The Statesman. — London, England, 1822-03-04 00:00:00

, .1 un, F • • 4^ .4 •"' • -4 TIM. STAI ; MAAN. TWO LET I EKS TO TUE EARL OF' LIVERPOOL. IN REPLY TO HIS MPERCH or TUESDAY, sec 46tH OF FEB. 181 1 2. BY MIL COBBETT. Ltrrra i. Kensington, March 1, 19.11. My Loati-1 have read with great attention the report of your very elaborate speech of the 26th of last month. That speech, which was an (mercer to me, rather than to , any body else, was not, and, indeed, could not be, an swered by the Magnuson of LANSDOWNE, because he holds, as to the main point of all, opinions equally erro neous with those of your lordship; sml, if those opinions coninne to be acted upon for only a little while longer, the landlords of England must inevitably fall before the Mainmon of the Stock-Exchange. The chief object of your speech was, to prove, that exeessice taxation is not the cause of the •' distress of agriculture," as it is called. There was some important collateral matter. which I shall notice as I proceed; but this was the maim olject that you had in view. Your speech was, in fact, an attempt to answer my rustic harangues. and especially those at litrativdon, at Epsom, and at Chichester, which, as you well knew, had made a deep impressiou on the minds of the whole coun try. In ortter to effect this object, your lordship assigns iovtlier caose for the distress; because it would have born monstrous indeed to deny the existence of the dig ' tresa, at the very moment that you were proposing to i -toe (at the risk of thriving the gold out of the country) Aar millions of exchequer bills to lie lent to the parishes on an assignment of the poor-rates. This other cease brought forward by your lordship is, "orer-productiox," too great an abundance of food produced ; and, now let vs see the way in which you go to work to establish this monstrous proposition, at the same time that you assert the population to have increased from tea to j:wrteen mi ilious during the last twenty years! There is something so unnatural, so contrary to all expe:ience, in the idea, that the owners and occupiers of land should be iliaresird by abundant crops, that the mind iiivoluntarily starts back from it. Is the thing possible Clearly it is not ; for, if the farmer grows in good yeses 100 hushels of wheat upon a given piece of land, and it then sell at ss. a bushel, and if, in had veers, he grow 50 bildiels and sell at Ills. a bushel, du'es he lose by the good crop, and gain by the bad one? Is it rot, as far as price toes, the same thing to him? How, then, can abundant crops have produced the distress, that is to say, the inatility to pay rent, in the farmer? Bat, I shall have occasion to return to this topic, after I have examined your arguments in support of the as *echo that taxes do not cause the distress. Your lordship save, that, as a proof. that it is not es c.ssire taxation which has produced the distress, the save distress exists a!! orer Entope and in America. Hy distress yon here mean low price; and, was it not clearly shown, in my third Letter to Laadlords, that the drain of gold from those countries, which drain had been occasioned by Peel's Bill, ha I produced the Jill of price in those countries • while all the taxes, there as o tit as here, remained ;hat they were before that drain of gold took place? You produce the evidence of a Mr. J•COB to allele, that the agriculture of the continent is in a state of distress. If we believe all he asserts, what does it prove? Only that the landlords and fanners in other loudly taxed nations have been plunged into a state of diatreas by the fall of prices ; and, in what way is this to . prosice in our minds a conviction, that, with the prices of 1790, the laud of England is able to pay the taxes of 1922 How does that tend to show, that, with the prices of a time when the taxes amounted to thirteen millions a year. the land can pay its share of taxes smonnting to fifty.three millions a year? Supposing; ail Mr. JACOll'd facts to be tree (and that is supposing a great deal) what. do they prove more than this : that the agriculture of the continent is in distress from the faltof prices with an undiminished taxation r Your lordship inchstled America; but, you. cited no reideace. And, why was it, that no evidence was pro duced before the Committee, relative to America? Plenty of witnesses, ready to be called ! And vet, none called ! That was the country to appeal to. that was the argument of age:le:ace in support of your mon strous proposition, that heavy taxes do not produce the distress ; and here you content yourself with assertion, tare assertion ; without a fragment of evidence. Now, what are the facts as to America? Whv, that there are so tares worth speaking of; and that, though farm-pro duce has fallen full two-thirds since 1317, there is no distress. The very day after the last Epsous Meeting, I sem an English Men:limit, who left New York in De cember; and from his month made these notes : " Bank " paper reduced to a small quantity.—Growing less and " less.—All paper payable in gold or silver.—No coin '' mercial fat lures.—State of things sound and good.— " Freights goo.l.—Shipping increasing; as a proof of tt which a second line of Packet-ships had just been "'tartest, to sail between New York and Liverpool, by • Ityrnes, Trimhe End Co.—Manufactures, especially in " Cotton, making great progress, and yielding great • pr.slit.—The woollen saanufactures were also doing very well.—Wages of day-labourer at New York, a dollar " a they. In the cotton factories from eight to nine " dollar: a week.-111 the woolen from nine to ten (lot " lays.—Price of beef in New York market 3d. (English) " a ponnd." This, my Lord, is the state of America, where there are so tires to pay. Where there are no taxes things aeon "find their tree." You will say, "I don't believe your facts." Why, then, am I to believe pare Call witnesses, then! But, do you see, in any of the Ameri can news-papers, any complaints of distress! Do you hear of any distressed people petitioning the Congress How soon should we have such petitions before us, if such existed. Your post-office gets mail-loads of Ameri can newspapers. Hunt them through, my lord ; and, if you can held a single proofof the truth ofyour lion, let us have it. But, the absence of all evidence as to America, while you produce such masses of evidence as to other countries, is conclusive. It can leave a doubt in the mind of no rational man, that, upon this point, you have nothing but bare assertion, which, in such a use, Is not worth a straw ; and can only be regarded as having been made for the purpose of propping up your fallacious argument. An I told my Lord Etlenborongh. at Epsom, the case of America destroys your whole mass of matter. There prices have fallen more than they have here; there, there wall a temporary derattgemeat upon the disappearance of the paper-mosey ; but, there, the taxes being really next to nothing, and no tax at all upon tray necessary of ' lire, things found their level in a veryshurt time; and all became steady, sound and prosperous. litre, the evil grows more and more frightful ; the distress is swelled by time, just as 1 so often said it would be. Those in America, who, when Peel's Bill was passed, bad mort gaged their land,or were deeply in debt, lost their land, or became insolvent. Hut, there the evil ended. There are no leases of land in America. The fernier who lost Isis land, was soon up again. or. became a labourer, and in that state was nearly as well off as before. So that the distress was not of a-year's duration, and was never but merely ;sari al, and wholly confined to wiortgagers and debtors. but so here; fur here almost all is lease. sav teisagesset of dome sort; and here the government has Widow apoo everything. Hare the soldier, the sailor, the plamonan, the pensioner, and fundholder, are all . firettaird upon the land, and demand the same MN from it as they did when wheat wasfiftcers shillings(' bushel! Prices are now what they were in 1790. and now tar parties just mentioned demand more thee fisur times ssi much from the land as they did in the year 1790. In America priers are now what they were in 1790 • but. as the tar-gatherer demanded nothing then, and 'lemon& nothing now, the state of the farmer is just as good now as it was then. This is the staters( the two countries; and is it not. after this, scandalous to pretend, Mel tar• ation doss not produce the present distress) . lint, your lordship give , ' some reasons, drawn from facts at Lome, why legation should not be the cause of the distress. One of these is, that agriculture was pros perous up to the last . year offeror; and that, since that time, eighteen millions of taxes have been taken of. Aware that, after the answer that I have en often given to this, the fact would not avail you withnnt something further, yon go on to say, that it has been contended, that this nominal reduction of taxation was nothing when compared with its real augmentation by the rise in Me calve of money. Precisely so! Pre cisely thus it has been contended; and how do yon answer this propnaition? Why thus, that the paper money never was depreciated more than itfiterth ; that, therefore, the money can have been mugged no more than onefortrth in valor; that, theriyOrc, as the taxes were reduced one ; fourth in amount, the taxes could not noir press more heavily than they did in the last year of the War, when agriculture prospered and that, then:Arc, the taxes cannot be the cease V' the present distress. This argument rests entirely upon the original sin of Peel's Bill; namely, the most mooatrous idea, that price* ofprodsce would fall OIVIf in the degree that the gold was, at the time of paoing the Will.disher in value than the paper This original:sin has tainted all the proceeding's of the Parliament, as to this subject, from that slay to this. It was engetolered in the head of Mr. Rie tens ' and has since (mind its way even iato that of Sir Fitaxeis fit:sorry, who " cannot see how Peel's Bill ran have lowered prices of produce a h misdeed per " cent, when it has the value of !limey only pier " mid a bath per cent." Can he " see," and ran he tell. me, what the market price of gold had, or has, to do with the matter? Does he not know, that gold as merchandise and gold as carreary are two things very widely different? Does he not know, that, as slung as paper and gold circulate together, and especially when the paper is (as it yet is here to a certain extent) a legal tender; does he not know, that, when this is the ease, the paper •• palls Alwyn Me r otd," as PAINE so well ex presses It ? Does he not know, that to put paper out of circulation, you must draw gobl.f.-con abroad, lessen the quantity there, and lower prir•iw there, awl that your own prices must, besides the fall caused by the diminu tion of the paper at house, take a farther Altus per seat of the /breign prices? toes her not know, that to . take an nuisre of gold, or 775. 104. out of circulation is quite another thing than to take an ounce of gold ant of the 'market? No: hr appears to know nothing at all of the matter, any more than your law :ship; and to this blunder it is, that tve owe all, or the greater part, at any rate,„sf the pertinacity with which the Parliament clings to• the. measures, which have ruined so many thousand upon thousand,' of persons engaged in com merce, trade, manufactures and agriculture. la different parts of the Register 1 have explainedihis matter already, over and over again. So long ago as 1905, that is to sae, 17 years ago. under the title of " Jacobi,' Guineas," 1 explained how it was, that the gold was really depreciated by the potter of the paper. This article will be found in the Parliamentary port of " Paper against biold." As soon as I heard, to Awe rica, of the passing of Peel's Bill, I said in the Registers then written, that the Parliament was deceived in ex pecting that prices of produce sbould fall only in the degree of the then difference between the value of gold and that of paper. But. as this is the great stumbling I block; as this error is the main basis of all the false hh:Cthat your Lordship aad your colleagues are now aytt forth to the landlords and the farmers, I will 'bete, for, pirhaps, the twentieth time, madhsalour tit root this error oat of your minds. The erroneous position is this: that the market price of gold is the standard whereby to arca:ore prices of every thing. even in a case where paper is a legal tender. Look, my Lord, at Letters, to Landlords, Letter V. paragraph 170, and then beliemathis position if you can, though it be still adhered to by, and %%blued out in the dying Mikes of the EDINNURGII RIMER'S, by DR•XXV MCG/IFTT, by Mr. Iticaeoo, and mow. at last, by Sir FRANCIS BCROZTr. The notion is, that, became* bls. in paper would buy (in 1919) 775. 10'11. in gall'. leaving a different., of about 41 per cent., the causing of the Bank to pay in gold on demand could not possibly lower prices of produce more than 41 per cent. Bat, the fact is, that the gohl in the market had been, and then was, and still is, kept down in price by the paper. The value of gold, as compared with that of commo dities, must, like that of other things. dePend on the de mand for it ; and must it not, then, disk in value, when it ceases to be called for, or, which is the seine in effect, when its circulation is virtually prohibited in any parti- , enlar country, as is the case when there is a legal tender of paper? It most, as one of my Correspondents well observes, not only sink in the country where ant+ pro hibition exists ; bat, as it emigrates fur want of employ sect, it sinks in raise (in comparison with commodities) in other countries, because, by each emigration, it adds to the quantity of money there. This is the way in which we are to account for the difference in the depreciation of our paper when coin pared with gold, and when compared with this value of the produce of Me land. Bad the use of gold, as com mon currency, never ceased, this difference/ never would have been heard of. Bat, when it ceased to act in that capacity, it was no longer a standard of value. It sig. rides not a straw, whether the use of gold, as currency, cease in consequence of positive law, or in consequence of other caner% The effect is the same. In America, fur instance, where there was no late of legal tender, coin had, in 1817, been nearly banished from circulation. There was no dijfertnce, in any money transactions, be tween the value of paper and the. of Spanish dollars. Yet, as soon as the paper began to disappear in the sum mer of 1919, prices of fares produce fbll one-haft; and, in the fall of that year.• fat hogs, which had, only the year in•fure, sold at 12 dollars a hundred pounds, sold at 5 or 6 dollars. Nothing can skew more deafly than this the power of paper-money to oink the raise of gold and siirer compared with that of eoniosodities. Bet. even aitllaul any argument of experience, what indeed can be more clear? Suppose there to be a tenth part only of the enrrency of a country consisting of paper;, suppose no law of legal tender; suppose the paper to ha at par with the gold ; and, then suppose souse circum stances to take out of circulation a half of the paper ; will you contend that prices of produce will not fall at all, because the paper was, before this circumstance took place, upon a par with :obit Yet, this, if you be coo sistent. you must contend if you persist in contending. that the prices of produce can have been lowered by Peel's Bill only in proportion to the dtlferenee,between the value of pver and that of golds the time whys the Bill was passed. Why. my Lard, was must paper gene rally on a par wills gold in this country up to the year' 1797 ? And yet, will you conteod, that the paper did not assist, in proportion to its quantity, to same prices from the fatal hour that the Bank was invented up to the year 5797? Do you not see prices rise at emission of smaller Bank notes, daring the Whole of this period; and yet paper kept. all the while. at a par wills gold. and gold and paper circulated side by side! What mere do you want to prove, that paper-money pal s dowa the value of gold compared with the value of com modities; though the paper anti the gold may. all the while, bee! part What ittoreiln you want to convince you, that yon took a fidae standard when you pas-e.l Peel's Bill : What more do you want to espose the shallownes. lof Mr. Horner, the gdinburgli Reviewers, Mr. Iteardo. Mr. Peel. Sir Francis Borden, and, I must add, of your Lordship's own-self? What more do we of this great, troubled and distracted nation want, to convince us. that " stern-path-of duty" men, dungeon-hill men, anti si t Acts men, are nut the men calculated fur restoring the nation to safety and prosperity? When al.out to pass an act to compel the Bank to pay in gold, you should have aseertained, if possible, not any thing about the then relative ratite of paper and gold, hut, the proportion in which the quantity t!leirest halm; medians would be diminished by that set of com pulsion. This was the question that demanded (as I said at the time) all the mind that you had to apply to that, or to any, matter; and this is precisely what yon seem to have paid no attention to. Could any man is his senses believe, that the circulating medium would he diminished only in the degree of gi per cent? Could any man suppose, that, when the currency of this coun try came to be of the same nature as the co:rency of other countries, any thing nearly approaching the quan tity of 1819 would . be kept afloat; bearing in mind, as every man of sense must, that the gold drawn from other conntries must lower prices in those countries, and that these would, of necessity, pull down our prices after them? Thus have I developed this original sits of Peel's II:11; and, if 1 have succeeded in in skin_ myself understood by thelandlords, your Lordship will not get them gel dip a!olitr, through even the present Xessium of Parlia ment; for, they will have a clear view of the gulph which is open before them. As long as they can he made to believe, that Peel's Bill can have reduced priers only in the degree of the ditt , rence between the value of paper and that of gold in 1819 ; sa long must they confess that your doctrine, Mut eases do Nut produce distress, is sound and good. 'fake Sir FRlNeff BrIRDETT at his word (adopted from Mr. Racanon) ; get the landlords tu admit, that the market price of gold was the standard of the depreciation of money compared with produce; and yon have no difficulty in proving, that taxes are mot Me eaase of the distress of agriculture, and that theTepeal ing of them reshot remorse that distress: because it is not to he denim!, that agriculture was (as to farmers and landlords) prosperous in 1813, and that taxes have, since that time, teen taken off in a tleiteee proportionable to the difference (in 1813) h--tween the value of the paper and the gold. But, let the landlords see the thing in its trite light, let them once reject this groveling. this Jew-like, view of the matter, and your Lordship will, if they have the smallest portion of spirit left, find them extremely difficult to manage. 1 now come to another reaso n, produced by your Laval. ship, to thew 'that tares do nut rouse the distress; namely, that the wealth of the country has greatly its creuscil since' the year 1790. You ;teem to have attended. to " inc rustic harangues," sod to have seen, that it was necessary to saysomethirtg,in order to shetv, that the coup try could hear 53 millions of taxes now as easily as it bore 13 millions in the year 1790. You, therefore tell us, Bat the country is more-wealthy otaw than it was then. Now, my Lord, I have, in the Letter to Mr. HATS!, in that to Mr. Arrwoou. and in that to Mr. Coat proved that that is all vision which you call increase of wealth ; and have, indeed, so often proved that your ezportstnd imports and all year Sipa* o . wealth, are calculated to deceive only very shallow men, that . 1 will not here enter much into the matter. There is one part of your state ment, however, that I cannot avoid noticing. You bring forward the increase in the conaulaption of various exciseable articles, such as Tea, Candles, Soup, Brick*, Leather, and Salt. Ou the latter. indeed, you do not even pretend that there has been much of an increase. But, bow come you to have omitted MALT ? This was the great article of all, as a teat of what you were aiming at, namely, to make out an "improved coaditios in the " great body of the people." Aoil, as you quoted so much evidence from Mr. tacos (uf what tribe may he be?) respecting the state of the people iu Prussia, Po land and llanover, why not quote front the same book. a word orlwo from Mr. ELLMAS, senior, respecting the state of the people in Susses! " When you first began " business (I 5 years ago) were yonr labourers in the " daily habit of drinking beer ! Yes, all of them. Has "that practice ceased altogether? It has ceased gene " rally where the toasters do not find them beer. " When I first began farming in the parish where I now " reside, we had not et Jitmily in Me parish that did mot " brew their own beer, and enjoy it by their 011 , 14 re. " side; there are few who now do that, unless giv:: " them the malt ?" There, my Lord, that is time sort of crideace that can dour towards the country would have called on you to qnote. Here is a change ; here is the proof of all proofs of a deelise is the condition of the great mass of time peo• pie. What is your soap and candles compared to this? 1 What is your tea? Here, in the malt, was the article to he cited ; and this article you take special care to leave out of sight. Talk of wealth! What is become of the brewing utensils of two millions of families? What is become of their household goods, formerly so rood and now so beggarly ? What is become of the goods of 2410 thousand small farm-houses, whose inhabitants are now become mere labourers? What is become of the decent dresses of five or six millions of people, which the base paper-system has turned into fullers," Hut, as far as the present question is concerned, what has *otiose! wealth, in the broad sense of the word, to do with the matter ? The question is, whether the present farmer mast sot lose his capital and the present landlord his estate, unless the taxes be greatly reduced. The prices are what they were in the year 1790; and the taxes are f furer times as great in amount. Now , if the farmer o the year 1790 only got a living and fair profit on his stock, what is the present former to do, even if his rent be reduced to what it was in the year 1790? This redaction would totally ruin a great part of the land lords. This would be enough for them. Bur, pray ob serve, that all the additional taxes; that is to say, three-4 /berths that have been put on since 1790, have new to come out of a price no Ailther than Me prier q 11790.— These taxes are on allexciseable articles ronsmaused in the farmer's own family, in the families of all his labourers. in the families of the smith, wheelwright, collar-maker, bricklayer and carpenter, ie ahaterer proportion he has to pay these tradesmen. Upon a farm where them are ten labourers with families, they must have (included-in their wages) about 12 pounds a year for salt tax; and, in the whole, in the course of the year, for taxes. shout 1341 pounds. For, observe, Illell casino( .lo work Witholli a sufficiency of food ; and, if they cannot hare a suffi ciency of food for work, they must have half a sod ficieney as paupers; and even then there is the tax.— The tax on consumption in a farm-house, on a farm which has ten married labourers, is not less, on an aver age, than 60 or 70 pounds a year. My malt-tax used to amount to 40 pounds a year, and may salt-tar to about 15 pounds. Then there comes the share of the taxes of the smith and other tradesmen, and of various other per-• son Put all these parcels of tax together, and you will find them amount to pretty nearly 3:sopouttmlsa year; that Is to say, to :163 poem's more thee they mliml in the year 17911; and, if the farmer's crop sell for 44 rnorc than it dial imm the year 17110, how is he to pay his rent r• And, what nonsense to think of ansindog him and his landlord' with the enlightened Mr. Jogrea's tr.srels and with you, Lordship's visions about the surprising inereaw of " arm emus/ wealth"; travels. that seem to lm Ire Mon perform. sd for the express psrpose of &lying countenance to those sublime visions! We are told, that faun fall upon the counter / a m . of rouse, that those who consume faren.prod ue, i no i pay all the taxes attached to the raisin e o f it. Noir,this is very true, generally speaking ; but, forzet not, th a t ,1 1 , farmer and his family are consumers: forget no that, n the first place. In the next place, taxes donut fall app s the consumer, in case of a sin Ling of capital in pr,,s i ,,„ iar the article taxed. If the farmer cermet gets pri g aolficient to pay hies for the use of his stock aed s ena , Isle hint to pay hit rent, the tel which he pays is rai l i pi , the crop fells on bins and his laadlonl, a nd not os th", consumer. And this is precisely the rase at present .lnil, why cannot he get the price sitiSeient to pay hi s . self and his landlord ? Because his price must dep en d , nut on his wants and desires, but on the vaunt) of money in circulation ; and, that quantity of money Ds, heaps his prices so low, that, after paying the other out. goings, augmented u they sow are by the taxes, it I Q not suffer bins to have any thing left for prlfit or for rent. But, take off the Vanes, diminish his out.gi ar , in this way, and you !eau him something, for these tee purposes. And yet your lordship and yoar coll eallei, with Mr. Ricardo at your back, would fain main , A s landlords believe, that the taking off of taxes could A r a them no relief! Bat, the landlordis a emssamser too ! When he get s his rent, the taxlatberer watches it pretty unruly.. Out of 1,000/. look well after them, and you will 6id ' that a large perdu goes away is taxes. Would abed. lord have so relief in taking aII Me lazes f Caalw,.". i 4 the same rent (if it were ponsible for him to get it as well off as he was is 1790, if he have fear N ana ' mach to pay its taxes as he had then ? I 1 you tell oe, ' that it was the fault of the landlords that the jug g l e g contracting the debt was carried on. If you tell me, - that the present distress is the resalt, and the jut malt. of their roily and baseness. If you tell me, that, if eke • had possessed, any portion of jnstice, they never aselii hare suffered the labouring classes to lie plead/red o f their goods, and to be half.starved by the workiage a f the paper-tu•iney. If you tell me, that they rheekledat the pessing of the Dungeon Bill apd Six Acts. Ryon tell me, that they approved of Sldusouth's Circulate( , Nil; that they laughed when the Magistrate' ef Cheshire sent Jens Swans to jail for jour yam mela • hay; two years and a half of which are yet to cue; that they applauded the conduct of the Mischa* gistrates and Yeomanry oaths l i r es tAngset i dist the Oldham !septet was peculiarly loth/ft If lea ' tell use this, I agree with your Lordship; hat, to WIN; that, to take off three hundred pounds out of eteey fie r hundred that a landlord has to pay in tax, tr,eld A n t him no reliefs! Slap; it is not lac that yoetea 1 this ; you tell it them : and, therefore, your Lordship is perfectly right': There remain to henoticed, your Lordship's ormolus i l endeavours to maintain the monstrous doctrine, that ilie ~ distress has arisen from srperaorndas! crops ; yearns sertion, that commtvare and manufactures hays feriff4 and are i• a prosperous state; Its- pr.,je or for leodiagte , the parishesfnar millions in Esrlietpi-r dills; the hope I yell hold out of relief to the land from the effects of the I ginffing-funa : and, lastly, per , assertion, that the 1 e. piddle cred.t" and " national faith", as you call thin, 1 must be maintained, and that to main tits them is nets. ' sari, even to Az safely of the lutlhoidele. Bat. these 1 topics mast be the sukie.t of A Second Leiter. I am, nay Used, 'four Lordship's mast obedient. And most builds. servant, WM. comm. . • loroir B. The Second Li4er will appear in this hire to PRICE OF STOCKS TIIIB DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK. Rant Stock lndia Stack. I per Cent. WA .Shat Dino Roods Os. Ms. 441 a. pa !per Ct. Con.. 704131 Etcatit Fee Stock S per Clan • 94 Serih Sca OM too 4 per Cent 5............ %hat ELMS Id lOW 01.1 s. is.pa 5 per Cts. Nary ... as. lc pm 2 Falliicat. pm Lana Aim. • .9bet Coe. for As:et • 3iii Imp. 3 per Coot ...... .73 loJia ;or ditto WO 6 eer Omit.., Lott. 'rickets.. ... ti,. SIGN II ATZIII Morning 14 a. it •; The &rend Lett4 TAT Si 111111.0:4•11[1111411 TO•111011111411W. it —Evilminit 43 wi. 4fler I!. r of Mr. Coaperrr ten appear ia rArra.vAAr to-morrow. - _ ebt soutcoman. " Tlit 11111111111 S STATltiplle . Is INCOUPIIIItaIt, WITS . ILONDON: MONDAY r•teNtNn, LAIC!' 4. IS!2. ; : r STOCK E XeIIANG.E TWELVE O'CLOCK. The Consols iat present ate 791 for the Acme, and 7h for Money s the 5 per Cent. 102 H. There have been se-eral peplums tii,s morning signing their • dissent to the 5 per Cents. at what is called Abraham Newland's Office. mad one person close, it is said. his signed fur 201t,000/. The private letters from Holland this toorsitt,4 bring the Spanish Fonds 3 per Cent. higher than in London r. which is owing to the • favourable opinion entertained there of Spanish affairs. New Spanish 4 ettl Old Danish. Premise ..... Neapolitan . . ••• a...... • ON to 10 NALINPAST ONE O'CLOCK. Up to this hunt Jthe Feeds remain steady at PI. • A number of persons save vieitesl Mankato Newnan's Office, to obtain the letters !if form which are hissed but not Slied up them!. The number of permits orbs # have signed the 5 pet Cent,. are nut yet ascertaine d. There is no news on !PChang e. • . --moo -- The Irish paper" r meired la.dam, bring an wont of :he execntion of t to three tien who were comlemard for the smack on tide police. at Churchmen. Few spectators could be inure° to trimeas the ful scene, and of the lei , the principal parl were women. The same night, the house Mr. WHITE. at Castle• Mat on, with its Ore. and all the property, was burnt by a party of Main. boys, and the feinal is and children of the family were with difficulty rescued from the II danrq by • detach ment of the 42al regiment. lithe, houses bare bees also burnt, aid other outrages t•untinne to be commit. led. We are happy. however. to lear i that some if the horrible accounts previonstl• received are 11.. w cOc trodieted. Oa the abject of 11. e alleged rape of aim women, wives of sottlien of ISo Rifle Bilged.. the Limerick Advertiser • Beys—eo We are erviiibly rs formed, that the outrage stated to have bees con' min 4 d on nine women, that wives of soldiers, Newcastle, is walk,- sofogaded, ?Nei ties 1 # . . 0 16 ,