham.

A boat containing two men, named Wright and Tucker, was run down on Sunday evening, near the Penitentiary, by the Thunder river- steamer. Wright, to save himself, caught hold of one of the paddles, and was carried round the wheel ; by which he was killed and his body mangled. The other man was picked up in a state of insensibility, and afterwards died. They were young married men, and their wives were waiting for them at the time to take a short pleasure-excursion up the Thames.