The Sun. — London, England, 1846-06-11 00:00:00

TULE SUN, LOND - ON, THETIISDAY EVENING, JUNE - 11, lBl6 IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 10. THE DANISH CLAIMS. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (in con tinuation from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday) said—ln fact, captures of cargoes at sea during war have always been considered to be rightful captures. That has been the uniform practice and rule with all nations at war, and I have no doubt that it ever will be the practice in future. And if you permit a sense and feeling of justice for these in dividuals to be imported into this discussion, bear in mind that by granting their claims you impose a heavy tax and great burden upon every other class of the community, and yon should also make them compensation for what they have suffered during the war by contributing to its expenses. I say, therefore, that you will act most unjustly in granting these claims, for you will thereby lay a tax upon the people of this country.— ( Hear, hear.) If you think fit to remunerate one class, you should also remunerate another, but you tell me that the war itself was an unjust one, and that, therefore, those claims should be paid. Whether the war was just or not, I say the principle will equally apply. I would assume as a fact that it is perfectly just that these parties should be compensated for the loss of their property, and that the sum of 250,0001. should be handed over to them ; but whilst these merchants havelost their property, the whole of the people of this country have been subjected to heavy burdens for the purpose of carrying it on. They have borne those burdens, cheerfully, they have paid the taxes for the purpose of carrying on the w ar, and in some twenty d years afterwards you discover that several persons law orgtions in trade during the war have, according to the and the ordinary practice of war, lost their property, agree to a vote for the purpose of compelling ofthat war to pay who have }agree the burden thoseanpaeoypelue another tax of 250,0001. I think in a cla h ira er o d f in th ar i y s sort you are acting not only in contradictio e n d t e o in t g of nations during war, but you a e n injustice to thi -1 future demanded, wars country; and not only the extent riaeers:tjahtaealnit during roi m ‘nv g a de for the cap you are establishing the prin t a to m hear.) Sir, this case has with this country compensation tures that may be made.—(ti argued that it is with great diffi cu lt y that I can bring myreally been so often s e lf to enter into any further di scuss i on upon it. I think the ground upon which it has been stated by the Hon. Gentleman who has brought forward the subject is• , that there was no w ar bet ween Denmark and England.lf th er e was no war between this country and D enmark without a declaration of war on the part of England, then England has never been at war with any other nation. A declaration of war was made on the part of Denmark on the 16th August, 1807. That declaration was made by the King of Denmark, who said, " W e d o h ere b y make known, that on the 13th of this month hostile operations commenced between Denmark and England; and we therefore call upon our faithful subjects to take up arms in the first instance against the enemy, and to repel all hostile attacks." This Danish declaration was made on the 16th day of August, 1807; and, sir, it is perfectly true that a declaration of war was not made on the part of England, for it is not the policy of this country to make declarations of war. This country has been in the constant habit of suspending for a long time all hostile operations against other nations, and the war does not commence until all hope of conciliation is abandoned. Wars have, by these means been often prevented, and, Sir, I should be unwilling that any course should be taken by this country that should operate against that prac tice. In the year 1812, when America declared war against Great Britain, what was the course pursued in this country ? Great Britain, as the House may remember, made no declaration of war with America. Two or three months elapsed while captures were made by us on American property, as she had declared war, but we not having declared war, remained so until the September following. It is no argument in the case to say that we were not at war, and that we could not justify the capture of any property until the 2d of November following, the date of our declaration. Let us see how this case has been construed by competent authorities. I have looked back on many de tails on this subject which have never before been under my consideration, and I will now state what was the view taken by the Government at that time with regard to the position of Denmark and this country, in reference to this war. At the period of which lam now speaking (August, 1807), certain privateers cap tured a number of Danish ships in different parts of the high seas, near the shores of Great Britain, - on or about the 16th of August, 1807. On the 29th of August in that year, the Treasury had before it under its consideration the cases of the captures made by these Bri tish privateers. They had speculated on the chances of war either with Spain or with Denmark, and had fitted out yes sels, thinking that in either case they should make some thing by it. The Treasury came to the conclusion that their speculation on the chances of war was so bad a prac tice that they would give no captor of a ship under these speculative circumstances any remuneration. The captors of these vessels came to the Treasury, in order that they might have the ships given over to them, and also the property contained in them, What was the decision of the Treasury ? They were referred to the law officers, stating that the commencement of the Danish hos tilities had been pressed on by the circumstance of these speculative attacks, and that there would be enough to do to remove the imputation of rash pro ceedings. The declaration of hostilities by Denmark has been ascertained to have been on the 16th of August. 1807, and the mission of Mr. Jackson was concluded on the 13th, and then an order was issued with reference to all hi- Majesty's ships on the coast of Denmark. All these were public events, and it was more or less known to all individual, what would be the probable result. The Treasury salt: that it was expedient to consider the 16th of August the date of the Danish declaration of hostilities; and, in referent. to the decision they had already given, they acted agains' their own interest to say that there had been no of war —bu acted their own declaration interest, and in conformity the with y against the justic e of the case. They revoked the order with regard to the speculative captures in favour of the individuals who made them ; they awarded to these private ships rewards in proportim to the various sums taken. In short, everything aflirmen the declaration of war upon the 16th. I see no doubt as n the existence of that war; it was acted on as a war by all o: our authorities, although no declaration of war was eve issued by Great Britain until the 2d of November following. Another argument of great weight is that the Dane made their captures because we made crptures to a keg: amount on the Danish property. The banes succeeded it taking from you a large amount, and you took a lar g e amount from them, w hi c h was paid to the public account. I do not admit that fact—it is no greater ground for remuner ating these parties titan any other favourable circurnetanc they can allege. It is unfortunate that fr :m the mixed mole in which the accounts of the registry in the Court of Ad miralty were kept it is not possible to devise what is the amount w hick was paid on account of the Danish prize-money Two of these accounts are, however, quite clear. Tlit Danish claims realised a property of a million sterling, and out of that sum Parliament has voted to parties suffering from the Confiscation of book debts no less a sum thee. 278,000/., and the proportion of the captors' share in respect of the remainder is very considerable. We gave to-the cap tors in the navy concerned in the capture 348,0004 making, a sum of 626,0001. out of the gross sum of a million. No ac count of what was specifically paid to individual captors of private vessela can be obtained, but it appears to have been considerable. The accounts laid on the table of the House say that it varied • from one-half and two-fifths to four-fifths, according to the amount taken; so that if we take from the total amount paid into the registry, and apply that to the total amount paid in compensation to parties who hell suffered, and other expenses, the balance would possibly give an idea of what the average proportions paid to private individuals were. We are now called upon to make a serious inroad en the public revenue, and are called on also to impose on the country a tax of 250,0004 to repay those people who sus tained losses of property in the war. The Honourable Member, as I understand, says that he has abandoned the question of the justice or injustice of the war. I . am very glad to hear him say so; we have had enough of that argument, and on t h at point I shall not address the House. j bat I shall content myself with proving to the House that these captures made during this war stand on no different footing from those captures made during any other war. you are prepared to remunerate those merchants who have ost their p roperty during the pwear,ntyouholt l after wards extend the principle t o rse fered in property durino; any other' w w ar. Thes e a e suf the peculiar c i rcumstances which entitle me to your conn.- sideration. On ths''se grounds I think it my (hit) to oppose this grano.. It is important that the payment of s vast amount, the great expen se a l so , should not be en tailed on the country. The principle is not a safe one, and it is for: thf House of Commons to consider well before they alloaa such a measure to pass. Mr. HAWES--Sir, the Right Hon. Gentleman who has just sat down has made certainly a singular assertion. He says that from time to time the advocates of the Danish claim have forced a few arguments in their favour, and have then ventured to refer them to this House. It is the natural course Of debate, that as you fi n d an argument a-aced against you to examine those arguments you have already urged before, and if you can find matter to bvercome the arguments against you, so to do. If I were compelled to communicate beforehand all that I am going to urge to the Chancellor of the Exchequer (and I would do • so with great pleasure), he would natur a lly- seek in any place for argument to refute it. The Right Hon. Gentleman has exerted himself to show that there was a declaration of war, and a declaration of war on the part of Denmark ; he has adhere ll points to the faith held when the declaration of war tookaplace, and with that faith he has endeavoured to decide that question her Majesty'e Soli • * I have here before me the opinion of milted to him, and which on jllis case, which was sub staznaieh. I will give to the. House, as It is very short. n e: k, On thiiis opinion that the declaratio n on the part of Den he 16th of August, was not a decla ration of war ; the langua will take the liberty of readilasaTelse and explicit, and I this is his opinion •—" I am of opinion tha tVe - rY ''h°lll Y; • the instrument of the 16th of August, to which reference has been made, is c i a ration of war, and that it merely orders an embanrogtoaonde-Ze tish ships, and not the con fi scapm of them.- (I beg the House to mark that.) " There is a distinction between an embargo and a confiscation. It is stated by the law of Eng land and of nations, that an embargo directs only the de tention of the property from the owner, and a confiscation takes away the property altog ether. There is nothing in the instrument in question which authorises the taking away Permanently any British property." It would be_presump- Lamle in me, against the experience of the Right Hon. Gen tleman, and against the opinions of the law - officers of the Crown, to ente r u p on a l e gal argu ment the • but, in order to e n titl e myself to the cen.sideration o f _ House, I can quote the o pi n io n of her Majesty's Solicitor-Gene ra l, in answer to the Right Hon. Gentleman. The case must not, however, be allowed to rest there. The Right Hon. Gentleman has said that I have never raised the question of the justice or the injustice of the war. I have never argued that question in the discussion of the Danish claims. The Right Hon. Gentleman has assumed the complete justice of the war, and on that he has proceeded to argue that, supposing the war to be just, and the Danes to have declared the war, that all that was taken was the prize of the captors. Against the Right Hon. Gentleman I am sorry to oppose this argu ment. The Right Hon. Gentleman has said that it Was a great war on the part of England, and that Denmark declared war. If that be so, every state paper published at the time of the war is in direct contradiction to the Hon. Gentleman's statement. We went to the Court of Denmark and said that we wanted, as friends, to continue the nego • tiations which were pending before we went there. We have seen the declaration that passed between the two nations, and we have seen the convention, on the part of Denmark, was kept. Nov, then, can we say that it was a just war on our part? We went there for the purpose of effecting a particular object by means of negotiation, but had not declared war at the time—so it is asserted and recorded in all the state papers of the time—that we were not at war, that we went as friends, and desired to continue so. The Danish Minister never left this country until the 20th or 22d of November, and Mr. Canning said that we were then proceeding with negstiatio ns But if this was to be ar gue d on t h e ground that some British Vessels had also been taken, then I say it should not be for gotten that the Danish Government did not confiscat e our vessels until the month of December, that is to say until we had confiscated theirs, and then the Danish Government re- Solved upon the course they adopted by the issue of what I May call an order in council. Well, then, we have had stated to 1 1 .5 by a BritiSll NilliStVa et the present day that we were at war with Denmark when this was done. But suppose we were, a negotiation subsequently took place, and yet, notwithstanding that, in one month after, or rather more, the English Government confiscated the Danish vessels one month before they confiscated oars; that is to say, we confiscated their vessels in the month of November, and they confiscated ours in the month of De cember. taut, supposing the Right Hon. Gentleman to be right in what he states, let him not forget bat there was a convention immediately after which should have set matters right. I beg to refer the Right Hon. Gentleman to the 7th rule of the convention.—[The Hon. Member read the rule he referred to, which was to the effect that from the date of that document each power should afford the other protec tion to property, and that there should be a good under standing and a harmony of feeling.li argumentetweentheastwaognaianatat me, I therefore say, that if it be an that there had been a declaration of war, then I done we were not in a state of war or hostility . emanhad tha have existed was not say there can be no doubt but at the timewhewnitthhDiseancmt Denmark; or that the avowed hostility alleged to _ say farther, even if the facts were as the proceeding. R pr i oc gh e t ed i tn e g n. . G i entl to take itoutof the l ist of so peculiar as re presented them, still there were . circumstances connected with this case of a nature of all ordinary cases of two nations opposed to each other. Again, the Right Hon. Gentleman urges as an argu ment against my proposition, that there was no surplus left out of which to pay this claim, and therefore there were no funds from which to pay them; he also stated that 60,0001. had already been paid, as well as certain grants, the amount of which he has not named; then I say, if the Right Hon. Gentleman admits that, he cannot say that there was no sur plus fund. If there was no surplus fund, I ask why were these claims referred to a commission, in order that the claimants should have an opportunity afforded them of making out their claims, and to produce proof of them, and then to bring up their report before this House? That commission did sit, and heard the nature of the claims, which they reported upon, to the effect that, amongst other matters, they , had reduced the amount of claims. from 524,000/. to 225,000 L, which amount they re ported to have been proved. If, then, there were no claims, why was this Commission appointed to adjudi cate upon them ?—(Hear, hear.) Let the House bear in mind this fact in reference to these claims, that upon five distinct occasions you have, by your vote, recognised the justice and fairness of those claims; and that they were not deemed to have been illegal or unjust by the Commission to which they were referred, is proved by the fact that that Commission, after having heard the whole state of the case, reported that claim., to the amount of 225,000/. had been made good ; and on these grounds, then, I say that the present Government have no right now to withdraw from that report. If the Government now adopt this argument then it would be arguing that the Commission appointed by the Government to make the inquiry had come to an erroneous or an unjust conclusion. But, surely, after this House had decided upon the justice of those claims no fewer than five times, and after a Commission appointed by this House had reported to the effect that those claims were just and fair, the present Government should not now turn round and say that this was a seizure which had been made ac cording to the law of nations, and that, therefore, there should be no inquiry at all granted now. Ido say that such a coarse would not be correct or becoming to adopt. Bat there are other circumstances connected with this case to which I would wish to call the attention of the House. I think I have now satisfactorily shown the House that that which has been stated by the Right Hon. Gentle man to have been a declaration of war, was not a declara tion of war ; or that if there was, this House did consider the case one of such great peculiar hardship that it was re ferred to a Commission for examination, and that Commis sion reported in its favour. I must now refer the House to what Dr. Lushington said upon the subject. (The Hon. Member then read an extract, which was to the effect that though this seizure of the vessels was not contrary to the law of nations, yet it was not fair or equitable.) I want to know then (continued the Hon. Member) upon what grounds am I to rest these claims, if not upon these grounds ? The Right Hoe. Gentleman has stated that the 'public bore their portion of the expense of that war, 'but the Right Hon Gentleman should not forget that those claimants also bore a portion of those expenses.--(Hear, hear.) If this were an ordinary case perhaps I would not be warranted in thus urging it on the attention of the House, but I contend that this is slot an ordinary case, but that, on the c,ontray, it is one such as never occurred before, and such as perhaps never would occur again, and therefore no precedent could be quoted in support of it. And here I must say that it appears to me that the Right Honourable Gentleman has deserted his old arguments with great facility. I remember the Right Hon. Gentleman urging, as an objection against those claims,'that such a pre cedent should not be established ; but that is a point upon which no previous Chancellor of the Exchequer ever said a word ; and when an opportunity offered when this question might have been easily settled to the satisfaction of all parties, that opportunity was suffered to pass and was neglected.—(Hear, hear.) When this question was first argued before this House, Lord Althorp was Chancellor of the E xchequer, and he acceded to this motion, and expressed s wish that all just and fair claims should be paid. It has 'en said that those claims were not legal, and that if they were not, then the ground was taken from under me. Upon this point we have the opinion of a distinguished lawyer, the late Sir W. Follett, who said that they were not legal, hut that they were just and equitable. Well, it is not upon the grounds of the legality of these claims that I advocate them, but upon the grounds of their equity and ;ustice.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman has said that it was very important that these claims should be resisted, lest any canvassing should be going on, and other similar claims be brought before the House. Undoubtedly there may have been some" canvassing " going on ; but if it vas practised on one side, so it was on the other. Ido not •hink that any of my friends have canvassed in my favour, though I venture to say that the Right Hon. Gentlemen has `aken the ordinary means of securing an attendance of his supporters I say, then, that Ido think that these claims ire just and equitable, and therefore I ask the Govern ment now, after this House has already decided four w five times in favour of these claims, to grant - his inquiry. But in whatever way you deal sith it, let it be done as it has not been lone before. Heretofore it has been dealt with in a slovenly and careless manner, but let it now be done 'clearly and distinctly. My Hon. Friend near me will resist the application upon the ground that there had been a declara ion of war when this occurrence took place, but take that irgument away from him, and no other remains; and in order o defend that argument, I do no t now see any law officer of he Crown in his place ; but I still say that this is a question which does require a little more attention than has hitherto Teen given it, and if it does not receive that attention now it lever will receive it. With regard to the declaration of war, i my Hon. Friend contends for that, then he must encounter he opinion of the Attorney-General and other eminent authorities, expressed in the - year 1307 ; for it appears that at that time there could have been no state of noitility between the nations, for some of the British ships, in passing by the Danish batteries, Are aatually saluted by a discharge from their guns.—(Hear, hear.) I do not think my Right lion. Friend can even find a techni - sal ground on which to refuse this motion But Ido not put it on anything like a technical ground—l want him, and I ask him, to put it on a large and comprehensive ground. I hope my Right Hon. Friend will take the case of these merchants and shipowners into their consideration simply on the grounds of justice, On the 27th of July Lord Cathcart set sail, and the bombardment took place on the 29th. It :a true that the Hon. Member for Hull called the attention of the House to a very important document, which made out that a declaration of hostilities had taken place. If that was the case, it should be remembered that it was not by the inter ference of the British authorities, and therefore the parties who suffered muse be considered en titled to our protection. I have endeavoured to' con fine myself to the legitimate limits of this case, and I trust that after the House itself having allowed the justice of the claim by the pi oceedings on a late occasion, it will not now stultify itself by refusing a Committee. I trust it will not be considered unreasonable of me in aeking 'hat the House shall now allow a Committee to settle these claims. One word more—this case has been brought for ward by men of great authority, and the equity of the claims has never been denied, but it has been set aside simply on the grounds that it was a dangerous one, and that to comply with the justice of the claims would be setting up a dangerous precedent. This is a most unworthy view of the case, for it should be borne in mind that justice never sleeps, and that though not at one moment to be had, yet it would in the end assert itself. Mr. CARDWELL—My Hon. Friend who has addressed the House said that lie was willing to have this question settled by fair and legal argument, and for that reason he has quoted the opinion of the late Sir William Follett. Now, the Honourable Member should haVe borne in Mind that - that opinion was rot given upon legal, , but aeon equitable grounds. The Honourable Member, how ever, did not quite forget that the opinion was only an opinion on equitable grounds, and for that alorie is it that he now asks this House to have the question argued upon comprehensive grounds. My Hon. Friend has laid much force upon the . opinion of Sir W. Follett, and I ' cannot help thinking that he ' has relied a little too much upon it. The whole of those claims turn upon the fact, that if a com pensation was dae to the claimants by any act of the British authorities, that that compensation should be granted to those subjects. Were those ships taken when the law of nations was respected by both the British and Danish Governments, and in open defiance of the law of nations, or were they taken at a time when no such law existed, and was not respected, in fact, at a time when both nations were at war ? That was the whole question. Sir James Mackintosh took care to draw a clear distinction between these two points, for there was a great difference between the two. He took care to make that distinction which should be made between the seizure of the cargoes of ships in defi ance of the law of nations, and the seizure of ships during hostilities. The merits of the present question turned upon this point alone. The Honourable Gen tleman said that when the seizures took place nothing like war existed, and upon that he grounds the jus t would twiceieof the present claim. I hold in my hand a document is about ts7"nestawbe h h proves that war did exist, and that hostilities had ti . ace between actually taken 1, establish Member e llo m no e u st rab d le angerou n h t e , England and Denmark. and I beg he will open up in such cases by of the door which he would advanced. by the arguments which he has Mr. HAWES rose and explai n not to be heard in the gallerii ad, but in so l ow a tone as ( Mr. CARDWELL—The on. Menthe was he said that, even if a:war had existed, that is s i - s Or considered to be broken up taken place. a convection by the conyenti should have rememb wrong when Was broken op, on Which had Now, h e ered that this was tion which had been come to for the purpose which of Copenhagen from all the evils which saving the town would otherwise accru e to the property of the inhabitants, and it was such a conve nt i on as was rendered necess ary to 9th o f the month after this the safety of the people. On the hostilities recommenced . Now the re notable convention the which s hows that, if a declaration of is a document war was not made, hostilities an d all .the accompani has said ments of a war existed. The Hon. Gen tleman Great Britain by that no declaration of war was made by proclamation ; but should it be contended that Great Britain was to wait till a proclamation of war before As is to defend herself fro m th e aggr ession of an enemy ? ( The Hon. Gentleman p rocee d e d t o re ad several documents in as support of his arguments, but so rapidly and indistinct ly _ The not to be clearly understood in the reporter's gallery. ) T Hon. Gentleman said that the opinion of a great lawyer was taken on the subject and that that opinion was in favour of the claimants. Now he should remember that when the opinion of Sir W. Follet was taken it was a period when he was not in that House, and when he had not an 1 opportunity of hearing the question argued on all its merits —it was taken when the Hon. and Learned 'Gentleman was not a member of the Government, when he had nothing like an official capacity to guide him in giving an opinion upon the true bearings of the whole subject. In fact, it was an opinion given in answer to a case laid before hills as a pro fessional man, and it was well known how the cases for such opinions were prepared, and it was also known that on the manner in which they were Igepared depended the opinion of the counsel. Was that opera- wiptessed -after Sir William Follet - had heard the aPeegileo ou the matter is that Soma? Ws it gIYCII after hearing the speech of the Hon. Member for Worcester? On the contrary, it was given without knowing the grounds upon which the case rested, and simply upon equity, and not law. The Hon. Gentleman has said that after cutting down considerably, we now re f use d t o pay i t. the fact, for the justice of th e c l a i m i s not made out. Thistilßuis is notai tvrY But the Hon. Member has adverted to a document quoted by the Hon. Member for Hull, and he admitted,€ not only on former occasions, but on the present, that if that document was not got over it was fatal to his case. He, however, said he considered that that document was cured by the notice of the second of September. Now, Sir, I put it to the House, and I put it to the Gentleman himself, has he not been under a mistake in the view he has taken of that notice from the documents which I have quoted, which plainly prove that war existed on the 9th, two days after the friendly state of things which he alleged existed? Does not this then prove the Hon. Gentlemen in error, and on his own showing, I put it to the House, has he made out his case? nay, has h e no t s h own that he has failed? I will not further go into any legal arguments, as I should weary the House by their repetition, and I will entirely leave out that part of the case which depends on written or published documents, which are beforethe public, and there are only one or two other observations with which I shall trouble the House. The Hon. Member has said that my Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has com plained that new arguments have been introduced into this question. Now the Hon. Gentleman was not quite right in that assertion. What my Right Hon. Friend com plained of was, that new arguments were introduced in the Hon. Member's; reply, which it was impossible to re ply to, and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) only desired that the House would review a hasty and erroneous decision to which they were induced to come by specious arguments. Mr. HAWES—There has been no decision yet. Mr. CARDWELL—Yes ; that decision, which now calls upon us to go into Committee, which de cision, I say, was palpably influenced by new arguments introduced and brought forward by the Hon. Gentleman for the first time in his reply. In the cases where compensation was given and refused by the Treasury the decision turned upon the same point—whether there was or was not a state of war existing between Great Bri tain and Denmark. The Treasury, if a state of war did not exist, would have refuses to have made the payments which had then been made if there was not some claim, founded upon justice, for the demand—and they would have equally been ready to meet other claims also founded in justice. The pre cise question at issue was, whether there was, or was not a war ; and, in 1810, when the decision was given that there was one, although it was then adverse to the Treasury, they abided by it, and have done so to the present moment. The Honourable Gentleman called upon them to reverse a decision on grounds upon which Sir James Macintosh had never ventured to rely—(Hear, hear)—grounds from which he was most anxious to disconnect his case, and on grounds which are now for the first time brought under the notice of Parliament. The Hon. Gentleman says that the question has been always kept alive. But the question was first brought under discussion in 1839—the war existed in 1807—nearly thirty years after the time of the occurrence, not to mention that the grounds on which the House are required to come forward to give their decision have been carefully kept back. I, therefore, Sir, believing that the pre cedent will be dangerous, beg leave to second the proposi tion of my Right Hon. Friend that the House resolve itself into a Committee on this question this day six months. Colonel SIBTHORP-1 wish to call the attention of the House to those Members who did vote upon the question in 1841, and who are not present now. I find that, on the occasion of the division in that year (1841), the ayes were 127, and the noes 96 ; and I find on that occasion the names of the following gentlemen, who are not present now : The Solicitor-General (Fitzroy Kelly), Sir Frederick Trench, the Attorney-General, Sir Charles Douglas, and Lord Eliot, who is now Lord St. Germans.—(Laughter.) Where are all the Hon. Gentlemen gone ?—(Hear, hear.) Will no one tell me?—(Laughter.) But I would say on this occasion that you have spent sums of money in- ornamenting Tra falgar-square and other public places, but that it would be much better for you to be just before you become generous. I do look upon, this whole transaction as a mean one on the part of the Go vernment. Your merchants, who are paying an income-tax of five millions a year, have a right that their pro perty should be protected. Let us pay our debts, and when we have a surplus let us give away, This will be the proper mode of proceeding with our business. I have nothing whatever to do with these claims; I ani no way interested in them, but I think them founded on justice, and as such ought to be discharged. The House then divided, when there appeared For the motion Against it B5 Majority against going into Committee —27 The House consequently by this division reversed its former decision. PLACES OF WORSHIP (SCOTLAND) BILL. Mr. FOX MAULE then move the second reading of the Plates of Worship and Sites (Scotland) Bill. The Right Hon. Gentleman after going at considerable length into the disruptions that had taken place in the Church of Scotland, stated that the present measure had been rendered necessary by the course that had been pursued by many of the landed proprietors in Scotland refusing to grant sites in that country for the erection of churches by the members of the Free Church in Scotland. Among those who had refused to grant sites were Lord Macdonald, who had large property in the Isle of Skye. Sir James Riddell, Lord Murray, Lord Seafield, Mr. Campbell, of Lochnell, Lord Ailsa, Lord Cawdor, Lord Forbes, the Duke of Buccleuch, and the Duke of Richmond—all these persons had in his opinion acted with great intolerance, and inflicted hardships upon the people of Scotland that were unworthy of them. He contended that the honour of Scotland was en gaged in the refusal by these noble personages of sites for places o d f on w e o s rs in h c i e p col lege in the city of Edinburgh, for which institution 216 individuals had subscribed the magnificent sum it f s or es t t h ab e li m sh e n m le b n e t rs , w o as f the Free r t e o e e S re c c o t tc a h n o C b h le u re. It was necessary that some remedy should be applied to the evil, and the only remedy he could device was that which he had laid down in this Bill. The free church of Scotland, in addition to all that it had of 21,0001. This Bill to build gave the same powers as were granted in L or d R o ll s b ury ' s Act, passed a few years ago, f or th e purchase of certain sites. All disputes thi s Bill wou ld l eave to the decision of the Sheriff of the county in whi c h th e s it e soug h t for might happen to lie. He ad m itt e d th a t t hi s Bi ll was an, inter ference with the rights of p roper t y, b ut h e conceived that the circumstances in whi c h th e f ree c h urch people were placed by the owners o f land justified such a meas ure , and he conceived that if P ar li ament re f used to adopt this measure they would not be acting justly towards a portion of the people of Great Britain. The duties of private pro perty had been grossly abused by the landed gehtry to whom he had alluded. He would ask the House which of the two alternatives they preferred? Whether it was mat more desirable that the House should pass a Bill, which, at the discretion of a certain judicial officer, responsible to the Government, should convey half an acre, an acre, or at the most two acres of a certain individual's land,which was to be applied for the erection of churches ; or was it better to adopt the other alternative of engentiering, by refusing to adopt this Bill, a spirit of discontent in a large portion of the people of Great Britain --a spirit of hostility to the Government and the latielordes under whom they lived? lle called upon them to endeavour to put a stop to the present persecution towards the people of Scotland, for some day or other it must end by some means or other. He called upon them by sanctioning this Bill to prevent the ignorance and barbarism which must afflict in a short time a great portion of the people of Scotland. Let them prevent religious toleration, which was the boast of this empire, from being nothing but a farce, and so secure the affection and respect, not only of the class to which he belonged, but of every right-minded man in the world. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving the second reading of the Bill. The SPEAKER having put the question, Sir J. GRAHAM said he could avow with great truth that he approached the discussion of the subjeet a second time with heartfelt pain. He thought that the conduct of the. Members who seceded from the Episcopal Church of Scot land was pure and disinterested.—( Hear.) He was also prepared to admit many other grounds maintained by the Right Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. But it was said that this sympathy on his part was only sympathy in words on the part of the Government, but the Earl of Aber den was the very first landlord to grant a site for the erection of a free church. Instances of refusal had been adduced, but they were not many or important, for the Right Hon. Crentleman had admitted that several of the landlords who had been instanced as opposed to the granting of sites, refused to give sites with . the hope that th e di sruption might be heale,-1 He would not follow the Right Hon. Gentleman through all the cases he had entered into. The Right Hon. Gentleman here referred to the case of a Noble Colleague of his, and had admitted that - he had in every way promoted the moral and religious education of the people, and had offered every facilities to the building of places of worship. He had also re ferred to the name of others, among whom was Dr. Chalmers. iln passing, he would observe that he could never hear th e name of Dr. Chalmers mentioned without bearing testimouy to that enlightened and christianlike zeal with which he had always promoted any measure calculated to be beneficial to society in general. There were two causes which had ope rated very much to cause the present ill-feeling. Those who had originally seceded from the Church had inveighed against it in no measured terms. Such terms being heard by those who still remained with the Church and revered it, naturally caused ill-will against those who maligned an Establishment which they respected. Another reason was, that a spirit of bitterness and anger had been generated in consequence of the ministers of the church having given way to their feelings, and denounced the pro prietors to their own tenantry. That such a course had been taken was much to be regretted, and it was the true cause of the angry and acrimonious feelings which had lately shown themselves. The Right Hon. Gentleman mentioned the case of the Duke of Rich. mond. On his property there were twelve parishes, and to eleven Out of the twelve the Noble Duke had granted sites. The promoters of the parish churches in Scotland 'had built 600 churches, and 40 more were in progress, and a million of money was in the hands of those entitled to take care of the funds of the Society. If they extended the principle to Scotland, they should also extend it to Ire land. It was the duty of a Legislature to have a church under the sanction of the Legislature, within a reasonable limit of the centre of a district, in which be the efit people can worship. H e cou ld not see any n would arise from. such a measure. His conscientious belief was, that it would create an immense deal of mischief; and, not seeing any necessity for it, he could not support it. There was no precedent whatever for legislation on such a subject, and the Established Church it self had not such a power; if it had, it was so strictly guarded and so little used that it was a mere nullity. Beli • eying, then, what he had stated, he would move that the Bill be read that day 81, months. Sir ROBERT INGLIS co • and religious toleration should considered that religious freedom any distinction. As f.. be extended to all, without the question in all bearingitsar e could see, looking at it was only in a very small arose ; and it was also a fact, tta r t t t i Church had invariably chosen for the e grounds in juxta- position with that had been built for the purpose ofdra • proogp, they would find that r of cases the grievance ii t embers of the Free ies of their churches on which the olden church wing away the erase. Non. He called this egress act of injusticee"--°-- to grant this pro: nosition ; but he would go further, and say th o f w hi c h po ssess i on h a d b een taken, should interfer d with. Under all circumstanc es h e would say, h did e it would be consistent with the p r i nc i ples he had37e a lw think vocated to vote for the motion, th a t t h e Bill beread ays ad a second time that day six months. Mr. BAINE proposed the adjournment of the debate to that day week, which, After a few words from Mr. FOX MAULS agreed to, RAILWAY COMPANIES DISSOLUTION BILL. Sir GEORGE CLERK moved the second reading of thi s Bill, which he said was one which would be found of great might in fact be called the winding up Act, and which , companies in inchoate g p an Act, in order to give to cortata . 11 — if they should deem such a state the power of disolvl t 0 course necessary. Mr. HUDSON said, he felt that he was taken a good deal by • surprise by the - manner in wh 4 ch thiS Bill had been brought forward, &I he hid cer t a i ii t 9 PrOPCIO $9 be • e inserted in it, which he looked upon of so much importance, that he would take the sense of the House upon them. He had submitted those clauses to the Solicitor-General, and he had expressed his approval of them, and therefore he could not see why they should not be inserted. He then handed in the proposed amendments. Mr. HUME wished to know how they were to avoid liti gation in the cases provided for in the Bill ? He thought that the Government should introduce a clause appointing an auditor. Sir GEORGE CLERK said, it had been considered, and the only provision they could make was to have a fiat in bankruptcy. Sir G. CLERIC moved that the clauses be brought up to morrow (Thursday), and that the Bill be then read a third time. _ _ Mr. HUDSON hoped that the third reading would be postponed to Friday, as he had to leave town to-morrow to open a railway. The third reading was then postponed till Friday. POOR REMOVAL BILL. Sir JAMES GRAHAM, at five minutes to six o'clock, moved that the House should go into Committee7ro forma on the Poor Removal Bill. The House then went into Committee, and immediately after resumed, when the remaining private business was gone through, and the House adjourned at six o'clock. RAILWAY COMMITTEES. (lESTERDAY.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. GROUP 11. CORNWALL RAILWAY. The Committee met at the usual hour ; Viscount Morpeth in the chair. Several witnesses were examined, who gave evidence in favour of the central line ; among the rest Lieutenant Dunstan, R.N. During his cross-examination, however, by Mr. MmtivALE, on the feeling of the inhabitants of Cock in favour of a communication with Padstow, he stated that he attended there as a deputation to point out the superiority of a line communicating between Exeter and Padstow, and moved a resolution to that effect; Major Beamish, however, moved the following amendment, which was carried unanimously (we give it verbatim, and we need not say that the reading of it in the Com mittee caused roars of laughter) :—Resolved, "That the people of Ireland have long and painfully experienced the evils of strange in terference in our internal concerns, proceeding as well from the ignorance as the. arrogance of those who have unjustly and fraudulently usurped the power of making laws for our Government, and irrespective of our laws. That our melancholy experience of the calamities inflicted on our country by such interference plainly suggests to us the impolicy of any attempt on our parts to interfere in the conflicting local concerns of England, and that it does not become us as Irishmen to approach the Board of Trade with any expression of preference for either line of railway professing to connect Exeter with Padstow, such Connexion being exclusively an English interest, and therefore to be determined by English opinion. That in thus practising towards England a spirit of forbearance with regard to her separate interests, we hope to receive at her hands a reciprocal observance, and we respectfully solicit Lieut. Dunstan, that on his return to his native land he will impress on his own countrymen the justice of that principle for which we contend namely, the rights of her people to manage their own affairs. Several other witnesses were called, who gave general evidence in favour of the line. The CHAIRMAN stated that he hoped the parties would bear in mind that they had already heard a considerable quantity of evi dence of that nature. He also stated that he had received a letter from the Lords of the Admiralty, stating that they had no objection to the construction of a bridge over the river Tamar of foar arches, of the same size, and of the greatest possible height consistent with the standing orders, provided that the Cornwall Railway Company would provide a steam-tug at their own expense for the purpose of ,towing vessels through tho arches. The Committee, having heard the evidence of Mr. ;Bampten, engineer, of Plymouth, with reference to the expense of constructing a larger ferry to accommodate the railway traffic, and also to build the bridge at Saltash, adjourned till Friday next, at twelve o'clock. GROUP VIII. AYRSHIRE AND GALLOWAY. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. Knight, on his cross-examination, said this was the, first line he ever estimated for. His estimate of severance damage, for 56 miles, was 8,6001. The land to be taken for the line was 374 acres, which he set down at 19,1741. Several other witnesses were examined on similar points to those referred to by the preceding witnesses. Mr, M`Callum, civil engineer, was then examined at length en the engineering chatacter of the line. It was proposed to be a single line, with passings and sidings, and with bridges and land for a double line. The severest ascending gradient to the Dalmellington coal field was I in 75. There was another ascending gradient beyond the coal field of 1 in 55, about four mil es long. The heaviest descending gradient was lin 75. There was no tunnel on the line. The sharpest curve on the line was one in twenty-two chains. None of the works throughout were of an extraordinary character. His estimate of the whole was 520,0001., which he thought quite sufficient. The whole value for land and residential damage was 35,0001. The permanent way was 2,6741. per mile, or in all 163,1641. The earthwork was 201,7011.; masonry, bridges, &c., 44,715/. ; stock engines, 41,350/. ; stations, 15,315/. ; contingencies, 18,7151. The working expenses he estimated at 16,0321. The maintenance of the way was 4,0951. addi tional. His estimate of the gross receipts was 48,8571. Mr. Sergeant BELLasts asked the witness if he could produce by tc-morrow morning the particulars of the cuttings, value of l an d, &c., up to Dalmellington, by themselves ; and also the same part- CUlats with regard to the portion of the line Irom Dalmellingten to Ralcory - Bay. He asked for this, as the two parts of the case were essentially different. account T M h r e .r b T y r t E witness that ttime. d objecte d d itot think kt he courseasweuld be nnnasbulae to give a detailed l. Mr. Sergeant BELLASIS said he might as well ber eady with the details in writing, as he ahouid certainly ask him for all these par ticulars, and he ought to be prepared. Witness was then cross-examined, with the object of showing that he had but little experience in constructing railways. The Committee adjourned at four o'clock till one o'clock to•morrow. GROUP XIV'. MID KENT DXSTRICT. ' The Committee met at eleven o'clock. Present, Mr. Protheroe ' (chairman), Lord Emlyn, Mr. John O'Connell, and Mr. Grogan. Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD replied o n b e h a lf o f th e K en t Atmo spheric Railway. He said th a t th e li ne h e re p resen t e d l a b oure d under considerable disadvanteges in coming before the Committee as a line competing with the lines for which the South-Eastern Company , had obtained Act s o f P ar li amen t. Th e o bj ect of each company, h e must confess, was to shorte n th e di s t ance b e t ween L on d on an d T on b r id ge, London and Maidstone, London and Dover, and London and Has • tinge. Direct lines had attracted public attention, and the Legisla ; tore seemed determined at no very distant geriod of time to insist upon those advantages which the Kent Atmospheric now keld out to the public under the most favourable and economical circumstances. The distance to Dover through Maidstone, by their proposed. atmos p•bericline, would be 24% miles, whereas the distance by the South- Eastern line is 32 miles. In addition their line would accommodate the town of Sevenoaks, a most important neighbourhood, which the South-Eastern had neglected, except by casting oat a branch a mile and a half In length, with a gradient of 1 In 69. The South-Eastern making that effort, bad as it was, showed the importance of affording a traffic and a communication ac commodation to the town of Sdvermaks. The Earl of Stanhope, in his usual straightforward and intelligent manner, had given evidence of the value of the proposed atmospheric line as regards Sevenoaka and the district =mid it, and had told the Committee that the-general fettling of the inhabitants was decidedly in favour of that'projeets The line to Dover was shorter than the South-Eastern line to that place by four miles. The Kent Atmospheric proposed to use three. miles and a half of the best railway in England, the Croydon, and would thus save themselves the construction of the most expensive part of the line that crossing the streets and over and through the masses of th e houses of London. Thu and South-Eastern patroposed to avoid the Croydon altogether, i mportant railway th e mos t serious injury, thusdo that by diverting its traffic. The Learned Sergeant then reviewed the evidence on both sides, and entered into the details of the advan tagespossessed over the lines of the andric contended at some length, and w ith Atmospheric , that the K en t At mosp h er i c Railway p r eference over the s c h emes o f th e South-Eastern Company, as affordi ng b etter accommodation we a was iside the ra bt South-Eastern l eKentd Company, nt oi A m t a m ta to the public at a less amount of capital, and over a shorter length of road of lesser gradients and better levels. He concluded 'his ad dress by insisting upon the superiority of the atmospheric principle as laid down by Mr. Cubitt, who sanguinely anticipated its ultimate success, and even if the atmospheric traction should be laid aside, the line they projected Was the best locomotive line, and for that reason, setting aside all others, they were, according to the general conduct of committees si m i larly circumstanced, entitled to a preference over the South-Eastern schemes. But as respected the atmospheric traction, he firmly believed it would supersede the loco motive principle. Sir Robert Peel, no mean prophet, some years ago told the locomotive advocates to pause, for it was his @pinion that it would in course of time be superseded by the atmospheric. Ito (the Learned Sergeant) thought that the time had now arrived, or if it had not it was not far distant; therefore it behoved the Legislature to pause before they sanctioned an outlay of money upon public, works, which would eventually be useless. The atmospheric system mlght be beset and crowded with minor and insignificant difficulties now, but science could overcome all obstacles, nothing was impossible to genius ; that great man Coleridge had in that brilliar,t and beautiful poem, the " Ancient Mariner," anticipated the atnosphr,ric traction—it had dawned upon him in an happy hour of in.ntira,tion _ , coMpared 1 .0 wherefore d r i ves that ship so fast, Without a tide o r wind ? The air is cut away before, And closes in behi nd. " hadprinciple, then, of the atmospheric was true and practicable. It neon successfully tried, and he sincerely believed its adoption wtfild be a boon to the nation. Mr. Commatn, for the South - Eastern, then proceeded to address the Committee. He contended t hat the line from London to Maidstone should be made by his clients, b ecause they were a strong- nnited company ; whereas their oppo nents were divided into two Or three Managements, and the Committ ee well knew that union was an essential ingredient in the su ccess of any undertaking, both as respected the public and the undertakers. The Kent Atmospheric in'Ad not that element, and, th erefore, their chance - alth that rn of the South-Eastern, was proporti ona bl y deereased. It was qijite evident that the accommodation to Maidstone should Ibe supplied by an established company, whose cxpences had hitherto been enormously great and their profits nothing. The superiority of the South-Eastern was evidenced from the fact that their rivals where last year tefore Parliament, with a project similar to their pre sent one, 1 nit had been obliged to abandon apart of their scheme through a want of Rinds, and the difficulties inseparable from the atmospheric system. Mr. Cubitt, no doubt, was influenced by a fear that he could not venture to propose an atmospheric line on a locomotive one, with a gradient of 1 in 80, between London and Ashford ; therefore he would Make the Tonbridge branch their main line, and take advantage of the excellent levels and direct road of the Scott 2-Eastern Railway. It was but justice that now the angle by Red-hill had been cut off (and the ad vantage of the opening of the continental lines about to be derive d), that the South-Eastern Company should be allowed to remedy t fie defect, and provide the required accommodation. It had been stab ad that there was a superiority, as respected gradients, distance, and expenses, over the South-Eastern Railway—that a saving o f 4% miles between London and Dover would be effected by the pre 'posed Kent Atmospheric. He contended that the advan tages thus i ? trumpeted were all superficial—they had no foundatico, and that the only advantages offered to the public by the two eett.9l ,nies worth accepting were those the South-Eastern, and the t south-Eastern only, had the power of offering. The gradiet i t s o f the Atmospheric were b ad. Some of them were as len v as 1 i n 80 ; while the very worst gradient• in the South-Easi.e rn was lin 105. The works on the Atmospheric were heavy, and wo u ld cost enormous sums o f money. There were two tunnels, ot v 3 3,343 y ar d s l ong , th e o th er above 2,000 y ar d s l ong. A s to going -to S evenoaks, they would never be able to get an II quite as acceptable to the neighbourhood of S even - there ; a nd tboy did not intend, the Committee would observe, to ) ..lave any station there, in fact, the going to Seveno ak o was a lure thrown out to deceive, because the popula tion and 1. he ' district around S evenoa ks did not demand any r a il way such as t; 'tat . the atmospheric said they were about to make. The mile and P l half branch o f th e South-Eastern would be quite suf ficient,oaks. I a stead of a line running near the Seven Oaks would col the Soot It -Eastern proposed to go through the Valley of Bapford, etnd open up a communication by a branch with Wester barn, am' / other populous localities. The line through the Valley used to al l ttill further extent--indeed to an incalculable extent. He then subro i %mand a large amount of water power, whi c h wou ld b e Ittc_d to the Committee, that in point of gradients, and other engi The Cu A z nt3ering capabilities, the South-Eastern line to Maidstone was the e i n e that should be preferred. The Learned Counsel then went very ' 7 ninutely through the evidence, and concluded by urging the supers 17) : claims of the South-E as t ern sc h eme upon th e a tt ent i on of the Co t 4 . mittee. The roc „ was then cleared, and on our re - a d m i ss i on, Sour a- Em mule intimated, that the preamble of the Bill Of th e rtet Bill of the n Company was p roved ; and that the preamble of the Ice nt Atmospheric was not proved. The Coma a ittee then adjourned until twelve o'clock on Pride" next, mcs.. we, 1 Es.r.zu auzirtDouPsoii xvI T T. S OUT S :—V IESTER,N (ROIVIRSZATIVIPATNDN'TitifDD. Ma NZE :13teltio7' 1k --V2: BRANCH). The pr, The 11r [ran c ittee met this morning at the usual hour, :inoters c tri po nc. ..___._ a. with meat , bread, contracto ot;3.7nbreldZtoAcaNii DevldSoel3.9inTrieu,Mrt oPfilthOeirNhi. Witness called was Mr. William Dennison, Government thirty r, Portsmouth, WhO stated that for the last at Ports about 4/. ; counties, years he had supplied the regiments stationed !Muth, in Lancashire, Hampshire, Kent, and other il.rrssrißii Si, v eek, many of which he Pur " ch d a r s o e r d ag at e. Sa K li i s i b le u d ry a rnd lt oth l6 e o r line won .11 .tersetshire and Dorsetshire. Driving injured the beasts them dire K r ce nt. Supposing the railway were made, he would get time and 41 from the dealers, which would effect a great saving of forage to u l ~.) e ,nse• iie segreat quantities of meat, read, and supply ti advantageous . Frequently A ``htneuinigohsatmadand CoCoventay, F for t u h e e nt t l r y an it sit is o n f e w ee hi ss c ar h y thg l ie ~,,e , e t euships with these articles at twelve hours' notice, so that ,_. "ged Z 0 keep a large stock on band, in the event of a supply being ref, him. T .15 red, Which of course entailed considerable elpense upon By tl le railw Would go a great way to effect a saving. afford, , cu r , 4ul ( e, ' • l e A ti i 'L a b m l A s N hijz T I t: nt whi co c n h tra th cts e li W n l e til W OU n t l PY, 2. 4 .1. Q97 9=2414 vroald lilowistin Dowilted la it. _ fulfil doofvaenicilltimees Mr. Gue, a builder at Andover, deposed as to the delays which occurred in transmission of goods by the canal from Redbridge to Andover. The eharge for conveying goods per ton by the !South- Western to Andover was 1/. 16s. 6d. By the proposed line a saving would be effected of 12s. per ton. It would be of great benefit to the town of Andover. Meetings had been held in that town, at which strong feelings were expressed in favour of this undertaking. The same feelings were entertained by every person in Rcmsey. This witness was subjected to a cross-examination, but only confirmatory of the evidence which has been already given. Mr. Thomas Hill, shipping agent of the Oriental Steam Naviga tion Company, Southampton, was examined respecting the traffic carried by these vessels. They conveyed a great number of passen gers and also large quantities of packages from the manufacturing Catch% Mr. Wm. Paulton, cattle dealer, at Cricklade, near Cirencester, deposed that the line would open up a communication to the north for the conveyance of agricultural produce. This witness was examined at some length with regard to the advantages which this railway possessed for the conveyance of cattle and sheep to and from the different cattle markets. Mr. P. Matthews, a farmer at Hicken, near Cirencester, said that the district between Cheltenham and Cirencester was much in want of a direct communication to Birmingham. The whole of the agrl, culturists in the district supported the undertaking, because they knew that it would open up a more ready market for their produce. The Committee adjourned till twelve o'clock to-morrow. GROUP XX. LONDON, HOUNSLOW, AND ViTESTEEZT. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Evidence at considerable length was taken in support of the Duke of Northumberland's apposition. The case of the Duke of Northumberland having been concluded, the Committee adjourned at four o'clock to twelve on Friday. GROUP XXIV. Nonvircyz J.ND BURY. The Committee assembled this morning shortly after twelve o'clock; Mr. Granville Vernon in the chair, when a long conversa tion ensued as to the necessity :for further evidence of the traffic, which was followed by the testimony of Mr. Bruff, the engineer, who stated the general features of the line, which is easy in Its character, and light in its earthworks. The object in making this line was not so much to accommodate the two towns of Cambridge and Bury, as to form a communication with distant parts of the country, Cambridge being the focus of a series of ramifications to Lincoln, Weedon, and all those and other places which the great trunk lines accommodated. The people of Bury had always been very desirous of a direct connexion wi:h London, and this line in conse quence of the throwing out of the Direct Norwich, the East Suffolk, and other lines, would be the nearest. He had surveyed the line of the Ely and Bury Company about fifteen menthe ago, but had abandoned it for several reasons, but principally on ac count of the great expense of repair to the subsoil. He had sent his assistants to try the soil on both sides. It ran through the valley of the Lark, where, of course, there was the greatest deposit of vege table matter. This would occasion a much greater outlay than could be met by the estimates of the engineer of that line. By the reports of his assistants, as well as by his own observations, he found that the subsoil was loose and the surface shakey. The generality of the line was flooded in wet seasons. By the report of one of his assistants, he learned that the boring-bit had sunk, at the distance of 12 miles 7 furlongs, by a pressure of 5 pounds, 12 feet ; at 13 miles 3 furlongs, it sunk 23 feet by its own weight ; at 16 miles it sunk 18 feet by its own weight also, and in wet sea sons theland was all flooded. He had himselfmade an embankment in similar land, and lie found that as fast as the stuff was put in it pushed out at the side, and he believed that some such accident had occurred to the opposing Company, and that it took them weeks, if not mouths, to repair it. The ruling gradient on this line was, as on the Norwich, Ely,. and other lines, 1 in 132. The estimate for the whole line is 300,000/. ; for earth-works the sum allowed is 49,7291.175. 7d. ; for brickwork and bridges, 30,807/. ; permanent way, 185,750/. ; for stations, 25,987/. ; for land, 30,0001. ; for contingencies, 23,7001. ; and for management, 18,400/. ; which, together, allowing for incidental differences, would make a total of 300,000/. A long examination then ensued, upon the way in which the line would affect the property of a gentleman named Webb, the object of it being to show that this was not the best line which the country could afford. On the cross-examination of Mr. Sergeant WRANGUAM, it was shown that the gradients on the Ely and Bury line were so much superior, that the power which on that line would draw sixteen carriages, would on this line serve as traction power only for nine. The access to Bury also appeared to be bad, it requiring great in genuity to make a junction with the Eastern Union line. It was also shown that the subsoil was not of so unstable a character as the engineer conceived it to he, or at least that the danger and difficulty which he apprehended In the formation of the embankment would not or might not arise. Mr. CALVERT then entered upon a long examination of the mode in which the line affected the interests of the several landowners on the line, which had merely reference to private interests. A discussion then ensued as to the course of practice to be pursued, after which the Committee adjourned till twelve to-morrow. GROUP XXXI. BRISTOL AND nnelvEnrianravr (GLOUCES TER AND STONEHOUSE JUNCTION.) The Committee assembled this morning at twelve o'clock, and proceeded with the further investigation of the schemes comprised in the group which had been confided to them. Mr. HOPE appeared on behalf of the Bristol and Birmingham (Gloucester and Stonehouse Junction), and opened the case. It ap peared from the Learned Gentleman's statements, that the construc tion of the proposed branch would be attended with the greatest benefit to the various localities through which it would pass, and would also materially advance the interests of the Bristol and Birmingham Company, and be generally beneficial to the public at large. The present line was proposed to form a continuous communication on the narrow gauge principle, between Gloucester and Stonehouse. The Great Western Company had established a communication from the junction at Swindon en the broad gauge, and it was intended to supply the remaining portion of the district with railway accommo dation on the narrow gauge principle. This was the object which the promoters sought, and which he hoped the Committee would concede. _ . Witnesses were about to be called to give evidence as to the pro posed junction, when Mr. AUSTIN objected to the evidence being received as to the pro posed junction between Gloucester and Stonehouse, as it would materially affect the interests of the Great Western Company, and would also be a contravention of the agreement at present subsisting between that company and the Gloucester and Bristol Company, with reference to the district between Gloucester and Stonehouse. The room was ordered to be cleared. On our re-admission The CIIAIBMAN stated that the Committee were of opinion that the promoters of the proposed junction should be allowed to proceed with their evidence ; but at the same time they entertained a strong feel ing with reference to the agreement of 1840 between the Great Western and the Bristol and Gloucester Companies, and recommend that its leading provisions should be made the foundation of an amicable arrangement between the parties. The Committee then adjourned. have called some gentleman connected with that company in proof of this, if it were the ca ,, e. But not a single witness stated any thing of the sort. He, therefore, contended, taking all the circum stances into account, that the Committee could not sanction the proposed undertaking, inasmuch as it was not required by the wants of the district. Mr. LAING, on the part of the . premoters, replied en the general case. The room was then cleared, and on the re-admission of parties, The CuatamlN said the Committee would not give any decision al present. The Committee then adjourned. GROUP LIT. LEICESTER AND EIRIIINGRAt7, wsTri A BRANCH. The Committee met at the usual hour this morning, and were oc cupied the whole day in hearing the case of the opponents to this Bill. As the opposition was principally confined to the objections of the landed proprietors on the part of the competing lines and private individuals, no point of any peculiar public interest was elicited. Several witnesses were examined, but their evidence was merely a recapitulation of the statements already made known in connexion with the line. The Committee then adjourned. GROUP LX iY. IRISH GREAT WESTERN (PORTAR TANGTON TO GALWAY). (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) The Marquis of Clanricarde was examined, and bore testimony to the general advantages of the line. Ills Lordship considered that the railway which would afford to the inhabitants of Galway an op portunity of sending their corn to Cork and other parts of the south of Ireland where distilling was extensively carried on, must de cidedly be of great national importance, and promised to be highly remunerative. Mr. Denis Kirwan, of Galway, was examined, and stated that there was a considerable traffic from Galway to the south. Colonel Foster, Assistant Adjutant-General of the Forces in Ire land, was examined, and expressed his opinion as to the benefits of the proposed line in a military point of view, as it would afford facility in sending troops to Cork, Fermoy, and other parts of the south of Ireland from Athlone, which was a matter of the greatest importance. Robinson;of Clare, stated that the population of that town was 18,000 ; that there was a great quantity of corn sent from Athlone, and that a railway would afford a communication with the markets of the south of Ireland. After hearing some additional statements as to traffic, the Com mittee adjourned. LEICESTER AND BEDFORD RAIL WAY. A meeting of the Scripholders, duly summoned, under the sessional orders, was held at the London Tavern, yesterday at one o'clock, to consider whether the Company would pro ceed further with the Bill, WYNN ELLIS, Esq., M.P., took the chair, and said he had done so as Chairman of the Board of Management, feeling it his duty to attend and render them every aid in his power; but having been for some time unable to attend the meetings of the board from bodily indisposition, the necessary state ment would be made by Mr. Lindsell, the deputy-chairman, who would also answer any questions which proprietors might think proper to put. Mr. LENDSELL, after having expressed his regret that Mr. Ellis had been prevented from participating more actively in the business of the day, said that, in addressing gentlemen who were wellacquainted with railway matters, it was hardly necessary to tell them that the meeting had been convened in pursuance of the sessional orders of Parliament, which made it binding on every company applying to Parliament to hold a meeting prior to the third reading of the Bill, for the purpose of sanctioning further procedure in the case. He called on The SECRETARY, who read the advertisement calling the meeting. Mr. LINDSELL then proceeded to say, that he saw there was a numerous meeting present, and he took it for granted that there was then in the room, or would be soon, sufficient to constitute the meeting legal—(Hear.) The directors, then, took this opportunity to bring be fore the meeting everything connected with the interests of the Company, their original object and the means which had been used to carry that object out. The district of country through which the line passed was Bedford, on the south of Leicester, and Hitchin on the north ; it opened up the coal fields of Derby and Leicester, whereby the inhabitants on the route would be supplied with that necessary article; and they would, besides, find a ready market for their produce. But, beyond all these considerations, the great object of the Company was a communication between London and Man chester. To effect this it was an object with the Company to form a junction with the companies at both ends of the line—with the London and York in the south, and with the Midland Counties in the north. The directors, therefore, put themselves in cdmmuuication with the London and York at an early period, and he was glad to say that they had met with the most friendly ,aid and assistance ; but while this friendly aid and assistance was rendered them, both companies had maintained their independence.— (Hear, hear.) He said that the direct communication with the metropolis had already been achieved in that great triumph of the London and York, on which he had the greatest pleasure in congratulating those gentlemen. Not withstanding the success they had achieved,' it was still the intention of this Company to preserve their integrity, and only make use of the London and York line in their approach to the metropolis.—(Hear, hear.) It had been also the intention of the Company to effect a connexion with the Midland Counties, and by their line to complete a direct communication with Manchester and the ether large towns of the north. At an early period after the formation of the Company the Chairman opened a correspondence with that Company, and the result was an invitation to meet with their board at Derby ; but he was sorry to say that, notwithstanding their friendly disposition, they had not met with that attention and en couragement from that Company which they had been led to expect. When they arrived at Derby they were told, on the part of the other company, that they must form an alli ance with the South -Midland, and that after that the Mid land would be ready to treat with them on the subject of an alliance. But, after a connexion was to have been formed with the South Midland in addition to that of the Midland, to whom by the way 15,000 shares were to have been offered, they were told that there they must form a union with the London and Birmingham—a line which they had always looked ,-; non as directly opposed to the Leicester and Bedford.— (fl ea : : hear.) He asked whether gentlemen would think it tight to accept these terms?—(hear, hear.) Mr. Stephenson was the gentleman deputed from the Mid lands to communicate with them ; to him, then, the first thing that they had said was, that their object was not to stop short with a communication between Leicester and Hitchin; it was their object to proceed on to London, and with this view they had put themselves in London and York. What conveni ence es w p o o It was not their intention would d en th ce e w m it i h dia th ud e l ufei to use the London and York line e .xcept between Hitchin and corr London. Mr. Stephenson said, ,Kame not the London and York, for between the London And York and the London and Birmingham there was war —war to the knife." He said they asked Mr. Steplenson whether the Midlands would agree to their employing Mr. Cubitt, the engineer on the London and York, but he answered that they could not consent to any engineer from a hostile line being employed in connexion with theirs. Such was the in terview that had taken place between them and the Midland Company. They still hoped, however, to effect an alliance with that Company, and with this view asked time to consider the terms before ,they gave an answer. - This having . been agreed upon, they drew up a resolution worded with every care to avoid offence, to the effect, first, that no terms could be accepted compromising the indepen dence of this company ; or second, inconsistent with its posi- 1 tion with the London and York ; and third, that they offered,' to the Midlands an interest equal to that offered to the Lon don and York.—(Hear, hear.) He thought that he had by this time shown that the directors, after completing an alliance with the London and York, but failing with the Midlands, their failure was in consequence of the course of conduct pur sued by the Midland Counties.—(Hear, hear.) Notwith standing these difficulties, he saw nothing to prevent them prosecuting their original object. But there was one im portant feature which he wished to explain. At the time that this line commenced, the sessional orders had not been issued requiring 10 per cent. deposit, and they had only required of the shareholders a deposit of 5 per cent.; but the directors, having the fullest confidence in this line that it would be profitable to the shareholders, and prove a great advantage to the public, had taken it upon their own responsibility to pay 10 per cent. into the hands of the Ac countant-General.—( Hear, hear.) He was sure that this would meet with their entire approval. The directors also would take care, in respect of all the deposits made by the shareholders and other sums yet to be paid, that they should receive five per cent. on all such money.—(Hear, hear.) He had no other expectation than that the meeting would unanimously approve of proceeding with the Bill. The solicitor then read the Bill. The CHAIRMAN moved a resolution, approving of the Bill and giving the directors power to proceed. Mr. LINDSELL seconded it. Mr. D. W. HARVEY, after stating that he approved of the Bill, and of proceeding with the line, made some remarks on the caution necessary at the present day in railway projects. He said he wished that some of those Noble persons, Earl Fitzwilliam or some other Peer, would take steps ,to pass an order prohibiting all companies who had obtained their Bills from making their lines unless they deposited such instalments as would be a guarantee that they were able to complete it, and giving power to the shareholders to retire on receiving back their deposits, minus the reasonable ex penses. Mr. RICHARDSON asked whether they could not persuade the Direct Manchester line to join them in prosecuting !.heir object? He also asked, being himself a share hajer in the London and York, whether there was at; 17 ground for the rumour which he had heard, of its being iinp:obable that the Company would obtain their Bill? Mr. Listos}7. l, said, in the presence of the Chairman of the London and York, he, would say nothing of it. As to the other question, he had to answer, that they had tried to effect a union with several of the direct lines to Manchester, but as yet without success. Mr. RASTALL, chairman of the London and York, and a director in the Leicester and Bedford Company, said that the Hon. Proprietor knew as much about, the probability of the London and York Bill ultimately passing as he did. After eighteen days' examination before a Committee of the House of Commons, which produced a favourable effec t and after nineteen days examination on oath before the House of Lords, which also produced a favourable impression there, it would be bold to say that the Bill would not be granted. on Mr. Mr. J. J. M. RICHARDSON made som e remarks ds this Hudson's conduct in the House of Commons ttoewlix, h ana,ge- Bill, and on the Hon. Gentleman's conduct in as connected, ment of the railway companies with wh!chmovements, lest at and cautioned the directors to watc h howhiosut their Bill. an unguarded moment he might t resolution,r when the votes The CRAM/ AN then put m i gh t were unanimous in favour of p intimated that additional capital, to The CHafammr then intim the amount of some hundreds, mus t still be represented, to make the meeting legal,d therefore he adjourned it till one o'clock on Tuesday t an....., GROUP Miff . The Committee met to-day at twelve o'clock, in room No. 24, (Grand Corridor), present, Sir Robert Per k ;loon, chairman, the Mar quis of Worcester, Mr. Snit,llett, Mr. Fellowes,iilni Viscount Norreys. They resumed the inquiry respecting the MTGE?, LEAMINGTON, AND WASQi.7tCK• The whole of the morning was occupied in the examinatioi: of witnesses as to the traffic. After rewiring the traffic and engineering evidence, the Com mittee heard witnesses against the line under those two heads of evidence, the speeches of counsel being postponed until after the evi dence shall have been concluded. Adjourned, at four, till twelve o'clock to-MOITow, GROUP XXXIX. OLDHAM DXSTEXCT. The Committee re-assembled this morning at twelve O'clock; Mitt )ivett in the chair. The proceedings commenced by the evidence of Mr. Joshua Milne, a cotton spinner and coal-owner, at Schawe, the object of which was to allow the difference of distance by the two lines of "ilway, and to prove that the line of the promoters was better than those of their Opponents, whether by the Manchester or Hudd9 sfielo, or the Man chester and Leeds Railways. In reply to a question, the witness said he was not aware that a Bill had passed the Commons for a line to Barnsley which would give a direct coramunication with Manchester to Oldham. Mr. Nightingale, a manufacturer of Lucifer matches and pill boxes at Newton Heath, stated that he used 600 tons of timber, and that he employed 300 persons on an average throughout the year ; that he exported to all parts of Europe and North America and Australia, besides sending large quantities to every part of England, Scotland, and Ireland. The timber cost him 3s. a ton for carriage to Manchester, and his goods the same for return carriage to that place. This line would be of great con venience to him. To Mr. WADDINOTON the witness replied that the station of the Oldham districts line would be close to his works, and that at pre-- sent there was no railway accommodation whatever. The witness also spoke to 'the feeling of the inhabitants in favour of this line. Mr. Philip Lancashire, a land agent, at Newton, Mr. Harrop, of Saddleworth, Mr. Halliwell, and Mr. Frank Andrews, of Mossley, a cotton manufacturer, were respectively examined by Mr. RUSSELL in favour of the Oldham Districts line, all giving evidence of the same nature. h s o4 o r . w T e r t N i D s aaLb out 6 t o rt o o x f thewh which t rs e o s sr will 1 h i e e d e t e h e a e t et the d w a h t e o d l e h o y f the e Manchester and Huddersfield Railway. On re-examination the witness replied that the bulk of the popu lation of Mossley resided on the brow to which the Manchester and Huddersfield line would afford no accommodation whatever. To Mr. TINDAL Arsirrsorr, the witness replied that the principal public-house would be taken by the opposing line for a station. To the CuatamAiv, a reply was made that the road from the bottom of the hill to the top is on a gradient: of one In six, and the ruling gradient is one in ten. Mr. Joseph Kershawe, of the firm of Joseph Kershawe and Sons, testified that the carriage of the articles of their business from Man chester was 10s. a ton, and that the proposed railway would save the firm 3001. a year in that Item. Their concern was 400 feet above the level of the canal, and the only line that could accommo date Mossley was that of the Oldham Districts Company. Mossley is increasing rapidly in population—he should say that the numbers were doubled within the ast ten years. To Mr. ATKINSON, the witness replied that the inhabitants of Mossley got their goods from Liverpool by railway and canal, the dis tance being about 46 miles, but he was arguing on the supposition that the Huddersfield and Manchester line would never be made. He conceived that because the Act had been long obtained, and although they had broken ground, and had purchased ground, they had never paid for it. Such, at least, was the case with him. To the CHAIRMAN, the witness replied that the land had been purchased from him, but It was not his, and he could say nothing whatever of the title of the property. To Mr.-RIJSSELL, the answer was, that if the Huddersfield line were made it would not serve his purpose so well. By permission of the CHAIRMAN, Mr. ATKINSON here called the solicitor of the Huddersfield and Manchester Company, who stated that the works had been let for the whole line, and all the contracts entered into ; that works up to Staley bridge were already in progress, that the buildings bought in that town had been destroyed for the purpose of the railway, that all the land to the end of the line had been bought, and that the pur chases had not been completed, simply because there had not been time to investigate the titles, of which there are some hundreds, but the cash was now lodged in the bank, ready fel expenditure. Captain Lawes, manager of the Manchester and Leeds RaZiwaY , stated that between Rochdale and Oldham, before the openNg of their railway, there was only one coach, which was kept up rather for accommodation than with a view to profit, while during last year the company had carried upwards of 50,000 passengers. From Haywood there was no conveyance at all, while last year they carried upwards of 28,000 passengers. From Middleton, a place scarcely known beyond the district, they had carried more than 17,000 persons. :Great convenience would also ensue to the poor who were employed in Oldham, and whose families live at a distance, and who obtained a ticket for their journey here on Saturday and their return on Monday. As an in stance of the benefit of railway communication, he might state the fact that tons of water cresses are carried from London, and for con sumption in Lancashire, as much indeed as thirteen tons annually. A variety of other instances might be adduced to prove the same fact. The other line, the Oldham and Manchester, was laid out with difficulty, and there was one gradient as steep as lin 27. By the formation,of the Oldham Districts line the company which the witness represented would reap a small dividend. To the CusinzseN, Captain Lawes replied that the Manchester and Leeds Company now derived 6% per cent. dividend, and he might put one fact to prove the utility of his own railway—that was, the circumstance that the saving to the public since the line had been formed was equal to the whole expense paid by the public for transit before the line was formed, as shown before Lord Stanley. Last week they had carried as many as 40,000 passengers; during last year they had carried 469,000 third-class passengers and 41,000 first-class. To Mr. WADDINGTON, the witness replied that the Manchester and Leeds station at Oldham was as bad as possible, although the difficulty of the rise was great, and had been well surmounted. After cross-examination on the same point, the Committee rose at dye o'clock, and adjourned till twelve o'clock on Monday. GROUP XLVI. NEWCASTLE AND DANLINGTON 717NC TXON, AND TYNE DOCK. re of arse es.— During a -.uNisi*. ANcE.—We find the following o u a len d a l t i w l i ß th eb a uq iuil y, f o e, n • revolting narrative :i v a ° m l ' Io S YI Tha d tw P o e n he e th f e th r e all 3 i r one of them, nam ed s d .They - were carried home While one of their wounded both he ve men em companions ran to Gignac, 'ate nearest place, for a medical man oTn-7417--- r e ‘ l, nl t. c stab the b e d qnal:r named Monge; but he refused to stir unless he was pa i d 60f. in ad vance. The poor man who c: us eto him had no more than 5f., which Monge received as earnest and went to Rebuty. On coming to the house where the sufferers lay, ,he again refused to enter without being paid his 60f. in hand. M. Scrigi 3a, for whom the men had been werk ing, not having so much immediately at command, promised that it should be paid. 'Menge persisted! in his exaction, and, in spite of the entreaties and promises o f a ll a round him, and even the cries and moans of the wounded men, gave • rude and peremptory denials, ulti iz2ately walking off with the sf. is i his pocket. This conduct was re presOted to M. Crouzet, the spacial co m m iss a ry of p o lice for the railroad, who immediately sent 1;,o Monge a written demand for es GROUP LIII. shut a- his door in the face of the office who presented the summons. tution of the. sf. ; but the doctor not only refused to comply, but I t n the morning M. Martin, of Parmes, who is a medical man, 'TZES.• Mayor sultoPsnium UNION AND CANAL (L. TER TO WOLVERHAMPTON). arrived at Rebuty; - vated by the delay that he founded them both in danger, and one of of his outliving the day. Justice," but the stet() of the wounded was so much aggra (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yegtefday, s doubt be done, not only en the assassin, ay4) .. will no . Mr. MALims, on behalf of Lord Ilatherton, then Addressed . ' vs the Semaphore, l m ,r e ~ on,, • Committee in opposition to the line. He contended did • 1 s k so on the equally bra , . them so bad as to leave IT hope project totally uncalled for, and would that it was a but a , 'kLES.—LERAvicK, . d tin on Monday last. There was no evidence bro ht never give remuneration • Wit- • 41, gandn ese , in the parish of San s g, MAY 18.—A capture of whales necessity, and . . ._. Ug. z . forwarcila Drove its . . . -- eje l ioe the ouslaught,•he sea . being per a-heir-it was ProPalett hilaY ont a Capital resented as being grand, and the was incumbent on its promoters to brl of 8 00,000/., he thought it wa-5 ' wos ~,h ' s " srt" is reP _ whelming evidence in its favour, ng forward strong and ever- The day _ nfikle • most favour • - - --- 'was seen in clt the carcasses of 458 of these marine ed 61. per Grand Junction Compan lir. If they wished to prove that the f l'et l -7 cairn. ' ll ine suy the DlOber WM OW; AUC I tOtA- -- nue ~......_ ,_, y had too much traffic at present on their result of the at,. I "4994 ' 1 " l iPli 1 9 WITO de much to vie 4 ..,,,, „„,._ „ ngh , fr , monsters. On Vile, ' m ''''' " .1 v.l " . ''' ,32."—GraiifiNdirgiffe Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) A question then arose as to whether a plan should be submitted to the Committee and the counsel for the petitioners against the Bill or not. plans e TTh h rooma C n lid Ast W itecm as tAioN t n b s en cleaned, and on our re-admission, soafidthtebsaet docks,theCommitteewhiwhich werheaddepsoesnittedfoirn the Private Bill-office, and they could not find there any appearance of the proposed alterations. They were therefore of o pinion that a plan marked with the alterations should be laid before them, and that a copy should be furnished also to the parties opposing the Bill. The further hearing of the Bill was then postponed till the next Bill bad been concluded. NEWCA.STLZ-VPOZT-TYNE AND CARLISLE .03ILTE.NSXO PT. The case for this 1 3 W, wMcli was opposed, was opened by Mi*. Knowles. The Committee then adjourned. DESTRUCTION OF DOGS IN MAN- CHESTER. It has long been usual in Manchester for the autho rities to issue orders for the keeping-up or muzzlicg of dogs during the summer and autumn months, during which hydrophia is most prevalent. Formerly this was done, under the now defunct Manchester police com missioners, by a man going constantly about the streets with a sort of hatchet, with which he knocked down the dogs that he found at large in the streets un muzzled. This gave rise to some complaints, for occa sionally the poor animal escaped after receiving a or two, and much unneces sar y crue lty w as perpetrate d. Then for a time a man w a s em pl o y e d going about t he streets shooting any dog unmuzz l e d an d at large ; b ut this was occasionally very al arm i ng t o l a dies and oth ers passing at the time, and not al wa y s w ithout some ri sk for on one occasion a boy, who was n ear a dog that was thus shot at, received a large portion of the conten ts of the gun in his leg, and then this p rac ti c e was abandon ed ; and for the last few years, un d e r the corporation, .4 much more humane sy s t em o f d es t ro ying the an t i mats has been adopted. In 1843, the number ° a these animals suffered to g o a t large increase* so greatly as to becom e no sma ll nu i sa nce. o blow yigoro measures were, therefore, taken. Two men wer e coat stantly going about the town, seizing all dog s tha t were found in the streets unmuzzled, and these el conveyed to the town's yard, Clarence-street, an; destroyed erery evening, by the application o f be small quantity of prussic acid on the tongue of t. animal. In this way th e nu m b er o f d o gs destroyed tia the five months, from the Ist of M a y to the Ist of °he; tuber, in the year 1843, was littl e s h o rt of 700 ; i n t A ; same p ; eriod of 1844, about 600 dogs were destr o y e% in 1845, about 600 but this year the work of destraeL tion has commenced somewhat later—viz,, on the I t O h : of May—and from this cause, and the fact th at 0 . number of animals has somewhat thinned by the des r tion of former years, and that the survivors arc erl, more kept up, or are more generally provided with in open wire muzzles—(which, by the way, a re ie finitely preferable to the close leathern ones ell .. use till lately, being much less heating, bes ides abling the animal to breathe and to drink freely' which the leathern ones did not) —owing , we say' to to these causes the number of dogs destr o y ed season, before the Pt Ist October, will in all probability exceed 500. The present system pursued is to trace:taut! home, and then summon the owner before the nuisancecommittee of the council, and the option is given i bo to pay a fine of 2s. 6d. or to deliver up the dog to destroyed. There are 10 stations whither dogs 41 " taken for this purpose, viz., the town's yard, Clarerfe; street ; the Oldham-road police station the seaveng aj ,l and manure yards in Chorlton-street, Portland.etre e , Pollard-street ; Rochdale-road ; Bridgew a ter-art and Gloucester -street (Oxford-road) ; al s o to Chorlton town-hall, for Chorlton-on-Medlock .411,0 Hulme ; and the Ardwick township yard. • The la mouth being forced open, about half a small teaspef,. • of the prussic acid is placed upon the tongue, ant!f il is few seconds the dog is dead. The bodies of the 0 1 ' 04 destroyed are removed daily, so that there is ne d e l e b s t, from their carcases being left to putrify. MP r bet the daily number destroyed does not reach's seore; be in the dog-days the number destroyed will probe% io much greater. We aro not aware of any large to r_.o the kingdom where so large a number of th ese add is annuallydestroyed ; but here, we are, full,' Pe rs ,, ke ep the work of destruction is work of necessity, w oshe r down the immense number of dogs that wou ld wise overrun the town.—Mancheßter Guardian. KETS• RAILWAY it R MANCHESTER, ,7u.trz 10. I Ili STocic ExcuArtoz.—The sales are—Blac, kburn, Clitherl'anclieste dis.—Boston, Newark, and Sheffield, dis.— -Chester and 3 bire 3 - P o Direct, 1 1 4 dis.—Derby and Crewe, 2% p.— E a st Lanea s- Le ices.:„ Glasgow and Dumfries, 10s. dis.—Grand IJYiion,it ~ Pi e r and Bedford, par c.--Liverpool Ormskirk, . an d Frest o i;olics Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland, 611., 3 d• P* - d and i ' .g 6 ' and Birmingham, Quarters (C), 8% p.—Northrb,mberian gl3 cashire, 17s. dis.—North Kent, 1U dis.—North Staff° rd ' ill ß re ), —Oldham District, 1,4 p.—Preston and Wyre Ha-lv e r l u ( ar ters Ditto, Extension, 3i dis.—Sheflield and Manchester , 3 ),'A p.—Shropshire Union Railway and Canal, 215 " D ian, Eastern and Dover, Halves (No. 4), Is. di s .—Tren,, li a o land, )4 dis.—West Lancashire Coast, % dis.—WeSt J'„ a nd % T.—Whitehaven and Furness, 61s, 6d. dis.—EdinburP gow, Quarters, 173,. LEEDS, JUNE 10. „„,,long V% .. STOCK EXCHANGE.-The sales are-Eastern Count..., „dada. tension, 6s. p.-lluddersfield and Manchester, 17s. 6d. d-.is. d Li dsto, field and Sheffield, 4/. IBs. 6d. p.-Leeds and DewsbarY , g Branches, par-Leeds and Thirsk, 5% db.-Manchester Vorlg d Extensions, 2 p.-North British, Carlisle Branch, 68. P' rg 3t e, North Midland (East and West Riding), 8% P. -Ainbe ilis tingham, and Boston, 1% dis.-Direct Northern, 15s• and Suffolk, 16s. d3.-Grand Union, 15s. 9d. die - - L eeds ' LiverP„c ' and Midland, 15s. dis.-Leicester and Bedford, 30. dis• Rastriol'• Ormskirk, and Prestos:, 9s. p.--London and Manchester 1% dis.-Manchester, uxton, Matlock, and Midland, 7'l' i.l land and 'fhirsk Junctio.n, 21s. dis.-Northumberland _Sort° shire Junction, 15s. 6d. cis.-North Staffordshire, 2 3i ,tion, 3 % . Western, dis.-Welsh Midlands, dis.-W es t Riding HULL, Juss 10. Sila r° STOCK Excasmo.-The sales are--Hull and Selby , 35%-Blackburn, Darwen, and Bolton, 6% -Nortii Brtish, 'GOO' -Ambergate, Nottingham, Boston, Ste., 265.-Ar a f r i e i r ' C s ° llefli el .a di and Portrush, 125.-Axhohne, 30s. 9d.-Goole, Donca Leicester tze, dis.-Ifull and Barnsley Junction, 9dB-London Bedford, 18s.-Leicester and Tamworth, 2 40 .rpr 365. 6d.-Malton and Drlffield Junctim:', 47s • - -North arapton, 1 % -Nottingham and Mansfield, 68.6. dis. 1 14 West P" -- 195.-North Staffordshire, 41. 18s.-South ak thuul ' Union, 3/. 13s. 3d. 9 31 Manchester tde°rn andr d "L' SHEFFIELD, JUNE JO ch e eld tension 15s. Ex c dis " .— NG D E it — to T , h Q e usaralte:r are —areGsrint y , luShir e Fs le ftl (Nottingham to Lynn), 153. dis.—Sheffield and ,Linco sion, 15s. dig. acusnd. NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, Jogs JO. d CO: STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Glasgow, Dumfries, lisle, Bs. 6d. dis.—Kendal and Windermere, 105. 6d. dIS berland and Lancashire, 17s. dis. YORK, JUNE 10. 1) - ding 'II , STocK EXCLIANCIE.—The sales are—Grand U n i on (No and Lynn), 12s.—Leicester mid Bedford, 198.—London and 101 0 00 , 16s.—Mallon and Driffield Junction, 2/. 6s.—Manchester, 13 ,01' Matlock, and Midland, 2%—Newcastle and Darlington I:::ct e 'irocu" 8% —North British, Carlisle Extension, Li. 10s. 6d.—North bt i ajag , shire, 4%—York and North Midland, New (East and West 91, 14s.—Eastern Counties, York Extension, 1. THE BRITISH AND AMERIti °- SQUADRON IN THE PACIFIC. Llo yd'o The following statement has been received at from lima, of the 13th of April, 1846 : BRITISH.I ( • 1/ ' s m art, • Collingwood, line of battle, 80 guns, CaPt- R . -- O or , Coe'' with the fl of Rear Admiral Sir George SePa mender-in- Chief of this station. America, frigate, 50 guns, Capt. Hon. Georg tos sailer, and well manned. A. Dan tse- Fisguard, frigate, 42 guns, Captain John crowded to work her guns well. ; t sr •ck Blake- - . 1115 Juno, corvette, 26 guns, Captain Petri rived from England. , sae ThenlP Talbot, corvette, 26 guns, Captain Sir Thomas slow, but well equipped. till e r Herald, corvette, 26 guns, Captain Henry Kellett- 4 in Pa ndora, coast, north. nrili fib brig, 6 guns, Lieutenant James Wrood-- 611- the coast, north. OW Modeste, sloop, 18 guns, Commander T. Baillie- 4 e Gordon-410 rate crew and officers. f AS4 Frolic, brig, 16 guns, C c om om m m an a d n e d r er C G . e ß o . rg H e a T m . il G to o o r T o sa co iler rm an or d an w 4 ell sl m o r p, n 6 ed. ''' guns, A n steam sloop. ' ee Salamander, sloop, 6 guns, Commander A. S. 1 03° steam sloop. .jobli Spy, brigantine, 3 guns, Lieut. 0. Woolrid e—reu` g fast sailer. Total, 12 vessels, 305 guns. UNITED STATES. ~f CoLn i ; Congress, frigate, 56 guns, Captain Dupont --flag" o f OAT modore Stockton. This, frigate's armament coasistys long 32-pounders and six 68-pounders. 1 s i..-0 11 Constitution, frigate, 60 guns, Captain John manned, and sails fast. ea W ig carrz Savannah, frigate, 54 guns, Commodore Mode" _Ai 32-pounders, and carronades 42-pounders. re.--w . Portsmouth, corvette, 22 guns, Captain Montgoale" ,poll, d well, and well manned. , if e.-1 Warren, corvette, 22 guns, Captain Hull--ads an d well manned. . 1 , well, Levant, corvette, 20 guns, Captain Page—so and well manned. _ Ala 0111 Cyane, corvette, 24 guns, Captain Mervine- 84 "' • , . 0 014 well manned. sail.' - Shark, schooner, 12 guns, Captain Ilovse5012". hilt and well manned. a sai ler ' Erie, transport, 5 guns, Captain Twiner—bad well manned. ['ere's,' a 0 fatilc " t" THE " CHILTERN HUNDREDS." T he t hat 01 ,,, ta s stupid argument put forth by the monopolists , oill v , itiv event of free trade becoming the law of the land', 0 of acres of poor land would be thrown out 0 , .. tr ien? . . tion, has, within the last few weeks, receivedsl4. Ph pliant refutation in this town and neighbeurii, l 7 r A O _,.e o. passing under the Chiltern Hills the other dal! f„ ftfr: tion was pleasingly attracted to scores of byFbtub„ r ee. composed of dried turf cut off the sides of the Ur : ) . f. tr ratory to its being brought under the influen Bso littl e plough, with a view to its immediate cultivation 2 ~__,..d tir do our excellent farmers in this neighbourhood al° ,,Art l ,' cularly our esteemed ;townsman Mr. Banwell, , affrighting bugbear of free trade, that some of theme'a Nat''ool ar:uf 'o adopting an expensive process to cultivate thatr? ,_ to i , extensive farm, almost pr gy lington hill' attached to 10 E ed ßs tiat T if sufficie . n c t ow el:• . : o l l 1 1 : 1 iesr m n s lt a h N d e land, in connexion itit and capital were e he British farmer will be able to cope f/ summit. W e are other measures , the the world.—Berks and Buds G a zettie any competition 1 ROYAL SAPPERS cloned officers and privatesis eft Woolwich yesterday . morning . for Windsor Castle, where Sooi I employed in tunnelling, under the command of Lie - ' Yo at, to be r 1 Ilussey Fano Keane, son of the and his consort, Eugenia, daughter of Prince Eugene late gallant offi ce r, Geue -3 x fi p r : A l d e d o P Kean e, distinguished for his services in the East Indies. ,n col,. CORONATION OF OSCAR I.—The coronation O. - S Iv nois, as King and Queen of A . o ° l o' - t he - October next, on which occasion the Storthing will be conir Norway, is fixed to be held c'eved. mak% ' orife ' -":7----- o er On the 10th inst., at No. 6, Cheyne-walk, Chelsea, ' t op, Thomas Butler, Esq., o f a son. Hala ie On the 7th inst., i n Grosvenor-strpt, the Viscountess t of a son, r $o On the 3d inst., at Roach-bank, Rochdale, the l ad ! ° De° 0. Schofield, Esq., of a son. ~,,di of On the 4th inst., at Leintwardine, Herefordshire, he er nant-Colonel J. Colvin, C.R., of a daughter. of gorw - On the 6th inst., th e w if e o f J o h n Tomes, Es+ , „off° street, of a son. A., of 31 ' v On the 6th inst., at Grove-hill, Camber Well, the la _.,, j elf, Nugent, Esq., M.D., of a daughter, still-born. T . r. 114 On the 6th inst., at Hackney, the lady of the Rev- /1 d ..fd M A., Minister of St. Philip's, Dalston, o f a daught er. On the 7th inst., at Tamworth, the wife of th ° _ ''' ey. % if . R. H On the arston, of th a son. the ?I' o f . -- 8 inst., at Farnham, Surrey, the lady of Julius, of a daughter. On the Bth inst., at Dalston, Mrs. Hosford, of a Jot ti MARRIED. Bea rac-, On the 9th inst., at St. Pancras, by the Rev. Mr' o f the Potter, Esq., of Walsall, to Elizabeth, eldest daughter John Hasloch, of Kentish Town t DIED. grO• lit'rtie On the 7th inst., in Marsh-street, WaltharnstoW, i meg° Ann Sorrell, aged 47. Harr iet '--- On the sth inst., at Tempsford Hall, Bedfor dshire, E ol4l' relict of the late J. Wade, Esq. gurlet , 0f On the sth inst., Robina, the wife of Mr. B . I. A ' Hants, aged 24. On the 7th inst., .Augusta, second daughter of George Walker, Esq., of Norton, Worcester. , aged 7 9 . 0. On the Bth inst., Mr. J. Dupes, of Oxford 2a.., ~ . tgo On the 10th inst., at Boy al.Creseent , Notting-hill , —...02:-1 - 11 London: Printed andTablished by' 11.1T111WOIr0111• 106 , 4 , 13 „ rr . ecres Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, N 0 .112, Strand. """ 1 OP II, f the T4O!AYO7, la the Count"' of AlidOWol4 01111/414'