The Palladium. (Newnan, Coweta County, Ga.) 1835-18??, October 17, 1835, Image 2
The Estate,'* i Indictment for Perjury in
t,S > Merriwelher Sup. Cow t
John Clark, j August Term 1535.
The delendant was incicted under the penal
code of 1817 —Upon the trial, arid aflcr the S<>
1 icitor General had submitted the cause to the
v, the defendts. counsel oemutred to the iu
: not. The Court sustained the demurrer,
and determined, the objection taken to the in
dictment, would h ive been good, in the arrest
of judgment. The celis. counsel then moved
the court lor a verdn t of acqudtal, which pao
ti in, was resisted by thajcounsel lor the prose
cution—The counsel firth State contends—
the indictment should be quashed so that anew
indictment may be framed, and the defe idem
put upon his trial, by virtue of a legal indiet
m nt. The defts. counsel insists upo i a verdict
of acquittal upon the grounds that the deft,
hns been once tried, and ca mot therefore be
legally tried , for the same offence. The defts.
counsel aso contend this case, conies within
tiic reason and intention of the Statute, which
declares, “in no case sh ill a nolle prosequi be
en.cretl upon any bill oi indictment after the
case has been submitted to the jury.” Prince’s
Digest 372—1 tis also stated to have been the
universal practice, not only in this, but in the
other circuits of the state, to allow the defen
datft a verdict under similar circumstances—
and that the court will, in overturning a long
established practice, u-surue a heavy responsi
bility—The Court in determining the question
now presented for its decision, is fully aware o(
the responsibility which it assumes—The prac
tice which has heretofore prevailed in this cir
cuit, the court believes to have been, as stated
bv the defendant’s counsel, a id the same prac
tice may have obtained, in all the other circuits
fthe state for aught the coutt knows —It has
no recollection at this time, of a different prac-
tice prevailing in any of the other circuits, in
relation to the question, now before the court
although it cannot but think such #iust have
been the fact. Experienced and disinterested
counsel confirm the statements of defendants*
counsel, as to the practice in this, and other
circuits—But such a practice, is at variance
with the opinion, which the court entertains of
the law applicable to the case, now before it—
The court may it is true be in error, as to the
law; but it ought not to shelter itself, under the j
practice of the court, entertaining a contradicto
ry opinion, but to march boldly up to the ques
tion; and determine it, according to the dictates
of its best judgment, giving such authority, and
reason therefore, as it can now command—The
sth article of the amendments to the constitu
tion of the United States contains this provision
“no ]• shall any person be subject for the same
o ffence to be tried twice or put in jeopardyof life,
or Itt6.”Tlie true meaning of this clause of the
eon-eitution, undoubtedly is, that no ma •, shall
be twice tried for the same offence—Has the
c t.e riant been tried for the offence with which
be is charged, in legal contemplation? certainly
n _ , for the indictment, by which he is charged,
s manifestly defective, that he has never yet
’ n jiut in jeopardy by this prosecution—Sup
;•■!%(• the S- iicttor General had arraigned the
defendant open a written deed for a lot of land,
and h.-d submitted his case to the jury, by virtue
of such an instrument only—His counsel de
rouVtn it upon me ground, it contains no crimi
nal charge, whereon he can be leg dly convict
ed- of anv enme. Would such a proceeding
constifdteCtnal, in the eye of the law? Equal
ly as’ much so, as the case now before the
court, constitutes a trial, for the defendant is
no more in jeopardy, on account of the charges
allddged in this indictment, so tar as conviction,
and .punishment is concerned than if it was sim
ply a title deed—“ VVherever the indictment
whereon a man is ai quitted, is so far erroneous,
either for want of substance in setting out the
crime, or of authority in the Judge before whom
it was taken, that no good judgment could
have hepn given upon it against the defendant,
the acquittal can be nu bar of a subsequent in
dictment, because the defendant was never in
danger of his life from the first; for the law will
presume prima Jacie, that the Judge would not
have given a judgment, which would have been
; ible to have been reversed.” 2nd Hawkins,
c 35, sec 8, cited 1 John Rep. 76. in the case
<r t;,e people vs. Barrett and Ward. Ch. Justice
K it in the same case remarks “I am satisfied
tr 1 -b-rc, that the law is not now to be ques
ti - . mat if the indictment he defective, so
that no good judgment could have been given
v,~ on it, an acquittal upon such indictment, is no
bar.” The court has already determined this
indictment to be so defective, that no good
judgment could be given upon it against the de
fendant. But let us exhibit this case, in a much
stronger point of view in favour of the deft.—
Admit ho had not made any objection to the
sufficiency of the indictment, but had went or.
r gularly to trial, and the jury after hearing the
testimony on both sides, the argument of coun
sel, and the charge of the court, had returned a
verdict of guilty against him, and judgment had
been arrested, could he then, be tried again for
the same offence? “The arresting of judgment
after a conviction on an indictment for a felony,
is not a bar to a second indictment for tho same
offence, although the second indictment, is
precisely similar to the first”—The People vs.
Casborus, 13th John Rep. 351. Spence, judge,
in delivering the opinion of the court, in the
case last cited, uses the follovvi g language—
“ The effect of arresting a judgment, is the same
as quashing an indictment*:'the latter happens
before trial, the former after”—ln the case of
t People vs. Robert M. Goodwin, who was
indicted for manslaughter, and ihe jury could
not agree upon a verdict, but were discharged
by the court, the question was raised, whether
•iePt could again be tried for the same offmee,
an- it was determined in the affirmative—Ch.
Justice Spence who delivered the opinion of the
court, remarks—'ln a legal sense therefore, a
defendant is not once put in jeopardy, until-'the
verdict of the jury is rendered for or against
him. and if for, or against him, he can never be
drawn in question again, for the same offeru
18 h John Repts. 206—The case of the People
V 9 Mcßay, who waajnclicted for murder, and
sowed gtfftty,
was arrested on th’
proceedings —Ch justice Spence says, in oe
livering thc’opimon of the couit, *llis counsel
have suggested a doubt, whether am sting the
judgment does not entiil him to be dischargee,,
without being subjected to another tri I—lt will
be observed, that the judgment is am sled on
the motion of the prison’ r -An net done at the
request, and for the ben fit ol a prisoner, we are
clearly of opinion, cannot exonerate him from
another trial —We know ol no case, which con
tains the doctrine that where anew trial is a
warded at the prayer, a id in favor of a person,
who has been sou and guilty, that he shall not be
subject to another trial’—lßth John Repts. 218
According to the authority cited, there can
not exist a doubt, hud the defendant been regu
larly tried, and found guilty, and judgment been
arrest; and, but he could have been legally tried
again—Was he in any better situ tion when
tho indictment was quashed, before the exami
nation of a single witness, than he would have
been after trial and a verdict ol guilty against
him? The answer < ust be apparent to every
one—The objection to the sufficiency of the in
dictment was made by the defendant, and upon
his motion—lt is true the state declares ‘in no
case shall a nolle prosequi be entered on any
bill of indictment, after the case has been sub
mitted to the jury’—Wlirt is the legal effect of a
nolle prosequi ? ‘The effect of a nolle prose
qui when obtained, is to put the defendant
without day, but it does not at all operate as an
acquittal, for he may afterwards be ro-indicted,
and even upon the same indictment, fresh pro
cess may be awarded’ Ist Cliitty, Crim law, 391
—A nolle prosequi cannot be entered without
the concurrence of the Attorney General, or at j
the instance of the counsel for the government,
Ist Chitty’s Crim. law, 390,2 Mass.T. R. 414.
A demurrer to the indictment, therefore, fir a
defect good inairest ofjudgment, after the case
has been submitted to the jury, is not analogous
to the entering a nolle prosequi, after the case
j has been so submitted. For in the one instance
the motion is made on the part of the state, and
at the instance of the prosecuting officer; in the
other, it is made at the instance of the defen.
dant, and for his benefit. It was the intention
of the legislature, in the enactment of the sta.
tute, to prohibit the prosecuting officer from ha.
j rassing the defendant by repeated trials without
his consent. But for the statute, the prosecuting
officer could enter a nolle prosequi, whenever
the testimony on the part of the State, in his
judgment, was insuffici nt to ensure conviction,
and oppress the defendant by his continued;
efforts to convict him. The statute, however, |
justly protects the liberty of the citizen from •
the power of the government, by declaring its
officer shall not enter a nolle prosequi, after the
case has been submitted to the jury. The indict,
ment is admitted to be so defective, that the
court could uot legally have given judgment
upon ft. By going to the jury, the prosecuting
officer lost his right to enter a nolle prose
qui upon such defective indictment—But the
and Pendant had the legal right to be tried upon
it, without being subjected to any danger what
ever, for if the jury had returned a verdict of
guilty against him, judgment would have been
arrested—lt was the privilege of tho d-fenda it,
to demur to the indictment before verdict, for
any defect therein good.in arrest ofjddgme.it,
or to bave hazarded a verdict, and if against
him, then to have moved the court, to arrest the
judgment—He has made his election, and de
murred to the indictment, after the case has
been submitted to the jury, but before the intro
duction of any testimony. By the authority
cited, if he had not demurred to the indictment,
but had moved in arrest ofjudgment after a ver
dict of guilty found against him, he might le
gaily have been tried again for the reason, that
he has never yet been put in jeopardy, accor
ding to the true intent a id meaning of that
clause of the constitution which declares ‘nor
shall any person be subject for the same of
fence, to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb
—The court is of the opinion, in as much as
the defendant could have been tried ag in, if
found guilty by the verdict of the jury upon this
indictment, and the judgment arrested on ac
count of its defectivecharacter, and that he does
not now, stand in any better situation, nor enti
tled to any greater privileges than he would
have been, provided the objection to the indict
ment had been made, by way of motion in ar
rest ofjudgment—This motion it will be recol
lected, is made at the instance of the defendant
and for his benefit, not at the instance ot the
State, hence it does not come within the pro
visions of the Statute relating to the entering a
nolle prosequi, after the case has been submit
ted to the jury—There is however another
section of the penal code which deserves con
sideration—“on every trial for an offence con
tained in this code, or for any offence, the jury
shall be judges of the law, and the fact, and
shall give a general verdict of guilty or not guil
ty.” Prince’s Digest 372, The same question
again occurs as to what constitutes a trial, ac
cording to the legal acceptation of the term,
which has been already noticed—The Statute
evidently contemplates a legal trial to constitute
which, the defendant should have been charged
by the indictment or presentment of a grand
jury stating the offence, time, and place of its
commission, with sufficient certainty to enable
the court to gi e judgment thereon, against
him—“An indictment is a written accusation of
one or more persons of a crime or misdemeanor \
preferred to, and presented upon oath by a grand
jury.” 4th Be. Com. 302 —The di Pendant must
be charged with a crime or misdemeanor ii the
indictment, lor if it contain no. criminal charge
upon proof of which the defendant could be j
convicted (as in the present rase) he has never 1
been put upon bis trial, in the language of the
statute (or‘an qffence’ or‘for.any often- -con -
sequently is not entitled to a general verdict of
‘not guilty’—‘The test, by which to decide
w hether a person has been oi.ee tried is per
fectly familiar to every lawyer, it can only be by
a plea of aulrejois acquit, or a plea of autrefois
convict —To render the plea of” a former ac
quittal a bar, it must he a legal acquittal by
judgment, upon a trial for substantially the
same offence, and the verdict of a petit, jury;’
See tho opinion of Ch Justice Spence— The
People vs Robert M. Goodwin 18th John Kept
’202-3 Would a verdic tof acquittal upon this
bill of indictment (if it be not a legal misnomer
to call it such) operate as a bar, to another
prosecution for the same offence intended to
be charged here? Certainly not, for it wasLpon
that giound, the defts counsel mainly preuieat-*
<:d their objection to the suffi ieney of (he in
dictment, and upo . u hich it was sustained by
the court, taken in ccjpMTon with thv fact, no
good judgment, could have been given upon it
•ig.iinst him, f r in the language of Chief Justice
Kent already cited ‘I am satisfied therefore, thal
Ihe law r is not now to be questio ed, that if the
indictment be defective, so that no good judg
ment could have been given upon it, ar. acquit
tal upon such indictment, is no bar.’ Is it nut
a burlesque upon criminal jurisprudence, to
call that proceeding a trial, upon which no
judgment could be given, and upon which a
verdict of acquittal, if spread upon *hc record
of the court, would afford no protection to the
def ndant?
The Court is of the opinion, there has been
no trial in this case, in I ‘gal coo'emplation, for
the reasons already slated, and determines
the defendant is not entitled to a. verdict of ac
quittal, but that the indictment must be quashed
upon the motion of defts counsel, as being too
defective in judgment of law, to authorise a
conviction, for any offe .co whatever.
Hiram warner.
Judge Sup Court.
_ at tj vwfo&w&hita*
Withdrawal of Judge McLean. —By the fol
j lowing letter, which we find in the Columbus
Journal—published there at the request of the
gentleman to w hom it was addressed—it ap
pears that Judge McLean has distinctly with
drawn himself from the field of competition for
the Presidency:
Richland, (O.) August 31, 1835.
Dear Sir: Bei :g informed that my friends
from different parts of Ohio, having consulted
together, have come to a determination to organ
ize, and endeavor to produce a concert of ac
tion throughout the State, on the subject of the
election ufPresident, and as you are chairman
of one of the principal co mittees which has
been constituted with a view to this object, it is
proper tha I should make to you the following
communication :
On all occasions since my name has been
spoken of in reference to the Presidency I have
gjyet. my friends to understand in conversation,
j and by communications that have been pub
lished, that I would not be a party to a contest
that shall be likely to lead to an election of
C.’hief Magistrate by the House of Represen
tatives. Asa matter of choice I would not
take the office through the instrumentality of
the House.
I was fully aware that this course on my
part would discourage my friends and injure
my prospects ; but I was not desirous of the
office except on such terms as would enable me
to carry out those principles, which would ele
vate and tranquilize the political action of *he
country.
I was not unaware that there were several
gentlemen who looked tot the office, as I believe
with more solicitude than myself, and who had
•mui'h highen V|JrT>fr Krift*~~tr~~ of their sos-
Inw-citiz ns : and, as hr was hardly to bn expec
ted that these claims Would be postponed, my
resolution was taken in reference to such a
state of tilings. My anticipations have been
realized. The ground on which the contest
seems now to be placed by those who are op
posed to the Baltimore nominations—and from
the number of candidates in the field, it is not
probable that this ground can be changed—ne
cessarily, on the principles, 1 have avowed, ex
cludes me from the list of candidates. I ad
here to my principles, and of course, acquiesce
most cheerfully in the decision. Asa citizen,
I shall ever oppose that which I conscientiously
believe to be wrong in policy or in principle.
This declaration is due to myself, to my
friends g nerally, and especially to those of
them who have sustained the Administration,
and who were among the first to introduce my
name into the contest. I wish to remove from
all my friends any embarrasinent which they
may feel in the ensuing election of Chief Ma
gistrate on my With great respect,
I am,
Very truly and sincerely yours,
JOHN McLEAN.
Moses H. Kirby, Esq., Columbus, Ohio.
Why the resolutions of the City of New York
were qualified &c.—The Richmond E quirei
is not satisfied with the tone of the resolutions
of the City of New York. They were not, it
saj s, “up to the hub,” like the Albany resolu
tions. The following article from the Journal
ol Commerce will explain the matter. The
citizens of New York had witnessed the out
breaks against Tappan by the mob on a former
occasion on the same subject, and remembered
the great difficulty there was in preserving from
total destruction the houses and property, and
even the persons of every one suspected of
having con exion with Tappan or his society.
The free blacks were also threatened with total
destruction. It was therefore necessary that
the resolutions should be so guarded as not to
give the slightest pretext, in the sentiments ex
; pressed by the late respectable meeting con.
dcim.ing the abolitionists, for the renewal of the
violence it had been so difficult to quell. The
expression of tho just indignation felt against
Tappan would have signed his death warrant,
and led to scenes of violence. The truth is, in
; this city, in Philadelphia, New York, and we
believe in every city, there is a deadly hostility
entertained among industrious free citizens
against the system which tends to bring the
worthless colored people iu the path of their
pursuits. Globe,
The Southern papers express much dissatis
faction with the tone of the resolutions passed
at the anti.abolition meeting in th ; s city. They
appear to think them of a very milk nnd water
character, to say the least Doubtless they
might have been stronger; and they certainly
would have been, if the assembly na a whole
had prepared them, which of course was im.
possible. One thing was very evident at the
meeting, viz that the strongest sentiments
against the abolitionists, and in the favor of the
South, were most warmly approved. Wbenev r
any such sentiments was announced, it was
uniformly recejyed with he arty cheers. Pmbst.
oly the framers of the resolutions were infim n.
eed in part by a desire to alia • excitement h re
which at that time was in danger of expressing
itself in open violen e. Between Scylla and
Charybdis it was difficult to steer, but le ving
t e resolutions out of the question, the South
may re-d assured that in the city of New York,
the feelings of indig alien against the abolition,
ist ris nearly universal; that they are at best but
a sorry faction, of the saltpetre order, who make
a vast deal of noise in proportion to the nuni.
ber ; Their adherents and serni.adherenls are
diminished daily. It is only those who have
committed themselves to abolition doctrines,
that stick to the sinking ship. The whole
North is at length roused, on the subject, and
’ abolition will have to learn good manners, or be
turned out of doors Journal of Commerce.
A TRAGEDY.
Or Wednesday evening last, one McGrew,
accused of a most diabolical murder in April
last, for whose apprehension large rewards
were offered by the Governor, an I by i .divid
ual subscriptions,—was brought i to this town
and committed to jail. He ha I fled into Tex
as, whither be wis pursued by Mr. Taylor, of
Claiborne—who, after the failure of several
attempts to seiz him by force, —succeeded by
stratagem. The story is altogether a singular
one, —and the aid given by the Texas author
ities, gives a more favorable impression of the
dispositions of the government of that country
agai.ist criminals who escape there from the
pursuit of justice, than we have hitherto been
accustomed to entertain.
Mr. Taylor tiaced McGrew, after his flight
from this St •te to Louisiana, to Natchitoches,
and across the Mexican line to Nacogdoches.
At that place he learned that McGrew was two
hundred miles in the interior, at a settlement!
i called the Saline, at Hall’s trading house— I
where he was under the protection of Hall, and ■
the Comanche Indians. Between these Indi
ans and the Mexicans at Nacogdoches, hostil
j ity existed ; and when Taylor arrived a hostile
j expedition had been sent out against the Indi
ans. Mr. Taylor, accompanied by two men,
followed the party, —having been fur ished with
letters to B iwyer, the commander- -requesting
his aid. Instead of assisting, Bowyer it ap
pears, appnsed McGrew of i heir object, and
indeed, shewed him the letters. Thev were
obliged to fly” instantly ; and were pursued by
McGrew ad two associates —an Indian and
a white deserter—for twenty four hours. They
escaped by leaving the high road and striking
into the woods. On his return at IVacogd ches,
Mr. Taylor offered a leward of SSOO to any
one who would take McGtew. A Texas Cap
tain, named Ferguson, with eight men, under
took the enterprise, and marched to the settle
ment. Hall’s party aid the Indians made fight,
and Ferguson was beaten off. In the skirmish
McGrew was shot and slightly wou ded.
The defeat of this party produced a procla
mation from the political chief of Nacogdoches,
a sort of outlawry, ordering McGrew to be ta
ken out ol the country, as u.fit to remain there,
by reason ofgreat crimes commit! din the Uni
ted States. He also placed a civil force, con
sisti g of the Sheriff and ten men at the dispo
sal of Taylor This, artifice was successfully
tried. At Nacogdoches, one of McGrow’s ac
quaintances, fflmiliar with his habits and the
settlement, was prevailed upon to accompany
the party, and assist in the capture. Taylor
and the men, wre concealed about a couple of
miles from the house where McGtew resided,
while the Sheriff and the other man went up
frankly to the house to request lodging. The
person of the Sheriff was unknown to McGrew,
and On seeing him, he was suspicious, and arm
ed himself, but his suspicio s were dispelled by
the introduction of the other person, and their
proposition to give up their arms to hun for
safe keeping ; which was accordingly done.
His caution was completely lulled, and at night
he went to sleep in the tame room with them
upon a buffaloe skin, with his pistols under his
bead. When he was asleep, they seized him
and his arms, and threatening to blow his brains
out instantly, ifhe did not keep silence, car
ried hint off to the party who were in ambush,
and all instantly set out at full speed, and by
mor ing wete beyond pursuit. When he was
seized, he thought it was for his sh.tre in the
recent skirmish, to which impression it is proba
bly owing, that he did not give alarm at all ha
zards. When he discovered in whose hands
he was he behaved perfectly quiet: At Nacog
doches, the Emprcsario furnished a guard to
Ihe Sabine river. From there to Natchitoches
he was brought by Taylor and two others. At
Alexandria, the party fell in with Mr. Kemp,
the brother T the two murdered children, who
was returning from an unsuccessful hurt after
the assassin in Arkansas. From that place he
was brought without difficulty to New-Orleans
and thence to Mobile.
The crime of which this man is accused, is
one of the most atrocious evei read of in the
annals of depravily. Two children, lads of 8
to 14 years of age, were butchered in cold
blood, wantonly and savagely, from a demoni
ac spirit of revenge against their parents. The
crime, the flight, the pursuit and the arrest,
form altogether, an exciting, as well as a tetri- J
; ble tragedy.— Mobile Register.
Although every stage of your life is foil of
danger and exposed to difficulties peculiar to
itself*, there is one period of time the most im
portant indeed.—Mum ge is doubtless, the
most national, innocent, and useful state, if you
can form it to any tolerable advantage. It bids
luirest for that little portion of happiness, which
this life admits, and is in some degree a duty
which you owe to the world.
How defe celess is a single woman! She
cannot move beyond ‘he precincts of her own
house, without apprehension. Site cannot go
with case nnd safety into public. As she goes
down the hill of life, her friends drop away from
her, like leaves in autumn, and leave her a
punitig solitary creature. Now therefore, sum
mon to your aii!, all that reading, observation,
and advice of friends, and your short-lived ex
perience have power to bestow Pause, before
you tie t int Gorclion knot which death alone
can unloose; ad before you decide on a measj
ure of such (incalculable (importance, be suro
that reason approves your conduct, und forget
no’ to implore the direction of heaven. If a
pers n comes to a serious declaration in your
favor, affect no prudish airs of reserve. If you
r- ally s-es an affection for him, .nnd c.;n indulge
it vvith prudence, do uot scruple to acknowlegc
it. or treat him with the greatest openness and
candour. This will engage forever the esteem
: of every liberal arid honest man. If you cannot
receive him as a lover, you will not fail to retain
him ns a friend. Suffer net your imagination
to be dazzl dby mere splendour. The glitter
of wealth and equipage has induced many a
poor girl to sacrifice her peace at the shri ie of
vanity; and h- r nightly pillow, stepped i teajs,
and bitter regret, has soon told her that “ ever
is a dinner of iierbs where love is, ,hu s.ailed
ox and hatred therewith ” A giod man alone
is capable of true attachment, fidelity and affec
tion. Others may feel a fugitive passion, but
on this also! you can place no true dependence.
Look for a person of a domestic cast. Os what
consequence to you are even the good qualities
ofyeur husband, if he is rarely ever at home?-
It has often been asserted, that a reformed reko
makes the best husba id. It may be so; but I
would not have \ou risk your peace on so dan
gerous an experiment. Although not absolute
y necessary, yet it is highly desirable, that the
man with w hom you are to spend your days
should be a man of sentime t and taste. Those
qualities will variagate every hour with fresh
pleasure, every scene with animated remarks,
and every incident with the liveliest interest.
Fortune surely should be considered, propor
tioned to your habits, education, and station in
| life. But if you fi and the other requisites, be as
l modente as possible in this. A morsel thus
■ sweetened will be pleasant to the taste. Inn
I cottage so enlivened, joy will spting. The Al
! mighty will look from Heaven with approbation,
and crown the happy pair with the choicest of
blessings! And now, I commit you to the care
him, who is the tender Father of all creatures.
The world is before you, full of difficulty and
danger. Pleasure will spread her thousand
snares to deceive you, your passions will solicit
for unbounded gratification, and even your own
heart will prompt vou to deceive yourself; but
yon are in the hands of the greatest of Beings;
and whatever your lot may bo, riches or pover
ty, health or sickness, the state of marriage or
si gle life: fear not. Be virtuous, be cheerful,
be contented. See that your heart be right,
strive to do your duty, and leave the rest to
Him.
New- York, Sept. 27.
By the Mary Howland, from Liverpool, we
have Lo don papers of the 26th and Liverpool
of the 27tli August.
The pap rs do not contain any important in
telligence. Gen rals Alava and Evans had
arrived in Spain with 1500 nien.
Monny Market and City Intelligence.
Tuesday Evening.
The city has been tolerably free from reports
10-day respecting the Ministry and the conse
quences of the threatened collision between the
two houses of Parliament, which would appear
at all eve its, to be regarded with little appre
hension by the fundholders. Stocks have beou
steady all da , with some tendency towards
improvement. Consols left off’at 89 3-4 to 1-2
for the account; Omuium at 2 3 8 to 12;
and Exchequer-bills at ‘2os. 225. premium.
The intelligence of this morning has remov
ed all alarm respecting the movements of tho
city guard at Madrid, and has, besides, a salu
tary effect in regard to threatened insurrections
in Spain. These, troops are regarded hero
with contempt, since it is perceived, that, though
they can set convents en fire, and murder help
less mo ks and frairs, they are wholly destitute
of that energy and power of combination which
is to overthrow or place in danger the institu
tions of the country. The best things are now
hoped for from the Spanish Ministry. The
price of slock has rulli and considerably, but it
closed heavily this afternoon, and is “still far
from being held with confidence Bargains
were done in Bo.ids at 42. but they left off’ at
40 1-2. Portuguese at 3 per cents, were last
quoted at 55 1-2. In the other foreign funds
scurcely any transactions took place.
MARKETS.
Liverpool, Aug. 26.
The sales of Cotton to-day do not exceed
1500 bags, chit fly American, at rather lower
rates; 100 Pernains, &c. 13 1-4 to 14 3-4; 50
Bahias, 13 1-4; to 13 1-2; 70 Maranhams,
14 1-4 to 14 5-8; and 20 Surat 7 1-4 to tho
trade. The demand continues very moderate.
Members Elect to the Legislature
OF GEORGIA.
SCHRIVEN.
Senator. —M’Call. Representatives. —E.
J. Black and B. Green all State Rights
men.
CHATHAM.
Senator. —M’Al lister. Representatives .
Gordon, Millen, and Shick—all Uniou men.
BU.KE.
Senator —Lawson. Reprcse/ftft’ees-_Burke,
Allaway, and Burton—all State Rights.
JEFFERSON.
Senator Stepleto >. Representatives Flour
noy, and Turner—all State Rights.
WARREN.
Senator Gibson. Representatives Wilde,
Chandler, and Harris-Jwo Union, and two
State Rights men.
McINTOSH.
Senator Wood. Representatives McDon
ald, and Durham, all Union men.