The Sun. — London, England, 1860-05-10 00:00:00

UNIVERSITY OF LONDON. Yesterday afternoon the members of the Senate ad Council of this University assembled at Bur- ington-house for admission of candidates to de- Tees. As usual on these occasions there was a numerous attendance of ladies and gentlemen. Of 1 the members of the Senate there were present Sir J. S. Lefevre, Vice• Chancellor, Sir Jas. Clarke, Sir Edward Ryan, Professor Faraday, Mr. G. Grote, and Mr. Osler ; and of the professors, Messrs. Mor ris, Hall, Taylor, Williamson, Newman, Greenwood, Doctors Gull, Barlow, Bloxham, Cromwell, Hall, Angus, Sharpey, &c. Among the general company were Earl Stanhope, Lords Wensleydale, Teynham, and Lyttelton, Col. Sykes, M.P., Sir C. Fellows, Sir John Liddel, Mr. Brady, M.P., Mr. S. Gurney, &c. Earl Granville, as Chancellor, presided. Dr. CARPENTER, the Registrar, read the report, from which it appeared that 254 candidates matri culated during the past 'year. Of these 7 distin guished themselves in mathematics and natural philosophy, 11 in classics, 12 in chymistry, 4 in botany, and 2 in zoology ; 67 candidates passed the final examination for the degree of Bachelor of Arts, and 30 passed the first examination for the degree of Doctor of Medicine. The report showed that a very large proportion of the students distin guished themselves in examination in mathematics, botany, midwifery, ehymistry, classics, natural phi losophy, Scriptural history, conveyancing, common law. The following gentlemen were then presented to the Chancellor, and received their degrees as under : Andrew Commins, LL.D., Queen's College, Cork. Michael Foster, M.D., and Thomas Lewis, M.D., Uni versity College. George William Lawrence, M.D., Edward Evan Meeres, M.D., and Richard Wilkinson, M.D., King's College. John Langdon Haydon Down, M.D., London Hospital. Alfred Carpenter, M.D., and John Ward Cousins, M.D., St. Thomas's Hospital. William Newman, M.D., St. Bartholomew's Hospital. Samuel Giles, M.D., Guy's Hospital. Robert George Hardwick, M.D., Leeds School of Medi cine. Marcus Nathan Adler, M.A., Samuel Hesse Behrand, M.A., Samuel Wardlaw M'All, M.A., and Henry Nesbitt, M.A., University College. Walter West, M.A., King's College. Edwin Smith, M.A., Manchester New College. John Francis Rotton,M.A., and JamesDickers.on Davies, M.A., New College. Silas Mead, M.A., Regent's Park College. Thomas Green, M.A., Spring-hill College. Archibald Hastie Dick, M.A., Huddersfield College. Daniel Slater, M.A., 'Western College, Plymouth. Thomas Williams Mays, M.A., Hackney Theological Seminary. John Baker Greene, LL.B., Trinity College, Dublin. Robert Johnstone, LL.B., University of Edinburgh. Ebenezer Charles, LL.B,, Andrew Thompson, LL.B., John Warren, LL.B., and Henry Selfe Page Winter botham, LL.B., University College. Decimus Sturges, LL.B., and John Shoard, LL.B., Xing's College. George Henry Rouse, LL.B., Regent's Park, College. Samuel Hague, LL.B., and Richard Marsden Pankhurst, LL.B., Owen's College. Samuel Hoppus Adams, M. 8., Joseph R. Gasquet, M.B„ Matthew Berkeley Hill, M. 8., Philip Sydney Jones, M. 8., Charles Hayes Marriott, M. 8., and Henry Simpson,M.B., University College. William Liddon, M. 8., William Edward Robbs, Arthur Ernest Sansom, M. 8., and Edmund Symes Thomp son, M. 8., King's College. William Miller Crowfoot, M. 8., and Theodore Davis, M. 8., St. Bartholomew's Hospital. Walter Maxon, M. 8., Guy's Hospital. John Allen, 8.A., John Anstie, 8.A.., Henry Charlton Bastian, 8.A., James Bithell, 8.A., Thomas Bryer, 8.A., Valentine Chodron De Courcel, 8.A., John Dolleymore, 8.A., George Elliott, 8.A., Julian Goldsmid, 8.A., Thos. Horsman, 8.A., James Cole Jackson, 8.A., George Lake, 8.A., Edward Miller, 8.A., Richard May Miller, 8.A., William Manning Needham, 8.A., Henry William Porter, 8.A., William Edwin Price, 8.A., Edward Baines Pye Smith, 8.A., Geo. Antonio Ralli, 8.A., Richard Vicker man Taylor, 8.A., John Robert Vaisey, 8.A., James Lam bert White, 8.A., and_Thomas Wilson, 8.A., University College. Henry Nelson Capel, 8.A., Christopher Robert Cuff, B.A„ Henry James Newbury, 8.A., Arthur William Par sons, 8.A., Joseph Smith, 8.A., Matthew Henry Starling, and Thomas Tyler, 8.A., King's College. Edward Thos. Goldsmid, 8.A., St. Cuthbert's, Ushaw. Henry Edwards, 8.A., John Gerard, 8.A., Geo. Segar, 8.A., and Henry sergeant, 8.A., Stoneyhurst College. Raymond Wallace Esmonde White, 8.A., St. Patrick's, Carlow. James Jones, 8.A., Springhill College. Charles Cecil Stevens, 8.A., Melbourne University and Springhill. William Trotman Hewett, 8.A., Regent's-park College. Denis Maurice O'Conor, 8.A., St. Gregory's, Downside. Colmar Boaz Symes, 8.A., Cheshunt College. Robert Henry Roberts, 8.A., Baptist College, ➢ristol. John William Bradley, 8.A., Arthur William Carver, 8.A., and William Willis, 8.A., Huddersfield College. John Thomas Barker, 8.A., William Burrows, 8.A., and Henry Griffin Parrish, 8.A., Lancashire Independent College. Adam Clarke M'Lean, 8.A., George Robert Samuel, B.A„ aid William Henry Sutcliffe, 8.A., Wesley College, Sheffield. William Connon, 8.A., and Joseph Groves, 8.A., Wes • loyan, Taunton. William Frederick Clarkson, 8.A., Peter William Darn _ ton, 8.A., Samuel Dyer, 8.A., John Gammell, 8.A., Walter Hardie, 8.A., William Howgill, 8.A., Robert Vaughan Pryce, 8.A., Frederick Hughes Seavill, 8.A., and Robert Jermain Thomas, 8.A ) ,, New College. Thomas Douse, B.AI, Thomas Jones, 8.A., Henry Math win, 8.A., Henry Parry, 8.A., and Robert Burchal Tonge, 8.A., Owen's College. William Crosby Barlow, 8.A., Hackney Theological Seminary. John Thomas, 8.A., Trevecca College. Charles Morgan, 8.A., Working Men's College. PRESENTATION FOR HONOURS AND PRIZES. The Graduates having been severally presented to the Chancellor, the presentation of Scholars, Exhibitioners, Medalists, and Prizemen then took place in the following order : Henry SeHa Page Winterbotham, L.L.8., University College, to receive Law Scholarship. William Miller Crowfoot, M. 8., St. Bartholomew's llos • pital, Scholarship and Medal in Physiology and Compara tive Anatomy. Edmund • ymes Thompson, M. 8., King's College, Scho larship and Medal in Medicine. William Miller Crowfoot, M. 8., St. Bartholomew's Hos pital, Scholarship and Medal in. Surgery. Joseph Raymond Gasquet, M. 8., University College, Medal in Physiology and Comparative Anatomy. Matthew Berkeley Hill, M. 8., University College, Medal in Surgery. William Edward Robbs, M. 8., King's College, Medal in Medicine. William Miller Crowfoot, M. 8., University College, Medal in Midwifery. Arthur William Carver, 8.A., Huddersfield College, Scholarship in Mathematics. Henry Charlton Bastian, 8.A., University College, prize in Chemistry. Henry Charlton Bastian, 8.A., University College, prize in Animal Physiology. Henry Charlton Bastian, 8.A., University College, prize in Botany. Further Scriptural Examination.—Henry Mason Bora pax, University College, prize; Silas Mead, Regent's-park College, prize ; George Henry Rouse, Regent's-park Col lege, prize. First Scriptural Examination.—Samuel Conway, New College, prize; James Dickerson Davies, New College, prize ; Joseph Hammond, University College, prize; Philip Poppleston Rowe, Regent's Park College, prize; George Southey, Spring-hill College, prize; Joseph William Walker Spring-hill College, prize. First M. B. Examination.—Charles Hilton Fagge, Guy's Hospital, Exhibition and Medal in Anatomy and Physio logy ; Charles Hilton Fagge, Guy's Hospital, Exhibition and Medal in Chymistry ; Samuel Jones Gee, University College, Exhibition and Medal in Chymistry ; Charles Hil ton Fagge, Guy's Hospital, Exhibition and Medal in Ma teria Modica ; Henry Charlton Bastian; University College, Medal in Anatomy and Physiology ; William John Smith, University College, Medal in Materia Mediea ; Charles Hilton Fagge, Guy's Hospital, Medal in Botany. First B.A. Examination. =Thomas Barker, Trinity Col lege, Cambridge, Exhibition in Mathematics ; Thomas Garrett, Caius College, Cambridge, Exhibition in Latin; William Jardine, Regent's Park College, Exhibition in English ; Hermann Nathan Adler, University College, Prize in German. Matriculation.—Thomas Dale, Trinity College, Cam bridge, Exhibition in Mathematics; • Walter Dickinson, Stonyhurst College, Exhibition in Classics ; William John Hurst, Owens College, Prize in Chymistry ; John Makens, Guy's Hospital, Prize in Botany ; Henry Sammerhayes, Crewkerne Grammar School, Prize in Zoology. Earl GRANVILLE then rose, and was received with loud cheers. He said he would make no pro mise as to btevity, as he, did on the last occasion, although he was desirous to avoid prolixity. it was most satisfactory to find that in January last there were 108 candidates examined for matricula tion, and with success. The number of gentlemen who presented themselves for matriculation this time exceeded by 27 those of the previous year. This was a very satisfactory result as regarded the prospects of the institution. Another en couraging feature was that no less than 81 persons presented themselves for examination for a Bache lor's degree, and 30 persons who were not con nected with affiliated colleges, and a large propor tion of them were admitted to the hon_urs of the first class. Arrangements were mad to carry on examinations in the country in c)1 nection with this University. Five examinations were already held, and the results proved most satisfactory ; and there were applications for four examinations this year. There was a rumour that in Scotland a great desire existed to obtain degrees in the London University. If this rumour should turn out to be a fact, it should be considered as a great compli• ment to the institution. The senate had been en. gaged in preparing the medical curriculum ; that was a most important matter, for they would all admit that the great glory of the University was their medical school. (Cheers.) It performed the same functions with regard to the medical pro fession which Oxford and Cambridge did with regard to the Church of England, and those functions were creditably discharged. The medical council had issued a manifesto with re gard to the course of medical training, aid in Scotland the University had adopted the same method of examination and conferring degrees. They all knew how noble the medical profession was ; in hours of peace how instructing and agree able the conversation of a medical man was ; and in hours of sorrow (here the noble lord became much affected, and paused for a few moments) how con soling the conversation of a man of cultivated mind. (Cheers.) It was, therefore, of the utmost import ance that the medical man should be a person of general education. When he considered what in dustry, intelligence, perseverance, and logical power were necessary to qualify a man for this profession, he was disposed to place it above that of the law. It was therefore important to observe that those who intended to devote themselves to the medical profession should have, as a groundwork, a general education. (Hear, hear.) For this purpose the Com mittee of the senate had prepared a more severe and perfect curriculum. In this country the im portance of science had been generally admitted, and there was no doubt that we could show a galaxy of names of men who had distinguished themselves in that respect, and who were inferior to none; but with regard to the general diffusion of scientific acquirements we are not equal to France. Our thoughts had been lately directed to military matters, and so long as that spirit was confined to defence, and not aggression, it was cre ditable to the country. In some cases this had cre ated a slight reaction with regard to education. He had heard a highly-educated man compute how many gunboats might have been built with the money spent on public education. (Laughter.) Na yoleon I. laid it down as a maxim that a country wishing to have a good supply of officers should encourage science and art for the purposes of peace or war. (Cheers.) He thought the course of educa tion in the University of London was admirably adapted to both purposes. It encouraged as much as possible the acquisition of that general know ledge which would fit a man for any position in life. He was happy to find that the system adopted by the university had received the sanction and ap probation of the scientific world. He was much gratified with the appointment of double examiners (Cheers.) Under this system no less than nine gra duates had been appointed as examiners. In ad dressing them last year he had the great advantage of being in the Opposition ; but now ho was con nected with the Government. He felt that it was easier to criticise than to perform. Last year he found fault with the Government for not having sufficiently comprehensive views with regard to this university, and for not providing the members with a better habitation, and also not giving them a Par liamentary representative. On that occasion he quoted Cowley's description of what a university should be, with its quadrangles, halls, chapels, dining-rooms, &c., but now he was compelled to descend from the poetic region of Cowley to the prosaic dulness of Downing-street. (Laughter.) Owing to his connection with the Government, he was now unable to answer as to what the nature and extent of their future habitation would be. With respect to the representation, he would rather have a double representation, but the pledge of the Government as to one member would be fulfilled, and had been provided for in the Reform Bill. He felt considerable satisfaction in the circumstance that during the protracted debates on the Reform Bill no objection whatever had been taken to the proposal to have a representative in Parliament for the London University. He trusted that Parlia ment would settle the long agitated question in the present session. It would be imprudent in him to count the one chicken before it was hatched, or in any way interfere with the choice which the Uni versity might make in the selection of its represen tative ; but he hoped that their choice would be uninfluenced by party spirit, and that they would send to the House of Commons a man who would not only be qualified to promote local interests,but also those of literature and science. Having con gratulated the successful candidates and offered words of encouragement to others, the noble earl closed his observations by urging on them all, in the observations of an old writer, '° to continue to be curious and prudent spenders of time, so as best to prevent or resist temptation, so as to become profitable members of the Christian commonwealth, and by the discharge of all their duties to magnify God's name." (Cheers ) The meeting then separated. A 111 . 1SBAP ON TIIE UNDERGROUND RAILIV Y. On Saturday morning last a dray was driven to the office of Adam's Express Company, Cherry street, and a large dry-goods box rolled out upon the pavement. The box was addressed "Mrs. Mar-, garet M. Thompson, care of Levin Coffin, Cincin nati, Ohio." The driver stated that he was ordered to deliver it to the agent of the company, and re quest him to forward it without delay. He then collected his drayage, and informed the agent that the person sending it would call, pay carriage, and get a receipt. The weight of the box was 2651 h. The driver of the dray—or of tho horse attached to the dray—then very innocently remarked, " Master, dat's de curiosest box Lever saw; for every time I roll it over the heavy side come down." The agent thought it a curious box too • but time was press ing, and he sent it down to the depot of the Louis ville and Nashville Railroad, whence it departed on the first train. What could it contain ? What had Mrs. Thompson been getting in Nashville? Who could she be ? And who was Mr. Coffin ? The swift-winged express did not wait to ask these questions. It bore the curions box along towards its destination, and in due time landed it at Louis ville. Here it was hastened over to Jeffersonville and hurried on to Seymour. At Seymour another change of cars was necessary, and as the box was hastily rolled from the Jeffersonville to the Cincinnati and St. Louis train, the top accidentally came off, and out popped—what ? For the life of you you couldn't guess. A startled crowd gathered around to see, and, to their surprise, it turned out to be a full-grown negro man ? Here was a dis covery in which there was something of the se rious and a little more of the ludicrous. The negro perspired hugely—his eyes rolled up and down like one nearing the gate of the hereafter—but the fresh air soon revived him. In changing the box from the Louisville to the Jeffersonville cars it had been turned up so that he was head downward, and thus he made the trip from Jeffersonville to Seymour, nearly 50 miles.. But for the mishap at Seymour in a few hours he might have been delivered in Cincinnati, probably to be buried—probably to take a further trip on the. underground railroad Canadaward. The negro was taken back to Louis ville. He belongs to Mr. Newton M'Clure, of this city, :and was shipped by a free negro, named Nathan James. Whether James had any accom plices or not we are not informed. The matter will be thoroughly sifted; and we suspect some agent of the negro stealers will be found to have had a hand in it.—Nashville (Tenn.) Patriot. [ADVERTISEMENT.] —Holloway ' s Ointment and Pills— Changes of season are always trying to mankind from the var;ability of temperature now increasing then depressing the circulation. Hence the prevalence of throat affections, chest complaints, and disordered digestion at this season. For all this catalogue of ailments Holloway's Ointment rubbed thoroughly twice a clay over the parts affected will be found universally serviceable in preventing, checking, or curing each and all, however severe the attack. It is remark ably curative in cases of relaxed, inflamed, or ulcerated throat; while fer glandular enlargements it is a specific. For coughs, colds, asthma, and bronchitis Holloway's Pills should be taken simultaneously with the friction of the oint ment over the chest. Ease *ill soon follow this treatment, and health will-return THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, MAY 10, 1860. LORD I. RUSSELL AND EARL GREY. The following correspondence has just been made public : " Calton House-terrace, May 5, 1860. —ear Lord John,—lt is reported in the news papers that when Mr. Walpole on Thursday night quoted in the House of Commons my explanations of the reasons which induced me to acquiesce as a mem ber of your Government in your bringing forward a bill of reform in February, 1852, you interrupted him by saying 'lt is not true.' What you meant to assert to be untrue is not clear from the report, but you are understood to have given a direct contradic tion to the statement I made in the House of Lords. Of course it is very painful to me ; and as I am con vinced that my statement was strictly accurate, and that if you had been correctly informed of its pur port you would never have questioned its being so, I feel it to be necessary to call attention to the fol lowing report of what I said on the 19th April, which I have taken from the Times, and to ask you whether there is any point on which you differ from me. " 6 I cheered the observation of the noble duke when he said I implied that the Reform Bill of 1852 originated from the indiscretion of my noble friend then at the head of the Government. lam bound to say that I think the original difficulty on this subject arose fir om the fact, which is I believe well known to all your lordships, although it may never, perhaps, have been publicly stated, namely, that Lord J. Russell, as head of the Cabinet, without any previous concert or communication with his col leagues, committed himself by expressing the opi nion that the time was come when a change might be made in the measure of 1832. That opinion was expressed without the intention to express it having beem intimated, as far as I know, to any one of his colleagues, and certainly not to the Cabinet. I be. lieve when that announcement was made it was not approved by any, or at least by more than one or two members of the Cabinet. For myself, I can say it had my most entire disapproval—a feeling which I did not attempt to conceal, as Lord J.Russell can testify. Considering the inconvenience which I saw would ensue from the manner in which Lord J. Russell had given that pledge, and with the opinion I enter tained awl avowed as to the proceeding, it was with extreme reluctance that I consented, after those oc currences, to continue a member of that administra tion. But, looking to all the circumstances of that time, I felt it to be my duty to remain in the Go vernment, yet I did so distinctly reserving to my self the right not to be regarded as standing pledged to any measure of reform until I saw what might be proposed, and not disguising my conviction that to disturb the question at all was inexpedient if it could be avoided. Such was the situation of affairs when Parliament was about to meet in 1852. The Reform Bill, which was afterwards laid upon the table of the House of Commons, was submitted to the cabinet. For my own part I never approved it. I thought it open to the gravest objections. But, my lords, I was induced to consent to its being in troduced into Parliament by this one consideration —I knew that the Government was on the eve of falling, and it so happened that the principal at tacks made upon it were directed against the parti cular department with which I was entrusted. I did not think it would be honourable towards my colleagues, or right towards myself, that at such a moment I should appear to run away from the post which I held; and being persuaded that the bill had not the remotest chance of passing, having stated that to the cabinet before it was brought in, I undoubtedly acquiesced in its introduction.' " This report is substantially accurate as far as it goes, but it is much abridged (as is not unusual with respect to speeches in reply at the end of a long de bate), which makes it not quite easy for a per son who was not present fully to understand my meaning. Had the speech been given more at length it would have appeared that I was speaking of the opinion you expressed three or four years before the introduction of the bill of 1852, when I said that this was done without the con currence of your colleagues, and was the begin ning of the difficulties about reform ; that I ad mitted these difficulties to have been increased by the defeat of the Government on Mr. Locke King's motion in 1851, to which the Duke of Argyll had adverted ; and that in describing my reluctance to continue in the Administration, I referred to the time when Lord Derby, having failed to form a government, we resumed our offices, which we had resigned after that defeat. Subject to these ex planations, the report of what I said is substantially correct ; and as both Lord Lansdowne and Lord Clanricarde have told me they are satisfied of the accuracy of my statement, I trust you will also admit it, and that your contradiction may have been meant to apply to something you had been led erroneously to suppose me to have said, by Mr. Walpole's brief reference to what had passed in the House of Lords. It would give me great pleasure to find this to be the case, and to be enabled by you to explain publicly that there is no difference be • tween us on a matter of fact.—l am, &c., (Signed) " GREY." " Pembroke Lodge, May 6, 1860. " Dear Lord Grey,—l had certainly understood that your statement in the House of Lords referred to the speech which I made on Mr. Locke King's motion in February, 1851. That speech was made, as you are aware, after repeated discussions in the Cabinet on the extension of the suffrage, and the propriety of bringing forward any measure on the subject in the session of 1851. "As your statement did not apply to that speech my contradiction of your supposed assertion of course falls to the ground. " It now appears you were speaking of the opinion I expressed three or four years before the introduc tion of the bill of 1852. " I have, therefore, referred to the speeches made by me in answer to Mr. Hume on parliamentary reform, or national representation, in 1848 and 1849. Those speeches appear to me of a very Conservative nature, but they contain opinions which I held then and which I hold now. " I have no recollection of anything which passed in the Cabinet upon that subject at the time, but if I had, I should not think myself at liberty to allude to any differences in the Cabinet to which I be longed without the permission of the Queen, which I have not asked, and do not mean to ask. " Public affairs are so absorbing, and events suc ceed each other so rapidly, that they are apt to slip from the memory. I find that in 1848 some very strong language was used in regard to your conduct as Minister for the Colonies by the late Lord George Bentinck and others. It was my business, and I might say my delight, to defend your honour against accusations which I thought unjust. I little sup posed that at that time you were hoarding up accu sations to be used against me 11 or 12 years after wards in a place where I could not reply. " However, I do not mean to make any statement of my own in contradiction to what you have said. I will content myself with quoting a speech of yours in the debate on the address to the Crown in 1852, and by which lam willing to abide. After refer ring to other speeches you are reported to have said :--‘ Now, my lords, let me point out the real circumstances of the case. Three gears ago, if I remember rightly, various motions were mule in the other house of parliament, and obtained in that house a considerable degree of support, not only from those who voted for these measures, but in the expression of an opinion by gentlemen of great weight and influence, that experience had shown that there were defects in the Reform Act which required further legislation. My noble friend feel ing the force of these remarks and of public opinion, and seeing defects in the arrangement of the Re form Bill, which had not answered the expectations of the country, thought it right to express his opi nion that a time might come when it would be pro per to make some alteration in the existing laws relating to the franchise. My noble friend expressed that opinion in the strongest manner, and particu larly after the noble proofs that were given in 1848, by all classes of the population, of loyal attachment to the Crown, and to the existing institutions ,of the country. My noble friend expressed that opinion so far back as 1849, and since that time has had to combat various proposals made in the other house of parliament for alterations in the Reform Act. But it was my noble friend's opinion that if in combating these proposals for hasty and inconsiderate alterations in the Reform Act he had not expressed himself in favour of future improvements he would have shaken the foundations of that great settlement of our constitutional rights. My noble friend therefore said, and I think he was right, that he was not averse to well considered amendments. But it was impossible that ho could take this line in combating those propositions, which ho looked upon as dan gerous, without thereby contracting pledges, which he considered it his duty to fulfil at a proper time. I ask, can there be a better tithe for redeeming them than the present ? Is not the very apathy of which the noble earl speaks a sufficient reason for calmly approaching the subject, and calmly considering what amendments can be introduced? Would that apathy have existed if we had pronounced the Re form Bill to be a final measure, and , if he had said there were no blots in it which we would attempt to get rid of ? If he had taken that line, would there not have been a very different disposition on the part of the people of this country with regard to changes in the Reform Act far less temperate than those now about to be proposed P I firmly believe there would ; and I say this because I think it is a justification of the line which my noble friend has taken, and in which his colleagues joined? " When you made this speech you were eight years nearer to the time when I made those state- ments of which you now complain. You had not then imbibed those prejudices against rue of which I have lately felt so painfully the effects.—l re main, &c., (Signed) " J. RUSSELL." " Carlton House Terrace. "Dear Lord John,—l have received your letter of yesterday, and while I am glad to find your con tradiction was not meant to apply to what I really said in the House of Lords, but io what you erro neously supposed me to have stated, I must express my regret at the manner in which you have written to me. " I do not think it necessary to defend myself (as I easily might) against all the unjust insinua tions contained in your letter, but there are some observations that I must make upon it. It is quite true that your speech on reform in 1851 was made after repeated discussions in the Cabinet on the subject, but it was equally true that we entered upon those discussions under the advantage of your con sidering yourself pledged, by what you had said in the House of Commons, without consulting us, to bring forward as soon as you could some mea sure of reform ; and also that while you agreed only on temporary grounds to postpone making any such proposition for that session, I and some other members of the Cabinet declared that we were not to be considered bound by the reasons you might assign in the House of Commons for your conduct, that we held ourselves quite free for the future, but were content to remain in the Administration for the present, as there was no difference between us as to the course to be taken by the Government. " I think upon reflection you will feel that your charging me with having, while a member of your Cabinet, hoarded up accusations to be brought against you eleven or twelve years afterwards, is not justified by my having found it necessary in explanation of my own conduct to make a state ment (which has not been and cannot be contra dicted) as to the circumstances under which I was led to acquiesce in your bringing forward a new measure of reform. If I had wanted to hoard up matters of charge against you, I should not now have been without any written memorandum of these proceedings. "You are quite welcome to taunt me with my speech in the House of Lords in 1852; but you know perfectly well that it is the duty of a member of Government when its acts are attacked in Par liament, to state as well as he can the reasons by which the Cabinet he belongs to has been guided, even though sometimes those reasons may not have been conclusive to his own mind. My object in that speech was to explain, as I understood them, your motives for the course you had taken, with out implying my own concurrence in opinions which it was notorious to yourself and to all our colleagues that I WES far from sharing. It appears from the report you have quoted that I was be trayed into using some expressions going beyond this line, but undotbtedly it was not my intention to do so. " I shall this evening in the House of Lords ex plain in what res?ect my statement of the other night has been misunderstood, and that you have informed me that your contradiction was not meant ,o apply to it whet so explained--I am, &e„ (Signed) " GREY. " The Lord John Russell." "Foreign Office, May 8, 1860. " Dear Lord Grey,—All that I need say upon your last letter is that I shall think it necessary to publish our correspondence.—l remain, &c., (Signed) " J. RUSSELL. " The Earl Grey." " Carlton House-terrace, May 8. " Dear Lord John,--1. have no objection to your publishing our correspondence ; as you mean to do so, it will be unnecessary for me to make any state ment in the House of Lords.—Yours, &c., (Signed) "The Lord John Rissell." ' i GREY. THE FRENCH TREATY. The Court Circular has " been requested to state that the British Commissioners for the negotiation of the French Tariff have their office at No. 82, Rue de l'Universite Paris." It is a very proper fact to be made public, and we give our best aid diffuse the knowledge of it. In ignorance of the new arrangements, uninformed persons might have gone to the old British Embassy, in the Rue du Faubourg St. Honore. Of course, we all know this latter was only a pretentious Lam. No one is, we hope, so ignorant as not to be aware that it was only a mouldering specimen of the old rotten system of secret diplomacy. All well-informed people knew that the real business was done else where. In some small room in a back street, where there was nothing but a deal desk and a few high stools, there were two or three long-headed, square faced, quick-eyed men of the true business sort, shrewd at a bargain, and never at fault as to a fact, wearing no spangles upon their breasts or labels upon their calves, but having their fingers' ends well stained with ink. These were the men whi did all the good ; the dandies did nothing, or nothing but harm. Little Pcdlington had always penetrated this truth ; other less intelligent com munities had only vaguely guessed at it. At last it became patent. After the prelude had been fully worked out the transformation scene arrived, and amid blue fire and free muslins, the French Treaty started up from the stage trap, the humble work men threw off their sober dresses, Cobden struck his first position and waved his wand as Harlequin, his beauteous Columbine, Free Trade, shuffled round him, and Pantaloon, whose name is not mentioned in the bills, leant on his crutch and looked wistfully at the unrestrained damsel who tripped so lightly and who came and went so freely. How the pit did applaud! Mr. Disraeli recalled the circumstances on Tuesday night, and described the moment as a national delirium. There was an universal joy and an universal delirium. The uni versal joy was that the French Emperor had been converted to free trade; the universal faith was that no living moral except only Richard Cobden could have worked the miracle. But why has this powerful genius, like him of the Arabiaiz Nights, crept back into his tin kettle again? Why is it that the great monarch after embroidering his blacksmiths apron has gone back to the anvil ? What can Richard Widen have to do in a small office in the Rue de l'Universite ? The treaty is signed, the 'Emperor is converted. In old times, when a Saint converted an Emperor, there was nothing more to do but for the Emperor to make manifest his generosity. Ile set about immediately to found minsters, to make rows of cells to fatten monks in, and to carve off great slices of his dominions for the benefit of the priests of his new religion. He generally took a good deal from everybody and gave it to the Church. If Napoleon 111. be a true convert why does he not act as such ? And if he be in that plastic state of mind what need has Mr. Cobden to go back to his drudgery ? Why does not Napoleon 111. begin to carve out a few pro vinces for those active commercial monks who work in the British iron fields ? ,Why does he not pay more reverence to the precepts of the Order of St. Manchester? Why does he allow evil speaking of the new doctrines he has espoused ? Why does he not endow the free trade church 2 If the apostle of free trade has done his work, the priests of free trade expect to receive endowments. If not they indignantly repudiate the conversion. It wasn't worth making, If we are to make free trade converts, as some other converts are said to have been made, under con dition of keeping them in food as well as in doc trine, we begin to waver in our propagandist zeal. Mr. Cobden has, in the silence and reaction suc ceeding that tumultuous burst of applause, been called upon to open his hand and show what his new convert has given him. There is a dreadful rumour going about and getting possession of the general ear, that Mr. Cobden has opened both his hands wide and has shown that there is nothing in them. Men's hearts are sinking down to we dare not say where. The apostle has been taken in, after all ! He has got nothing—absolutely nothing. To use a good old word, which in the days of Queen Anne was classical English, the Emperor has completely " bubbled" him. He has brought shame upon himself, but most dis credit upon his backers. He is a simpleminded earnest man, with one great idea in his head ; but these French are sharp practical fellows, who believe in no nonsense or theories unless they come out well in pounds, shillings, and pence. Yet here he is, or rather there he is, worse off than Moses Primrose, without even the green spectacles to show for what he has given away. That wicked, unconverted Em peror gave him fairy money. Those backers of his never thought of doubting for a moment that their representative could tell good money from bad. When he held it up to them at a distance they jumped for joy; but now that he has put it down before them they see at once the obvious imposture. They are not uncivil to him—and, indeed, why should they be ? for the honest man did his best, and if he did not know good money from bed it was not his fault; but the disappointed gentlemen are looking into each other's faces with a most comi cal and expressive silence. Mr. Cobden goes back to Paris to do all his work over again. But how is he to do it ? When he began to negotiate this precious treaty he had much to give, he had advantages to offer in exchange. Ile was then rich in gifts. Yet, even with all his wealth, his wine duties, his free coals, and his custom for Paris knioknacks, he could buy nothing of any value from that cunning Emperor. The - people to whom he went turned his pockets inside out and sent him away empty .. He came back, not as_ a man who had been robbed, but as a 'man who had been fairly " done.". He had gone into that matter con trary to all his own principles. He had gone to Paris to commit an infidelity to free trade. He had stopped to haggle and to chaffer for her favours, to fix terms for her controlment, and tariffs for her repression. No one could say that he was a fit subject for sympathy. He was like a Quaker cleaned out in a gambling-house. Why did he, of all men, ever go on such an errand ? What right had Richard Cobden, with his high principles, to be found haggling about reciprocities ? If he had stack to his own principles we might have had some claim upon the generosity of the Emperor for gifts freely given ; perhaps we might even have seduced him by our bold example ; at any rate, we should have manifested to the - world that we our• selves have faith in the principles we recommend But now we have no 'claim Whatever. We have nothing left to offer, and no sentiment at our call. Mr. Cobden has, to use a happy phrase coined by Lord Palmerston on the somewhat analogous occa sion of the Ashburton treaty, " shaked out his bag of equivalents upon the floor." He has not only shaken them out, but the Emperor has picked them up and pocketed them ; and now, when all is done and the whole thing is settled; when M. Girardin is crying aloud to make the most of this great advantage, and to screw down Perfidious Albion to the last penny; and when the lifoniteur is swollen with columns of Senatorial eloquence, wherein France is taught to chuckle over her gains, poor Mr. Cobden is sent back to the Rue de l'Universite, either to buy, without equivalents, what he, could not get for equivalents, or else to sue in forma pauperis for some little restoration of that out of which he has been so supremely diddled. They may call us a nation of shopkeepers, but for a good hard bargain commend us to our French neighbours ; and for a special instance of their talent commend us to this French Treaty : We have made some foolish Treaties before this since we be came a nation, and, indeed, we always had the Credit of losing over the Council-board what we had gained in the field. We are apt to be too frank and open, and • perhaps too careless, in our bargaining. But this was always attributed to ignorance in our diplomatists, who were supposed, inasmuch as they were often men of high rank, to have no manner of knowledge either of geography or of commerce. Thus we once gave away, in mere wantonness, our then richest possession in the East, and it is said that we lost another valuable island because our Plenipotentiary did not know where it was. But here we 'have lost a trade because our Plenipoten tiary, who was a man of trade, did not know there was such a trade. It may sound very presumptuous, but it seems to us that, now Mr. Cobden has gon e back to his unwelcome work of petitioning and haggling, he requires some advice and guidance. At any rate, it would be as well to give him the aid of what ever little power over the subject-matter of his negotiations we may still possess. We faintly hope that his 30 per cent. may shrink again to its honest arithmetical proportions; and we would fain believe, encouraged by the words of Count de Kergorlay in this day's paper, that the prohibition on the export of rags may be eventually removed. But even those Southern people, who are thought to be all sentiment and impulse, are not such fools at a bargain as we are. The Spaniards, with all their chivalry and knight-errantry, have just abso lutely refused to give up Tetuan until they have received in hand the money by which it is to be ransomed. Now, there is one little equivalent with which we did not, because we could not, burden Mr. Cobden. We have it yet in hand. Of course, we mean the paper import duty. Everything else has gone, vanished, and is for ever lost. After the experience we have had with these matters, there will be, we think, a very general conviction that we shall be the most insensate of all fools. if we part with this till we get an equivalent assured. Every man must now see that Mr. Cobden's work will be a good deal lightened and very much more likely to end well if we should intimate plainly that no French paper will be allowed to come free into England so long as French rags are prevented from coming equally free to England, and that the same rule will be observed in all other countries. It is but a shred saved from the general wreck, but as we have it, we may as well hold it until we have obtained the required equivalent.—.7'inzes o I TEE CASE OF THE BEY: MB. HATCII (Continued from 'the Sun of yesterday.) Mr. Hatch said he never allowed the girl Eu genie to get into the bed where he and Mrs. Hatch were, but merely under the counterpane, and Mrs. Hatch was always present. Mr and Mrs Plummer brought the young child Stephanie on the 25th of August, and they had every opportunity afforded them of speaking to their daughter Eugenie, if they had been so minded. They went away in the even ing without making any complaint, and left both the children behind. Before she left, Mrs. Plum mer said her daughter Eugenie was heiress to £15,000, and that she was betrothed to a Mr. Gay, and was to be married when she was seventeen. On the following day, the 26th of August, Mrs. Plummer returned, and she said that she thought the thunder storm which had, occurred in the night was a judgment on her for leaving her chil dren, and she had come to fetch them. She dined with the family, and -went away with the children in the evening. She complained that the children were not treated as she wished, and that an heiress to £15,000 should sleep in calico sheets, but made no other complaint ; and something was said about the children being placed with him again at Christmas, and before she left she made his adopted daughter Lucy a present of a toy. Both the children kissed him and took an affec tionate leave when they went away. At this stage of the case the court adjourned for the purpose of enabling the jury to take some re freshment. Upon their return the examination of Mr. Hatch was proceeded with. Witness heard nothing more of the matter until Oct. 25, when he received a letter from the Bishop of Winchester, and having consulted Mr. Onslow, the governor of the gaol, he resigned his post, and was afterwards tried and convicted. Cross•examined by Sergeant Shed—Witness was ordained in 1848. At • that time he was 30 years old. After leaving Cambridge, he went to New South Wales as a tutor, and then returned to Eng land. His salary at the gaol was £250 a year, and a residence was found for him. He had no fortune, and was entirely dependent upon his appointment. Daring the fortnight Eugenie Plummer was at his house he was very kind to her, and she appeared to be fond of him, and generally ran to him and kissed him when she came out of school. He never scolded her or made her cry, upon any occasion. She was scolded once for behaving improperly to a gentleman in the house. He did not wish to insinuate that she behaved in any manner indecently. He saw nothing in her conduct different to what he should expect from a child of respectable Christian parents. He was to receive £5O a-year for each child, and there was no disagreement as to the amount he was to receive when the children were taken away. Witness would not undertake to swear that the child Eugenic was left alone with her mother any part of the day on the 25th October except when they were in the water-closet. Witness did not kiss the child in her bed more than four times. He had a distinct recollection that his mother was at the drawing-room window when the children were running after him, and he had no doubt his wife and the French ladies were there. On the 18th of August he did take the children on his knee, but it was merely to tell them a story to amuse them, and he swore that no indecency whatever took place. When the child came to his bedroom in the morn ing she had nothing on but her night-dress and he himself was also undressed, but, of course, covered with the bed-clothes. Eugenie was sometimes in the bed in the position he had stated while Mrs. ll,atch was engaged in washing the other child, Lucy. He should not have allowed the child to come to his bed if it had not been by the express desire of her mother, as he did not think it was right. Serjeant Shce—Thinking it wrong, why did not you, a clergyman, and a man of your age, compe tent to form an independent judgment, refuse to allow it to be done ? Mr. Hatch—l thought the child was accustomed to it, and she did.not think any harm of it. Serjeant Shee—But if you yourself thought it was wrong, why did you allow it ? Mr. Hatch-1 did not think there was any ab solute harm in it. Cross-examination continued—Most likely he kissed the child when she first got into the bed. He would swear positively that he never went into Stephanie Plummer's bedroom with nothing but his night-shirt on. Witness had always been on affec tionate terms with his wife, and he considered that he could safely depend on her judgment in any mat ter of delicacy connected . with her own sex. They were married, at Sydney, in August, 1845. He never told her the details of this charge until the day he surrendered'himself, the 12th of November. He had previously shown her the letter the Bishop of Winchester wrote to him upon. the subject, and in which he requested that an investigation should take place into the affair by the visiting magistrates. He handed this letter immediately to his wife. This letter was received on the 3d of October. On the Bth of October witness saw a copy of the letter that had been written to the Bishop of Winchester by Mr. Plummer, complaining of his conduct to I daughters, and thus became aware of the precise nature of the charges that were made against him, He did not show this letter to his wife, and his rea son for this principally was, that his child Lucy's name was' mentioned in it, and that his wife • might get into conversation with her about it. He did - not mention the matter to his brother chaplain at the gaol, but he wished now that he had done so. He, of course, felt that he wanted advice, and he was on intimate terms with a great many clergymen in the neighbourhood, but still he did not mention the matter to any of them. He resigned his appointment at the gaol, which was all he had to depend upon in the world rather than have the matter investigated by the visit ing magistrates. His reason for this was that Mr. On-slow, the governor of the gaol, told him that whatever might be the result of the inquiry, it would be impossible for hi m t o retain his position with any comfort. He now. believed that it would have been much the better course for him to have met the charge and refuted it by the evidence of the witnesses, who he knew he was in a position to produce. He did not even mention the matter to his own solicitor, and his reason was, that he thought the whole thing would be hushed up. He saw, now that it was too late, that he had not adopted the most prudent course. Sergeant Shee—Will you explain how you could come to the conclusion that the matter would be hushed up and no one know anything about it, when you must have been aware that you would have to leave Wandsworth and break up your estab lishment, and would be bound to give some explana tion of the reasons for this proceeding Mr. Hatch—l did think so, and I can give no other explanation. _ Cross-examination continued—When he left Wandsworth he went to Poplar, but his wife did not know where he had gone to. He was aware that his wife had written - a letter to Mr. Plummer before he surrendered, and he also knew that a war rant had been issued for his apprehension upon this , charge. He believed that in his wife's letter she implored Mr. Plummer to forgive him, and stated that he was already utterly ruined by the proceed ings that had taken place. (The letter was put in. It was to the effect that Mr. Ha.tch'had left his home distracted—that he had given up his appointment, and that they were completely destitute, and im plored Mrs. Plummer, for God's sake, to forgive him, and not carry matters any further.) While he was at Poplar and aware that a warrant had been issued against him, he took no steps to obtain advice, but his mind was very much distracted at this time, and he did a great many foolish things. When he was taken into custody he inquired of the officer what the punishment was for such an offence. Mr. Pratt, the solicitor to Mr. Plummer, offered to abandon the charge if he would admit that it was true and ex press his regret, and he refused to do so. He never made use of the expression, " I am mad," or " I was mad." Re-examined—He refused to admit the truth of the charge, and told Mr. Pratt so distinctly, and that he had determined to meet the charge. He was quite stupified at the charge that was made against him, and did not mention the matter at the time to any one except Mr. Onslow, the governor of the gaol, with whom he was on very intimate terms. _ _ Mrs. Essig Hatch said—l am the wife of the Rev. Mr. Hatch, the prosecutor of this indictment. I am 35 years of age, and was married to him iu Sydney, in 1845, and we stayed there about a year afterwards, and then went to Walton-on-Thames, of which parish my husband's father was vicar. I remember Mrs. Plummer coming to our house on the 11th of August, with her husband and Eugenie Plummer, the defendant. (The witness then gave a detail of what occurred subsequent to the departure of Mr. and Mrs. Plummer on the evening of the 11th of August, to the same effect as her husband.) When the cab had.started I went into the drawing room and stood at the window. My mother, the governess, and the two French ladies were also there. I never lost sight of my husband or the two children Eugenie and Lucy until they came into the house. They were not in the garden more than two or three minutes—a very short time. My mother called out to Mr. Hatch that she was waiting, and he and the two children came in immediately. If any pro ceeding such as that spoken to by the child Eugenie had taken place I must have seen it; it could not have happened without my doing so. I remember my husband being up-stairs with the two children on the 18th of August. A gentleman named Coghlan went up to fetch them, and they came down immediately. (The witness then contradicted the defendant in some other particulars.) It was impossible for my husband to have gone to Eugenie's bedroom any evening during the fort night she was at our house without my noticing his absence. It was at the request of Mrs. Plummer that Eugenie was permitted to come into our bed to be " petted," but it was greatly against the wish of my husband. She was never allowed to come actually inside the bed, but only under the coun terpane. Lucy used to come into the bed also, and Mr. Hatch used to make them say the first and last letter of any articles in the room that he mentioned. She never exhibited the slightest symptom of fear or distress upon any occasion when she was taken into the bed. I remember Mrs. Plummer coming to the house on the 25th of August, and she had plenty of opportunities on that day of being alone with her daughter. Upon this day Mrs. Plummer' said that Eugenie was betrothed to their own medical man, and the child said, " Yes, and when I am seventeen I intend to marry him." Stephanie, the younger child, was left with us on this night, and when Mrs. Plummer left she did so on the most friendly terms. It was impossible for Mr. Hatch to have committed any act of inde cency in our bedroom with the child without my seeing it. Mrs. Plummer came again on the 26th, and said that she thought the thunder-storm of the previous night was a judgment upon her for sepa rating herself from her children, and she had re solved to take them away. Before she went away she kissed me, and appeared to be very friendly. During the whole time Eugenic Plummer was in out house I never saw the slightest act of impro priety on the part of my husband towards her. My husband handed me the letter he received from the bishop, but I did not read it, and I was not aware of the pa . rticulars of the charge against him, until he surrendered himself. On the 28th of October I wrote the letter that has been referred to, to Mrs. Plummer. My husband did not know that I was going to write to her, and ho did not know the terms of it. I remember ill.. Pratt, the solicitor, coming to visit me at Wandsworth. He said that he wished to speak to me alone, and after some conversation it was arranged that my husband should surrender at Ridler's Hotel, Holborn. Cross-examined—The little girl Lucy bad been*a member of our family two or three years at the time the Plummers came. We were very fond of that child, and were very kind to it. Eugenie Plum mer was treated equally kindly, and nothing was denied to her that was reasonable for a child. I did certainly stop her beer. (A laugh.) Her mother wished her to have beer, but I considered it was not proper for her. I generally used to get up first and dress Lucy, and during that tithe my husband re mained in bed, and the child Eugenie with him, but I do not think she was ever there longer than three or four minutes. I never saw my husband kiss Eugenie while she was in bed with him. My atten tion was not called to the circumstance until nearly three months afterwards, and yet I can remember that during the fortnight Eugenie Plummer was in our house, my husband did not leave the room any evening for so long a period as ten minutes. lam sure he was never absent more than two or three minutes. I will swear he was never absent for so long a period as ten minutes. I believe that I enjoyed my husband's entire confidence, and he never kept anything secret from me, and always consulted me in everything affecting his interest, except in re ference to this transaction. When my husband re ceived the . bishop's letter he appeared very much distressed, and was about to put it into his pocket, but I - insisted upon seeing it, and he gave it me. I only glanced it over, but I saw that it referred to some charge of indecent assault upon the Plummers by my husband. Mrs. Hatch gave her evidence with very great calmness and self-possession, although she was evidently deeply affected at the unhappy position of herself and her husband. At the close of her examination the case was adjourned, the father of the defendant renewing the recognisance he had entered into in the sum of £5OO for her appearance on the following morning. [ADVERTISEMENT.] — A most interesting recovery from a vast complication of diseases, such as indigestion (dys pepsia), flatulence, constipation, nervous, bilious and liver complaints, cough, asthma, consumption and debi lit y , without the aid of medicine, yDu Barry's delicious Reva lenta Arabica Food, is recorded in the following letter : Cure 52,422. " Bridgehouse, Frimley,. 3d April, 1851. Thirty-three years diseased lungs, spitting of blood, liver derangement, deafness, singing in the ,ears, constipation, debility, shortness of breath, and cough , h ave been re moved by your Revalenta Arabica. My lungs, liver, sto mach, head and ears are all right, my hearing perfect, and my recovery is a marvel to all my ac q uaintances. —JAMES ROBERTS, timber merchant!' Cure No. 4,208. " Eight years dyspepsia, nervousness, debility, with cramps and nausea, have been effectually cured by Du Barry's health restoring food. I shall be happy to answer any inquiries. —Rev. JOHN W. FLAWELL, Ridlington Rectory, Nor folk." Cure No. 3,906. "Thirteen years cough, indigos tion, and general debility have been removed by Du Barry's excellent food.—JAMES PORTER, Athol-street, Perth." En tins, at Is. 6d. ; llb., 3s. ; 21b., ss. 9d. ; 51b., 125.; 121 b., 265. The 101 b. and 121 b. tins carriage free, on receipt of post office order. Du Barry and Co., 77, Regent-street, London; Fortnum, Mason, and Co., 'lB2, Piccadilly; Abbis, Graceehurch-street ; 4, Cheapside ; 63, and 150, Oxford street ; 330 and 451, Strand • 49 and 60, Bishopsgate street ; 85, Tottenham - court-road. Also at Dublin, Bewley and Draper ; at Edinburgh, Refines and Cc., a t Liverpool, Nixon and Thew; at Mancehester, Sharp an. Scott; at York, Raimes, Blanchard, and„Co,.; arSouth smpton, Randal laid Sou _r:t_ • SUPPLY OF GAS TO TILE METRO- POLLS'. The committee appointed by the House of Com mons to report upon a bill now before Parliament on the supply of gas to •the metropolis met on. Tuesday, when the following members were pre sent :—The Right Hon. T. S. Estcourt, chairman ; Mr. Packe, Mr. J. A. Turner, Lord R. Cecil, Sir J . V. Shelley, and Mr. North. Mr. Denison, Q.C. ' who appeared on behalf of the promoters of the bill, opened the case. He said there were about twenty-two companies, large and small, who now supplied the various districts of the metropolis with gas. The first company was started in 1811, when many persons doubted if the speculation would pay at all ; but at this moment there was very nearly £2,000,000 a year paid for gas, and not very far short of 1,000,000 tons of coals were used in its manufacture. He should be very glad if he could lay before the committee a state ment of the accounts of those companies, as had. been done in the case of the water companies, but that he was at present unable to do. Last year, when a committee sat on this subject, there was . 11. formal order—not of the comm itt ee merely— but of the House of Commons, for the production of certain papers, returns, and accounts of the several gas companies for the last five years; but no return had been made in answer to that order. He did not know whether the gas companies had set that order at defiance, but they had certainly paid no attention to it. Possibly, as a dissolution was at hand at the time, they looked upon it as a dropped order, but the fact was th a t no re t urn h a d been made. Now he said they ought to have those re turns before them, and he had to ask the committee to call upon the gas companies to supply those re turns. The promoters of the present bill considered that the various gas companies should not have the power of cutting off the gas in one street because one peer man was is. Bd. in arrear of his bill, or in another, of restricting the illuminating power of the gas or of fixing the price of gas at 4s. the thousand cubic feet in one district, in others charging 65., 7s. and 55., while in some districts there was no limit at all. One of the objects of the present bill was to enforce uniformity of price, giving the companies a fair profit for the money they had laid out, and at the same time a security to the public for fair value for what they paid. In the early days of gas there was no limitation, but by degrees, as the making of gas was found to be profitable, several companies started in combination with each other: first, in 1850, the London, Equitable, and Chartered; next, in 1853, the Phcenix, London, and South Metroppli tan, and, conjointly with them, the Surrey, as a consuming branch. From this period the price of gas began to rise from 4s. to 4s. 6d. the thousand cubic feet. Under the present system there was even a difficulty in getting contracts for the public lamps, an instance of which had occurred in Chelsea. In June, 1858, the Chelsea vestry tested the public lamps, when they found they were overcharged in one year £9OO over what they contracted for, but when the matter was brought before the Court of Common Pleas, the verdict was against the vestry, on the ground that they could. not prove that the whole quantity of gas contracted for had not been supplied, which it was manifestly impossible they could do unless they,had a person to test the lamps every hour of the night. On the 19th Nov., 1857, the first meeting of delegates of the metropolitan pa rishes took place to have an alteration in the system. The first thing they did was to petition Parliament, complaining of the monopoly of the gas companies, and stating that the consumers were at the mercy of the gas companies as to the price, quantity, and quality of the gas supplied. The petition set forth that no less than 7,728,000 cubic feet of gas were consumed in one year in the metropolis, produced by 810,000 tons of coal. The value of that gas, calculated at 4s. 6d. the thousand cubic feet, was £1,738,000, as estimated by engineers ; but the actual sum paid by the consumers of the metropolis amounted to about £2,000,000. Shortly after the Easter recess of 1858 a Parliamentary committee was nominated, consisting of five members, to re present the gas interest, five to represent the parishes, and five independent; members. That committee did take a good deal of of evidence, but were not able to make a_ report to the house. In the course of last session, however, a bill was pre sented to the house very similar to the one now before the committee. Nothing, however, took place in the ,matter, except that that bill afforded a basis of negotiation between the parties, and it was agreed between Mr. Wyatt, who acted for the peti tioners, and Mr. Baxter, who was agent for the opponents of the bill, that there should be no oppo sition on the standing orders, or on the second reading of the bill, but both parties were to be at liberty to take what steps they pleased as to ques tions that had not been agreed upon. After some further remarks, counsel concluded by asking the committee to enforce the order for the production of the returns of accounts, &c., by the various gas companies. The room was cleared, and when the public were re-admitted, The Chairman said the committee were of opinion that the information required in the returns ought to be produeed. The committee would make no order at that moment, but trusted the former order would be complied with. The committee then adjourned till this day. L U UNTRY MARKETS. NEWARK-MAY 9. The show of wheat from the farmers to-day was fair, and a moderate business was transacted at rather lower prices. Barley in short supply, but steady. Peas firm, at 45s to 545 . per qr. White Wheat, new, 58s to 61s Red do. ' 5273 to 55s Old white sBs to 61s Red do. 52s to 55s Barley, malting.— 40s to 46s Barley, grinding 30s to 323 Oats, old, .. 283 to 323 New do 263 to 293 Beans. 455 to 483 Beans, new —s to —5 LYNN-MAY 8. The supply of wheat was limited, and there was a fair attendance of farmers and factors. Trade ruled at last last week's rates. Old white 50s to 56s Old red 47s to 52s New white ..... ..18s to 51s New red... 48s to 52a HULL--MAY 8. There was very little doing in wheat to-day, and prices underwent no change. Oats in demand. Peas scarce, and in good inquiry. Barley active. A thin attendance. Wheat.... Old white per qr. . s6s Od to 58s Od Old red New white .. „ New red .... „ , 53s Od to 55s Od Dantzic, Kent) , &c. old white 46s Od to 50s Od Dutch, Belgian, and French 46s Od to 56s Od Baltic and Hamburg, red 44s Od to 48s Od St. Petersburg and Riga, old 39s Od to 44s Od Barley.... English malting ' 40s Od to 44s Od Grinding 3ls Od to 34s Od Saal and Oderbruck Holstein and Danish 34s Od to 33s Od Grinding oats _ English, old _ 27s Od to 28s Od Archangel and Riga, per at Os 101 d to lid Friesland and Dutch Oslld to Oslltd Swedish and Danish oBlld to Osllld Beans ....English, old, per qr New pigeon 4os Od to 42s Od ' New tick. 42s Od to 44s Od Egyptian 378 Od to 38s Od Peas Foreign breakers Grinding • Tares ....Winter —s Od to —s Od Indian Corn Linseed, feeding _ _ _ _ crushing Linseed cakes (I - ull) £lo 10 0 to £lO 16 0 Foreign 715 oto 8 5 0 Rape cakes 415 oto 5 0 0 Bones 415 oto 6 5 0 NEWCASTLE-UNDER LYNE-MAY S. A slow trade in wheat, at barely last day's rates. Flour difficult to sell, but steady. Barley in small supply, and prices varied from 30s to 45s per qr. Oats quiet, but held at full rates. Beans 44s to 50s per 38 stone. BRISTOL SUGAR—MAT 9. Our market has been completely bare of samples till to day, when about 300 hhds. of Barbadoes just landed were brought forward and mostly sold at fully previous rates. Nothing doing in rum. 13IRTHS. CASSON.—On the 9th inst., at St. Stephen's-terrace, 'Vest bourne-park, the wife of Henry Casson, Etk., barrister at-law, of twin daughters. HUMS.—On the 9th inst., at 16, Wilton-street, Belgrave square, the wife of Lieut.-Col. Hume, C. 8., Grenadier Guards, of a daughter. D UNDAS.—On the Bth inst., at Woodhall, Yorkshire, the wife of the Hon. J. C. Dundas, of a son. M A It It I A 0 14 B. BROKE — GunDoN.—On the Bth inst., at St. George's Hanover-square, only son of Major-General Broke, to Charlotte, eldest daughter of Brampton Gurdon, M.P., of Letton, Norfolk. HOUSTOUN—MONTEITIL—On the Bth inst., at Trinity Church, Alarylebone, Captain Wallace Houstoun, R.N., son of Sir Robert Houstoun, of Clerkington, N.B. to Caroline Frederica, only surviving child o f Lieut.-Gen. Monteith, K.L.S., and Mrs. Monteith.. ' DEATHS. BEATIE.—On the Bth inst., at Torquay,Willoughby Bertie third son of the Hon. and Rev. F. Bertie. EVERET r.—On the 7th inst., at Biddesden,Wilts, the Rev. Thomas Everett, aged 66. MusonAvE.—On the 4th inst., at 41, Belgrave-square, the Right Hon. and Most Rev. Thomas, Lord Archbishop of York. 51411'111.-011 the 8111 inst , at Kidwells, Maidenhead, Jas. Smith, Esq., solicitor, aged (3. WiLsort.—On the Bth inst., at 18, Upper Wimpole-street, Horace Hayman Wilson, Esq., Boden Professor of San _ suit, Oxford, aged 75. WATSON.=On the 6th inst., at Barnsbury, Mr. Thomas Watson, late of Gutter-lane, city, aged 58. LONDON: Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG:, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 11V,, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the ()aunty of Middlemeg i Thursday, May 10, 1860.