with the two men to get certificates, or lines, but they came back without them; that they staid about half an hour in Robertson's house, and he then recommended them to go to Pearson's house in the Canongate, which they accordingly did; that the men and Pearson went to get the lines, but as it was to the place where they were formerly refused, they did not get them; that Pearson went to Robertson's house by himself, and staid only a short time, but immediately after the two men went into Robertson's, but witness and Macpherson stood at the door; that they all afterwards went to Pearson's, but he was not at home; that they afterwards went to Robertson's, when Margaret Macpherson and witness went in, the men stopping at the door; that they begged Mr Robertson to marry them; he asked where the men were, when witness told him they were at the door; that Robertson desired them to go down to Pearson's, to enter by the back-door, and he would follow; Pearson was in, and said he would endeavour to make Mr Robertson marry them. Mr Robertson came in a short time, and said he did not know what to do with those people, but Pearson said, that on a former occasion they had got over this by getting the lines after. wards, and then signing them after marriage, which Robertson said he recollected; that Robertson and Pearson retired into another room, and Pearson shortly returned and demanded 7s. 6d. for each couple, but the men said they had not so much said they would get it after the marriage, but Pearson replied that Mr Robertson would not do it without money; that Mr Robertson was going to baptize a child, and would soon return, but Pearson said Mr Roberson would wait if they would be quick; that the witness and Macpherson went for the money, and returned in a few minutes, when they found Mr Robertson writing the little lines they

got afterwards, which she identified when shewn to her; that the money was given to Fitzgerald, who gave 5s. to the parson, and 15s. for the lines, which Pearson took up, and said they would get the lines any day after Monday, upon calling either at him or Mr Robertson's house; that the witness and Fitzgerald were first married, and Moonay and Macpherson immediately afterwards; it was a religious ceremony, and there were two prayers; that M. Macpherson called on the Tuesday or Wednesday at Mr Robertson's for the certificates, but he refused except they were all present; but the two men being at Perth, M. Macpherson wrote to Perth, which Fitzgerald answered, and desired them to get the certificates or return the money; that they shewed Mr Robertson the letter, who desired them to be easy, and to go down to Pearson's, and he would follow; that they went to Pearson's, who said he was afraid the lines would not be got; they afterwards went up the street, and saw Mr Robertson coming down, when they returned again to Pearson's, and shortly afterwards Mr Robertson came, when he and Pearson went into another room, and in a short time Pearson came back, and desired them to call next day at four o'clock; that they called ac cordingly, when Pearson said he had got the lines after a good deal of trouble; Pearson then desired them to go to Mr Robertson's house; they went there, and Pearson came immediately; that Mr Robertson took the lines out of a drawer, wrote something on them, and gave them to the witness and Macpherson. [She identified the lines on being shewn them; they were the same which the former witnesses swore were forged.] That the parson read over the lines at Pearson's desire, and added, he was afraid there was something wrong yet, as they had not got an officer's certificate; but if any thing occurred to tell him.

Edmond Fitzgerald, corporal 88th foot, said that he was married on Sunday the 19th of October last; the witness, along with Moonay and the two women, called about eleven o'clock at Mr Robertson's house, and afterwards at one o'clock; that when they came back at one, Mr Robertson sent his servant with them to Mr Paisley's in College-street; they went first into a public-house, when Mr Paisley came, and demanded 10s. 6d. for each certificate, but the witness said Mr Robertson told them they should be only 7s. 6d. each. Mr Paisley then asked if they had an officer's line, when they replied they had not, and Mr Paisley refused to grant the lines; that they returned to Mr Robertson's house, who gave them a line to go to Pearson's, which they did. [The witness then detailed what passed, in nearly similar terms with the preceding witness, and fully corroborated her testimony.] That the witness paid the money, twenty shillings, to Robertson after the marriage, who took five shillings of it, and gave the rest to Pear

son.

Margaret Macpherson, wife of John Moonay, private in the 88th foot, said, she was married, on Sunday the 19th of October last, in Pearson's house, by Mr Robertson. She identified both the pannels, and also the small certificate, which Mr Robertson gave her at the time of the marriage. She gave an exactly similar account with the two preceding witnesses, and added, that, when she got the lines, Pearson said to Robertson, "I do not know what these ladies owe to me, for I have had a very eident day of it;" but Robertson said, he would not take any thing from them.

John Moonay, private in the 88th regiment, corroborated the testimony of his wife and the other two witnesses, Mr and Mrs Fitzgerald.

Mr Archibald Scott, procurator

fiscal, was asked if he knew where Pearson's house was? said he believed he staid in the Canongate, but does not know the particular place. Thinks all the street is called Canongate from St Mary's Wynd on the south and Leith Wynd on the north, although part of the south side is in the jurisdiction of the city.

FOR THE PANNELS.

David Milroy said, he lived in the head of the Canongate, on the south side, and he paid taxes to the city, and was in the jurisdiction of the town. That it went down so far as St John's Close. That the close where he lives is 218 from the bottom of the street.

Peter Hog, pawnbroker, No. 208, Canongate, which is in the jurisdiction of the city, although commonly called Canongate.

Robert Paisley, session-clerk of St Cuthbert's parish, said Pearson call ed on him for lines for two soldiers, when he asked for the officer's line, but Pearson not having this line, he refused to give a certificate. He got different prices, from 10s. 6d. downward, for lines.

Lord Gillies told this witness that to give a line certifying proclamation of banns, when no such thing was done, was a high crime and severely punishable.

Mr Archibald Scott said, he had seen Pearson's write, but he does not think the certificate now shewn is like his writing.

David Anderson, labourer, said, he was in Pearson's house some time since, when he saw a man deliver him a parcel, which he said was marriage lines. Pearson paid him 15s. for the parcel, which was the sum the man asked.

Mr Drummond, for the Crown, and Mr Maitland, for Mr Robertson, and Mr Pringle, for Pearson, severally addressed the Jury.

Lord Gillies, who presided, then summed up the whole in a very able

manner, after which the Jury, without leaving the box, unanimously found Robertson guilty of clandestinely celebrating the marriages libelled; and both the pannels guilty of feloniously using the certificates of proclamation of banns as genuine, knowing them to be forged.

On Thursday the Court met to pronounce sentence, when Mr Maitland addressed their Lordships for Mr Ro. bertson in mitigation of punishment.

Lord Succoth stated, that it was the duty of the Court to apply a suitable punishment to the offence. As to the case of Mr R. the Court had no alter native-the Act of Parliament was imperative. The punishment for celebrating clandestine marriagas was banishment furth of Scotland for life. The Judges had nothing to do whether the law was politic or not; that remained with the legislature, and all they had had to do was to apply the law.

The second crime was publishing the counterfeited certificates of proclamation of banns, which, although not amounting to forgery, was still a most dangerous offence. It was not easy to draw any distinction between the cases of the two prisoners in regard to this crime. Mr R. seems to have been very willing to celebrate these marriages; and, whatever his motive could be, it was not for him to inquire. He deviated from the path of his duty, and both prisoners had gone into this nefarious plan, although it appeared that the prisoner Pearson was the person who first proposed it. Mr R. probably had thought that the procuring a certificate afterwards would do away the crime under the statute. As to Pearson, he seemed to take a wonderful interest in procuring the marriage of these parties, who, it did not appear, he had ever seen before, which made it very much to be suspected, that he meant to pocket the 15s. given to him.

In regard to Mr Robertson, the Court could do nothing less than banish him from Scotland for life; and, in consideration of what was stated by his counsel as to the punishment for the second offence, he should propose, that, before banishment, he be confined in the jail of Canongate for three calendar months. As to Pearson, it certainly appeared that he was the instigator of the business, and he should propose as punishment, that, in addition to three months' imprisonment, he should be banished from Scotland for fourteen years

Lord Reston concurred entirely with the opinion given. Mr Robertson, as a minister of the Gospel, should have rather been employed in teaching and instructing the people over whom he presided; neglect of which had led him into the temptation to commit the offence for which he had now the misfortune to stand convicted. The offence of fraud and imposition here committed was well known to be of a heinous nature by every person in the country.

Lord Gillies then addressed the pri soners. He stated it always to be a most painful duty to pronounce the sentence of the law; but what rendered the case of Mr Robertson more so was, that he was a minister of the Gospel, a member of the Established Church of Scotland, than whom a more respectable body of men did not exist. It was true the ministers of the Church of Scotland were not so well situated in point of riches as those of other established churches, but still they were upon an equal footing, and made themselves respectable in their ministry, situation, and rank in society, by strict attention to the duties of their office and zeal for the cause of religion. He had had some practice at the bar of this Court, not of short standing, and he was happy to say, that this was the first instance in his recollection of a

clergyman of the Church of Scotland having been arraigned at that bar for a crime, and he sincerely hoped and trusted it would be the last.

His Lordship observed, that he was not then addressing an illiterate person, but one who must know the blackness of the offence he had committed. The imposition upon two poor soldiers, who, from the allowance they received for serving in his Majesty's army, could not have much money to spare, and the little pittance they might have at that time must have been peculiarly necessary on their entering into the state of matrimony. Had he from a mistaken zeal, and from the repeated importunities of these men, celebrated their marriages gratuitously, the Court and Jury might have commiserated his case; but base and servile motives seemed to have led him to pocket the miserable pittance of these poor men. His Lordship observed, that it would be presumption in him to address a minister of the gospel upon religion, with which he must be better acquainted than he possibly could be; one thing he could offer, however, was, his sincere prayers for his repentance and amendment. The law was imperative, and the Court had no alternative but to pronounce the sentence which had been proposed. He (Mr R.) properly could not, after what had happened, be of any great use here, so that, by removing him into another country, he might still, by leading a life of virtue, frugality, and honesty, become an useful member of society. His Lordship then proceeded to address the prisoner Pearson in a strong and impressive manner, as to the base and sordid nature of his conduct in the whole of the transaction, and concluded by sentencing both prisoners to three months' imprisonment, in the jail of Canongate, and Mr Robertson thereafter to be banished Scotland for life, in terms of the statute; and Pearson

for the period of fourteen years, with the usual certifications.

POTTS, WOOD, &c. FOR ASSAULT ON ONE BEARING A PARLIAMENTARY PETITION.

Assizes Staffordshire, March 20.

This case afforded considerable mirth to a very crowded Court. It was an indictment which charged the defendants with having riotously assembled together in the parish of Stoke, in the Potteries, against the peace of our Sovereign Lord the King, and with having assaulted Thomas Deakin by working a quantity of water from an engine on him, while he was obtaining signatures to a petition for Parliamentary Reform.

Thomas Deakin, who deposed that he lived at Shelton, near Stoke. About twelve months since, or a little better, he was taking a petition for Parlia mentary Reform round the country, to get signatures to it; he went to Stoke, to Mr Spodes' manufactory, and a person, named Clay, came and ordered him off, and he went from the premises on to the turnpike road; Clay came to witness again and told him to go off; witness told him he was on the turnpike road, and as he was doing nothing amiss he should not go; he then went away. Witness was opposite Mr Spodes' manufactory. Witness saw Mr Spodes' gates shut, and in about ten minutes he saw them open, and a water engine was brought out. One of the defendants (Taylor) had hold of the end of the pipe; he was guiding it, and the engine began to play upon witness; he retreated back to the place where he was at first, they still followed him, turn which way he would. Potts had hold of the pipe, Hazlehurst was there.

Mr Pearson-What is Hazlehurst? -Witness; A barber..

Mr Pearson-A political barber, eh? (a laugh.)

Witness continued.-Hewson was there; he had also hold of the pipe. Part of them were wheeling the engine about; and there were from 60 to 100 people there. Prosecutor heard them say, "Curse him, follow him up, and play in his pockets." They played upon him until all the water was exhausted. He tried to escape, but they followed him, and one of them said"Curse you, stop, stop, and stand your ground." Clay was the person who said this. He heard many voices say, "Curse him, follow him out of Stoke." After the water was exhaust ed, they pulled off their hats, and gave three huzzas! and some voices cried out, Bring more water, bring more

water."

Cross-examined by Mr Dauncey.How long had you been in the petitioning line?-Only a day or two. What were you to be paid?-Three shillings a-day.

What other lines have you been in besides the petitioning?-I was brought up a boatman; and last March I was a carter; after that I took to pot selling; and after that my father told me he could put some bread in my fingers for life in another way.

What line was that?-To make paste blacking.

Mr Dauncey. That was putting bread in your fingers indeed! (a laugh.)

From whom were you to receive three shillings a-day-From a Mr Parkisson, at Handley, a schoolmaster; I went to school to him a bit.

What! to qualify yourself for the petitioning line?—No, not exactly so; but he promised me 3s. a-day.

Ah! when you were going to set all the world to rights?-I think it

would be a good job if it was set a little to rights. (Laughter.)

Mr Dauncey Ah, Mr Deakin, but there is an old adage that said it was better to begin at home.-Prosecutor Yes sir, likely 'tis.

Had you a petition ?—Yes, I had a petition; there were some words at the top of it, but I cannot purtend to say what it was about, but I know it was for Parliamentary Reform.

Mr D.-What is that?-Prosecu tor, Eh!

Mr D.-What is that-Parliamentary Reform ?-I don't know justly.

Mr D.-No, you neither know nor care, I suppose, so long as you get your 38. a-day. Did you get nothing else?-Those who chose gave a penny or so, to send it up: this I gave to Mr Parkisson.

Did you explain the petition to those who signed it?—No, it explained itself. I have used the words, but I don't know what they were.

Had you not a few little phrases of your own to treat them with?-Little

-what?

A few phrases a few words to address to them?-Not to the best of my knowledge.

Did you not mention any thing about a new King ?—Not that I know of.

Will you swear you did not ?—Yes, I will swear it.

Mr D.-That's a good fellow.(Laughter.)

A new Constitution; what do you think of that; did you say it was time and right that we should have a new Constitution?—I forget what I said to the people; I cannot purtend to say.

Q. Boroughmongers! do you think you said a little about them?—I did express some such words as that; now you use it, I think I did say summet about borough-mongering factions, but that is almost out of my head.