L DOMESTIC and admitted of the honorable privy counfel INTELLIGENCE. We Clonmell, June 2, 1788. AST Wednesday evening, a difpute happen ed in this town, between Thomas Butler, of Cathel, Efq; and Enfign Godley, of the 51 regiment of foot, wherein the former unfortu nately received a wound under the left breast trom the officer's fword, of which he expired joon after. An inquélt was holde on the body of the deceafed next morning, by the Mayor and a very refpectable jury, who brought in their verdi manflaughter in his own detence. have every resion to think that this unhappy occurrence arofe from the madness of the moment, and not from any malevolent difpofition in the officer who neverthetet abf nded immediately after the tranfaction, and eluded a diligent fearch made after him by a party of our Police. Cafhel, June 3. A moft barbarous murder was committed on Sunday laft on the body of the Rev. Chriftopher Ryan, parish prieft of Knockantowry, near this city, by Bridget M'El Jigor, his own fervant maid, who, whiltt this unhappy man was afleep, cut his throat from ear to ear. She has abfconded, but diligent fearch is making after her. The coroner's inqueft fat on the body, and brought in their verdict wilful murder. No caufe can as yet be affigned for her committing this inhuman act. Kilkenny, June 10. Laft Sunday night, be tween the hours of twelve and one, a dreadful fire broke out in this city, which rapidly confumed three houfes; and had it not been for the ftrenuous and fuccef-ful efforts of the 70th regiment, with Lient. Col Coote at their head, the whole Areet must have experienced a like calamity.The citizens of Kikeuny, highly fentible of the fervice rendered them by that active and humane officer, mean to give him a public teftimony of their gratitude. Joba grains of fhot in his hand. Lord Earlsfort, in his charge to the Jary, faid, he hoped that the period would foon arrive, when the mesheft fubject would feel his protection in law against however exalted in ftation or elevated in fire; the violence and encroachment of any party and he wished the idea to go abroad, that no les gal fubtilty, no evafive chicane, would interfere with the juftice of that Court, or divert it from its object. The practice of fhooting in the vici nity of a great metropolis like this could not be too much reprehended: it deltroyed, by the of the poor hefbandman's toil, who, let the trefpals of the party and their dogs, the fruits crop be good or bad, was obliged to be punctual in the payment of his rent, and for the injury of having his feed tred under foot, to lay that trefpaffers were gentlemen was a very poor recompence. If gentlemen really wished to amule themselves in fhooting, they might repair to the mountains, and not maraude about the improve. ments of the city, where in too many inftances, from the obftruction of their views by hedges, they killed human game. Every man's ground should be held facred from encroachment. In the cafe before the Jury there had been a grofs violation of the law, and a trefpaf, and it lay in the difcretion of the Jury to eflimate the da mages; they might decree fifty, or a hundred, or two hundred pounds, according to their difcretion, and the Court would not deem the fum too heavy.- -The Jary retired, and brought in a verdict with gol. damages. Mr. N– -gh had for the above offence been charged capitally on the fhooting-act-but the bills of indictment were ignored by the Grand Jury. In the courte of the trial, Doctor Duignan, as counsel for the traverfer, interrogated the gardener as to his religion-it appearing that he had fire arms in his poffeffion-but Lord Earlsfort interfered, and faid, that the queftion was not material in the cafe-and he hoped, that in this enlightened age, when tolerance beamed its influence all over Europe-matters of religious prejudice would never be fuffered to prevail aga oft a man fuing for the protection of his perfon and property-a fentiment which does much credit to his Lordship's candour and love of equal juftice. DUBLIN, May 31, 1788. LAW INTELLIGENCE. A caufe was tried on Saturday last at Nifi Priss, in the Court of King's-bench, before Ld. Earlsfort and a fpecial Jury; the decifion upon which, it is hoped, will reftiain thofe who affect the character of fportimen from trefpaffing on the grounds of the laborious farmer and induftripas husbandman, It was an action brought June 2 The Court of King's-bench was yefagain Mr. N. gh, for an affault and tief- terday engaged by a motion in arreft of judg pa, by a poor man a gardener. It feems that ment, to fet afide the verdict of a jury, who M. N. -gh flushed a rail on his own ground, fome time fince tried Sir John Freke, Henry and followed it into the land of the gardener, Hatton, and Richard Griffith, Elq; for obftrucwho endeavoured to protect his property by resting Mr. Alderman Exfhaw in the execution of monftrating with the parties on the impro. his duty, as a magiftrate, by which verdict," the priety of the trefpaf; a féuffle enfued in confe- former gentlemen were acquitted, and M.. Grifquence, and Mr. N gh difcharged his fith found guilty. As this is a matter of great towi g-piece at the man, which lodged feveral public expectation, we think it necellary to give f the It is contended that equal juftice has not been done in the cafe between the Crown and the Subje&-that the jury returned a verd & which they were unwarranted by the evidence laid be fore them. The information which had been taid against Mr. Griffith, confifted of two counts. The first contained two charges-it accuted him of having ufed certain contemptuous and opprobrious expreffions, in order to bring the au thority of the magiftrate into difrepute, with questioning Mr. Alderman Exfhaw's authority, as a magiftrate, to difperfe a riotou× mob.”The evidence was confulted to know whether the charge was fupported, which thated that Mr. Griffith had faid- this is a place where geatlemen's fervants meet to amule themselves with innocent recreation-I have fome doubts whether it is an illegal adembly-take care what you are about, Mr. Alderman-have you read the riot act ?--you are not justifiable in ordering your men to fire." This was the only evidence against Mr. Griffith; and where, it was asked, did the opprobrious and contemptuous expreffions appear? not, as was afferted by his counfel, on the face of the evidence, and not appearing, then it was contended that the jury had given a verdia contrary to that which they were bound to give by law. The next count charged them with wilfully-and maliciously obstructing, hindering, and molefting the faid Mr. Alderman Exhaw in the execution of his duty, &c." The fame words, as mentioned above, were again quoted, and as the Jury had no other ground for their verdict, it was asked by what pof offible conftruction of law, or fact, the Tiaverfers could be fuppofed to have coltructed the magiftrate from the above premifes? It did not appear that he had offered any violence to the Alderman himself, nor did he 'inftigate others to d fo. Where then was the foundation of the verdict in either of the counts? it was not to be found, unless upon the erroneous principle, that a conversation innocent in itself, between Mr. G. and the Alderman, having been overheard by the rabble, they put a foolith conftruction upon ir, and were in confequence guilty of violence. - Great ftrefs was laid upon this point, and it was maintained that Mr. G. not having any evil intention, and not having delivered any evil words, even fuppofing the converfation to have been overheard, was not aniwerable for the confequences of the rabble's mifconftruction of it. There were certain expreffions, which of themfelves bespoke mifchief, fuch as "I'll depole the King I'll levy war against the State!"-Thefe needed no concurrent circumftances to confirm their guilt-bat berore an ill conftruction would be put upon words innocent in themfelves, it was neceffary that they should be attended by fome criminal circumflances, which were not so much as pretended in the pielest cafe. It was alfo contended, that it was a men ftrous novelty in law, to vifit one man's crimes upon another, as was now attempted, in endea vouring to punith Mr. G. for the milconduct of a giddy mob-tpr he was not in the riot; he threw no ftones--be gave no refiftance to the magistrate--and the counsel for the Crown were defied to produce a fiogle cafe out of the lawbooks, which by fimilarity to, could give à fanction to the verdict. It was faid, fappofing this mob had committed murder, Mr. G. would incur a comparative degree of guilt.-Could he be indicted for murder as principal? no; could he be indicted as acceffary before the fact? could he be indicted at al no, not with propriety, for an indictment against a map for any poffibi lity, which is againit the law, is a good indict. ment; by an equality of reafoning it was contended, that if he would have been guiltless in the cafe of murder, he was fo in the present one, which was a crime of lefs magnitude. --But what proved the abfurdity of the verdict ftill further, it was argued, that Sir John Freke and Mr. Hatton were acquitted, although in the fame degree guilty-although affenting to every expreffion that Mr. Griffith delivered. Mr Curran in the course of his pleadings was remarkably acrimonious, and inveighed against the verdict with much afperity. He stated it as the liberty and right of the subject to counsel even his Majefty, if he thought it needful →→→→ What then fo Gorgon-headed in a magiftrate, that he is not to be approached? he faid, that unless the verdict was fet afide, an encouragement would be given to the licentious abufe of magifterial power, which was the weift of all licentioufnefs and a bad magistrate who would be wicked enough to raise a conflagration in the city, would have nothing to do afterwards but to extinguish it with the blood of the people! The further hearing was deferred until this day. Mr. Thomas Humphry, was then put to the bar, and arraigned on fix indictments for forgeries, intended to defraud the Directors and Governors of the Bank of Ireland, to all which be pleaded not guilty." 44 Mr. Caldbeck, the prifoner's counsel moved the Court, that the prifoner fhould be admitted to bail, as the Crown had put off the profecution one term, when the prifoner had declared him. felf ready to abide his trial. The Attorney General would not confent.It was not his intention that the prifoner fhould be held over during the long vacation until next term-and therefore he requested him to name a day fhort as poffible, to have a trial at bar.-Thursday was agreed on for the purpose. Mr. Humphry is a handsome young man, apparently not more than two or three-and-twenty, and was dreifed entirely in black. The Court was uncommonly crowded. The Duke of Leiofter fat on the bench with the Judges the whole, and Lord Allen part of the time. Mr. Griffith appeared at the bar, and was at ended by Mr. Parfons of the College- Mr. Hartley, reprefentative of the city of Dublin-Major Dovie, and feveral other gentlemen. 61 Mr. Attorney General moved the Court of King's Beach to difcharge a rule, of last Term. whic which had been obtained against two Juftices of the Peace, for the county of Monaghan, to fhew caule why an information should not be granted against them, for having enlarged, and admitted to bail, Thomas Gartland, of Carrickmacrofs, who was charged with wounding Daniel Shove lin, of the fame place, with the iron of a carpen. ter's plane, of which wound he, in a few days after, died. When the Court, on hearing the circumftances, as they appeared by the affidavits, was pleated to grant the information, as a tranfaction proper for public profecution. Seven gentlemen argued in fupport of the motion. Agents, Mr. B. Mitchell, and M. G. James. Againft the motion, Mr. Curran, and two other gentlemen. Agent, Mr. Charles M'Mahon. By the late determination in the Court of King's-bench, in the cafe of the King againt James Foy, three points of very great and general concern in the Crown-law, have been at length folemnly fettled by the unanimous opinion of that Court: Firft, That a perfon indicted as acceffary before the fact, at common law, may plead his former acquittal as a principal in that offence in bar. Secondly, That the committer of a murder, and the procurer of that murder, are both liable to the punishment of treafou, under the ftatute of 10 Hen. 7, in Ireland, but in different degrees, viz. the actual committer of the murder, as the Principal in the first degree, the procurer as the derivative accefforial offender in the fecond degree, and that the procurer is not a diftinét, fubftantive principal, as was contended against Fitzgerald. Thirdly, That Foy, who was indicted as the procurer of the murder of M'Donnell and Hipfon, was in the nature of an acceffary before the fact, and as fuch intitled to the fame benefit of pleading and trial that the acceffary before the fact in felony was-and upon thefe grounds the court al lowed the plea put in by Foy's counsel at Caftlebar, and ordered him to be discharged from all further profecution. Thos. Humfrey was brought up to the Court of King's Bench, and a rule was made that he be admitted to bail, for the alledged forgery on the Bank of Ireland, himself in the fum of 1oool. and four fureties in the fum of 5col. each; his folicitor, Mr. Peters, gave notice to the Solicitor of the Bank, of the names and additions of the bail, together with the numbers and places of their abode, and he was ordered to be brought up for that purpose on Monday next. 7.] Philpot was brought up, and in confequence of his being found guilty on two counts, of the indictment against him, charging him with the feduction of artificers, he was fined 500l. on each, and is to be imprifoned twelve months for each; and fhould he not, at faid time pay the fine he is to be kept in prifon until he difcharges the fine to the fatisfaction of the Crown. Barrington, alfo for the fame crime, being found guilty on one count of the indictment, is to be fined sool-and is to fuffer twelve months confinement, in which Gtuation he muft alfo remain until the fine is paid. Foy, alias Sladden, was remanded to Ballin robe, for the purpose of procuring bail the ensu ing affizes. Frederick Lambert was brought up to the bar, and pleaded his Majefty's most gracious pardon, dated the 10th day of May laft, which being read the Court was pleased to allow the faid pardon, pursuant to the terms thereof, which are, that he be tranfported out of his Majefty's dominions in Europe for the term of his life." 9] This being the day appointed by the Court of King's Bench, to give their opinion on a motion made to arrest the judgment in the cafe of the King against Richard Griffith, Esq. the Court was uncommonly crowded. Lord Earlffort, in a very eloquent and able speech, ftated the feveral objections to the information, and the reasons on which the Court decided, and delivered the unanimous opinion of the Court, that the information was totally defective, as not having contained a fufficient defcription of the offence, and as not having fet out by what all the magiftrate was obstructed in the execution of his duty; and, therefore, that the judgment ought to be arrested, and the information quashed.This profecution, of courie, talls to the ground, fhould the Crown Lawyers think it prudent not to proceed in the bufinels. After the Court had delivered their opinion, Mr. Griffith addressed them as follows: MY LORDS, I beg leave to exprefs my acknowledgments ta this Court, not as party in the caufe which has been decided in my favour, but as a free ciuizen, for the patient and painful attention, with which the Court has day after day, listened to the full difcuffion of this caufe :-an attention, which has not been given so much on account of the confideration of the parties, as the magnitude and conftitutional importance of the queftions involved in their decifion, fhould not, my Lords, have taken up the time of this Court, nor the attention of the public, fo long upon any subject in which I was alone interefted. I fhould not have endeavoured to arrest judgment from any apprehenfion of a fevere fentence-becaule, if imprifonment had been decreed, it could not have been fo painful to me, as the fituation in which I have been placed by my attendance on the Court during the whole time this caufe has been agitating nor could any fine which the Court in moderation might have impofed, have exceeded the expence I have incurred by making a return inadequate indeed to my counsel for the knowledge, ability, and research, which they have displayed on this occafion-neither, my Lords, was I induced to refift a verdict founded in error, from an apprehenfion that my character as a citizen or man could be injured by it.-I have fuch an interoal evidence of the uprightness and purity of my intentions as would confole me even under the imputation of guilt;-but I have more, [ have the repentant declaration of feveral of the jurymen to support me in the affertion, that there is not a man in the kingdom who believes interfered with any other motive, than to prevent my fellow-citizens from being butchered. Under thefe circumftances, my Lords, it will be asked, why it is, that I have at to much trouble and expence refifted a verdict from the confequences of which which I had fo little to apprehend? I have refifted for the fake of juftice, and I am founded from what fell from the Bench, in saying, that I refifted a dangerous, infidious, and unconftituti enal principle in law-I refifted, my Lords, in order to prevent the establishment of a precedent that should allow the malice or ignorance of any future profecutor to bring an innocent man to trial upon the general charge of a crime, which, if defcribed, would not be deemed an offence. And I now call upon the Attorney General to commence a new profecution, to the end, that if I have been guilty of any action which conftitutes a crime, I may make atonement to the laws by suffering the punishment due to my of fence; but if, on the other hand, I have acted as a good citizen and an honeft man, that a jury of my countrymen, with the facts before them, may have an opportunity of vindicating my innocence. 12.] On Monday night laft, the journeymen cotton and linen-weavers, to the amount of about five hundred, went to the room of a working cotton weaver in Marybone-lane, tore down his looms, destroyed the work, and made a bonfire of the whole before the door; and after doing fo, went off shouting and huzzaing, without further mifchief. The charge against the man was, that he worked at under rates from what the Committee had thought proper to appoint. The man had a large family; which he was endeavouring to fupport, and not to continue idle like many others of the bench. On Tuesday morning, in confequence, he lodged examinations against nineteen of the principal ringleaders in that outrage; they hearing of his proceedings, fent a party to watch for his return, met him on the Coomb, and placed a rope about his neck, intending at first to hang him at the Tenter-fields, but changing their purpose, were dragging him to the Canal, in order to duck him, and then placed the rope about his body, whilft above a thousand were following and fhouting in triumph, which, however, was but a fhort duration, for about twenty of the master weavers, who are members of the Liberty Corps of Volunteers, purfued the mob with their bayonets fixed; when they came up with them, expoftulated on their unlawful proceedings, but finding no threats fufficient, boldly rescued the man, and took five of the principal ringleaders, who were sworn against, and properly fecured. When the mob faw the Volunteers coming up, they beat and abused the victim of their vengeance with clubs and sticks, knocked him down, and cut him with a hanger. He was much hurted and bruised in his head and body; he often earneftly begged of them to fpare his life, and not use him ill, during the time of their bring ing, or rather dragging him along, but no intreaties had any effect whatever. The conduct of the mafter weavers, belonging to the Volunteers, deferves the highest praife on this and indeed on every occafion where fpirited exertions are neceffary, as only for their immediate interference, the man might have loft his life, before either army or police could be brought. -12.] Came on in the Court of Exchequer, by nifi prius, the cause wherein Mifs Aan Burke was plaintiff, on an action of damages brought by her for refufing to admit her to bail, in a cafe where the law entitled her to fuch indulgence. After a long hearing of an able bar of lawyers on both fides, the Lord Chief Baron fummed up the evidence in a very able manner to the Jury'; faid he was happy he had the affittance of twelve men as jury on the occafion, as he never found his opi nion fo much embarrassed in his life. After iemaining out for, fome time, they found a verdict against the defendant of one penny damages, and fixpence costs. A fimilar trial immediately enfued, the fame plaintiff, Mifs Ann Burke, against Alderman Lightburne, defendant, on the like charge of refuting bail, on the fame occafion. The Jury found one penny damages, and fixpence costs. On the fame cale, the fame plaintiff against Alderman Sutton. The Jury found the like damages and cofts. In the course of the above trial, the Lord Chief Baron condemned the conduct of the defendants for refuling bail, either through error or neglect, in all cales where they were bound to admit the liberty of the fubject. -The excufes they made were trifling and inadmiffible-one of them in particular had nothing to lay on his own behalf, but that it was part three o'clock, and he would do no more bufinefs on that day; and if it was not for fome doubts which remained on the minds of the jury, and fome peculiar delicacies in the cafe, the cou fequences to the defendants would have been very ferious. 21.] Laft Saturday, an ejectment was tried in the Court of King's-bench, brought against a person who occupied the lower part of a house in Spitalfields as a yearly tenant, paying his reat quarterly. The plaintiff proved his title, he having a leafe of the house for a certain number of years, held under Mr. Richard Brett, in whom the fee was. On the part of the defendant ic was contended that fix months notice after the. expiration of the year fhould be given by the plaintiff to the defendant to quit the premises, in order to give him time to provide himself with another habitation. It appeared that the defendant paid his rent very regularly, when after a great deal of arguments of counfel on both fides, in the courfe of which the law refpecting landlords and tenants were clearly laid down, the plaintiff fuffered himself to be non-fuited. A correfpondent recommends a remedy always at hand, for the extirpation of poifon taken into the human body, or the bite of a mad dog. It is only common writing ink, which a short time fince Mon. Touffant Navier, the King's phyfician at Verfailles, difcovered, that mixed with foap water, taken inwardly, or rubbed on the outward wound of the bite, did not, ia any inftance where tried, fail to effect a cure, ODE performed at the Caftle of Dublin, on Wednesday the 4th of June, 1788, being the day appointed to celebrate the Birth-day of his Mott Excellent and Sacred Majefty, Kiog George III. Thee to Earth Aftræa gave, No. Not in pageantries of state, Vainly glittring, foon to die; Thine the fplendor, that outthines The treafures of exhaufted mines, Thine the fervor, that infpires The breaft with patristic fires, Exalts, improves, irradiates, and refines; That can, the cavern's gloom beguile Of horror, and bid darknefs fmile, Gives triumph to the warrior's parting breath, And freams a glory o'er the field of death. Thou with blood of heroes bought, That perith'd on th' enfanguin'd plain, (By diftant nations vainly fought) With us un-injur'd fhalt remain; Of distributions, boundless as the air, Hibernia and lerne jointly thare. Secure in GEORGE's guardian hand Feels with a fympathetic glow, Long, long and glorious be that Monarch's reign, I' approve. BIRTHS for July, 1788. - N Dame-treet, the lady of John Barber, Efq; of a fon and heir.- At Waterford, the edy of John Judkin Butler, Efq; Captain in the gift regt. of foot, of a fon. The lady of Nicholas Taaffe, of Ballybough-bridge, Elq; of a daughter.-In Melefworth freer, the lady of Thomas Kingsbury, Efq; of a fon-In Brideftreet, the lady of Doctor Dickfon, of a fon. In Dominick-freet, the lady of Arthur French, Efq; of a fon and heir.-In Clare-ftreet, the lady of William Henn, Efq; of a daughter. In Sackville-ftreet, the lady of William Kilbee, Eq; of a daughter.-At Waterford, the lady of Alexander Alcock, Efq; of a fon and heir.-At Stephen's-green, the lady of the Right Hon. the Earl of Granard, of a daughter.-In Gloftertreer, the lady of Henry G. Malony, Elq; of a fn and heir-On Uther's-Iland, the lady of Jofeph Atkinton, Efq; of a daughter. R MARRIAGES for July, 1788. ICHARD Hornidge, Efq; to Mifs Grueber, daughter of the Rev. Doctor Grueber. Tohn Crips, of Cabirnary, Efq; to Mrs. Harrifin, relict of Robert Harrifon, of Gartura, Elq; --John Bury, fen. of Wicklow, Efq; to Mils Sherwood, of Redcrofs.-Daniel Manfergh, of Cafhel, Eq; to Mifs Catharine, Pennefather, of Newpark, co. Tipperary.-In Cork, Thomas Reeves, Efq, M. D. to Mifs Oates.-The Rev. Walter Thomas, of Barnhill, co. Donegal, to Mifs Thomas, of Mole!worth ftreet. -Jofeph Jones, Elq; merchant, to Mif- Bien, daughter William Brien, Eiq; of Dublin Cattle.-John Sirpell, of Marlborough-street, Efq; to Mila Mary Ruffell, of Sandymount, co. Dublin.. William Francis Read, of Great Britain-street, Efq; to the Widow Whiteway, of Stafford street. --At Bath, England, John Lewis Boiffier, Efq; to Mils Crosbie, lifter to Sir Edw. Wm. Crosbie, Bart. At Kiniale, the Rev. John Kinton Dawfon, to Mils Catharine Herbert, fecond filter to Henry Herbert, of Muciufs, Etq;-Tho. Nev.lle, of the city of Dublin, Elq; to the Widow Hort, of the co. Kildare-At Waterford, Thomas Handcock Strangman, Efq; to Mifs Wakefield, William Gore, Efq; Cornet in the 14th da. goons, to Mits Maria Head.-The Rev. Alex. Gondy, of Donaghadee, to Mifs Lucy Adams. DEATHS for July, 1788.. laft, and could read the fmalleft print without fpectacles. In France, where he went for the recovery of her health, the Right Hon. Lady Matilda Bermingham, youngest daughter of the Right Hon. the Earl of Louth.-At Churchhill, co. Armagh, Thomas Veiner, Efq,-At Kilmiling, co. Wicklow, Thomas Doute, Efq; Agent to Lord Vitcount Powerfcourt.-In Great Britain-freet, M/s. Ballard. In the 66th year of his age, the Rev. Plunket Preston, rector of Duntryleague, co. Limerick -The Rev. Samuel Mead, Archdeacon of Kilmacduagh.—In Mecklenburgh-freet, Toby Purcell, Elq; Surveyor of Afton's quay; which employment he had held for upwards of 40 years, with credit to himself and advantage to the Revenue.At Stephen'sgreen, Mrs. Cuffe, mother to the Right Hon. James Cuffe, fifter to the late and aunt to the prefent Earl of Arran.-At Bristol, on his way to Bath, whither he was going for the recovery of his health, George Cartland, of Stephen'sgreen, Efq, a Barrister at Law, and one of the Commitioners of Bankruptcy.-On, his way to Mallow, Captain Caldwell, brother to Sir John Caldwell, Bart.-The Rev. John Donnelly, of Eyrecourt.. At Waterford, Sydenhamn Snow, Efq;-Near London, Mrs. Lucas, lady of Charles Lucas. Eiq; and daughter of Sir James Hamilton, of Monaghan At Milltown, co. Dublin, Mifs Hannah Claffon, fecond daughter of John Claffon, Elq, an eminent merchant. TH PROMOTION S. HE Rev. William Darby, Chaplain to the Royal Hofpital, to be Archdeacon of Kilmacduagh-(The Rev. A chdeacon Mead, deceafed.) -Doctor Daniel B yan, to be Physician to the county of Dublin Infirmary-(Doctor Cullen, refigned.)-The Hon. Major Gen. Lellie, Colonel of the 63d foot, to be Colonel of the 9th regt. foot-(vice Lord Saye and Sele, de-. ceafed.)-The Right Hon. Henry Lawes, Earl of Carhampton, to be Colonel of the 6th dragoon guards-(vice the Right Hon. Sir John Irwin, K. B. deceased.)-Walter Hore and Francis Patterson, Efqis. to be Judge Advocate and Judge Martial in and throughout the kingdom of Ireland. The Right Hon. Geo. Ea i of Waldegrave, to be Colonel of the 63d regiment foot(vice General Leflie, promoted.) |