i 
1843.] 
THE GARDENERS 
CHRONICLE. 
351 
complaint, the times of starting the trains being con- 
sidered, in several points, very inconvenient, and the fares 
higher than on any other railway out of the metropolis, 
and nearly double those of the competing line, the South 
Eastern or Dover railway. The result was the appoint- 
ment of a deputation to wait upon the directors, with a 
view of showing that the interests of the shareholders 
required a different policy to be adopted with regard to the 
fares, as well as the interests of Brighton, which the 
meeting considered to be injuriously affected by the high 
prices at present charged to passengers. 
IRELAND. 
Dublin.—The declarations of Ministers in both Houses 
of Parliament on Tuesday week have caused no ordinary 
sensation among all parties in Ireland, none of whom 
seem to have been prepared for the decisive step taken by 
the Government in relation to the question of repeal. At 
the meeting of the Repeal Association last week, Mr. 
O'Connell adverted to the proceedings in Parliament, and 
said that that was a great day for Ireland. He found in 
the London papers speeches attributed to Lord Roden 
and Jocelyn, and Wellington and Peel, and little “ Spring 
Rice,” as he was called in the south of Ireland. He 
rejoiced to find that their enemies had at length been 
reduced to the necessity of using Billingsgate in assailing 
the repealers. They could abuse them, but he defied them 
to accuse the repealers of acrime. A short time ago the 
English newspapers either took no notice at all of the 
repeal agitation, or put it off in a paragraph of five lines ; 
but it was so no longer, and he was gratified to find that 
the repealers were now known and feared, but that they 
could not be subdued. He thanked the newspaper Duke 
of Wellington for that; he thanked the newspaper Lord 
Roden for it; he thanked the paltry Whig Lord Lans- 
downe of the newspaper for.it, but above all he thanked 
that most despicable and contemptible of politicians— 
Henry Brougham. He was not worth their groaning. He 
was treacherous to his friends and cajoling to his ene- 
mies—a toadeater of so foul a nature never disgraced the 
profession of the law. He had, to be sure, high talents; 
ut no human being ever degraded his talents through 
selfish motives ashe haddone. There was no road to 
power too filthy for him to climb. Oh! it was delightful 
to find such a man against them, for they could not have 
a more contemptible enemy, He of course only spoke of 
the newspaper Lord Brougham. Mr, O’Connell then 
proceeded at considerable length, and said, that ‘‘ if Peel 
extinguished their liberty, he should do so through the 
best blood of the Irish people.’’ The Queen, he continued, 
the Union was repealed. He 
town and village through which her Majesty would 
pass would display its flags, on which should be written, 
‘‘ We pray your Majesty to repeal the Union.” After 
some further observations, Mr. O’Connell concluded 
his speech by declaring that Ireland should be for the 
Irish, and the Irish for Ireland. Mr. Steele rose and said 
“ Sir Robert Peel talks of civil war, let him try it if he 
dare.’’ Here the meeting rose in great excitement, and 
cheered for several minutes. At the meeting on Monday 
last, Mr. O’Connell renewed the subject, and said there 
would be no civil war in Ireland as long as he lived. The 
people would keep at the legal side, and if others invaded 
them that was not a civil war, and he promised them that 
there was not a Wellingtonian of them all who would 
shrink less than he from that contest if it was forced upon 
them. Violating no law, the repealers would keep on 
constitutional grounds, as long as it was left to them; but 
if they throw them from that, ve victis then, for the 
contending parties. The room was crowded to suffocation. 
The rent for the week exceeded 600/.—The Provincial 
papers are filled with details of meetings in connexion 
with the Repeal movement, and surpass, in violence of 
language, even the accredited organs of the Association 
in the capital, Government has sent a troop of Lancers 
to Enniskillen for the purpose of sustaining the police, 
should any necessity arise out of the Repeal movement,— 
The papers announce that Father Mathew is expected to 
arrive in England in the course of a short time, on a visit 
to Cambridge, Wisbeach, Norwich, Ipswich, and other 
places.—The Atmospheric Railway between Dublin and 
Kingstown will be opened by the month of July. 
Mullingar.—A great Repeal dinner has been given in this 
town to Mr. O'Connell, at which the Roman Catholic 
Bishop of Ardagh, Dr. Higgins, stated that every Catholic 
Bishop in Ireland, without an exception, is an ardent 
epealer. ‘ I know,” he said, ‘ that virtually you all 
have reason to believe that the Bishops of Ireland were 
Repealers ; but I have now again formally to announce to 
You, that they have all declared themselves as such, and 
that from shore to shore we are now all Repealers.”” Mr. 
O'Connell interrupted the speech and declared that “it 
was the best news he ever heard.’ 
Law. 
ral v. Hurel.— 
—The Att 
Custom-House Frauds.—This was an information, filed at the suit 
of her Majesty’s Attorney-General, to recover from the defend- 
ant, a glove importer, carrying on business at No. 8, Old Jewry, 
penalties to the amount of nearly 5,000/., for illegally defrauding 
© Board of Customs of the duties payable upon 921 dozen pair 
Of French gloves. The Attorney-General in opening the case to 
Fe Jury, stated, that this information was founded on the 3dand 
a Will: oo , an act which rendered any party liable to 
@ penalty who should receive or conceal goods which had 
thej case, proceeded to say that he thought 
AG jury would have but little difficulty in arriving at the conclu- 
‘on as to the guilt of the defendant when they should have heard 
the nature of the evidence he should present to their notice. 
They would remark, as the case proceeded, that considerable 
ingenuity had been exercised in the transaction, and he regretted 
to say, that one of the chief instruments in the fraud was no 
longer within the jurisdiction of the English law. That person, 
whose name was Tye, had, as a partner of a Mr. Sherer, a gentle- 
man whose conduct in the affair it was far from his intention to 
impugn, because it appeared that he had been altogether ignorant 
of the acts of his partner—it would seem acted as the Custom- 
house agent for a firm of the name of Vidil and Hurel, who carried 
on the business of glove-dealers and manufacturers at No. 8, Old 
ewry. The partner Vidil, it would appear, resided at Grenoble, 
whilst the establishment in London was conducted by Mr. Hurel. 
That gentleman had employed the person Tye as his Custom-house 
agent, and the jury would hear from Mr. Sherer and the other wit- 
nesses a history of the manner in which the Custom-house 
Buea for that firm had been transacted. It was butright that 
he should state in the outset that one of the witnesses, and amost 
important witness too, whom he should put into the box, was 
one of the officers by whore connivance one of the frauds com- 
plained of had been effected. That officer would lay before them 
a full detail of the manner in which the fraud, with regard to 
the cases of goods which had reached this country by the Lady 
de Saumarez, had been accomplished, He did not mean to con- 
tend that the statement of such a witness was altogether calcu- 
lated to induce them to ‘place implicit reliance on his credit. 
All, therefore, that he asked was, that they should regard his tes- 
timony in the light of an explanation of the transaction, which it 
was impossible, for various reasons, to obtain through any other 
's truth would be borne out all the surrounding 
events which would be detailed by other;witnesses. He simply, 
therefore, solicited that this man’s evidence should be treated by 
the jury as an explanation of the affair. The witness Sherer, 
the partner of Tye, would prove that he had landed and ex- 
amined the contents of the cases, of which he had taken an 
account, which had been passed by the witness Burnby, the 
tainted officer of the Customs, and it would be found that the 
variance between the account which he had taken, and that 
upon which the duty had been paid, was precisely the difference 
which was charged against the defendant by the informa- 
tion. The two offences which were charged on the present 
occasion had reference’to cases landed from the Belfast and from 
the Lady de Saumarez, and if he fully made out the case, then 
the jury would have no difficulty in returning a verdict for the 
Crown, on whose behalf this information was now filed, not only for 
the protection of the revenue, but also for that of the fair traders, 
whose interests were compromised by transactions of thisnature. 
Evidence was then adduced on the part of the Crown. Charles 
Sherer deposed as follows:—I am a Custom-house agent. In 
1840 and 1841 I carried on business in partnership with a person 
of the name of Tye, under the firm of F. and J. Smith and Co. 
Messrs. Vidil and Hurel were Tye’s customers, They were glove 
importers in the Old Jewry. Vidil lives at Grenoble, and Hurel 
carried on the business in London, We received instructions 
from him to pass goods at the Custom-house. The bill of lading 
was sent down to us, and if Tye was not there, I attended to the 
business. We received instructions in January, 1841, to pass 
oods brought by the ship Belfast from Boulogne. I obtained 
this ‘sight entry’? in consequence. I examined three cases 
marked G § 529, E E 1,525, and CM No. 5. This is a sight entry 
for these cases. Edward Manico wrote the body of this entry. 
ascertain what officer will be on duty there. Burnby 
i i I knew an officer named 
Homersham; I believe 1 made an entry of the 
contents of the cases marked G S 529, which contained 152 dozen 
pairs of men’s gloves, 213 dozen of habits, and 5 dozen of women’s. 
‘The case marked E E },525, contained 240 dozen habits, 134 dozen 
men’s and 15 dozen women’s gloves, and C M 5 contained 145 
dozen men’s, 290 habits, and 10 dozen women’s. Imade this list 
from the inspection of the goods themselves. The course of 
business, on obtaining a sight entry, is this: a blue book is sent 
to the landing-waiter, who should therein enter the contents of 
the different cases. The of the importer attends the 
examination, and I did so on this occasion. The agent generally 
sees the landing-waiter enter the contents in the blue book, but 
sometimes the officers make an entry in another book first. After 
ad examined these goods they were repacked. These gloves 
were packed in the ordinary way. I gave the list of the contents 
to Tye, my then partner. This is a perfect entry of the goods, 
and it is in the handwriting of Tye. The amount of duty is 
entered. After the i by the landi aiter, the goods 
are repacked in the case. The agent then makes a perfect entry, 
with a view to the payment of the duty, William Bourn 
examined—In the early part of 1841 I was one of the landing. 
waiters of the Customs, This blue book which has been putinto 
my hand, was the blue book of the Lady De Saumarez. It was 
my duty to take an account of, and to inspect the caseson board 
ofthat vessel. Irelieved Mr. Mason, another officer. The first 
part of this book is done by him. I attended the examination, 
and saw the goods. The whole of them were inspected in my 
presence, and I took an account in the book of the packages, 
‘and we compared them afterwards. I made a true account, and 
Sherer’s account corresponded with mine. le out a true 
account on some leaves which were formerly in this book, but 
those leaves are not here now. There is aleaf here which has 
been substituted for those taken away. The substitution took 
place at the Ship Tavern, in Water-lane, Tower-street. Homer- 
sham was present on the occasion of the alteration being made, 
and it was he, in fact, who had taken out the old leaf. The new 
leaf is in my writing. That leaf was obtained from a blank book. 
Blank books are very easily to be had, The seal was melted, and 
a counterieit seal was then put on the book. Lord Abinger— 
in fé w seal on the book, or on the new 
leaf?’ Witness—Yes; an artificial seal was made use of. 
could not undo the book unless we broke the seal. Homersham 
had a counterfeit seal like the Custom-house seal, On my going 
to the Custom-house-quay that day, it was an understood thing 
which had come into the hands of the defendant, upon which 
nm paid; but the essence of the case was, in 
truth, the knowledge or the no knowledge on the part of the 
defendant. The question did not turn upon whether these were 
the Jury was 
an, whether they were satisfied that the 
defendant had received “uncustomed” goods, knowin 
duty had not been paid 
to be no evidence whatever, The 
merchant in obtaining goods from the Custom-house would 
therefore go to himto pass them. There was no personal inter- 
ference whatever on the part of the defendant in passing the 
goods through the Custom-house. It was always done in the 
name of the agent. i 
carted off to the merchant’s warchouse. In this case F. and J. 
‘There was nothing of a clan« 
destine nature—nothin: 
defendant had anything to do with the business. There were 
two persons who were acknowledged to be infamous villains, 
the disgraceful manner in which business had for a long time 
been carried on at th 
really guilty was allowed to stalk abroad, while proceedings were 
taken against these highly respectable merchants.—No witnesses 
were called for t! —The Att y-General, in his reply, 
commented ‘strongly upon the absence of evidence, which the 
defendant, if really desirous of proving his innocence, might 
readily have produced. He might have produced the invoices 
and bills of lading, which came to him with the goods imported 
im in the Belfast, and Lady de Saumarez; and if, as was 
insinuated, he really paid Tye the full amount of the duty, was 
The defendant, however, did not 
appear at all desirous of freeing his character from guilt. He 
world. All he wanted was, to throw a doubt upon his know- 
ledge of the transactions. Then it was said a verdict could not 
be given against him. He, however, submitted, that in this, as 
in all other cases, the question was, what was the fair and rea~ 
sonable construction to be put upon the transaction, and no one 
could doubt that the evidence entirely proved the case against 
Some of the persons concerned in this 
no sympathy with men who betrayed the trust reposed in them; 
Abinger briefly advertec i 
the Jury, whether they believed the defendant had received the 
goods in question, knowing they had not paid the full duty.— 
The Jury, without hesitation, returned a verdict for the Crown ; 
and the Attorney-General proposed that the verdict should be 
entered for 4,500/. penalties, which was something less than the 
rown was entitled to. 
Attorney-General v. Charles Candy.—The Attorney-General 
appeared for the Crown in this case, which, like the preceding 
one, arose out of the late Custom-house frauds. The informa- 
tion contained a variety of counts, framed under the provisions 
of the statutes 3 and 4 William IV., c. 53, and the first charged 
the defendant with treble penalties to the amount of 7,604/., for 
clearly appeared, from 
on the part of the Crown, that the cases in question were con- 
signed to the defendants, and arrived by the French steamer 
Phoenix from Havre. They were landed, in the first instance, at 
Galley-quay; and, after being duly examined by one of the 
Custom-house officers, were carted to the defendants’ premises. 
The defendants employed, as their Custom-house agent, a person 
named Lumley, who had under hima clerk named Hunt, who 
attended to the Custom-house business, and in whose presence the 
goods in question were landed, weighed, and valued. It seemed 
that a practice had, for some time, existed at the Custom-house, 
of permitting the importers of silk goods, to take them from the 
control of the Customs officers before the duty was actually 
paid. The goods in question were delivered to the defendants in 
this way, before the amount of the duty was paid, but in a short 
time afterwards, the amount of the estimated duty was actually 
paid by the defendants. The only question therefore was, 
whether the defendants, in paying the estimated duty, had 
i ich the Crown was really entitled, 
‘g 
sd 
ES 
2 
B 
S. 
5 
& 
cs 
4 
sum than the defendants were really bound to pay. In order 
to explain to the Jury the precise m i i 
supposed the alleged fraud had been effected, several witnesses 
in different of th ti house 
prove the course of business in that establishment. Their 
evidence was generally to the same effect as that given by the 
witnesses in the case of “The Attorney-General v. Hurel.” It 
appears thatthe landing-waiter has a blue book entrusted to him, 
the threads of which are secured by a Governmentseal, and each 
leaf stamped with a Government stamp; and in this book, when 
goods are landed, itis his duty, in the presence of the agents for 
consignor and consignee, to take an account of the weight, value, 
and description of the goods so landed, and to return the book 
From the account thus entered 
He commenced by observing, that there were some questions of 
Jaw in this case, but that, in his estimation, as well as that of 
his client, Mr.Candy, the questions of fact were far more im- 
portant than the questions of law. He represented a British 
merchant, in extensive business, who was charged with a deli- 
berate fraud on the revenue, in collusion with that man Burnby,, 
r 
