Star. — London, England, 1818-02-14 00:00:00

■ z p. . ' • J , L 44! 101E.LLIGENCS. • •. . ' \ CONFSINIT COURT, DOCTORS' COMMON& LAT KIRKWALL D. LORD KIRKWALL. W 1;. SCOTT gave judgment this day in the above cause, being a suit of Divorce instituted by Lady Kirkwall against Lord Kirkwall, on the ground of , Adultery The Learned Judge observed, that the facts of the adultery, with the identity of Lord Kirk wall, and the different persons with whom he coha bited at various places, not being any of them Lady Kirkwall, were fully proved ; the Court therefore pronounced for the separation sought. COURT OF conukoN PLEAS. CAM CON.-FRATICIS V. STIPURN (TEARY WILKES. The plaintiff in this case is a Clerk in the General Post Office, with a salary of 5001. a-year ; the defen dant, a Medical Practitioner. Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN stated the plaintiff's case. The plaintiff was married to his wife, whose maiden name was Hannah Lester, at St. Andrew's Church, Holborn, on the 24th May, 1812, of which marriage they had issue two children. Thomas Dean produced a copy of the marriage register.--Joseph West was present at the ceremony. Mr. George Caster married a sister of Mrs. Francis. The plaintiff was twenty-five years of age when they were married, and his wife twenty. Witness resided with them a year and a half after their marriage. Their conduct to each other was most affectionate— Saw defendant at the house of th© plaintiff, where he staid for six weeks. Does not know whether he boarded ' and lodged there. He was introduced to the plaintiff by the recommendation of Mr. Owen; of whose Plats be had professed himself a follower. Funding the plaintiffs wife had eloped, witness made inquiry at a house in Foley -street, where he got some intelli gence of her and Dr. Wilkes being together in Lon don, and had been seen walking arm in arm in the, streets. Witness was present when defendant was in custody, at .Union Hall on a charge of stealing a broach, the property of the plaintiff, which was found upon his person. The charge of felony was aban doned upon his giving up the broach, and Mrs. Fran cis was not examined as to the fact of her having given it hint. • This was the 281 or 29th of Decem ber last. Witness requested her to go home with him; but 'she pei3isted in her refusal, Was present when a letter from the defendant, after his being ar rested for debt, was delivered to Mrs. Francis, direc ted." to Mrs. Seymour, No. 5, Joiner-street." _ _ cross-esainixeil by Mr. Justice Daltas.—Does not know whether Dr. Wilkes resided in the plaintiff's house as a physician or as a lodger; but he attended the lady during her illness. Mr. Francis was upon absent from home during Every day, attending his duty at the Post Office. The parties were thus left alone together, except one servant-maid. Mr. -Henry Bankes was married to the sister of the plaintiff. He latterly resided at Tunbridge Wells, and was in town last October, when he, as usual, went to No. 49, Charlotte -street, Portland Place : he found the defendant (Dr. Wilkes) on friendly terms, an inmate of the house : he understood him to have got admission there as the friend and companion of Mr. Owen, and as one warmly embarked in his plans, and that he *as to remain there while Temple cham bers were fitting up for him. While witness was in town, he was struck with the conduct of Dr. Wilkes. Mrs. Francis was in a very weak state of health, after a typhus fever: she appeared enthusiastic in Mr. Owen's Plan, and at times seemed not quite sane. The base and improper conduct that he attributed to the defendant was an evident intention to flatter the illusions of Mrs. Francis, when they evidently arose from weakness, with a view to her ultimate seduction. Witness stated his suspiciqn to Mr. Francis, and the result was, that the defendant was immediately com pelled to quit the house. In the hope of bringing the lady to a better state of mind, she was carried by her husband for a few days down to witness's house at Tunbridge Wells, where she soon recovered; but im mediately on her return to town she eloped with the defendant. Witness cable up to town about the 29th of December, and:accidentally met the defendant and Mrs. Francis, walking arm in arm, in Pimlico—he followed Viem—had the defendant carried to Union, Hall, firs:, on a charge of stealing.a broaehhelong ing to Mr. Francis, but the charge was' relinquished, because it was stated that Mrs. Francis gave it to the Doctor; he was afterwards arrested for debt, and the lady forcibly carried away from him. It was then proved that Mrs. Francis and the defen dant lived together as man and wife for a fortnight, in a house in Joiner-street, Westminster-road. The following extracts from letters written by the defendant were also put in in evidence: " My dear Hannah—This absence only serves to chew the horror I feel without you.—l will repay your devotion.—My dear love, if I fall I will fall like Phzton, in a noble daring!" Another has the following passage : " How to see you, I don't know—or whether you can come to me to-night. Oh! what have they done with you? I shall apply to 11.— 0— for bail. Oh! what shall I do, my beloved Dannah ?" In another letter to a friend, the defendant de scribes himself as " residing in the bosom of a most attentive and affectionate family." Mr. ANDREWS, late in the trial, said he was unex pectedly instructed to appear for the defendant. The COURT, after some hesitation, allowed the Learned Counsel to put some questions to the brother in-law of the plaintiff, who admitted that Mrs. Fran cis was at present in her husband's house, where care was taken of her, In consequence of the distracted • of her mind. "DRE*S addressed the Jury for the defen urged the impossibility of his paying any his distressed circumstances. He also that the injury to the husband was not so when he could take his wife back again domestic roof. • istice DALLAS charged the Jury, and said poverty of the defendant, though not to be ad, "was yet no weighty consideration in a case lad, for he must pay in person if he cannot As to the charge that the unfortunate hus not abandoned the wife in her distracted iod, but had ordered persons to take care I last person that should urge that in we , Isis crime was the defendant. Idly; after five minutes' consideration, man rdict for the plaintiff—Dan:ups, 5001. examination of one of the witnesses it came ie defendant is now in prison for debt. PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS. HOUSE OF LORDS, FEBRUARY is. Counsel were heard this day respecting the following Scots causes— " Gordon v. Majoribanks," in continuation, and finally. " Hunter v. M'Govran," heard in full, O n both thes.: cases their Lordships' Judgments were postponed. ' " Sir W. Elliott of Stobbs, Bart. v. Pam" in this case Coun sel were heard in part. To proceed again.on Monday. His Grace the Duke of Noaruustaracallo and Viscount Gassvu.i.e - respectively presented Petitions, touching certain private business before the House. Mr. Merman, from the Treasury, presented the Annual Ac counts respecting the number, &c. of vessels cleared out from the Scots Ports, foi the White Herring and Northern Whale Fisheries. . Mr. Sawatt, from the Stamp Office, presented an Account of the number of Licenses for Promissory Notes, issued in the years 1815, 1816, and 1817, pursuant to a recent order of the House. After waiting for some time in apparent expectancy of re ceiving some communications, their Lordships adjourned tdl Monday. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. HUTCHINSON (from the Bank) presented Accounts of the Weekly Amount of Bank Notes and Bank Post Bilk in circu lation during the last year, with the amount of the whole, the price of Bullion during the same period, the balances in hand, arc.--Ordered to lie on the table. Mr. H. SUMNEIt presented a Petition for leave to bring in a Bill for making a New Road from Greenwich toWoolwizii.--- Referred to a Committie.—He also presented a Petition for leave to bring in a Bill to authorise the erection of a Bridge over the Thames at Rotherhithe.—Referre d to a Committee. -. Lord G. L. GOWER presented a Petition from certain Soli citors in Staffordshire, praying that persons not brought up to the Law tyay be restrained from acting u CoorcyanciTs.—Or dered to he on the table- _ • Sir E. BRVDGES.preeented a Petition from some of the principal inhabitants of Maidstoue, praying for leave to bring in a Bill for enabling Creditors more expeditiously to recover Small Debts.--Refereed to a CODlRlaltee. - Mr. DOUGLAS presented a Petition from Dumfries, pray ing that a Bill might be brought in for so regulating the Royal Burghs in Scotland, that the espenditure of each should. be re gularly brought forward by the proper Authorities, that the accounts might be audited. The Honourable Member, in irtro ducing the petition, -spoke at some length on the importance of the subject, and on the advantages likely to result from the 'adoption of such a law. The LORD ADVOCATE of SCOTLAND said a measure of the nature of that adverted to, had been in his contemplation. for some time, and he had meant to bringin a Bill on the subject in the course of the present Session. After a few words from Mr. W. DUMAS and Lord A. Ha , stilton, the Petition was ordered to lie on the tables A similar Petition from the Merchant Burgesses of the Burgh of Dumfries, was presented, read, andorderelto lie on the table. Mr. MELLISH presented a Petition from artist Free holders of Middlesex, praying for leave to brinsfin ejill for she erection of a New Bridge ever the Maine' from Haedixecturisita Ordered to lie on the table. • • - *eh A Petition was presented frotn Birmingham in favourofawl Chimney-s Weepers Regulation Bill.—Ordered to lie ()tithe table. The Chimney-sweepers' Regulation Bill was read a second time, and committed for Monday. On the motion of Mr. GORDON, AccOunts of the Sums expended within the last ear on Plymouth Dock and Lines, were ordered to be laid be fore the House. Sir F. BRYDGES postponed his notice, respecting the Copy right of Authors, from the 17th inst. to the Sd of March. Mr. C. WYNN presented a Petition from a Mr. James Holmes, Curate of Sandacre, in the county of Derbyshire.--; The Petitioner had Livings ' and Freeholds in several other counties; and as it was inconvenient for him to travel so as to exercise his elective franchise in each place, he prayed that some provision might be made in the Bill before the House to lev itate Elections, for the accommodation of persons in his satiation, who he suggested might be allowed to vote by affidavit.—The Petition was ordered to lie on the table. ELLCTION LAW AMENDMENT DILL. The Report of the Election Law Amendment Bill 'svaltaken Jaw forAlser c,onsidaratioila i 44 wa s X e-c4 = Mr..W i n.Cti hoped Gentlemen Who Cal any " to propose in the au now before the Hoiiie,woulli take this op.. portunity of bringing them forward, as this was the stage in which they could be most conveniently received. Besides the Universities of Word and Cambridge, he wished to except the City of London from the operation of the pros-lanais which it contained for limiting the duration of Polk, as the reannerin which the City Elections were always conducted made it W. necessary to alter the law with respect to them. • Mr. LOCKHART thought that clause of the Bill objection able which went to provide, that if a riot took place on any day during the election, the Sheriff, or returntrg Officer, should have power to adjourn the poll to another day. If it might thus be adjourned from the second to the third, it might be ad journed in like manner from the third to the fourth, and so on, l and in some cases it might so happen that when a candidate was satisfied he should not be able to procure 400 votes in the two first days—the number necessary to keep the poll open—that he would set his own party on to make a riot that he might thus gain another day to bring up his forces. The claw was the more objectionable as it did not say where the riot must take place to authorize this adjournment, and consequertly a riot at a considerable distance might be used as a pretext for doing so, though it had nothing to do with the election. At present he bad no remedy to suggest, but be had thought it right to throw out these observations. _ _ Mr. WYNN said it appeared to him that In the cues supposed the discretion of the returning Officer must be exercised, and if he acted improperly, he would doubtlelebe liable to the severe censure of that House. Mr. LOCKHART knew of no remedy for the evil of which he had spoken, but by suffering the poll, in the cases he had supposed, to be kept open only for thine who should swear they had been preveuted from coining up before by the riots. Some further discussion took place on the other clauses of the au, in which Mr. BAUM, Lord Leectuss, Sir M. W. RID- Lay, Mr.Vl'vrat, and Mr. Banes participated, after which they were agreed to, as was a new Clause proposed by Mr. Wring, which went to give the Sheriff or Returning Officer, during the time of an Election, the authority of a Justice of the Peace. The House then resumed, .7 1 fr. Bacsanza reported, and the Report was ordered to be received on Monday, and to be printed. BOARD OP AGRICULTURE: Mr. D. GIDDY presented a Petition from the President and Members of the Board of Airiewfrwrop praying for the asset of a awn of money in aid of aiseir funds, in the present year. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated the Petition to be recommended by the Crown. Ordered to lie on the Table. PETITIONS. Mr. BENNET presented a Petition from Joseph Mitchell, of Liverpool, one of the unfortunate persons lately confined un der the Habeu Corpus Suspension Act. Vittether this person was or was not entitled to credit, he muse leave to those who knew him better than he (Mr. Bennet) did. He, however, had no reason to believe his statement other than pxrect; the hard ships he had suffered were great, and to him it appeared be had' a claim to the protection of the House.- As the -Petition •was very long, and only stated whet had bees previously brought before the House; he did not wish the whole of it to be read. The prayer of the Petition, which called upon the House not to grant Slinistera a Bill of Indemnity to preclude the Peti tioner from seeking that redresem which he was entitled, was then read, and the petition was ordered to lieou the Table. On its being moied lay Mr. Barer tbatit should be printed, The CHASCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER asked if there, were nothing offensive in its language? Mr. BENNET said, the Petitioner complained of the hard ships he had endured, but the language of the petition was not disrespectful to the House. _ _ . The petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. BENNET then presented a Petition from Thomastvarts, another of the persons who had been eonfu:ed under the Suspen sion of the Habeas Corpus Act. This he did not desire to have read, as it only recapitulated various petitions which- had been presented to the House before. But he had to state, the Peti tioner expressed much astonishment at some of the allegations of his former petitions having been denied. He had stated no thing that he was not prepared to prove at their Bar, and he prayed for an inquiry into the whois Of * late proceedings. Ordered to lie on dip Table. lir. Samar laving moved thatthe petition should be printed. Sir M. W. R/DEEY rose tenotice the conduct of the Chan allot au,' Exchequer en the la/4P/titian. The Right Hon. Gentleman. after it bad been ordered to lie on the table, lead asked if it contained any thing offensive, elk its being moved that it should be primed. lie submitted to the House, that any thing that was fit to lie on their table was fit to be printed. Mr. W Yrraiuld not agree that because a Petition was suf fered ft/ lia on the table, that it followed as a matter of course It was fit to be printed. Petitions were primed for the use of the Members, and therefore he thought the I louse might be safely and properly allowed to us- their discretion arta whether they should or should not be printed. In many cases they might be dispostd.to hear a complaint, though not to give it currency by printing it. Lord FOLKESTONE thought the strongest argument that could be used for printing l'etitions, was the statement that they were printed for the use of the Members of that Houle. How Could the Members understand what these Petitions were,unkse They were printed ;(Hear, hear, hear !)—Would it be said that the Members might go one at a time and read them at the table? Was this the way they were to become acquainted with them? 'Till within the last nine months, ab Petitions had been regularly printed. Since he had been in Parliimein, it was common to ptintall Petitions at fall length. Since it bad become usual to abbreviate them, and now it was a question whether they should be printed at *IL He thought it a great insult to the people, whose servants and whose representatives they were, for them to say that what they thought fit to lie on their table ought not to be printed. He should be sorry to see that time arrive when a motion for printing a Petition should be negatived by the House. The Petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. RENNET neat presented a Petition from another person who had been confined under the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, of the mane of Wiliam Ogden, amen 74 - years of age. lio complained of having been heavily ironed, and otherwise most harshly treated during his confinement, in consequence of which he feared he should never be able to follow his employment again. He had been thus punished because he had been an ad. vocate for Parliamentary Reform ; though he had paid taxes many years, and brought up 17 children by his two wives. He de clared to GOD that he had done no wrong, and prayed the House not to pass a Bill of Indemnity to screen Mini,ters, and preclude , him from obtaining that redress to which he was entitled.—The Petition was ordered to lie on the table, and to be printed. On the motion of Mr. ilr.swer, the. Petition of Benbow, pre-. seated on a former night, was ordered to be printed. Sir F. BURDETT said he had a Petition to present, and from. . . the scenes which bad lately been disclosed, he could almost fancy himself living under the Government of the- lley of Algiers.' The Petition he held in his hand, was from one of those persons who had been so illegally imprisoned, and not leas illegally set at liberty, without being first brought before any tribunal where the parties might establish their innocence. Ile hoped these Pe- . titians would not lie Idly on the table ; but this he knew they. mold not, as one notice had already been given of a motion on' the subject. The Petition be now presented was fmrn Jobe Stewart, a Weaver in Glasgow, who bad been apprehended byt the Sheriff of Lanark in February last, and confined for seven weeks and three days. The Petitioner described himself to have been subjected to great hardships wkille in prison, and to have ,sustained much injury in his , w from the expenses whirls the proceedingshad thiovrn on him. He prayed the House _ afford men relief.—Tbe Petition rotas ordered to lie onthe table. " Sir F. ISORDETT presented a Petition from certain inliabi tents el Abe parish of St. Georges, I iseover-oquare, signed by 20 names. The Petition prayed for a Bajerm in Parliament, cen sured the present Government, coeallisetted the Suspension of the Habeas corpus Act, and decimal, their prayer were not at tended to, they would mist by t illot paying the taxes. • Lore CASTLEREAGH tboldst at first the word" resist" had been used but in a oonsdlaniletsal sense by the Petitioners. But when they declared they Mould not pay taxes, a question arose quite distinct from that elParliamentary Reform, and he should now move that this Petition be rejected. Sir F. BURDETT was dr opinion the parties only threatened to refuse to pay taxes as the consequence of their not being re presented in Parliament. The filltnnet in which the word" resist" was used did not nec.:ssarily imply unconstitutional' renstanci: Lord CASTLEREAGH referred to the wdfds of the Pell non, which ran . thus .—" If your Hop l ourable Weise will nee' take into your most serious canaideroffon, and comply with out prayer, by granting a Reform In Paritamens, your Petitionere will most certainly resist by not paying taxes."—The Petition was then rejected. Sir F. BURDETT presented eye Petitions from Bath, mach signed by 110 names, praying for a Reform.' In Parliament -r- Des . - dered to lie on the table. Mr. BROUGHAM wished to know froth the Maisie Lord opposite, when it was probable that the Report of Oho Secret . Committee would be presented to the House ? ' .•. FINAUCE. Mr. BROGDEN brought up the Report of the thirty millions Exchequer BiUs Bill. -Mr. TIERNEY wished to Mk the Chancellor a the Exchequer a question. Of the 59,060,000 the. Right Honourable Gentleman had - Moved for on a former night, he now proposed IQ tilre but thirty millions, and this sum he had stated would be enough to carry on the public business till after Easter: • He wished to know what was to become cif 'the six mil lions due to the Bank, which was to be paid early - in the month of April ? He wished to know if in this thirty millions any provision was made for payirag 'the Bank • The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that unquestiodably the 30,000,0001. would be sit& cieat, not only to cover the current expenditure, .but also to pay, (if it were necessary to pay it in ode surd) the 6,000,0001. due to the Bank. It was however. expected, and indeed he took it for granted; that ; this would not be the case, but that the payonit's. w,otikl be gradually made as should best.suit the tconyetki ence of both parties ? • • • - • --...—_. Mr. TIERNEY presumed it was one of tote least considerations whether the payment should be made in one sum, or in more than one. 11.1!skt, he wished to know was, whether. it would be irrap *ay : by the•period at which the bargain with the should expire. • . The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said no part of the 6,000,000/. was to be paid to the Bank before the sth of April. By that time the Loan would be in the course of payment. Mr. TIERNEY supposed he was then to under stand, that on the sth of April the Bank was in some way or other to be paid in money. • The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQXTR, did not say the Bank would, by that time, bst paid the whole in one sum, but the payments, when the sth of April should arrive, would have commenced in the way that might hest accord with the mutual con venience of the Bank add the country. As much would be paid by the sth of April as the Bank ex pected to receive. Mr. TIERNEY did not know how the mutual con venience of both parties could, be consulted in the business. He should suppose payment at once would be most convenient to' the party that was to receive money. If he understood the aancellor of the Ex-1 chequer right, what he had now said knocked on the head all that he had advanced on a former night. He had endkavoured to tie him down on this subject to something specific, by askin g w h e th er th e B an k was to be paid the 6,000,0001. it was to receive, in money or in 'Exchequer 'Bills? The answer given to this question was most important. It had been seen how it affected the country, when it was stated, that the payment was to be made in money ; but after what had just fallen froni the Chancellor of the Exchequer they were all at sea again. If out of the 6,000,0001. which bad been borrowed, but one pound ihould be given to the bank, it might be said tile paymeitbad 4commruded, and the rest was to be Eri c: l o 4, 4 *barged at some time or other. But tiffs sr a ,; portant to the country, as the Bank :Mould net having been paid, an argument for n ot re 7 cask payments. Every body had under t -t o ,,i a tt l 6,000,0001. was to be paid in money. It seen, that of the sum voted (39,000,0(04 141 90,000,0001. was taken by the Chancellor ,a• I E4 chequer, and the payment which was to be 2 , 34 ally made was in fact deferred. It was clith eu i say why he should have got the 39,000,010.,4 supply, and then declined taking it, to par o f i loan which he had, called on the House to He might have good reason for doing one of things, but he did not see how the Right 110n 54 . 4 Gentleman could feel justified in doing 15-.1 out of the 30,000,0001. he had said there paid as large a proportion of . the loan as expected to receive by the t ime which 1 , nkmed. Was there then any understandii. gag Bank and the Chancellor of the Erclie;Le, the payment of the loan should be postp.*! there were, he ought to let it be known, tlic might start fair. He (Mr. Tierney) was the k anxious for an explicit answer on this head. a / mour was abroad—he had, indeed, hex d r • tively asserted that day, that the payrnen! of t q in money had never been in contempleion. things were now in such a state that r.;1Y:21- what the Chancellor of the Excliegne r at. It only required the simple ing the English lapguage, to undet-,:_,l:iore explanation of the Chancellor cf the 11:.1.t qur other night, the direct contrary of rAr peared to be his intention to do. What has in the mean time to chungo those intent,tr s not. Only this was to be- learned inns :;:e e t ence in the present case—that latieWer tion of the Chancellor of the Excheo.,.er, a fortnight before he could expect to heat tl?.: which it was really intended, to give —0h..., and /auglatre.) The. CHANCELLOR of the EX( lIEC Notwitiuiamssng all that was said by the }LI nonrable.Gendernan, he was pnwinced thy; person in the Home could have misunderst,4 had said on the occasion adverted to az 41„ on.bGentleman. On that occasion the it k: Gentleman distinctly asked, whether the ns was to be paid in money, or by an Excl.'s:viz., J 'chequer Bills? To that he as distinctly rel.zi the payment was to be in money. No qua asked as to the time. when the payment us; made, whether on the sth April oe at any kr.e andtherefore nothing as to the time was sai.: in his irflivereter, hear, hear.) He sad; even if the payment were made by an issue chequer Bills, ns these would necessarily b in money, his answer must at all events nue tinctly implied, that at some time or other tir meat would be made in money. The on'_y qaf which he was asked was as to the nice o meat—and as that was all that was asked. r all that he could be understood to answer— hese, hear.) As to the time when their p would be made to the Bank, tinetly that it would be such that in _no_ degree be thereby prevented fo. its Cash.P.iymetats ; and all that •::.c P. forentlensan could be understood iii ear...rats:a., hire* been the effect of the time in *teeth* the'resumption of Cash Par-rite:..l , .. TIEIiNEY said the Right certainlytenly stated the que:tion Tierney) had put ea a former evenir.o. wheq'he asked that question, he held . bill, whifh it was stated that the f:i r to be repaid on or before the 51'.1 and he certainly thought, that when hi aSi what shape the re-payment was to be ma 1. could be only understood tb Mean the r:.?.:rt :which was to be made on or before the Lth 01: 3 .1 and when the .Chancellor of the Exch.xite aimed that the re-payment was to be in 'rico! (Mr: Tierney) was certainly stupid encr,..7 l ". stand hini as meaning that it was to be rade zi time mentioned in the bill. • Mr. SHARPE said that after all that said on the subject, he wished to know eh.:"111 f ix millions were to be repaid before the tiro( the Bank wa6.10, resume its cash pavrre arc ? • • The CHANCELLOR of the tXt'HEci.l The repayments Mai •be made at such tine Ainic may requite.—(hags, fear.) •Mr. GRENFELL said, his understand:rig ishe Chancellor of the Exchequer had said clx tnes day, certainly was that the te-paysr,r:u be made to the Bank, not in E:chequer ie Bank notes, before the, sth. of April. He 'understood, •that if not before the sth of Aiir.:l at least-the repayment would be made c1.:7;:7 lirilent Session. As to making the :i7ne.::" . l mentaccord with the time of resuming riti ments,.it was to be observed that there s'.. V!' Restriction Act, an option to keep it in rd! three years, and if the option was to be cs nuance of the Act for three years, weuld for the re-payment of the six ',71 tionably extended ? He hoped the Chance.. ..7!I Exchequer would condescend to answer ; s was desirous of takin this opportunity that Government had, for some time pp:. 74 suing Exchequer Bills at a premium of 2J. ix: per diem, which was equivalent to about :3 per annum, even deducting the premium n • , J the Bills issued at that rate. It was very that Government should be able to rai,e r - zr such moderate terms, but the most imp was, that the tendency would directi) 1.. • down the rate of interest throughout the o He then descanted on the political ben,.ri:, rate of interest being lowered—that it stor:;a:ril commerce and manufactures, and enable: ( 4 men of landed property to borrow mom y security of their estates. It was a c omn:i;:: , '.*: to the benefits of a low rate of interest, tendency to withdraw capital from the cry :'r• the purpose of being deposited in the reign states, or otherwise abroad, where s rate of interest could 'be obtained. To I.• that the badness of the security of any It vernment would naturally crevent any c onsiao part of the capital of' this country being i!tr , :l employed elsewhere than in this Country. that the rate of interest throughout the count!! now so low, dust the Bank ought to loci' n hat he e Bank state of her Mr. AND dant, and t damag contended t irreparable, under his d Mr. Justi that the pm - • overlooked, of this kind in purse. /I band bad state of mh • of her, the nuation of 1 The Jul - ) ned a vordi • In the ex out that the • ev. • a). • . • II • •