Star. — London, England, 1824-03-31 00:00:00

4 llOw' ' PP"''' - \' • r -t• mon origin with ourselves, speaking one - common lan guage, and adhering to one common religion. Such were the generourand patriotic ties bidding the United States. with' Eisglend.;. Amiiie trusted that such nations, once acting in concert, would by able to treat for ever z"llrotatra gOserirAlictsl countries who should • So sha al WWII* to milting staves Here he• Flt it to be due main. individeal to mention that the saase measure-had been adopted in the Arabian Sea and. the Persian Gulf by a British Officer (Sit William Keir Grant), who in all his treaties in that quarter tad established the principle of piracy in regard 'to _the slave trade, and it was only due to • that Officer to. state, that he had made this great printiOe the condition of any peace with theAtabian Princes; and it would redound , to the honour of such a commander, that lie had already made treaties, for which the principle of the present Bill might be found and referred to practically. He hoped that this saving clause. ofrestitation to humanity, this great antidote to slavery, would be inserted in, and insisted on, in other treaties, ?hat the Slave Trade might be swept away for ever. He hail observed with sincere satisfaction, the steps. of his Majesty's Government on this occasion ; and he offered to the Ncible Earl opposite his thanks for the seal with which lie had forwarded the present Bill. Earl BATHURST, in explanation, said that a right of mutual search respecting slave ships was established between this Country and the United States ; so that, hi effect, whether the present Bill passed or not, the Slave Trade was adjudged to be piratical, both by America and England. The Bill was then read a third time,"passed, and mes saged to the other House. Several private Bills were brought from the Commons by Lord G. Sowell/11T, Sir J. OILLHAII, and others. Afijourned till to-morrow morning, at Tm. HOUSE OF COMMONS. - A person from the Treasury brought up certain Returns con nected with the Excise and Customs. Sir T. LETHBRIDGE moved the second reading of the Bris tol and Taunton Canal MIL Mr. W A BRE opposed the Motion, on the.ground that the Ciinal could be of no public advantage. and would materially interfere with much valuable private property. He Moved that it be read a second time tbat•day six months. Sir T. LETHBRIDGE supported thft Bill. Theretitions pre tented in favour of the Bill were sufficient proof of the public ad .vantagt expected from the Dill. Mr. C. HAILTET opposed the Bill, and Mr. %tour supported it. Aker a few words from Sir T. ACLAND, who said that he wished , that the Bill should go into Conimittee— The House divided—Ayes 102—Noes 34—Majority for the se cond reading, 68. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON presented a Petition from several Merchants and Shipowners of the City of Loudon in favour of the St. Catherine's Dock. Mr. Alderman BRIDGES presented a simiiaf Petition from certain Wine Importers of the City of Loudon.—Both Petitions were ordered to be printed. Mr. MAN' ' -- the Dock -.Jr. ANN INo presented a Petition from London Company, praying that the St. Catherine's Dusk Balmiest not paw into a law.—Ordered to be printed. Lord LOWTHER presented a Petition from Whitehaven, in favour of the Small Debts 13111.—Ordered to be printed. Lord I.9,WTHER presented Petitions from Malvern Port, sod another place in Westmoreland, against Slavery in the West Indies; Ordered to br ptinted. Petitionspraying for the gradual AboUtion of Slavery in the West Indian Colonies, were presented by Sir W. Isomer from the townx Almon and Pickering, in the county of Lincolti ; by Sir T. Lwrrt saltine ft ont the town of Wells ; by Mr. Ceuwen from Workingtoit, in the county of Cumberland ; by Mr. W. SMITH from the towns of Dereham, Stoketerri, Downham. Barton, and Marham, in the county of Norfolk ; by Mr. Anxitcaoststr from DowntoO, in the county of Wilts; by hlr. lioxxxanonrit from Penzanco, in Corn wall ; :..nd by Lord Mirrors front Halifax, in the county of York. Mr. 10 RC II said, that he had a Petition to resell( front the Mayor and Corporation of Nottingham against the Allen 'Act. He was liqvy to say that there was one Corporation at least in the country which had the courage to oppose this unjust, arbitrary, and unconstitutional measure. The Petitioners roinlemned this Act, because it enabled the Allied Sovereigns, flushed as they were by their recent successes, to pursue their victims with vindictive malice even into this country, the last asylum for persecuted freemen. Mr. Alderman WOOD assured the Honourable hlembet that the Corporation of Nottingham was not the only Corporation that bad courage enough to oppose this Act. In a few days he expected thnt the Corporation of London would present at the bar of the }louse, a Petition as hostile to the principles of this Act, as that Which had just been presented by the lionoutable Member himself- The Petition was ordered to be prin,ted. MANCHRSTER GA6 BILL. Sir J. MACKINTOSH said he rose for the purpose of presenting a Petition from an individual named Wil liam Walker, a solicitor of Manchester. The Petitioner, he said, complained of an attack made on his character before a Committee appointed to inquire into the merit, of a Petition on a Private Bill. He prayed that the -House would afford him an opportunity of refuting the charges made against him. He should give no opinion on the merits of the Petitioner ; indeed, as far as he was informed, his opinion was rather adverse to him. These charges he stated to have been made before a Committee, on a private Bill, by 01)C of the witnesses who had been examined. This Committee, the Petitioner said, was ad journed sine die, and he was thus precluded from an pottunity of refuting charges which, if allowed to re main unan,werea, must be ruinous to his character. Mr.IIItIGHT opposed the Petition. He conceived that as a Report had not been made, no Petition could be received having reference to what took place before the Committee. The House could afford no remedy. The SPEAKER said it would be difficult to lay it, down as a rule, that a Petition could not be received because it prayed for something whieli the House could not do. The Petitioner, however, referred to circum stances of which the House could have no cognizance. Until a Report had been made they could not he aware of what pasted in the Committee, neither did they know, except horn the statement (f the Petitioner, that the Committee had adjourned sine die. Air . I lUM E said a few wry: ds in favour of the Petition.] Tile SPEAKER said the Mouse could have no know ledge as to the fact ‘k nether the Committee was sitting or riot. It was cornpe:cnt for any ll , mourable Member to movethat the p!occedir.gs of the Committee should be laid before them. Mr. BRIGHT said, if the House could not be cog' ii. Lint of what took place in the Committee, a fortiori, a person out of doors could not. The SPEAKER said the House could not be cogni sant of it until the Report had been made. Mr. B. WILBRAHAM said the Committee sat on' the Manchester Gas Bill, and in the course of inquiry at' fact came out which the petitioner thought bore against him. He did not think the Committee was bound to be hearing witnesses pro and con whenever an individual supposed that anything which came out in the course of examination might be injurious to him. Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH said he had no objec tion to withdraw the Petition, as the subject would be brmight on in antther shape that night by the Member for Sussex (Mr. Curteis), wile. had given notice c.f . a isiosion to revive the Committee. The Petition was accordingly adtbdrawt. Mr. CURTEIS then rose to move for the renewal of the Committee ou the Manchester On Gs* Da The 1. . . .. ~::.~_ 111111Wr pgrimr7 I t paper Latd fakett Member pettil Sir cancel , . Friend (Mr. Curteis) to be perfectly in order. It was competent to any Member to state in . House whar passed in an open Committee. The SPEAKER said there was no doubt but any Member might state that of which he war cognisant. However, it would involve the House in great di ffi culties and . inconvenience if portions of evidence taken before a Committee were to be lead. Mr. CURIE'S then proceeded to make some obser vations on the manner in which the Petition on this Bill, as well as other Petitions, was got - up. He hoped the Committee would make some report, and he should therefore move that the Committee do meet again and proceed to-morrow. Mr. STANLEY opposed the motion at considerable length. 11e went into the Committee with send men friendly to the Bill ; but the fraudulent manner in whir it appeared that the Petitions in favour of it had been . got up, was alone su ffi cieot ground for adjourning the . Committee sine die. Of 730 signatures to one Petition,: 1.50 were duplicates. The reason assigned for this was,• that a skin of parchment not intended at all for the pur-: pose had been attached to the Petition by mistake.— The only way in which Mr. Walker became connected with the business was, that the Petitioniay at his office for signature; and while there, a number of signatures had been appended to it, not signed by those tit hose sib natures they purported to be. The facts which apreared before the Committee were sufficient ground for throw ing out . the Bill. No imputation had been laid on the ' Committee for adjourning sine die. This decision, l could assure the House, was founded in mercy to the parties themselves. - Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH, after paying a high compliment to the talents of the Honourable Member (Mr. Stanley), said the question lay in a very Ramp... cotnpass, A Committee had been appointed to report, an theft did not report. He meant to throw out /to im putatipit against the Committee; but' it was against .the practice of the House to adjourn sine die without repast ing. It was said that Mr. Walker's . character was not affected: it appeared to him that it was materially fected, for the fraud was said,to have been,comontted at his office ; and that fraud was tineof, the grounds on which the Bill was thrown oat. Mr. Walker, if the op portunity were afforded, could prove that he was no party to the fraudulent signatures stated to have been appended to the Petition while it lay at his office, and that it was impossible the thing could have been done at the time Mentioned. It was ratites a cruel sort of mercy to refuse to any man the opportunity of estab lishing his characters Mr. PHILLIPS opposed the motion.—The regular way would be to move that the Commiuee be revived. In this he was borne out by a precedent which occurred in 1816. He did not think, however, it would be proper to revive the Committee. The inhabitants of Manches ter, so far from being favourable to the Bill, were una nimously against it. Alehouse-keepers and quack doc tors Were brought forward as witnesses, and the grossest attempts were made to impose on the Committee. Mr. T. WILSON said, his opinion had been, that if the original Petition in favour of the Bill was rot tainted with fraud, the Committee ought to proceed. Being as sured that it was, he could not countenance any fur titer' step being taken by the Committee. Mr. BRIGHT opposed the motion.—The lioase saw how the Petitions were got up, and that, he thought, was sufficient ground uhy the Committee should not proceed. To set names in that-planner to Petitions was a high breach of privilege, and he hoped an example would be math, of this Manchester Gas Bill. . Sir I. COFFIN-said, that in justice to all par,ties, he should vote for the revival of the Committee. Mr. H. SUMNER said it was irregular not to have the Report of thee Committee before the House, and that was his principal ielson for wishing that it should be revived. As the character of an individual was . in volved, he thought they should have the Report before diem. It could then be ascertained whether or not the privileges of the House had been •iolated. After a few voids from Mr. Alderman HEYGATE and Mr. Ctirmas, the motion was negatived. ORANGEMEN. Mr. DAWSON said, he rose for the purpose of pre seining a Petition from certain Freemasons, praying that they might be exempt horn the operation of a law passed last Session with respect to Secret Societies. He thought it right to take this opportunity of calling the attention of the House to events that were at present going on in that part of the country with which he was acquainted—events growing out of secret societies. He regretted to hear, and he was certain it must be matter of regret to the House to be informed, that from twenty to twenty-five persons were put on trial for their lives, in consequence of excesses arising out of .aborni• stable processions. •In the ccuniy of Armagh twelve ' were tried, and in the county of Antrim also tome were !put on their trial. The Learned Judge who went that Circuit, finding the business on the criminal side poi tiply so greatly in consequence of these processions, thought it his duty to assemble the Gentlemen of the County, and re - commend to them to use their exertions for putting an end to them. Some had also been tried in the county which he had! the honour of 'representing. He was anxious to take this opportunity of stating that he reprobated in the strongest manner the existence of such processions—(Hear). If Orange processions were to take place, it was impossible that the Catholics should not think that they too ought to have their processions. It was, however, quite clear that all such processions were illegal, and in the highest degree improper. In the North of Ireland they were attended with the worst consequences. They were often the occasion of murder and of mischiefs of every kind. Every Gentleman took one part or another where such processions oc curred. He hoped that in future the Gentlemen would do everything in their power to put an end to them. Mr. S. RICE said he thanked his Honourable_ Friend fir thus declaring his sentiments Kith respect to these processions. This declaration, coming from. him, was more important, and promised more -good than any thing that had occurred in the present Session. He hoped the recommendation would go forth to the Pub• lic, and would not be lost on bis Majesty's Goiernment. The law made last year on the subject ,was utterly in operative. He regretted to say that within the last few years pains had been taken to inuoduce Orange Lodges into. many parts of the South of Ireland where they never had been heard of before. Mr. HUME thought that the Magistrates who coon testaneed these meetings should be reMoved from the ,Member proceeded to ps4som•44atementt (roma r relative to Aka tooleplillte ip the'Commlfrce. said the 'minaret' of ..the evidence t before thre Committee ha 4 not been given to any iber 6T it, and therefore he did not think it was come it to the fien. Member to read them.:. r J. MACKINTOSH said he conceived his Hon. -- ~ : --~~-~-T , " • Commission of the Peaee.—The Petition from the Free. masons of Ireland was received ; and Mr. BROWNLOW-pcesented a similar one fro - ht the Freemasons of the County of Arniagh. The Honour , able Gentleman quoted the opinion , of Baron Maclellan, .as;to the mischievous nature of these processions.- , -He thought the Freemasons were entitled to the considera tion of the House, from their being a charitable society, at a Prince td the Blood at their head. The Freemasons of Ireland were entitled to the same privi leges as those of England. ABERCROMBY seid, that the Hon. Member ; hid been told last Session of the effects of hit Bill, -and' those effects were now admitted to have been right.-- On this subject, much more could be done by influence than by legislation. He was sort,- that meskin high stations should lend the support of their name losd au thority to these Associations. Such men should be told,. that they were not to look for the favour of Govern ment when they adopted such a line of conduct. —The Petition was ordered to lie on the table. FEES OF COURTS OF JUSTICE IN SCOTLAND. •Lord A. HAMILTON rose to submit a motion to re- Fer the Reports. of Commissioners of Inquiry into the Fees of Justice in. Scotland to a Committee of the whole ,I-fonse. He rev etted b that while the Coratnissionets appointed for the same object in Ireland had done so much, and while certain, usefuraneasures were the result of their labours, the same good effect had not attended the labours of the Scotch Commissioners. He had waited till all the Reports were made, and he saw that no deCisive o.easities had yet been adopted in pursuance of the recommendation in the Report: In the course he now meant to take he would first point out what the Reports of the Commissioners recommended ; then how, ' much had been done ih pursuance of the recommends= i true ; and lastly, how much remaine4 to be done. But" before he proceeded to shew how slow the work of re formation went on, it would be necessary to inform the House that a Bill passed only last year, abolishing the inferior Commissary Courts, though it had been recom mended by . a Commission so far back as 1808. As to the Report, it would - appear, that though a Commission had been appointed, no measure—at least no adequate measure; had been yet adopted upon their suggestion, and yet this Commission must have cost the country 40,0001. at least. There were five Commissioners who sat fur seven or eight years, at an expense of 50 00/. a-year.— Th 6 sum total of the annual saving recommended by the Commissioners, amounted to 20,000/. a-year, of which (1,0001. a-) ear would have been saved to the Public and 12,0001. to the suitors in the Court. Now,, he asked if Government had not a right to carry into ffect this recommendation if practicable ; and yetavhat. had they done? Why not one fourth of that sum wiks reduced, the utmost amount of reduction being onlari .5,001)1.? - With regard to the retrenchment of offices,' the same negleet'veas apparent. The , number of offices, reccmmeirdeo to be abolished was ninety, while the' number redly abolished did not amount to fifteen, not including those in the inferior Commissary Courts. • In the Court of Session, cut of ten offices proposed to be abolished, only three were really abolished. In the same Court, though a faring. of 6,0001. a-year was re commended, a reduction of only 1,6001. a-year took •place ; and if the compensation to Judges' Clerks were deducted,* there' would be a sating of no more than three hundred and eighty pounds a-year. In fact, not one hill of what was recommended was abolished. With respect to the ten offices of this Court, if a Com mittee were granted him, he was prepared to prove the practicability of 'abolishing them. The next were the Commissary courts and inferior Commissary Courts. In Edinburgh, of five offices recommended to be abo lished, only one was abolished ;'but - with regard to the inferior Courts, a Bill had passed which put in effect all that had been recommended. As to the amount of re duction in the Consistory Courts of •El f3oorecommencled, only £4OO was reduced. -In the Chancery department, notwithstanding the abuse stated in the Sixth Report of the Commissioners to exist iu it, nothing had been done. In one branch of this department, the duties were done by a deputy with a large salary. He begged to call the particular attention of the House to the amount of treatment money given to the clerks in this department. In 1816, it was £677; in .1817, £800; and in 1818, £680._ This continued, notwithstanding the recommendation of the Commissioners to put it on a different footing. The next was the Exchequer Court, in which one of the Baronships and the office of Deputy Remembrancer were recommended to be abolished; and though no persons were appointed to these offices, which were now vacant, still they were not yet abo lished by any legislative enactment. lie was prepared to prove that four Barons were fully competent to the busine-s. The salaries of these two offices also were not yet reduced, for the same reason, because Govern ment had the power of renewing them iE they pleased. In the Court of Chancery, out of £5OOO recommended, not one shilling had been reduced. The Noble Lord here referred to the Report, to shew the enormous abuses which exi.qed in this department. The next was the Lion Court, in which, though 10004 was recommend ed, no reduction took place. Then followed the Courts of Justices ofthe Peace,-in which - nothing had been done, though the ninth Report recommended an abridgment of the proceediags, particularly in Excise cases. They also recommended that the small debt jurisdiction , should be extended, and that something like the County Court Bill should be introduced ; but nothing had yet been done. The jurisdiction now extended only to £5, and it was recommended that it should be extended to £lO. With regard to this, he had made up his mind to introduce a Bill similar to the County Courts Bill.— 'The - last were the Borough Courts, :and certainly no subject ever required more investigation or reformation. It occasioned him no little surprise to see twelve Re ports of Commissioners on the table, and the recom mendation of none of them carried into effect. In the last Report, many of the charges for processes in the Courts were stigmatised as illegal extortions. Any person comseeted with' Scotland was entitlid to .call an the Noble Lord (Lord Advocate) For some explanation— nay more, for some reniedial measures. The Noble Lord then recapitulated the several, Reports, and the Courts to which they referred, and concluded by moving— .. That the twelve Reports presented by the C ommissioners of Inquiry on the Courts of Janice in Scotland be referred to a Corn. Muer. of the whole House." The Amendment having been seconded, • The'LORD ADVOCATE said, there was a difficulty of understanding what the Noble Lord exactly meant by his motion, though its object' might be surmised. If he had moved that any one of the Reports be referred to a Select Committee, to inquire what had been done on it, •the meaning would have been obvious, and not lialfle to the same objection of obscurity with the present tap- Oen. The Noble Lord'had been most attehtiveto pet sons filling the office which Ik (the Lord Advocate) did, . • * • :1"' •. • • • . . . ~ti~ :- • ;., but he denied that there was any inclination on his port to carry into effect the recommendation of the Repo ' r, Any person who read the Reports must see there was a great deal of most valuable information in them, and most valuable historical accounts of the different offices to which they referred. It was to be observed, that none of these Reports complained that anythingwas sadi cally wrong in the constitution of these ofkces; they . re commended some few fees to be aisigghtz& 1-The-Com mission inquired into the fees of nine,ditTeretti:couns4 Justice in Scotland. There was !I general instruction to inquire into the Courts of Justice, under-which they car tied their researches into two Courts noe properly Cool of Justice. The one of them was,-.the Cittlft of;Lion, equivalent to the Garter King of Arms in England.-- With that office he did not think the CemMissioners ha I any right to interfere, as it was within the King's F it, rogative, and he'took measures to preirent them. Th. other was the Court of Chancery ; not the Court Chancery as was understood in England, but a mere office, whence certain writs issue. The Director was ( 1., Earl of Rosslyn, and under him were a Depiity and two Officers. The Commissioners inquired - into the office, and recommended the fees to be continued; at not excessive. By the 51 of Geo. 111. chap. 54, provision was made for the regtilation of certain offices, by which the surplus of the fees - were to go re the pliblie;44 among those the two offices in question were includeZ The' Learned Lord then-went through the constitution of several other Courts, including the Court of -Session, the Court of Exchequer, and the Court of Justiciary, and shewed that they were all competent to regulate themselves by the prevision of several Acts of Parlia ment, which he quoted. With Cigar(' to the Commis sary Courts, he brought in last year a Bill to regulate them, but received the most decided opposition from the other side of the House. He was then placed io.a difficult situation ; when he did not bring a Bill before the House, -he was charged with neglect of duty' ;''bit when he did introduce it, he was opposed bithe No* Lord at every step he took. If ever there was in Alt' entitled to the support of the Noble Lord, it was that to which he alluded, as it went the length of abstraet ing twenty-three patent offices from the Crown. It ,the first instance where an officer of the Crown pro posed the abolition of twenty-three patent offices, and that it was opposed by the other side of the House—(Hear, hear). It was, howiver, received in Scotland as a valuable boon, and gave general Satisfac tion. The next Court was the Sheriff's Court. To te• gulate that he brought in a Bill last year, but withdrew it on finding that a Commission was appointed by the other House, which would reach that Court in the course of iti inquiries. However, the Sheriff's Court was at tended with good effect in administering justice; and . the best proof of it was, that the appeals item it to the superior tribunal did not exceed one in 117. The tame reasons prevailed with respect to the Borough . Courts. The Report of the Royal Commissioners was yet not Le fore the House; and he waited until it was to introduce any measure. The Noble Lord next alluded to the Cour s of Justice, where sums not exceeding five pounds were recoverable. It was suggested to extend this jurisdiction, as the facility of recovering by a summary process so small a Sum-as five pounds only gave facilities to credit. He was led to doubt the ill -effects of the system, from the consideration that out of 212 in the jail of Edin burgh for debt, 132 were there for sums under tiv6 pounds. There were last year 8,700 causes tried in the Courts, and as the Sheriff or his Deputy had to preside, 'there was-a great and unnecessary duty thrown on them'; He considered that the administration of justice in that respect was worthy of the attention of the Noble Lot d, and he should, instead of his present general motion, have moved to ,refer the Report respecting the Justices in . Scotland ;o a Select Committee. Is was his opinion that the Gentlemen of Scotland, the. Justices of the Cotirg, should be admitted to a greater share in the administration of justice, and that they were entitled to preside in the Courts of Session. It was an opinion he had long entertained, and he was con vinced an arrangement to that effect would be attended with great and genet al.advantage. It occurred too fre quently that the prisoner remained from Session - to Ses sion without trial. The Justices of Scotland had-arduous duties to perform, but particularly in times. of. public commotion, when-they were left without assistance from the Noble Lord opposite, and others, who went away, no doubt, because they felt they would be of no use.— Those Gentlemen left all the labour on the Lord Ad vocate or the Sheriffs, ashen they might naturally . - be looked to for countenance and wpport. Having . shewn that out of the nine Courts reported upon, Aix re gulated themselves, and that two were under the Consi deration of the Royal Commissioners, he would dispose of the other by moving as an amendment, that the Re post relative to Scottish Justices be referred to a Select Committee. "Mr. A RERCROMBY thought the Learned Loyd had out a prospect of reform ; in that he was fully dis posed to co-operate. What the Learned Lord .had stated was strictly true. He was extremely desirous of seeing-the system of Grand Juries introduced into Scot lend ; but until that could be done, nothing could be more valuable than allowing the Gentry to .have a Alcatel- share in the administration of justice in .that fibuntry. He hoped the Learned Lord would include, in the inquiries of the Committee, the propriety of seeing whether Grand-Juries could not be beneficially intro duced into Scotland ; if the Learned Lord did not, he (Mr. Abercromby)should feel it his duty to move to that effect. Lord BINNING thought the case made out by the Noble Lord was completely answered by the Learned Lord s He deprecated the hasty adoption of sweeping changes, but would recommend the Honourable and Learned Gentlemen opposite to allow the Learned Lord to carry into effect, in the cautious, disci iminating mode which he was about to act, the disposition which he en tenained to make the necessary alterations recommended by the Commissioneri. Mr. HUME praised the perseieranei of his' Noble Friend below him, in bringing forward this subject 50 frequently befori the House. He was sure list if only one-tenth part. of the arguments urged by his Noble Friend that evening were attended to by the House, they would see the propriety of agreeing to the motion- Mr. KENNEDY wished to know if it was the inten tion of the Learned 'Lord to proceed with the inquiry which he promised chit Session? The LORD ADVOCATE said he must first consult those in Scotland interested in the icqu;rl, before he pledged himself to any course. Mr. ABERCROMBY said he was surprised to find that the Learned Lord had note any doubt upon the propriety of going on with the inquiry. The extraor divary statement just made by the Learned Lord com pletely altered• his•whole view of the case. . Mr. W. COURTENAY would condidly say, that in his opini ri, the inquiry ought to go on, and begged w - . —4lta.'°'"",t'`! • ;;;,, • - , )111 11 ' . • obi 1 t 0 11 0 rt% 4! •..-.. El 4 .v :7_, - . • . IPS .-.ill :is A ( 1 4,1 *.) 7. •1 3 . q -ri :~ ; -1 ~i r~ f~ ~.., t ,: • • • - 1 4 . - • • - ,