The Sun. — London, England, 1846-07-17 00:00:00

RAILWAY COMNUTTEES. (YESTERDAY). HOUSE OF LORDS. Room D. The members of this Committee re-assembled to-day at eleven o'clock. trsvnazt AND =nor ST. EDMUND'S (NOENVION EXTENSION). Mr. George B. Bidder was re-called for the purpose of answering some questions respecting the shares in the dif ferent lines of railway which he had projected in this district, which terminated the case against the Bill. Mr. Sergeant WRANEHIAM said that it then became his duty to address to their Lordships such observations as might appear to him necessary . to put the case before them with regard to the evidence in that light in which it should be viewed. Their Lordships laboured under a misfortune with respect to this line, which the other tribunal before whom this Bill was tried were free from, namely, that they had not had all the rival schemes before them. Had this been otherwise, they would have had an opportunity of weighing in the balance with the present line some of the schemes for the same purpose which had been referred to 17 Mr. Bidder and the company , he represented. Now it was in evidence before the Com mittee that the scheme then before them was calcu lated to give accommodation to the same district, and to afford ample remuneration to the promoters. It had been stated by Mr. Bidder yesterday that such was not the case, but that it was true of the schemes with which he (Mr. Bidder) was associated, Mr. AUSTIN said that he was just informed that his friend, Mr. Bidder, had received by telegraph an account that an express had arrived at Yarmouth in - three hours and a half, including stoppages. Mr. Sergeant WILANCHIAM said he was about to state to their Lordships what was the amount of expense that would be incurred by these rival schemes. Why, the cost of the first line was 440,000/. • of the second line, from Thetfo rd to Redham, 480,0001. Then there was the coast line, the Ipswich, Norwich, and Yarmouth, the capital of which was 11,950,000/. There was another line from Thetford to New market,the cost of which would be 350,0001., making a total of 2,465,000/. of shares for the accommodation of that district, which, with the 40,000/. required for the establishment of a station at Norwich, and the money they would be entitled to borrow, give altogether a sum of 3,333,000/. Such was the sum this rival Company required to gave the advantage of railway facility of transit to Norwich, Ipswich, Yarmouth, and Stowmarket. The present project would effect this object by a direct line, except with a slight kfrAttlirfieElWlll4ll,olltimrtant town of Stowmarket, the attention of their Lordships to a mistake which 'had been committed by the only witness against the Bill, Mr. Bidder. That gentleman, in dealing with the question, as regarded Yarmouth, said that he was desirous in his schemes to connect the centre of Suffolk with Norfolk, whereas the point to which he alluded was not in the centre, or even the county of Suffolk. Mr. Bidder bad also stated to their Lordships in his evidence that, though he did not think Yarmouth entitled to a per fectly direct line, yet that he it might justly re quire the second best line at the Mint he had mentioned, namely, Diss. Now, the present scheme did give that second best line. After some further observations as to the evi dence in support of the Bill, the Learned Counsel concluded by calling on the Committee to declare the preamble proved. The room was then cleared, and on our re-admission, The CHAIRMAN announced that the preamble of the Bill was proved. STANDING ORDERS' COMMITTEE. MOUSE OF LORDS. Their Lordships met at the usual hour; Lord Shaftesbury in the chair. Their Lordships immediately assumed the form of a Select Committee on Merits, and proceeded to the consideration of a list of thirty-two Bills which came before them in that ca pacity. Fourteen of these were railway Bills. OXFORD, WORCESTER, AND WOLVERHAMPTON. The proofs on the part of the promoters of this often ad journed Bill were completed this morning, and the preamble was declared proved. SHREWSBURY, OSWESTRY AND CHESTER JUNC TION (CRICKHEATH AND WENN LINES.) SHREWSBURY, OSWESTRY, AND CHESTER JUNC "TION (EXTENSION AND BRANCHES). These Bills were again called on, and after hearing some further proofs their Lordships declared the preambles proved. A number of other Bills were part heard and adjourned. On resuming the form of a Committee on Standing Orders, their Lordships proceeded with the case of the WILTS, SOMERSET, AND WEYMOUTH, The promoters of which Bill had complied with the stand ing orders. After partially hearing one or two Bills, which they ad 3ourned till to-morrow, the Committee rose. DIRECT WESTERN RAILWAY.. A meeting of the shareholders in this scheme was held yes terday at the King's Head Tavern, Poultry, at twelve, for the purpose of determining whether the Company should be dissolved. Mr. LAWRMICE moved that Mr. Alderman Challis should take the chair. Mr. Alderman CHALLIS, having taken the chair, said he did so most reluctantly, but his reluctance was altogether on his own account, and not in any way arising out of any cir cumstances connected with the Company. He had entered Into railway matters at first with all the reluctance which one could do who had foreseen all that had subse quently occurred. This railway afforded another ex ample of the unhappy issue of this kind of speculation. It started with good prospects, no energy was wanting to urge it forward, and the line, which was at first believed to be a good one, had been justified by everything which had sines faken place. The Great Western during the present session had had ten or twelve of their Bills thrown out without opposition on the part of this Company ; and others had met with like ill success, because the lines proposed deviated from that direct course which this Com any had adopted. He assured the shareholders that it was no bubble scheme, taken up with a view to the aggrandisement of a few individuals. The 141nMittee believed at the time that the scheme was a good one, and would certainly succeed; they entered into it in good faith, and by their conduct had shown them selves honest men. Although he had attended their meet ings less ftlequently than others, yet he had attended, and he could assure them that the interests of the shareholders were considered. There had been no jobbing; everything had been done to economise expense ever since it was seen that the line would not succeed, at least in the present Parliament. indeed, the last two or three months had been occupied in cutting down the bills, well knowing that. railway committee men were considered fair game. He said the line was proposed, a provisional committee was registered, and a good and able engineer, in whom the company could trust, namely, Sir John Macneil was selected. The line was surveyed, the plans deposited, and the number of shares issued were 1,400,000, but this Number the committee considered it proper for the security of the company to reduce to 120,000.Theie shares were allotted many of them to landowners along the line, but only 17,630 had been returned paid upon. What could the committee do in these circumstances? They felt that they could not go on; their were brought to a standstill for the want of the support of those who had the shares allotted to them. As he had already said, the Committee from that moment considered only how they could reduce the expenses, and he asked the confidence of the shareholders for the committee ; he courted inquiry, And the closest scrutiny of all the affairs of the Company. The SECRETARY having read the advertisement calling the ntietl4ll/, Messrs Bischoff, Coleman, and Gordon Thompson were appointed scrutineers. The accounts of the Company were then read, showing eteeipts, deposits on shares, amounting to 44,813/., and on the credit side payments for engineering and surveys, 11,334/. ; for law, 10,5751., and other miscellaneous accounts, to the amount of about 8,1001., leaving a balance of 14,970/ . The CHAIRMAN expected that the Company, if dissolved, would pay, after meeting the outstanding accounts, 255. or 30s, a share. He hoped that the meeting, instead of declaring a bankruptcy, would simply dissolve the Company. Mr. Alderman SIDNEY moved that this Company be, and the same is, hereby dissolved. Captain LAMPET seconded the motion. some discussion ensued on the question of dissolution or bankruptcy, and - what the effect would be on the assets of the Company. The motion was put to the vote, and the scrutineers hav ing made up the numbers, The CHAIRMAN declared 'it to be for dissolution, with out bankruptcy, 2,845 ; neuters, 140 ; and said that as not one-third of the shares had been represented, he adjourned the meeting to this day week, at one o'clock for two, and between this and that time that the officers of the Company would take the opinion of a profes sional man as to what position they stood in. A dissolution would put them in a worse condition for the recovering of the outstanding deposits not paid up. A vote of thanks having been moved to the Chairman, the ' meeting then adjourned. Tux LATE EXTRAORDINARY MARRIAGE CASE AT Butowrots.—The Rev. Timothy Gibson, senior curate and lecturer of St. Matthew's, Bethnal-green, who performed the ,marriage ceremony in the recent most extraordinary case p•hich came before the Brighton magistrates last week, has addressed the following letter on the subject to the Times : " On the let of October , 1845 , a gentleman, wh o signed him self i n the marriage register of St. Matthew's Church, as 4 Edward Greville Halford, of Lewes, Sussex; was married to 1 Sophia Dilling, a servant in the employ of Captain Dunning, of Brighton, a nd whom he deserted within three weeks after marriage. The young woman saw him in Brighton about a fortnight since; challenged him as her hu=band; and, at the _instance of herfriends, took the necessary preliminary measures for obtaining from him a maintenance.Tchhe of fase magistrates, sheld yesi te •• lav at Brighton before a full bench , Captain 'Allen in the chair I attended for the purpose of identifying Mr. Halford. Shortly after I entered the Court, and berore f kid seen Sophia Dilling or any one whom I knew, the gentieman in question came into court and took his seat at the table in front of the bench. I immediately banded up a paper to the chairman, of which the following is a copy :--, To the Worshipful the Bench. The clergyman is now in court who married Sophia Dilling, at St. Matthew's Church, Bethnal-green, to a gentleman who signed himself Edward Greville IHalford. That gentleman the clergyman has not seen since the day of the marriage until this morning, but he is now in court, and if any one of the magistrates will ask him the clergyman will point him out to the whole court.' When the case came on for hearing, all the witnesses were ordered out of court. After a considerable time had elapsed, the attorney who had attended to conduct the case came to me and said the case had broken down, and bad been dismissed, although not a single witness had been called on the side of the young woman." FATAL RAILWAY ACCIDENT.—BIRMINGHAM, WED NESDAY NlGll7.—This afternoon an inquest was held before Dr. Birt Davies, borough coroner, at the Wellington Hotel, Communication-row, up o n the body of William Stock, the railway guard, killed at the Barnt-green station, on the Bir iniosham and Bristol Railway, on Monday_ afternoon. The only important evidence was that of Mr. M'Connell, the ,chief engineer of the company, who deposed that the deceased had no right, according to the regulations of the company, to traverse the roof of his carriage to join corn. parry with a friend behind. His (the deceased's) duty was to remain in his seat at the break. Witness also deposed that the bridge was sufficiently high to admit trains and passengers through without danger. The deceased stood upwards of six feet high, and if he had stood where be ought to have stood, or sat, no accident could have occurred. The space between the floor of the place where the deceased sat and the arch of the bridge was six f ee t six inches. No accident had ever previously occurred at that bridge. The coroner, in his charge, observed that there did i. .jot Ai: ; thbe any substantial accusation against the com a 1 . 4 11_ ...w y - r•-, ed to him to be an accident. The jury, under ,-----•• do , _.., It•,n • the worthy coroner, returned a verdict of aCI-1"110461(4rei • ath, with a deodand of ls." The officers of . . ' .it. : $ l4 lit ,- es 4401 *usft iirmingham Railway were in attendance, if 4, es- .•.4 a Dr' ' that not the slightest blame was at # ::, . e..48,85z , 10 jpr VS ..., ~ / 4 ,TI ic' ~, th. i n-any. Mr. Saunders, the secretary, . 1 " '': • tributa te- i- f ci ) P ( • . - r, y e , ' • ,vjacern for the family of the deceased, i' - evidced the grea t -. )4 Will be made to provide . '''•'':.- stutialieun- deratood that All g t e . 4 .._ - lcl tlituri• POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MA NSI ON-HO USE. CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD. George Marriott, alias Charles Metcalf, alias Mr. Mellish, of the firm of Neill and Mellish, of Austin friars, was brought up for re-examination upon charges of having conspired with other persons to defraud trades men in the city of London of goods of considerable value. The court was crowded, and the new distinct cases were entered into. Mr. Humphreys attended for the prosecution.. The following is the additional :evide nce in the first case which was brought against the prisoner on the 6th of June, by Messrs, Neville and Jourdain, hosiers and warehousemen, of No. 11, Gresham-street, West. William Mart, warehouseman to the prosecutors, said, about the 6th or 7th of May, the prisoner called at our warehouse and gave me a card, G. Marriott and Son, ironmongers, 16, Great Trinity-lane, London. He said, he had been recommended to us as a respectable house, and having a son in Australia, to whom he was in the habit of sending ironmongery goods at different periods, and the last letter received here, expressed the wish of his son for a small assortment of drapery and hosiery goods, he called with the view of purchasing a p arcel of that description of goods to the amout of 1001. or a little more. He said the goods must be ready by the Tuesday following or they would be too late to go by the vessel, and he then gave a reference to Messrs. Neill and Mellish, No. 3, Austin-friars, merchants, who, he said, hail known him some time, and would testify as to his respectability, and he would call on the following Monday to ascertain whether we were satisfied with the reference. He did so. We had sent a clerk to Neill and Mellish, and I told the prisoner that, as far as the reference was concerned, it was satisfac tory, but we did not know anything of Neil and Mellish. but would make inquiries about them. He then inquired the usual terms upon which we did business. I told him two-and.a-half discount for prompt cash, or an accept • ante at three months. He said he thought he should avail himself of the acceptance, but he was not quite sure. I asked him how the goods were to be disposed of, and at what docks they were to be delivered? He said, that having to send other goods by his own cart, he would not trouble us to deliver them; his car man should call on Tuesday with an order trom him for their delivery. We therefore packed up goods—namely, 35 dozen socks, 86 dozen stockings, and a variety of other articles, to the gross value of 1331 . 14 s. 10 d. , bu t •••- for the payment. Mary Anu Watts, housekeeper of the house No. 3, Austin-friars, said, I have been housekeeper there for nearly fifteen years. It belongs to Mr. Fisher. I know the prisoner as Mr. Mellish, in which name he took the office on Monday before Lady-day, in company with Mr. Neill. I showed the offices to them, and they went to Mr. Fisher to agree about the rent. A brass plate was put upon the door, as follows:—" Neill and Mel lish. Second floor." They took possession on the Monday following. Their clerk called the prisoner Mr. Mellish in my presence. I saw the prisoner there occa sionally for about three weeks. After that he only came occasionally. Mr. Neill told me he was in the shipping line. The counting-house was ready furnished, and there were two rooms, and each room led on to the staircase, so that any one could go into one room and pass into the other, and then go down stairs again. They had no goods of their own, but they brought some pens and ink, and after a few days they brought four maps to hang up. The old clerk left on the 29th of May last. Cross-examined—The prisoner told me himself his name was Mr. Mellish, and I saw him write it on paper for the plate, and I have heard him called Mr. Mellish repeatedly, and never saw any one of that name there but the prisoner. Mary Shelton, said, I am housekeeper, at No. 16, Great Trinity-lane, which belongs to Mr. James. Li May last, the prisoner occupied the warehouses there. The card produced, " Marriott and Son, Ironmongers," is one of his ; I never saw ironmongery there. A truck-load of paper and some empty cases were all I saw there. I answered messages for about the first week, and the porter answered afterwards. The pre mises were abandoned. The prisoner went away first, and then the man. A carman, who was employed by one of the prisoner's companions to call at Messrs. Neville and Co. for the hosiery, stated, that by direction of the man, he con veyed the goods to No. 2, Oxford-court, Cannon-street, where he left them in the belief that he had been em ployed by Messrs. Neville, who said that he should be employed again by them. W. K. Milwood, clerk to Messrs. Neville, and Co., stated that he inquired at No. 3, Austin-friars, of Mr. Neill, of the firm of Mellish and Neill, into the re spectability of Mr. Marriott, of Great Trinity-lane, and received from him a most unexceptionable character. Mr. G. Bryson, accountant, of Basing-lane, stated that he was engaged as agent for Mr. James, the owner of No. 16, Great Trinity-lane, and that he let the ware house to him about the week after the quarter day. He saw the prisoner write on two or three occasions, and to the best of his belief, the papers produced (the order for delivery, and a letter addressed to Neville and Co., dated June 10, 1846), were in the prisoner's hand writ ing, as were other papers produced. The second owe brought against the prisoner was as follows : Mr. Benjamin Wilson, hat manufacturer, Walbrook, said the prisoner came on the 23d or 24th of April to our warehouse for the first time, and presented a card with the name Marriott and Son upon it. He said he wanted a parcel of goods to the amount of about 1001. for his son in Australia, and his terms were what we call cash, but not money down ; and we agreed to let him have some, and asked him for a reference, and he gave us a reference to Neill and Mellish, Austin-friars, and he was to call again in a few days. After we received a report from our clerk as to the reference, we agreed to execute the order. The clerk to the last witness stated that upon calling at Austin-friars he saw Mr. Neill, who gave the prisoner an excellent character. Sergeant Dubois (No. 14 N) of the metropolitan police, who took the prisoner into custody at Stockton, proved that the prisoner was living there in the Lame of Metcalf, and that upon being asked whether he had any children, he said " none alive." The third case against the prisoner was brought by Mr. Craggs, wholesale fancy stationer, of Budge-row. Mr. C. A. Craggs, in the employment of the pro secutor, said, on the 29th of April the prisoner came to us, and asked me if we could execute a shipping order for him to go to Australia to a son he had there. He presented a card with Marriott and Son upon it. We told him we could, and we told him our terms were cash, or three months with a very respectable reference. He referred me to Neill and Mellish, No. 3, Austin friars.—(Laughter.) He said I was to call any hour between ten and four o'clock, they being merchants, and that they were executing an order for him at the same time. I told them I would call the next day upon them, and I went there and saw a gentleman who represented himself as Mr. Smith, who said that Mr. Marriott was most respectable, and punctual in his pay ments, but I did not consider the reference satisfactory, and we delayed the order for a few days, but I sent an invoice of the goods I thought would suit the market to the prisoner at Great Trinity-lane ; and after that the prisoner called, and said the goods and the prices would suit him. He said he wanted some paper to pack with ironmongery, which he was going to ship to his son ; and I asked him if he would accept a bill ? He agreed; and also said that Neill and Mellish would cash it imme diately upon allowing them 5 per cent. discount.— (Laughter.) Upon these representations I let him have part of the paper, to the amount of 181. 4s. 6d., and he gave me an acceptance at three months for the whole amount, 551. ss. 6d. I sent one of my lads :,to 16, Great Trinity-lane, with the goods in a truck. It consisted of paper, but we did not complete the order. Mr. Craggs, the principal of the house, also gave evi dence. He had his suspicions of the integrity of the prisoner, and of his reference from the beginning, and determined not to give credit to him for a farthing's worth. The prisoner, however, contrived to induce the brother of the prisoner to entertain a better opinion of him, and to let him have part of the order. Neill had told witness that he would immediately discount Mar riott's acceptance, but upon being subsequently applied to apologised upon the ground of having a large pay ment to make. The witness finding that there was no chance of retribution, went to the landlord of the house in Trinity-lane, and mentioned the facts ; and the pri soner afterwards said, if witness had not been a fool, but kept himself quiet, he should have had the money. It was li premisesesii, sm hi e 1 t ! : ,au w gur ed i p t tr n i e sote s t s cwaa w saph a so s e rocat g i c o ota i uh n s ia g oottn w tethha i t ee h bop t ry h dr ti e ehsre b e. n i l e l r t o Nei I a called atl t n h d e evidence of the next witness. Nicholas Mullins, 306 R, Metropolitan Police, stated that he knew the prisoner by the name of Charles Peck, alias Metcalf, as a transport on board the hulks at Dept ford. He then produced a certificate of " the particu lars of Charles Peck, late of the Thames hulk, Dept ford, dated 15th November, 1843, convicted of obtain ing goods by false pretences, at Newington, on the 7th of December, 1840, sentenced to transportation for seven years, and discharged by pardon, 21st October, 1844." The prisoner, who had asserted upon being appre hended that everything would be found to be right, and that all his transactions were bona fide, said not a word during the examination, except that he wished to bo remanded. The depositions in the above-mentioned cases were all taken, and the witnesses were bound over to prosecute ; but, as many other charges are expected against him, he was remanded till next Thursday. A partner in the house of Calvert and Co. stated that an attempt had been made by the prisoner to com mit a little plunder on that concern, but it proved un successful. The following two letters were produced by the gen tleman who appeared for that firm : " Messrs. Calvert and Co. " Stockton-on-Tees, 75, High-street, June 16, 1846. " Gentlemen, —I shall feel obliged by forwarding to me, at your earliest convenience, the price of ale, porter, and stout, for shipping and C home use.—Yours, &c., " HARLES METCALF." " Messrs. Calvert and Co." " Stockton-on-Tees, 75, High-street, June 18,1846. " Gentlemen,—The following order I shall feel much obliged by your forwarding per the first vessel:- 5 barrels porter, at 335. 5 barrels ale, at 405. 10 do. stout, at 435. 1 0 X at 48s. 10 do. do. at 535. 10 XX at 58s. I am likely to do a good deal of business in the shipping trade, in connexion with my brothers, who are ship owners at North and South Shields. I refer you to the house of Messrs. Neill and Mellish, merchants, 3, Austin-friars, Old Broad-street, with whom I have done much business, and they can speak as to my family con nexions, which, I make no doubt, will meet with your entire satisfaction.—l am, gentlemen, yours, respectfully, "CHAS. METCALF." The prisoner, whose coolness all through the investi- gation was very remarkable, was then taken back to prison. GUILDHALL. WHEN ROGUES FALL OUT, &c.—Yesterday three persons, named Wm. Shaw, John Colder, and Win. Pitchford, were brought before Alderman Lucas, charged with having a num ber of sacks belonging to Messrs. Trueman, Hanbury, and CO., the brewers, part of a number which had been stolen from the Eastern Counties Railway. The case excited some interest, from the fact that the par ties were all connected together in an illicit still, in conjunc tion with other persons, and that some quarrel having taken place amongst them, a general split was the result. A few days since, from information received, police-consta ble 357 proceeded to a house in Playhouse-yard, for the pur pose of making a seizure of a still, but on searching he found that everything .had been lately removed except three sacks, with Trueman, Hanbury, and Co.'s name on. There were two men (Shaw and Couter) in the house at the time, whom the officer took into custody for not being able to give an 4ccount of the sacks. They were brought up to the Court and remanded for a few days. In the mean time the pri soner Pitchford gave into custody two men named Johnson and Shaw, who were taken before the magistrate of Worship street on a charge of felony, and remanded until Saturday next. Johnson was allowed out on bail, when he immedi ately gave Pitchford in charge for having had . the sacks found at Playhouse-yard. The charge was heard here on Wednesday, and a remand was granted, but Pitchford was allowed out on bail. He no sooner got his liberty than he returned the compliment by handing Johnson over to the care of the police, and thus the matter stood when the case was proceeded with yesterday. Johnson's evidence was to the effect that at various periods he had seen sacks at Pitchford's house, and that he offered them for sale at ls. 6d. each, and that on one occasion he wished him (Johnson) to erase the names, for which he would give him 6d. per sack, but the offer was declined. Pitchford went under various names, etch as Poole, Smith, Pitch, &c., and belonged to the house in Playhouse. yard, where he kept a private still at work. He himself went with the prisoner Pitchford, and took the house from the landlord in the name of Poole, which he believed to be the prisoner's right name. William Johnson, the eon, deposed to having been em ployed by the prisoner to work the still in Playhouse-yard. The house was taken in the name of Poole, which he believed to be the prisoner's real name. Sacks came at various times with different articles in them, and they all had the name of Truman, Hanbury, and Co. on them. The prisoner's (Pitchford's) counsel contended that he never went by the name of Poole, nor did he take the house; and called the landlord, who at once said that the prisoner was not the Mr. Poole who took the house. The person who did so referred to the elder Johnson, who gave Mr. Poole an excellent character. --,_ .1-1- r...--. di. "Rant., enmities Railway. stated that he belonged to the Brick-lane station, and that in the month of _ _- _ May one parcel of sacks, out of eight, directed to Thetford, was missing. and was never heard of afterwards. They inuit have been placed in some cart, and thus carried away from the premises. The sacks were identified by a gentleman from Messrs. Truman's as belonging to that company. The two first prisoners declared that they knew nothing of the sacks; they were only employed on the premises as labouring men. Alderman LUCAS decided on discharging them. They were then placed in the witness box, and stated, that they were employed by a person named Poole, but the pri soner Pitchford was not him. • The prisoner often called at the premises in Playhouse-yard, as well as Johnson, while the still was at work, but he never interfered in any way, nor did he ever pay them. After some more evidence of a conflicting character, Alder man LUCAS decided on sending Pitchford in the custody of a constable to Worship. street, on a charge of offering sacks for sale knowing whose property they were, the case turning out not to be within the district of this Court. In the course of the afternoon the prisoner was taken before the magistrate at Worship-street, and was committed for trial. SOUTHWARK. DESPERATE SUICIDAL ArrEmprs.—Yesterday, Elizabeth Holmes, a respectable looking young female, was brought before Mr. Seeker under the following circumstances : A policeman of the hi division stated that while on duty in the Kent-road he went behind some new buildings, and saw the defendant standing on the brink of a deep well, which was uncovered at the time. Suspecting that her in. tention was to precipitate herself into it, he went up, and with some difficulty brought her away. When they were walking together in the Kent-road she left his side, and run• ning into the centre of the road threw herself down at the moment a heavily-laden dray was passing along, and she would inevitably have been run over if he had not dragged her almost from be neath the wheels. He added that he subsequently conveyed her to the station• house, and from thence to St. George's Workhouse. FLANDERS MAIL AND DUTCH PAPERS. THE HAGUE, JULY 11.—His Majesty the King arrived here this morning, at nine o'clock, on his return from his excursion to Friesland. THE HAGUE, JULY 12.—The King again left the Hague this morning, for Soetsdyk, whence his Majesty will go to Arnhem, to be at the races at that place to morrow. Towards the end of the month his Majesty will go to Luxemburg. THE HAGUE, JULY 13.—The Government has received a dispatch from the Envoy of the Netherlands at St. Petersburgh, dated the Ist of this month, accompanied by a note of the Chancellor of the Empire, Nesselrode, of the same date, announcing that the tara of the 15th (27th) July, at which, according to a preceding conven tion, the ukase of the 19th of June, 1845, should be ap plicable to the flag of the Netherlands, being on the eve of expiring before the negotiation between the two Governments could be terminated, it has pleased his Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, agreeably to the desire expressed by the Envoy of the Netherlands, in the name of his Government, to order that the faculty provisionally granted till the 15th (27th) of July, 1846 (the ships of the Nether lands to import indirectly goods into Russia without being subject to the increase of duties of Customs or dered by the ukase of the 19th of June, 1845), shall be prolonged for this year till the expiration of the navi gation season. BRUSSELS, JULY 11.—The Senate, in its sitting to-day, adopted several projects of law. JULY 12.—Their Majesties received Sir Hamilton Seymour, the English Minister. The King presided in a Council of Ministers, July 13. The Senate, in its sitting to-day, heard the report of the Chevalier de Bethune, on the project of law relative to the Convention with France. It then formed itself into a Secret Committee, to hear the communication of the Minister of Foreign Affairs respecting the negotia tions which preceded the convention. The Independence announces the departure of Mr. Mercier, which, it says, is to take place to-day or to morrow. This statement is at least premature. Nothing was decided yesterday or has been decided to-day re specting the departure of Mr. Mercier. The train from Paris to Brussels direct, which left Paris yesterday morning at seven o'clock, arrived in our city at ten o'clock. If we mention the hour of its arri val, it is not to complain of it—we halo a more impor tant observation to make. We learn from a traveller who may be relied on, that the train consisted of 28, perhaps 30 carriages ; it was, therefore, as considerable, perhaps more so, than on the day when the late catas trophe took place. It is to this point that, for the sake of the pablic, we think it our duty to call the attention of the directors of the Company. A large train has always more chances of danger than a small one. It may be remembered that when communi cation by railway was first introduced into Belgium, the trains were always divided, so that no more than ten or twelve carriages attached to one locomotive. After the accident of the Bth of May, 1842, it was judged that it was desirable to avoid, as far as possible, the union of two locomotives. In the present instance two loco motives were attached to the train which leaves Paris at seven o'clock in the morning, because the train is divided at Douai ; one half proceeds to Lille, and the other to Valenciennes and Brussels; but might not two trains be sent from Paris, instead of one very long train, leaving it necessary that an interval of half or three-quarters of an hour should elapse between their departure from Paris ? By this regulation it would prevent those lamentable accidents which we have had to notice of late. DUTCH FUNDS.—AMSTERDAM, JULY 13. Money. Bills Actual Debt, 2% per Cent •• •••• • . • • 61 GI Ditto, 3 per Cent • Ditto, 4 per Cent. 95% Amort Syndic, 3% per Cent.......... Ditto, 3% per Cent.. •.••••• • . • • • • • Commercial Company, 4% per Cent . • 176% 177% East India Loan, 4 per Cent.... •• •• • • 94% 95 Exchange on London, at sight • • • • • 12 25 Two months... •.••..•••••• 12 15 On Hamburgh, at sight .... 35 75 Two months. •••• • . • • ...... 35 31 On Paris •••• • • • • 37 Two months. ••••••• • • • • • • • 56 75 -Dutch Papa's, July 14. PRUSSIAN FUNDS.—BERLIN, JULY 10. . St. Schuld Sch., 3% Bills. Money per Cent rxuss.English Bonds, 1830.4 per Cent Foreign Exchanges „ „ ........ Exchange on London, £1 Sterling, 3 Months. 6 24' 6-231,4 Tlamburgh, 300 Marks, 2 Months. 14814 148% Paris, 300 fr., 2 Months •• •.•• • • • 79'2-3 79% —Universal Prussian Gazette. July 11. HAMBURGH BORSENHALLE, JULY 9. Bills. limey, Bank itt S i l s i t ai s • e e r s i e . 6 . 1 . .. Austrian 5 per Cents . .sc . r — ip — tion ..... ....... 101% -- .•• •• •• •• 1590 Anglo-Russian Loan . ..... ....... 106% Russian 5 per Cent., 'lamb. Certificate. 10114 101 e p n e t r Cent .. .. .. .. .... ............ : : 2 1 9 7 3, LI :/..,, Ditto, hope and Co., 3d and 4th series.. Ditto, in Certificate ..... ..... "-- • • • • • • • . New 4 per Cent., Hope and Co. ... ••• 90 Ditto Stieglitz .. • . „ „ ........_ '— Spanish3N per ew C 5 Anglo-Portuguese Loan, 2% per Cent.. Ditto Dutch Actual Debt, 2% per Cent...... 5 93 Ditto 3 per Cent •.•• • . • ....„. _ Polish New 4 per Cent Loan, 1844.... 7935 ..... Anglo-Danish Loan, 3 per Cent •• •• • • 86% 86 3( National Bank Shares• •• • • .... ...... . —. BELGIAN FUNDS.—BRUSSELs, July 14. Actual Debt, 2', per Cent .•••••• • • • • • . • _ Rothschild's Loan, Five per Cent ........ Loan of Thirty Millions, Four per Cent •. Ditto Three per Cent.................. Ditto. Thirty-seven Millions, ditto .. •• • . Ditt0 i ditt0,1840........ ..... .... .• . 101 Ditt0,ditt0,1842.................... Ditto, 1844 .. . . ... 100 Ditto, 1836... • • ........... ..... ...... Ditto, 1838 •• .. •..................... 74 Ditto of the City, 1832 ................ 101 Ditto, 1843 . 100% Bank ofßelgium • • —Brussels Papers. July 15. AUSTRIAN FUNDS.—VIENNA, JULY 8. b per Cent. Metalliques • . 4 per Cent. ditto • • ••••• • • • • • • • • • ........ 1001/ g B per Cent. ditto. . Loan, 1834 .••••• •• • • . • •• • • ••••• • • • • • 154% Ditto, 1839 12214 Bank Shares Esterhazy's Loan ........ . • ........... RAILWAYS. The Northern, or Ferdinand • • ••• • • • • • • 184 Gloggnitz .. • • • ••••••• • • • • • • 134 Vienna—Milan .. ............. . Leghorn• • • • •• • • • • • • ••• • • • • . Oldenburg • • • • • • • ...... •• • Pestoja . • . ...... ....................... Apenninen • • • • • • •••• • • • • ........... .Allgeraelne Zeltung, July 11, PMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, July 16. Their Lordships met to-day at Four o'clock. ROYAL ASSENT. The royal assent was given by Commission to the following public and private Bills. The Lords Commissioners, who arrived shortly after four o'clock, were the Earl of Minto, and Lords Cotten ham and Campbell. The following is the list of the Bills : Election Notices (Ireland). Dublin, Dundrum, and Enniskerry Railway. Leeds and Thirsk Railway (North-Eastern Extension, Wath to Hartlepool). Scottish Central Railway (Alloa Branch). London and Birmingham Railway (Camden and Euston Stations Enlargement). Slamannan Railway (Bathgate and Jawcraig Branch). Leeds and Thirsk Railway (St. Helen's Branch Devia tion). Leeds and Thirsk Railway (Knaresborough Branch Extension). Ambergate, Nottingham, and Boston Railway. Midland Railway (Eyewash Valley Branches). Midland Railway (Claycross to Newark). Deeside Railway. Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ardrossan Railway. Wilsontown, Morningside, and Coltness Railway (Cale dilian Junction). Wilsontown, Morningside, and Coltness Railway (Im provement and Branches). Wilsontown, Morningside, and Coltness Railway (Bath gate Branch). Midland Railway (Nottingham and Mansfield). East and West Yorkshire Junction Railway. Stirlingshire Midland Junction Railway. Great Western and Uxbridge Riklway. Wexford, Carlow, and Dublin Junction Railway. Great r einster and Munster Railway (No. I—Carlow to Kilkenny). Norfolk Railway Extension (Dereham, Wells, and Blakeney Branch). Cambridge and Oxford Railway. Reading, Guildford, and Reigate Railway. Newmarket and Chesterford Railway. London and South-Western Railway (Farnham and Alton Branch). London and South-Western Railway (Chertsey and Egham Branch). London and South-Western Railway (Hampton-court Branch). Dunblane, Dowse, and Callender Railway. Lancashire arta Yorkshire North-Eseteru Bann ay. Morayshire Railway. Monkland and Kirkintilloch Railway (Chapel Hal] Branch). Scottish Central Railway (Denny Branch). Bristol and Exeter Railway (Crewkerne Branch). London and Birmingham Railway (Aylesbury Railway Purchase). St. Helen's Canal and Railway. Morecambe Harbour and Railway. Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole Railway (Methley, Askern, and Oakenshaw Branches). Midland Great Western Railway of Ireland (Mullingar to Galway). Sheffield, Ashton-under-Lyne, and Manchester Railway (Dukinfield, Worsborough, and Glossop Branches, and Sheffield Station). Glasgow, Paisley, and Greenock Railway (Polloc and Govan Branch). Scottish Central Railway (Perth Termini and Stations). East of Fife Railway. Scottish Central Railway (Crieff Branch). Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland Junction Railway. Grand Junction Railway (Huyton and Warrington Branch). Mallow and Fermoy Railway. Limerick, Ennis, and Killaloe Junction Railway. Great Southern and Western Railway of Ireland (Cork Extension). Mountmellick Junction Railway. Clonmel and Thurles Railway. Cork, Blackrock and Passage Railway. Killarney Junction Railway. Glasgow Southern Terminal Railway. Stirling and Dunfermline Railway. Midland Railway (Burton-upon-Trent to Nuneaton Branch and Ashby Canal Purchase). London and Birmingham, Grand Junction, Manches ter and Birmingham Railway Amalgamation. Eastern Counties Railway (Epping Extension). Wishaw and Coltness Railway (Greenhill Branch). Newcastle and Berwick Railway. Waterford, Wexford, Wicklow, and Dublin Railway. Templemore and Nenagh Junction Railway. Midland Great Western Railway of Ireland (Liffy Branch and Longford Deviation). Kilmarnock and Troon Railway. Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole, and Port of Goole. Dublin and Kingstown Extension Railway. South Leith Church Bill. Chard Canal Railway Bill. Stockton Gas Bill. Worcester Gas Bill. Yeovil Markets and Fairs Bill. Manchester Markets Bill. Bath Waterworks Bill. Newport and Pillgwenlly Waterworks Bill. Bristol Waterworks Bill. Witham Navigation Bill. Ardrossan Municipal, Police, and Improvement Bill. Aston Rates Bill. Schoolmasters' Widows' Fund (Scotland) Bill. Banffshire Roads Bill. Vidgen's (or Dudderidge's) Estate. Videan's Estate. Abbess of York's Estate. Waucbope's Estate. Dundas's Estate. Cullen's Estate. De Winton's Estate. Thompson's Charity Estate. Creagh's Divorce Bill. Curtis's Divorce Bill. Messengers from the Commons brought up several Bills, which were ordered to lie on the table. CORRECTION OF CLERKS BILL. The Bishop of LONDON said that, with their Lord ships' permission, he would move that the order of the day for going into Committee on this Bill be dis charged. He did so principally in consequence of the advice of his Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack, to whom some of the provisions of the Bill were objec tionable, and who had promised that if the Bill were postponed, he would devote his first leisure time before the next session for the purpose of drawing up a Bill to remedy the present state of things, which every one must admit required great alteration. Unless the Church were armed with greater power for the punishment of such as were her ministers, and who had disgraced them selves, the Church, and the morality of the people, must suffer great injury. The order of the day for going into Committee on the Bill was accordingly discharged. The Bishop of NORWICH presented a petition in favour of this Bill. He was decidedly of the same opinion as his Right Rev. Friend as to the necessity of some such measure as this. He knew many instances in which clergymen of the Church, notwithstanding their awful profligacy, retained their livings, and it was almost im possible, under the present law, to dispossess them.— (Hear, hear.) lie himself had convicted one of this sort of disreputable clergymen, but it bad cost him 3501. To the honour of the clergy of his diocese he has received addressed from them, thanking him for his conduct in that case, and 150/. was raised and paid by them into the Norwich bank to defray as far as they could the expenses to which he had been put. This showed their anxiety to maintain the disci pline of the church as well as the great diffi culty and expense of punishing the guilty. Livings might be gambled for, and yet the bishops were disabled from putting a stop to such nefarious proceedings. He did not grudge the money that was expended in the prosecution of clerical offenders, for, in his opinion, money could not be better expended, but surely it was high time that something should be done by the Legislature to make it an easier matter than it now was to visit such offenders with just punishment. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that some Bill of the kind was necessary, but he thought it inexpedient to discuss its provisions at present. As the Bill had been withdrawn by the proposer of it, he would not take up their time in alluding to it further; before the next session of parliament he would consider the propriety of bringing forward a Bill to carry out the intentions of the Right Rev. Prelate. The subject then dropped. PROTEST AGAINST THE CORN IMPORTATION BILL. Lord RADNOR complained of the course adopted by certain Noble Lords who bad signed a protest against the Corn Bill, but who had never been in the House during the discussion of that measure. He thought the practice quite unusual and objectionable. Lord BROLTGHAM thanked the Noble Lord for re ferring to the subje ct. Th e practicesatiooifi voting ed the by prosy, h y eiri and protesting by p rox y, was sand Parliament, b u t i t h a d ne ver been usual in British Parliament. He thought, however, that the Noble Lord referred to had acted through inadvertence, and from The LOR S D T C . not being aware of the regulations which obtained in their Lordships House regarding protests. a ß ietition from the clergy of the diocese of Leicester against the Bill for h Bangor, and pray the union of the sees of St. AsaP-- and the Archdeacon and clergy for Manchester. ing their Lordships to provide a bishop The Bishop of OXFORD presented afrom the petition H A A S N A c P E H L A L ° N i t: p r ß e A se N ti T te G d O oses to unite Oxford, against the Bill which PrQP the sees of St. Asaph and Bangc'n of the archdeaconry of Lord STRADBROKE presented a number of peti tions relating to railway Bills before the House. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE laid on the table the annual returns furnished by the Registrar-General of Births, Marriages and Deaths. LORD GOLIGH , AND LORD FIARDINGE'S AN NUITY BILL. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the bring so prayed t h at the B ill be restored to its ing up th e report of th i s Bill, and in doing original form. He re retted that th e first dut y im p osed on him i n hi s presentgsituation should be the taking of the preset course, which might be construed into some thing not like due acknowledgment of the great services rendered by the illustrious individuals in question. He felt however, the highest sense of the great services rendere d, still his duty to the public an d to the other House of Parliament compelled h i m to ask them to reconsider the decision they bad given, and to place the Bill in its original form. Before asking them to take that step, it would be neces sary for him to go into the circ umstances that had led to the proposal of the grant in question, He was bound to say, looking at precedents under si milar cireumstances, and looking at the substance of the Bill, it seemed to him that it did confer on these distinguished individuals ado quate compensation. This was his decided view after taking a glance at similar circumstances in the history of the country. Ile would only call the attention of the House to the fact that a Noble Duke in that House, after the battle of Talavera and a brilliant cam paign in Spair., was made a Viscount, and received a pension of 2,0001. a year. This was considered ade quate cor.npensation for the great services rendered then, and therefore he thought the provisions of the pre wat Bill, as it originally stoood, was ample enough to meet the case et the distinguished individuals in question. If they were to make any alteration in the present Bill, they would be doing more for Lord Hardinge than had been done for those who had rendered the most re markable services, and obtained the most splendid ad vantages which had accrued to this country during the last war. According to the tenor of this Bill, it was arranged that the sum of 3,0001. a-year should be given to Lord Hardinge, and the sum of 2,000/. a-year to Lord Gough, over and above the sums which had already been voted by the East India Company, with a view to enable them to support the dignity of their peerage in that House. If this Bill were to be passed in its present shape, it would be giving more than had ever been give nin any previous instance. In order to bring this matter properly before the House, he should remind their Lordships that the annuities, to which reference had been made, had been granted by the East India Company, and were in fact a part of the government of the Com pany. Thus then, in fact, there was the guarantee of the State. Now it was well known that as the East India Company could not guarantee anything without the authority of the Sovereign, the Noble Lords who were about to enter upon the enjoyment of those annuities would have the benefit of the Sovereign's authority; and the reply, therefore, to those who took a stand upon this Bill was, that there was only a temporary interest in the • possession of those by whom the annui ties were granted, but he thought that what he had just stated was an assurance that that ground was invalid. In the case of Lord Colborne, for whose eminent services in Canada a pension had been granted by the North %Vest Company, the same course had been observed. The object of granting that annuity was to enable him to maintain the dignity of his 'Peerage in that House, and no doubt had ever been started of the validity or the permanence of the grant. He (the Marquis of Lansdowne) had a long list before him of distinguished individuals upon whom similar grants for similar ser vices had been conferred. The first he had upon that list was the Marquis of Cornwallis, whom he had known in early life, and of whom he never could speak but with the utmost respect. Then there was the late Lord Wellesley, than whom no man had rendered more eminent services to his country in India. These, and all the rest, were rewarded just in the same manner ; so that there was little doubt of the continuance of the annuity, especially when it was recollected that if the interest of the East India Company was a contingent interest, the Crown held the reversion. Again, he must remind their Lordships that if this Bill were to be car ried in its present state, the amount conferred would surpass all the lavish expenditure of the last war, when the currency was depreciated, and, consequently, the total sums were of less value. And, further than this, he must also beg to remind them that if they refused to accede to this proposition, they would be entering into a contest with the other House of Parliament, which has, at all times, assumed the right of managing the public money. It would be expressing an opinion contrary to that House ; and, in fact, would be sending down an amended money Bill to that House, and thereby be likely to create an increased jealousy in that House, which was an evil at all times to be deprecated. There was no no doubt but that the representatives of the people were the proper persons to impose the taxes which. the people had to pay, and to direct the way in which they ought to be levied. On this very day he had received a letter from a distinguised lady regarding a p-rson who was the subject of this conver sation, and who was alike distinguished by her own merits and for her ancient descent. This was Lady Emily Hardinge, now Viscountess Hardinge. This lady stated that she and her family—and she was quite sure that their feelings were quite in consonance with those of Lord Hardinge himself—she stated that they were perfectly satisfied wi:h the amount of the allow ance and the way in which it was conferred. She was the grand-daughter of the first Lord Camden, than whom a more excellent lawyer and upright individual never existed. She was the niece also of the second Lord Camden, who renounced the per centage on the Exchequer, which he was granted in consideration of his public services. He (the Marquis of Lansdowne) hoped, therefore, their Lorciships would rescind the vote which had been come to on this question on a former occasion, and vote for the measure brought in by the late Government, The Duke of RICHMOND opposed the motion. His opinion on the subject was unchanged. The Noble Marquis stated that he had received a letter from Lady Hardinge, in which she expressed a desire that the sub ject would not cause any division in their Lordships' House. He (the Duke of Richmond) could not, how ever, look upon it as a private question. It was on public grounds he opposed it. There were few prizes in the -lot of a soldier's life, and the ability, energy, and courage displayed by their armies entitled then to the highest rewards the country could bestow. He would ask, did the grant of foreign lands to the Noble Duke, in consideration of his great services, weigh for a mo ment when the Parliament of this country rewarded his glorious achievements ? No, the country considered that it was dee,.ily his debtor, notwithstanding all the rewards he received from foreign powers. He (the Duke of Richmond) was surprised at the conduct of his Noble Friend (the Marquis of Lansdowne) in,taking the course he at present adopted, for three weeks ago when the Bill was read a second time he did not vote at all, but went below the woolsack. The Noble Marquis—also the Postmaster- General—would, he hoped, adopt the same course he did then, and vote against the measure —(Laughter)—and he trusted the Noble Lord (the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster) would not go below the woolsack, but express his opinion unre servedly on the Bill. lie saw no reason to alter the opinion he formerly expressed, and he would firmly resist the motion of the Noble Marquis. The Earl of RIPON defended the course adopted by the late Government in regard to the present measure. In questions of this kind it was difficult to fix the precise amount to be affixed for such services as those which had been rendered; still he thought enough had been named in the Bill. In the case of Lord Nelson, for the brilliant services he had rendered, the utmost sum granted was HU a-year. In other cases the same principles of economy had been observed. It was a painful circum stance to interfere with a feeling of generosity, but he thought it was the duty of the Government to see that no undue application of the public money was made. With regard to the case of Lord Hardinge, ho was in India the representative of the East India Company, and had advantages and emo luments such as did not fall within the reach of those who held office under the Crown. The company had, on many occasions, conferred great advantages on those who held office under them. Lord Clancarty, Lord Cornwallis, and other Governors-General of India had received pensions and large grants of money. Lord Hastings received no less a sum than 60,000/., and his son had also been treated with great liberality. Lord Wellesley had also been treated in a similar spirit. The grant proposed by the company in the present instance was said to he offered independent of the execu tive and the Legislature, and that that grant should not be allowed to regulate the one proposed by Parliament. But this was not the fact. The Government was virtually a party to the act of the company, as the latter held its charter under the Parlia ment of the country, and conducted its operations in harmony with it. If they gave reins to their generosity they would involve themselves in continual difficulties. They ought to deal as liberally as the circumstances would warrant, but nothing more; and he was per suaded, that if a grant of 8,0001. a year was allowed to Lord Gough, it would be the means of serious incon venience in future, when similar cases were to be con sidered. From all precedents, and judging from the circumstances of the case, the late Government con sidered they could not go further than the provisions contained in the Bill as it originally stood. He did not wish to cast the least reflection on the distinguished in dividuals in question, as he felt it a high honour to have been connected in office with the Government under which such great men had achieved their brilliant vic tories; still he was bound to act in the way he now proposed. iLord BROUGHAM said he had not spoken on the previous occasion, when the Bill was discussed, but since then he had carefully considered the question, and he must on the present occasion vote against the amend ment which had been proposed. As he understood the question, the real matter was the propriety of granting sufficient sums to the distinguished individuals in ques tion, in order to enable them to maintain with dignity the rank of peerage which had been conferred on them. Much as had been said on the other side, this was the real point they should keep in view, and the wording of the preamble of the Bill showed that such was the original intention of its introduction. He argued, that the consequence of this doctrine would be, that where a peerage was conferred on a distin guished military officer, that House would make inquiry into his private fortune. He did not see what the Go vernment had to do with the East India Company and their grants ; for although he admitted that their grants could not pass without the sanction of Parlia ment, still that did not make their money the money of the Government, or of the public ; the money if not bestowed in that way would remain in the treasury of the Corporation, and never would pass into the coffers of the Exchequer. Ile said it was difficult to limit the reward for military services. Ye tit might be asked, whe ther 5,0001. was not enough for Lord Hardinge ? but he answered, that he had before this, seen 2,0001. and red ribbons given to men for services which, in after years, if their fame ever should pass into after years, would make men raise their hands in wonder, that so illiberal a reward bad been bestowed on the brilliant actions of Sir Henry Hardin,;e. As for the constitu tional question, he agreed with the Noble Lord (Lans downe) that it would be better far that the privileges of the people's representatives should be left unquestioned by them, and uninterfered with. But he contended, for the privileges of their Lt rdships' House, that their Lordships had a right to exercise their judgment on the Bills sent up from the House of Commons, and were not to swallow either the whole Bill untouched, or to reject it altogether. The letter from the Noble Lady, which had been introduced by the Noble Earl, affecting and powerful as it was, had just an opposite effect on his mir.d, from that which it seemed to have produced on the Noble Earl's. Perhaps the letter might have been ex pected from the grand-daughter of Lord Camden, and the daughter of the late Marquis, but he contended that from a sense of justice to Lord Hardinge, §tinaulated by the generous and disinterested conduct of the Noble Lady whose letter had been alluded to, their Lordships ought to deal liberally in this case, The Duke of WELLINGTON said he had been in the Government when this Bill w as i ntroduced into the House, and, therefore, he begged to submit a few ob servations to their Lordships. He be Red Vl* Lord- • ships to recollect that it was a money Bill sent up from the Commons, proposing a grant made under a standing order of that House, and founded upon a message from the Crown. He begged his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord Brougham) to remark the exactness of the words of the message, which very words had been engrossed in the preamble of the Bill. Her Majesty stated that she desired to make provision for Lord Hardinge, in support of the dignity which had been conferred on him, and in consideration of his great services. He said the House of Commons had passed this Bill at the suggestion of the Crown. Now this House had the same Bill be fore it. It was an understanding between the two Houses that their Lordships' House should not alter a money Bill, yet this House proceeded to do so ; but he defied the Noble and Learned Lord to produce one instance of thus increasing a grant after it had come from the other House. The consequence would be that the Bill would be lost. He acknowledged the high merit of the Noble Lord's services in the field, and her Majesty had conferred the dignity of the peerage upon him, a reward which had been received with approba tion by the country. He said the Noble and Learned Lord asked for instances, and he could give him one in which the poverty of a Noble Lord was made the sole basis of provision. He would not give the name. Another case he recollected, in which it was supposed that the Peer had sufficient to support his dignity, but it was found afterwards that he had not, and provision was made for him on that accoant. He would not men tion the name. He begged their Lordships to consider what would be the effect of leaving this particular point to: caprice or to chance what effect it would have on the mind of military men who might have conferred on them this expensive honour. It appeared that the sum of 5,0001. a-year, and 2,0001. a-year were to be granted to Lord Hardinge and Lord Gough, respectively, by the East India Company for the purpose of maintaining the dignity of their positions in that House. He quite agreed with his Noble Friend the late President of the Board of Control, that these grants were to be made out of the funds of the East India Company, with the consent of her Majesty, and it was necessary for her Majesty to give her consent be fore any such grant could become valid. It was, there fore, evident that it was only as servants of the Crown that Ministers could take any notice of. the making of the grant, but it was equally evident that as such tier vents they could not do otherwise than take notice of it. He had advised her Majesty to give her consent, and such being the case, they had agreed to bring in an Act of Parliament for that purpose, and he would remind their Lordships that in the event of the Bill being altered in that House, there was a possibility that the annuities might be lost altogether ; and he intreated, therefore, their. Lordships, for the sake of the army, for the sake of the officers, and for the sake of their families --for it shciuld be remembered that the position of those families depended upon their vote that night— to confirm the decision at which the other House had arrived. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE felt that he had to justify himself for the vote which he was about to give, for he bad, he must confess, changed his principles. He had certainly voted in opposition to the annuity the other night, but he had done so without sufficient consi derotion, and without once reading the Bill which con tained the clause, which it was now desirable to erase, and which his Noble Friend (Lord Monteagle) had so strongly inveighed against. It now appeared evident that this grant must have the consent of the Crown; and there was the further consideration that arose with re Bard to the position of the Government, and the circum stance still more important as regarded this debate ; that these grants were not made so much as rewards for the services which had been rendered as to enable the Noble persons on whom they were conferred to support the dignity of the Peerages which had been bestowed upon them. It should be observed that the grant ta Lord Hardinge was limited to his own life and that of his two succeeding heirs male, while that of Lord Gough was limited to his own life alone. The Noble and Gallant Duke on the cross-benches had rightly reminded them that as it was the duty and the privilege of the House of Commons to make grants of public money, if this Bill were altered at all the annuities might be altogether lost to the noble persons for whom they were intended, and should, therefore, vote with his Noble Friend. The Earl of GALLOWAY was surprised at the vi tuperation of a Noble Lord connected with Ireland, not now in his place, the other night, although he had abstained from moving the amendment. Like the Noble Marquis, he had come down the other day ignorant of the clause which regulated these annuities, and was anxious to justify himself from the charge of inconsis tency. But seeing that not only the Noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington), who had spoken from the cross benches, but that other members of the Government, of which he was a member, and also several members of the present Government were induced to alter their mode of proceeding, he felt that, though just contrary to the vote which he had previously given, he should vote with the Noble Marquis (the Marquis of Lans downe) on the present occasion. The Earl of WICKLOW quite agreed with the Noble Marquis, the Postmaster-General, (the Marquis of Clanricarde), that this vote ought to be sustained. He could not forget that the Noble Lord, from whom the proposition had originally emanated, had refrained from putting the amendment himself, but had expressed a de sire that some other Noble Lord of greater weight in the House would put it to the House. Then up jumps the Noble Duke on the cross-benches (the Duke of Rich mond), and put the vote to the House, and thus secures the Noble Baron's vote. Truly he believed that no one was more surprised at the effect of his own eloquence, than was the Noble Baron himself ; nor any one, he believed now, that more regretted it. Seeing, then, the change of parties in the country, and the change in the Ministry, and the possibility which existed, that in the event of their not acceding to the proposition of the Noble Marquis (Lansdowne), that the annuities to the two noble persons for whom they were intended might be endangered, he should certainly go in opposition to the vote which he had given the other evening. He thought it would be imprudent and impolitic to adhere to the decision which bad been taken on the former oc casion, and he called on them to support the Bill in its original form. After a few words of explanation from the Marquis o LANSDOWNE, The Duke of RICHMOND said he must deny the imputation that he had ever said anything reflecting on the character of Lord Hardinge. What he stated was, that Government should take care to prevent a divided command in India in future, and to take care that the Governor-General should not be second in command. He must say in taking the course he did on the present Bill, be was not in the least degree actuated by party or political considerations.—(Hear, hear.) The Earl of GALLOWAY explained, that he had no intention of attributing any such motives to the Noble Duke (the Duke of Richmond). The gallery was then cleared for a division, when there appeared— . For the amendment (restoring the Bill) .... 47 Against it —, lB Majority for the Government 29 The report was the❑ brought up and received. Several Bills were advanced a stage, and the House adjourned. HOUSE OF COII,IMONS, July 16. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. NEW MEMBERS. Mr. SHELL (Master of the Mint) took the oaths and his seat as Member for the borough of Dungarvan. Lord A. PAGET also took the oaths and his seat as Member for the city of Lichfield. MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.—ROYAL ASSENT. Sir Augustus Clifford, the Usher of the Black Rod, appeared at the bar, to summon the Speaker and the House to hear the royal assent given to several public and private Bills, (for which see Lords' report). The SPEAKER returned after the absence of half an hour, and informed the House of the Bills to which the royal assent had been given. A messenger from the Court of Chancery brought up several returns. MANCHESTER AND SOUTHAMPTON RAILWAY. On the motion of Lord E. BRUCE the Manchester and Southampton Railway Bill was read a third time and passed ; as were also the following Bills :—Billings gate Market, Cambridge Improvement, and Hill's Estate Bill. DERBYSHIRE, STAFFORDSHIRE, AND WOR CESTERSHIRE JUNCTION RAILWAY.: The report upon the Derbyshire, Staffordshire, and Worcestershire Junction Railway Bill was considered and agreed to. EDINBURGH AND GLASGOW UNION CANAL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. SLIGO SHIP CANAL BILL, This Bill was read a third time and passed. DUBLIN WIDE STREETS BILL. Sir J. Y. BULLER brought up the report on the Dublin Wide Streets Bill. AYRSHIRE AND BRIDGE OF WEIR RAILWAY. On the motion of Mr. DUNCAN, the Lords' Amend ments to this Bill were considered and agreed to. LORDS' AMENDMENT. The Lords' Amendments to the following Bills were considered and agreed to : Ashburton, Newton, and South Devon Railway Bill. Birmingham, Lichfield, and Manchester Railway Bill. Buckinghamshire Railway Bill. Gloucester and Dean Forest Railway Bill. Great Western and Wycombe Railway Bill. London and Croydon Railway (Thames Junction Branch) Bill. Newcastle and Darlington Junction Railway (Durham and Sunderland Railway and Wearmouth Dock Pur chase and Branches) Bill. South Wales Railway Bill (No. 2). THE ANNEXATION OF F SIN DE, HUME, seeing th e Right SI Baronet p E R on , t h e sident of the Board of Control in his place, ask him a question with respect to Sinde. 'reed to - 11, to know if Sinde had b een annexed to th- e wished as was declared by Lord Ellenb'jr 0 Bri'f is h emp i re, ougn to b' e t h e i ntent i on of Goverment, in the mina or wheth er annexed ; manner in w'nich i;eylon was tion of the t ;as to be co ns id ere d as a por no, he wishepd osses` ''sons of the E as t I n di a Company?lf toascertain what course was to be taken by the Government, as the government of that province was altogether different from any other place in the East si India Comp any ' s possessions, as it was in neither pre dency, nor had it a civil government, but it was governed by a single officer. Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE said, that in answer to the question of the Hon. Member for Montrose, •he begged. leave to tell him that the province of Sinde was a pro vince kept by the East India Company in trnst for the Crown. The Hos. Gentleman would recollect on perusal of the panrsrs which had been viblished by Lord Ellen -1 Trough with respect to Sinde, that Sinde was annexed in the usual manner by notification, and th,e Management of it had been entrusted by Governrne nt to Sir C. Napier, who reported his proceedings to the Rome Department. .When his report was received% it was . determined that he sho u ld cont i nue t o igoVerri the province of Sinde in the manner which he had ex" plained to them, and to that decision no dissen t or disapprobation had been given by Lord Ellenborough On account of that circumstance, the province continued to be administered to by Sir C. Napier in a mane which was, as the Hon. Member had said, totally dif ferent from the manner in which the other provinces of India were governed. He believed that in the month of July, 1844, the Court of Directors of the east India Company addressed a communication to the Governor-G enera l o f I n di a , an d a d v i se d bol a to propose for their consideration a plan for the civil and military administration of the pro vince of Sinde, in conformity with the usual prac tice in such cases. In consequence of the important matters which had to come under their considera tion with respect to the affairs of the Punjaub, and also several other weighty matters, the Governor - General had not seat any plan, as he had been advised by the Court of Directors. In December of the same year the Secret Committee made a similar communica- Lion to the Governor-General with respect to the expe diency of governing Sinde like other provinces ; but the Governor-General, up to th e mon th o f J une in this present year, had not returned any answer, nor sent to any place. He could inform his Honourable Friend, that on th e 24 t h o f J une ( t h at was J une last), t.i.milar orders had been sent out to to the Governor' General with regard to the annexation and governmen t of Sinde. Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN wished to ask the lion. Member for Montrose, whether, with regard to the discussion on the Charitable Trusts Bill, which carOG on yesterday, he (Mr. Hume) had any objection t° place on the votes of the House the clause as amended? Mr. HUME said he would do it on Wednesday nest" MINISTERIAL POLICY. Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I stated that I would to.: day give notice to the House the general course et policy which it is the intention of her Majesty's Govern' ment to pursue with respect to those Bills before the House, and I will do so in moving the consideratio n of the order of the day. On Monday I will state to th e House the policy which it is the intention of the 0 0 " vernment to pursue with respect to the sugar duties. I will then unfold the plan we Coll' sider ought to be adopted, after which I propose t adjourn the further consideration of the question ulltu to-morrow week (Friday). It is now late in the session to lose time, and I will make as little delay as possible ; at the same time I propose a short Bill for the contiee" ante of the sugar duties for one month, or until Parlia ment shall otherwise approve.—(Hear.) With regard to the Poor-law Removal Bill, I have: already stated MI general views respecting it to the House, and what is further proposed to be done will be stated by the Sore' tary for . the Home Department. The next Bill before the House is the Drainage Bill. Some Members of the Government will undertake the Care of that with the hope of carrying it through. The next ar ° the Bills brought in by the late Chief Secretary f or Ireland—one of the most important of these the Ejectment Bill, it is our intention to adopt w ig some slight alterations, preserving especially that ciao* which prevents the seizure of growing crops. Wa also propo se t o p rocee d w i t h t h e Lease 1 0 ' i 1 but with respect to the Tenants' Compensat ion Bill, we find the machinery so exceedingly complicateci that we will postpone it for further consideration. Tbe r : are some oth er Bill s a ff ect i ng Ireland, regarding -whit the Chief Secreta r y f or I re l an d (M r. Labouchere) w ig- able to answer whatever questions will be put to There are some Bills which are now in the House Lords ; one of them is called the Small Debts B ill ' which is a Bill similar to the one which has been troduced by the former Go vernmen t, an d w hi c h 11° : been repeatedly before Parliament. The pres e t Government entirely approve of the general r port that Bill, and although it is a Bill of great leeg i .o containing many provision s , th e y d o h ope t h at they ° I/ t be enabled to obtain the sanction of Parlialeena to it during the present session, as it is is measure of very great importance. There 6 another Bill, which likewise is at present in the o° ° _, of Lords, which the Governme n t d o no t propose to 0, % into their own hands unless necessary, but which 1 t rt h i i s , 9 will obtain the assent of Parliament—it is called Religious Opinions Bill. That Bill was introduced bl t , member of the late Gove rnmen t, i n th e name of o Government, and, therefore, is a Government Dil l ' Ae trust that the author of that Bill will continue to W r , charge of it; but if he should not do that, some 10 .40 ; ber of the present Government will then propose i„ ootano: e bw, waste : I s t. e o flljvagnir With has introducedt importance, respect -Bill in its present shape. There are many other ft, which ment posed t o h in l w lr il e l la n n o ci t give any t d17 1,:0(7,: whicheother measures Piv V l 7 .l * . ' notice. I will only say that, looking at the iroPr ° ' I as a sue.) ' the greatest importance, we shall endeavc,to introduce a preparatory measure ; and if it of cessary to ask the aid of Parliament for ! t oo , measure of that kind, we shall d this 1 et' At all events we shall endeavour to take ps v e " n e of this time and the next session for the i s u t t e .r o ducti o- 41 some measure on the subject. These are the gens'ig statements I have to make, and I beg to move that orders of the day be now read. POOR REMOVAL BILL 11. On the order of the day for proc ee di ng w ith this °I being read, dib V Mr. E. DENISON, who was f o r some ti me inel l A fj ot from the noise which prevail e d a ft er th e N o bl e Lor" 0 01 down, was understood to say th a t t h e Poor Ite tn i 0 Bill would cause great injury and great inconvenien olt many parts of the country. He begged leave t, t ,- os ie the Right Hon. Gentlem an th e Secretary for the `-',, os Department whether i rremovability or sett lemee,b, pot contemplated by th e Bill . He was sure it weal" fer meet with the approbation of the Hon. Mew:herd, Finsbury to grant irremovability without se , ttle p d 10 The word i rremova bi lity was a word not to be, fog pot any dicti onary, and it related to a condition of lilBooo to be fou n d i n any law-book. Before that -word co have penetrat e d t h e understandings of half tine C 0 munity it might have to be swept totally away• fp id (Mr. E. Deniso n ) th oug h t i t r i ght to tenth e Noble P il ir at the head of the Government that there wrai one reel lo sl able deficiency and one great defect in his r4dministrs P o st there was one great thing wanting, and that was 8 '; Ilii i , of adequate r e p resentat i on of the landed interest 11 „es country. He said the great towns were amPLY m or e powerfully repr esente d. The law was represented' Pit,io than it deserved —(Laughter)—but he looked iit El io fur any powerful parties to represent the intereslA Po 0 : land. In the Government were the representati v e; London, Manchester, Halifax, Nottingham, Sli % ol eo Devonport, and Edinburgh ; and when he ?jive, Edinburgh, he would not do justice to his own !te e t citl if he did not mention the Hon. Member for tit. s ole pti (Mr. Macaulay), not less celebrated for Lis great t D $ t ° than for his upright and noble conduct —an ornery e v re an Administration. But he looked in vain for ta;, (l o ' f ioef presentatives of the land. There was Lord Lan s° t her e an owner of land in England, and also in Ireland ; w hat was Lord Grey and Lord M or p e th—(H ear, h ea 1), 0 i) Lord Morpeth had his character as a represent! t! ci jek land in the m anu f ac t ur i ng i n t erests of the West lltrep/ and in the m em b ers hip o f t h e League.—(Lau gu, 0 1 He said, Lord Grey, in pressing on the abolition 1 0 0 01 onlytwenty regarded ( asH e a a r , an d laughter sanguine pro il e ; f is i corn-laws, had, said that l an d rents would rise f' 0" fi he fte c e o n u t l d e (Laughter.) Whe n th at h ad occurred he might il into credit; but he (Mr. Denison) did not think, th.V the present moment especially, he represented ;Lee their interests or their views. As for the, f" t ies ber for Halifax (Mr. C. Wood), he was no represent ro) of the land by his own address, and he (Mr. Del Ater' found him applauded in the newspapers as the rep ,:S l a p tative of the manuf ac t ur i ng i n t erests o f t h e West I .3 1 ' de' and the repealer of the tax on wool. If this WI is 6 .. t he' fect in any Ad m i n i s t ra ti on , it was so part i cular ] .y 10„atl present moment, when the l an d e d i n t et:e st : 0 0! received a rude shock from the hands of t h ite from whom it had least reason to ex , deet 00 The landowners required to be co nc iliated toy iards . io measure which had lately passed. If at, an' y timo th y was a defect in a Ministry that it did n:ot rer , re sentv landed interest of the country, it Ivy ~ partio larly so at this time. No per s o n saY o 0 he ; AO he was one who wished fo r r.nything ii],„, e xclu'i.i, privileges, for on a former oP -casion, when exclusive p vileges were sought to be afforded to the land, be thrown thrown his weight i nto the opposite scale ., anc) bad "" t he denounced as faithless among the faithfp:i. At pa present moment the landed interr f bad 01 quarter to wtich to look for • • Jaw ~„0 receiving a "Jae attentl - t ieg their interests , While questions se,riously aff ee ' o r;it them - were about to be brought—forward questions 111 - o f which they would feel deeply ; there was the L -01 ,,,'10 Settleme nt Bill , the Highway Rates Bill, tl - , 0 Turr i f o l oel Trusts, and other Bills affecting the e tie — st i on of i ' t st taxation. He begged leave to tell his ' N - oble Frien u w es: if his Administration was to last, it • enist be by „; V sures that it would last, and tl j , A the defect: :, - 614: Ministry to which ho had al,'- ,I e-.e 1. ..!, he was sorry, i' ; "„ e I' was one of such a nal- - re RA t e prevent him gi c i — is 9 . or; that degree of r ..;onfiXet&e IV. hich he would °Ole' have been 17^ • . IV, to afford. , eil l : P A Colo- Vt A r 10% 1 OuD thought that the lion. Membe r be . lam` - t ..Itae Lord addeesiva. the House should have allowed the . 0 0 1 Lord to state the course, which he intended to Pl' st ri , before he bad attempted to find fault with his Min', He thought that his Him. Friend was somewhat the taken in the view he had t a k en o f t h e di v i s ion 0f e at' Poor-law Removal Pa. The question of settl*,bt w as one which w as not proposed by the I; Hon. Baronet at th e h ea d o f the late • Adm i n istre when he first announi!ed the measure. It was aIV merely to prev en t the removal of peepers. poor clause affecting the settlement of the . , 1 00 ( was introduced a r iterwards by the Honourable to e for Maldon (Mr. E. Denison) himself. r t i r , Mr. T. DUNCQMBE sa id that he took the it 'be ra few ev en i ngs ago to put a question to the Noble Dotollg to the pri nc ipl es 'upon w hi ch the Government was 0e conducted. Thar,:question had excited irritation I , the „ Noble Lord's inTird, but it was a question wbie her, country would_ require to have answered. Le.,t 01 ,0% same side look at the s t ate o f t h e H ouse at present, - 0 0 th e knew where to s it.—(L aug ht er .) Sitt',ng 'lOll with the Noble Lord were th o se s'/P f t.O7 L hitherto been hi s bit terest enem i es . Tb e reaso n °a Mr, was, as he underst oo d, th a t th ey had ben infore tb none but the extremes would be dissatisfied. li o tet ° o i required explanation. E ver y P r i me Minister in., t o cl into office had stated the principles on which !lel) THE ~SITN, LONDON', .FRIDAY gVENING,____JULY 17, lA4&'