lieve the sufferers; hundreds were saved by means of boats and rafts, and provisions sent to the villages from ten to fifteen miles distant : a violent storm and thick drifting snow increased the danger incurred by those who attempted to afford relief. 22. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT. -Xavier Chabert, the fire eater, who described himself in his schedule as a resident of Dublin, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Liverpool, and London, a professor of chymistry and pyrotechny, a general commission-merchant, and an exhibitor of curiosities, was opposed by Mr. Nicholls, on behalf of the Messrs. Preston, of Edinburgh, haberdashers, from whom he received muslins to the value of nearly 400/ In answer to questions put to him by counsel, he stated, that he was in the habit of putting fire and molten lead into his mouth. He professed to swallow them, but he only put them into his mouth, and took them out again in a sly manner, for they were too hot to eat. He could swallow prussic acid without experiencing any ill effects from it; that's what he called pyrotechny. He had five partners in the beginning, but, as they were not thriving, he latterly acted alone. He had a counting-house in Dunster-hill, but he had no property, except a wife and child. He re ceived goods from his opponents through a traveller, and he sold them in a week after to a Mr. Christoph, who never paid him, and who could not now be found any where. When the time for paying his opponents had arrived, apprehensive of being arrested, he put all the goods, which he had in the counting-house, into a coach to carry them off, and when he See infru, page 167, 24. came to the place where he was to deposit them, he met an officer going to arrest him: he, therefore, ran off, left his books, &c. in the coach, and could never find them since. The Court discharged him, MARINERS. KING'S BENCH. The King v. David Enans. This was an information filed by the Attorney-general, under the statute of the 11th of Wil, liam III., against the defendant for having as captain of the ship Bis. cayan, refused to bring back from Genoa, a seaman named Steinson, who was engaged on board that ship. The Solicitor-general, in stating the case for the prosecu tion, observed, that the present information was filed against the defendant, the captain of a ship trading from Liverpool to the Me. diterranean, for having violated most salutary statute of the 11th of William III., which subjected to three months' imprisonment any master of a British vessel who should leave at a foreign port and refuse to bring home any British seamen belonging to his vessel→→→ Steinson had been engaged by the defendant as steward, in a voy. age to Genoa and Leghorn and back to Liverpool. The vessel sailed from Liverpool in January, 1828. During the voyage there was some quarrelling between Steinson and the captain and mates. On the arrival of the vessel at Genoa, after the cargo had been discharged, the defendant complained to the British consul of Steinson's conduct, and Steinson was in consequence placed in pri son at Genoa, where he remained for two days and two nights. The consul then told the defendant that he was bound to take Steinson back to England, or find another vessel for him. The de fendant refused to take the man on board again; but said that there was a brig called the Tiffin ready to sail for England, which was short of a hand, and Steinson might, if he liked, return in that. Steinson then applied to the master of the Tiffin; but being unable to agree about wages, the consul again sent him to the defendant, to whom he addressed a letter. The defendant, who was on the point of sailing from Genoa, refused either to look at the letter or to take the man on board, and sailed for Palermo with out him. Steinson remained for about three weeks at Genoa, where he was maintained by the British consul, and was ultimately sent to England at the public expense. Mr. Brougham (for the defendant) cross-examined Steinson and another witness (who was called to corroborate his testimony), with a view to show that he had refused to do his duty on the voyage to Genoa, had been guilty of disobedience, and had quarrelled and struck the second mate, who had challenged him to fight. The jury immediately pronounced a verdict of Guilty. 25. SEDITIOUS PLACARDS. LAMBETH-STREET.-A ruffianly looking fellow, who gave his name James Bird, was brought before Mr. Wyatt, charged by Keys, an officer of Bow-street, with collecting a mob, and hawking inflammatory publications in the Whitechapel-road. From the statement of Keys it appeared, that, while on his patrole, his attention was attracted by a very crowded mob assembled in the road, and a person in the centre flourishing some papers, and haranguing those about him with violent gesticulations. He went up to ascertain what was going on, and heard the prisoner addressing his auditors in language calculated to excite a breach of the peace, and urging on them the purchase of some paper, which he called " a dialogue on the Catholic question." He desired him to desist, but he refused, and he (Keys) being convinced, that, if there had been any Irishman or Roman Catholic within his hearing, there would have been some violent outrage, on his refusal to leave the place took both him and his papers into custody, and brought him to the office. The papers were of a religious charac ter, and inveighed, in very seditious and inflammatory language, against his majesty's ministers for their conduct as to the Catholic Relief bill. The papers, about three thousand in number, were here handed to the bench, and were headed, "An account of a Conversation between St. Paul's Cathedral and the Monument." The printer's name was Carpue and Son, Rose-lane, Spitalfields. The duke of Wellington was accused of treason, and Mr. Peel as his abettor in his designs. The defendant was ordered to find security for his good behaviour for the next three months, and to give twenty-four hours notice of bail. 27. FIRE IN WESTMINSTER ABBEY.-A few minutes after 10 o'clock in the evening, flames were seen issuing from the north transept of Westminster Abbey. The alarm being given, the ten o'clock bel was rung, and the Abbey was soon surrounded by crowds. The Dean of Westminster was out of town, but every assistance was afforded from his house, which is situated in the cloisters, and a supply of water was furnished by means of buckets. the hours at which the workmen From the confusion and alarm which prevailed, there was some difficulty in reaching the place where the fire had broken out: the fire-escape was tried, but found too short to reach the spot. The door leading to the vaultings of the edifice was opened, and several men having ascended the stairs nearest to the flames, it was ascertained that the screen had caught fire, and fallen on the boards, which were in a blaze. The fire was fast communicating to the roof, and for some time threatened destruction to the building. The engines soon arrived, but the firemen were unable to bring the leathern pipes to operate with effect, though they came in time to prevent the further spread of the conflagration. Had the alarm been given half an hour later, the roof of the Abbey must have been entirely consumed, and probably the greater part of the building. The damage done was fortunately very trifling, being merely the destruction of a screen or partition formed out of a castoff scene once used in the Westminster plays. This screen had been put up some time before, to exclude one of the nooks or recesses in the gallery nearly over the communion table, and the space thus enclosed was used as a sort of lumber-room. It was a part of the building into which no person had access, except the workmen usually employed in repairing the roof, and as there were no repairs in progress, the cause of the fire was involved in mystery. No combustible matter was found. An inquiry was instituted before the magistrates of Queen's-square office, but led to no result. Hollicombe and Mr. Carter stated VOL. LXXI. Mr. were admitted to the Abbey, which was from nine o'clock in the morning until six o'clock in the evening, when all the gates were made securely fast, and the keys safely deposited. Two Italian modellers and a labourer, who were the only persons employed in that part of the building where the fire occurred, were next closely examined, but nothing was elicited to criminate any one. A number of workmen were also examined, who had been for a considerable time employed about the Abbey, but it was proved that on the day of the fire they were engaged at a house in the Little Cloisters. It appeared from further evidence, that any person, who had gotten access to the Abbey, would find no difficulty in picking the locks in king Henry VIIth's chapel, from their simple construction and defective state. It is supposed they are upwards of two hundred years old, and from every appearance they seemed to have been picked, particularly at the door where it was supposed the entrance was gained. Orders have since been given for new locks to be put on the doors of both aisles of Henry VIIth's chapel. Mr. Carter stated, to some questions by the magistrates, that the men, who were employed in modelling, were not permitted on any occasion the use either of fire or candle. It was stated in the course of the examination, that footmarks were perceivable in a passage near a door where it is supposed that the incendiaries must have entered, the stairs being indented with rough hobnails, and marks of iron-shod shoes: accordingly the shoes of most of the workmen were inspected, but they did not tally with the marks so deG scribed. One of the witnesses deposed to finding a piece of lead nearly half a hundred weight, near the door at Poet's-corner, which it was supposed had been taken from some part of the Abbey. The general opinion was, that the fire had been occasioned accidentally by some persons who had entered the Abbey for plunder, or rather had remained concealed in it after service in the afternoon. The difficulty was, how had they made their escape? and that they were supposed to have effected by a small door on the right hand of the south side of Henry VIIth's chapel, situated within one of the abutments. This door was scarcely ever opened, and was secured only by a bolt on the inside, without any outer fastening. The staircase communicates with the northern transept; at the bot tom of these stairs the lead mentioned above was found, which had been stripped off the roof; and the door was open. A few yards opposite from the door is the iron-railing which surrounds the chapel, and marks and footsteps were plainly traced; the top of the railing was muddy, and had the appearance of a place over which some persons had escaped. ADMISSION OF CATHOLIC PEERS. -On Tuesday, the 28th the House of Lords resumed its sittings after the Easter holidays. On the left side of the House several ladies were seated, to witness the expected introduction of the Catholic peers into their lordships' House. Soon after, the duke of Norfolk, lord Clifford, and lord Dormer entered, accompanied by several noble friends, and proceeded to the table of the House, and sèverally took the oath prescribed by the late Roman Catholic Relief bill. On Friday, the 1st of May, three other Catholic peers, lord Stafford, lord Petre, and lord Stourton, took their seats. 29. UNION HALL.-About four months ago, the son of a Mr. Roberts, residing in the neighbour, hood of Cavendish-square, left home for the purpose of proceeding to a day-school in one of the adjacent streets. Not returning home when he was expected, inquiries were made, and it was ascertained that he had not been at school that day. His parents became extremely uneasy at his absence, as night approached; and although every effort was made to discover tidings of the lad, the night passed away without his return. The following day redoubled exertions were made to find him, but every method to trace him was unattended with success. Four months had elapsed, and still no tidings were heard of the boy, and his parents and friends gave him up as lost. On the 11th of February last, a squalid-looking boy, about eleven years of age, in a starving condition, with clothes scarcely sufficient to cover his body, and without either shoes or stockings, was taken before the magis trates of Union-hall. He had been seen the same morning in Kent-street, singing ballads, by a Mrs. Richardson, the wife of a tradesman, who, taking compassion on his forlorn state, questioned him and his answers convinced her, notwithstanding the condition in which he then appeared, that he had been tenderly reared, and was far above the sphere of those persons whose necessities compel them to wander about the streets to gain a livelihood by such means. Mrs. Richardson took the boy home; and having given him food, which he stood very much in need of, accompanied him to Union-hall, and having stated the circumstances under which she found him, the magistrates gave directions that he should be admitted into Newington workhouse, until inquiries were made respecting his relatives. When at the police-office, the boy's appearance indicated want and privation: his clothes were covered with vermin (not having been changed for a length of time), and his legs and feet were swollen in such a manner, that he could walk only with difficulty: he declared that he had not slept in a bed for three weeks previously, but had lain down in carts and outhouses. It was apparent, however, that he wished to conceal the abode of his friends, and in order to strengthen this belief, he said that his father and mother were dead. While in the workhouse, Joseph Snow, the beadle of Newington, all along suspecting that the boy was deceiving them, and that he had friends in town, tried every expedient to ascertain the fact, in order that he might be restored to his parents, and the parish relieved from the burthen of his support. With this view, he questioned him over and over again, but the boy still persisted in declaring that he was an orphan, and actually remained from the 11th of February until last Wednesday an inmate of the workhouse. A morning or two previous to the day mentioned, Snow, still impressed with the belief that the youngster was imposing on him, began to ask him some of the usual questions, as to whether he could tell where his father resided when he was alive. The boy answered that his father used to live in East-street, Cavendish-square, opposite the sign of the "Leopard" public-house and actually gave the name of an undertaker residing in the same street, who he said had buried his father. On hearing this, Snow, imagining he might obtain some information on the subject, took the boy thither, and having inquired, found that an undertaker of that name formerly lived in the street, but that he had long since removed, and no one could tell his present address. The landlord of the 66 Leopard" disclaimed any knowledge of the boy, as also did a Mr. Bennet, of Welbeck-street, a master chimney-sweeper, who the boy alleged used to sweep his father's chimnies. Snow finding all inquiries fruitless, was about to return back to the workhouse with his young charge, when, in passing the end of a street leading out of Welbeck-street, a little boy came running up to our young hero, and addressing him by the name of Roberts, expressed much pleasure in seeing him. Snow, immediately on seeing the little fellow, detained him, until he gave such an account as led to the discovery of the abode of the father of this extraordinary boy, with whom it appeared the little informant had been a schoolfellow before the former abandoned his home. Snow, acting upon this information, repaired to the resi dence pointed out to him and there found Mr. Roberts, the boy's father. The beadie having expressed a wish that the father of the boy would attend before the magistrates, Mr. Roberts appeared at Unionhall. The only explanation he could give of his son's conduct was, that the boy, having contracted a small debt in the neighbourhood, and being fearful that he would be chastised for it, had suffered the |