The Sun. — London, England, 1846-03-12 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 11. ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIEF BILL. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. FINCH was not opposed to the whole of the principles of this Bill, because he thought that some of its provisions might with very great safety be adopted ; as for instance that which went to repeal the law by which schoolmasters were regulated, and which he thought might be very judiciously abolished. But there were other points to which he en tertained strong and insuperable objections. He was aware that there were parties belonging to the religi ous community of the Roman Catholic Church who held in all its force the doctrine of the political supremacy of the Pope.—(Cries of " Where, where ?") The authority to which he would refer was the late Charles Butler, the barrister, who it was well known was himself a Catholic, and who hal stated that this doctrine was held in the Vati can and its precincts.—(A laugh.) He might add that the same principle was supported by the celebrated Bellarmine. And further, he might cite the - oath.as administered under the provisions of the 31st. Geo. 111. Mr. O'CONNELL—That is not the oath now administered to Members of the House. Mr. FINCH had just had the book put into his hands, and he was therefore not responsible for the error, but he still must contend that there were many individuals who held the doctrine of Papal supremacy. There might be no imme diate danger, but he could see in future years, and that at no distant period, ample cause for apprehension if this Bill were carried. There might be cases of conscience in which the imposition of an oath would be felt as a hard ship, but he believed they were very few, and there was, on the other hand, an evil to be guarded against. Many young persons were led, at an age when they were incapable of judging of their future course, to take re ligious vows from which, at some after pet iod, they would be very glad to be released, and he conceived that a very advan tageous change might be made in the regulation of religious communities. Each of these establishments might be visited by a Commissioner, appointed by Government, who might see each of these young persons s eparately, and take measures to effect their liberation whenever - it was desired. (A laugh.) With regard to the observation of the Noble Lord respecting the Jesuits, he did not conceive that any security could be taken against them, or at least any that wasworthy of the name. This was in 18 9 9.—(Hear, hear.) He understood that ex pression. It was that the Right Hon. Baronet had left he hind him all his former opinione, and that Hansard should be laid aside. Still he (Mr. Fiuch) would say this was a constitutional principle. Spain, though a Catholic country, had seen it necessary to suppress many of its religious orders, as inconsistent with the Government of the country, and other nations had done the same. There was, therefore, no thing inconsistent in this country exercising some control over such orders. At present sisters of Mercy and other religious bodies were springing up, distributing tracts, and using every exertion to make proselytes, and they were not interfered with ; yet it might come that in a few years it would be necessary for a Protestant Government to interfere with the proceedings of monastic orders. If the Roman Catholics, however, con sidered the subject well, he was sure they would not venture on processions, in which the host, they so much vene rated, might be liable to insult. There was one other point to which he would refer. The clause which gave the power for Roman Catholic prelates to assume the legal title of bishop and archbishop could . not but be offensive to the digaitaries of the Protestant Church. Nothing could be more offensive than for a Roman Catholic bishop 'to take the title of Archbishop of Canterbury. He thought that the Catholic clergy would, if this Bill passed, assume the titles of the Protestant clergy. He deprecated the spirit which was at present so prevalent among all sections of the Protestant clergy to look favourably on Roman Catholics, and to make unjust concession to them. Having these opinions, he would oppose the second reading of the Bill. Sir JAMES GRAHAM wished to detain the House for a -short time while he stated his reasons for giving his support to the second reading of the Bill. He supported it, because he was favourable to its spirit and because he conceived that that was the spirit of toleration.—(Hear, bear.) If there be Fetch penalties in the statute-book, he for one was satisfied that they should be inquired into, with a view to ascertain it; without danger to the community, they could not be re- Moe - ed.—(Heer, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Oxford had endeavoured to show that tire Act of 1829 was one which should be swept from the statute-book. He (Sir James Graham), so far from con curring in that opinion, thought it one of the brightest pages in the statute-book, and was a consummation which he, from the part he took in it, should always look back upon with delight. He did not see why they should have any oh jection to this Bill, or why they should think that it swept away any of those safeguards which it would be desirable to have, for it did not go so far as the Bill in the other House. The Bill in the other House provided relief for all Dissenters, while this one proposed to remove those only which affected' R0111;411 Catholics:. In some other respects also the Bill in the other Mouse went further. - He had the greatest veneration and respect for the religion which the Hon. Member for the i'hivereity of Oxford professed, but he was sorry to say that, iu Ins opinion, the policy of that Church towards Roman Catholics, in -former times, was most unhappy and unwise.—(llear.) He believed that in conse quence of that policy the British Crown had been deprived of the as-istance of the ablest men in England. The Hon. Member for the University of Oxford had admitted that there were penal Acts on the statute-book which ought to be repealed ; yet he was opposed to the second reading of this Bill, which proposed to repeal the greater portion of those Acts. For his (Sir J. Graham's) own part, he confessed that if there were such penal statutes as had been alluded to, it was the bounden duty of the Legislature to repeal them. And what had been the defence set up with reference to the clause respecting Roman Catholic schoolmasters? The lion. Member for Oxford ad mitted that there was another clause, but that it never came into operation. He also admitted in the course of his speech that that statute ought to be repealed, and vet he said that he would oppose the second reading of this Bill which proposed to repeal it. He (Sir J. Graham) was most anxious that this Bill should be passed lute a law as quickly as poseible. He was not, however, prepared on the part of her Majesty's Government to sanction the second reading of the Bill. lie also reserved to himself the power of proposing, in Committee, some alterations with regard to the concluding clauses of the Bill. The Hon. Member had said that this Bill proposed to repeal the Act of Supremacy, but it pro posed no such thing. He (Sir J. Graham) would, in fact - oppose the repeal of that Act ; nor did the Bill which was now in progress in the other House of Parliament propose the repeal of the Act of Supremacy. He did think that, considering the immense number of the Roman Catholic subjects of her Majesty, penal ties should no longer be enforced against them in either a temporal or spiritual point of view. —(Hear, hear.) He would again say that he really thought that the great settle ment of the year 1829 should, so far from being regarded as unhappy, be considered as a most politic and wise settle ment.—( Hear hear.) To that settlement he was determined to adhere. With the reservation to which he had already referred; lie was prepared to give his most cordial support to the second reading of this Bill.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. WISE would gladly have left the introduction of a measure of Reman Catholic relief to the good feeling and tentions of Protestant Members of that House, rather than n measure of that nature should have originated in conse luence of any complaints made by the Roman Catholic por tion of the House. He did not think it wise to keep on the statute-busk the remnant of a law condemned by the general feeling of the people of th e coun t r y. His Right Hon. Friend :seemed to have misunderstood the subject before the House. The House was not at present in Committee, where objections might be taken - to this or that clause of the Bill. They were discussing the general principles of the measure. If these enactments were useless, as the Right Hon. Baronet had wined, he would ask why were they kept on the statute- Ireele ? He thought, therefor e that his Right Hon. Friend wile bound, in consequence of his own showing that the laws s; ere ineffective, and were continually evaded, to support the second reading of the Bill ; while, at the same time, Hon. Members on his side of the House were not bound to re pudiate the measure in consequence of any observations which fell from the Right lion. Baronet. He (Mr. Wyse) vonsidered it perfectly impossible to attempt, by any legis lative 'enactments, to bind the Opinions or consciences of any class of her Majesty's subjects.—(Cries of "Hear, bear.") If the Elonse woem look, through the Act, they would timid eienemeitts coeepelling the citizens of a free. country, differ ing teen'elie establiehel religion, to attend the public read• in;; rommon prayer. He could not be. blind to the benefits conferred en the country by the wise government of Queen Eli - 4'll)2th and the politic measures of her statesmen; but he could not help attributing toiler the bad policy which had been - observable on the subject throughout the succeeding reigns. With regarfl to the observations of the Hon. Member f•Jr Ratlandehire, he gave him due credit for good feeling; but he wished that he had been more accurately informed of the opinions of Catholic writers, and of the nature of Catholic prayers. There was no such thing as a recognition of the tem poral supremacy of the Pope in any place beyond the Papal dominions. Such a belief was well suited to the dark ages, but not to the present time ; and he would join all Europe in deprecating the extent of the power of the Pope beyond the Papal dominions. With regard to what had been said about an enactment for the suppression of the Jesuits, and the forcing open of conventual institutions, or that there should be at least an inquiry instituted into their practice a sort of inquiry of lunacy, perhaps—did the Hon. Member not know that those institutions were perfectly open, and that females entering them were allowed a certain time to consider before. they assumed the title of nuns ? With regard to the title of bishop, it should be re collected, that though it was different in Ireland, in England no Catholic bishop took his tithe from any English see, and there was nu Roman Catholic bishop who took his title from an existing see, except when the Protestant title had ceased, as in the case of the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Teem, and in that ease there e was no Protestant title. 'Therefore he hoped that that House would not longer con tinue this relic of an age of , bigotry, of which he, if he were a Pretestiett, would be utterly ashamed. On these grounds, then, he trusted that in this House he should hear no more of non-tight of dignitaries of the Roman Catholic Church to the titles which they nuw Lure.-(hear.) Mr. COLQUIIOUN was anxious to state the grounds upon which he should support his lion. Friend the Alimber for the llniversity of Oxford. Ile admitted that there were Acts bearing upon this subject _to be found in the statute book, which he was perfectly prepared to get rid of; and so far as they related to educational matters, he agreed with the observations which had fallen from the Hon. Member who had just sat down. There were parts of this Bill to which he took exception, but if those parts were expunged in Committee lie did not. know whether he might not be in (-lineal to assent to the measure.—(Bear,) He, however, , certainly slid not agree with the Right Hon. Baronet the Se cretary of State,for the Home Department, that because a Bill contained enactments which were wise and just in them selves, he was justified in voting for it second reading, while at the same time there was a paramount part of the Bill which was considered highly objectionable, and contrary to the spirit of the constitution.—(Hear.) And, without going back to defend the _ reign of Queen Elizabeth; &sari - guisbed as that reign was for the advancement of religion, and the promotion of literature, because any one who looked into the works of Spencer or Shakspere, or studied the works of Lord Bacon. must be convinced that it required no. defence. lie would contend that the paramount part of the Bill to which he objected was decide dl y o pp osed to that wise and equitable spirit which ought to actuate them in the present day.—(Hear.) The constitution of the country was based upon one recognised and constituted authority ; they must take care not to allow an authority to exist that was above the authority of the Crown and the Parliament of the country. He found that it was the opinion of many forties connected with the Church of Rome, that that Church bad newer over all ecclesiastical matters ; that in • this respect it had supreme control. This was asserted by many writers who concur in this view of the power of the Chnich. If so, let them take the case of an election. A vote given in an election would be considered an eeclesiasti eel matter, though an elector was considered alone respon ate. en a political point of view to the country. That a vat; dean. election was an ecclesiastical matter, was stated -.by/the Church of Rome, -and in proof of that they had the aridence:.of the • Committee appointed in 1835. It was ..--eleeeeteindelreetkat Committee that the Church Of Rome held [his OVONN-F,LI. said it was not so. 'Al's. COLQU'iIotA4 said tho H on. an d L earne d G en tl eman could not disputethe fact, as the evidence taken before the ree , j Committee fully bore that out. It was held to be an eccle siastical matter, because an oath was taken at an election. Mr. O'CONNELL—The Church of Rome does not say so. Mr. COLQUHOUN said the best course was to look to the practical proceedings of the Church, and not the mere words. It was their ditty not to ask what the Church taught, but what she practised. He (Mr. Colquhoun) did not seek the mere words on the authority of books, but what was practised and continually acted on, and that it was as he had represented it to be could not be denied. As long as he had a seat in that House he would oppose every attempt at ecclesiastical domination, he would always be the advocate of the right of free judgment and the right of conscience. The Jesuits had ever aimed at this domina tion, and he called upon them to take all legal steps with a view to undermine their power. He did not wish to re move them from the soil in fact. That was not a policy which he would recommend, but he thought that every means should be taken to prevent ecclesiastical power from superseding the civil. Now, as the Act of Supre macy, the Ist of Elizabeth, went to put an end to that power, he considered that it should not be repealed. lie must, therefore, offer his decided objection to repeal these laws, though he did not wish at the same to be considered one who would support his religious prin ciples by penal enactments. lie objected to any intolerance, as it WAS subversive of all religious principles, of all Pro testant feeling. Intolerance was not the doctrine of the Church of England. The Church of England recognised the right of the exercise of private conscience and judgment. —(llear, hear.) But he found that it was admitted on all side, by every body in point of fact who looked at the present aspects of the day, that we were advancing to a very important period is the history of Europe—(Hear, hear)—a period in which we were engaged in a great struggle between the ecclesiastical autho rities and the civil power.—(Hear, hear.) His Honourable and Learned Friend the Member for Rutlandshire had alluded to the movement within the Church of England. Well, he (Mr. Colquhoun) did not mean to say it was not one which foreboded great and serious danger to the Church ; and he did not mean to say that if it increased he should not shrink from asking the Legislature to interpose for the purpose of arresting the progress of that dangerous movement. He, for one, would not shrink when the proper time arrived from grappling with the difficulty. The Honourable and Learned Member had said; that. there was a Mr. Wharton, and au Archbishop of Rhodes, and another gentleman, Mr. Green, who had ajected to take the oath required by the Act, and had consequently suffered great annoyance, but the Hon. and Learned Member had said that it was not the oath of 1826 that they objected to, and he had also refused to read the oath. But what did the oath require ? Merely that Roman Catholics should deny the civil authority of the Church of Rome, and yet the Honourable and Learned Member had called upon the House to approve of his Bill because a certain layman and an Arch bishop had experienced some inconvenience because they did not choose to take the oath in question. He (Mr. Cof quhoun) contended that if this Bill were passed it would en gender most urgent and serious dangers which, in his opi nion, it was not wise to increase in tunes like the present. If the Legislature passed this Bill without any modification, and just as it was proposed by his lion. and Learned Friend, they would give the strongest support to those men whose conduct would be calculated to injw e in the most fatal manner the liberties and constitution of this country. Come front his Hon. and Learned Friend, or front the Lord Chancellor—come, in fact, from what quarter it might—he should give his most decided opposition to a Bill like the present, whether it was supported or opposed by the Government, or whether it was backed or con demned by the highest authority in either House of Parliament. He should, in fact, oppose to the utmost every attempt to break down the constitution of Great Britain.—(Clear, hear.) He would not give his sup port to measures like the present, which he believed to be fatal to the constitution and liberties of Englishmen—liberties obtained at a period which his Hon. and Learned Friend looked back to with contempt, but which he (Mr. Coign houn ) regarded with the greatest of veneration and respect. Mr. O'CONNELL said the Free Church of Scotland had repu diated the principle of ecclesiastical supremacy in temporal matters. His opinion was that in ecclesiastical matters ecclesias tical government should be supreme, and in civil and temporal matters the civil power should be supreme. With reference, to the speech' of the Right lion. Member for the University of Oxford, he had stated many things which would have been better if considered in Committee. He could assure the House, that as regarded any processions of the kind being exhibited in the streets of London or other large towns, he had too much veneration for that solemnity to expose it to the ribaldry, and perhaps to the insult of thess who differed from him in their opinions upon that subject. lle would, however, state to the House, that at Malta an officer of the British army conscientiously refused to fire the accustomed salute at the time the procession of the Host was passing by. Ile was punished by the Government of this coun try for not doing so, by being deprived of his commision. He (Mr. O'Connell) however brought the circumstances under the consideration of the House, and undertook his defence on the ground of his conscientious scruples. He did not think he could allow himself to be silent upon the monastic order. There was no law to prevent those institutions. There was no law to prevent the superiors of convents keeping nuns in 'their house. The doors of the convents are al ways open, so that the nuns might leave at any time they thought proper,—(Hear, hear.) They had not however done so. The Right Hon. Baronet seems to be impressed with unfavourable notions regarding the Jesuits. lie had had opportunities of looking over the history of that illustrious order. He was convinced there never were greater friends to the advancement of literature than they had been. He believed that their virtues were their crime. He defied any man to state, with name and fact, anything derogatory to that illustrious order which he was not able to refute. Their lives were spent in the performance of the most acetic virtues. They are compelled to spend a number of years in a course of training at their colleges, to enable them to teach others, and at the expiration of that period they may or may notbe admitted into the - order. They have produced many great men in all branches of literature and science, which no person can but admit. The authority of Pascal, although a great and fascinating writer, yet he dces not attempt to look into the facts of the case ; and he (Mr. O'Connell) believed that there was not a statement put forward in that book that he was not able to refute. Michela - was not either any authority to be quoted upon the subject of the Jesuits, nothing could be more atro cious than his book. As to Eugene Sue, the writer of romances of the most atrocious nature, be states no fact whatever of the Jesuits. He succeeded by drawing largely upon his imagination to turn his work into a most gross and unatural romance. There is not a single fact recorded in it. They had been persecuted by many countries by reason of their superior moral lives. Spain and Portugal had ba nished them from their countries, and no person could say that those countries were at all in an enlightened state. lie thanked God that the order was now reviving again, that in the la,t. year 40 missionaries had been sent to a great portion of the most uncivilised parts of the globe. They would probably double their number in the next year. He begged pardon of the House for introducing to their notice the sub ject of the Jesuists ; it was the first time he had troubled the House with such a subject; and concluded by stating, as his firm and settled conviction, that they were the greatest benefactors to the literature and science of this country. they were either obsolete or penal, and in either case they should be repealed.—(Hear, hear.) If they were obso lete, then they were no use, and ought to be abolished ; and if they were penal, then that was a still stronger reason for their repeal.—(Loud cries of "Divide, divide.") Strangers were then 'ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared— For the second reading Against it ... 23 • - - ---Ma)ority for the second reading —43 MANCHESIER, HUDDERSFIELD, AND GREAT GRIMSBY DIRECT RAILWAY. This Bill was read a second time. OUT-PENSIONERS' PAYMENT (GREENWICH AND CHELSEA) BILL. Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT moved the second reading of this Bill. Captain PECHELL briefly expresses his dissent from the principles of this Bill, as its operation was by no means calculated to benefit the interests of, or to give satisfaction to, these veterans. Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT defended the Bill as a measure that would inflict no hardship on the pensioners, but rather ,be a means of protecting them. The Secretary-at-War had no power to withhold or grant pensions, but it was provided that the payments should be made through him. Instead of pensions being paid; as hitherto, by a clumsy and cumberons processi, they would be_paid directly_by a staff officer, under the general superintendence of the Secretary-at-War • After a few remarks from Captain PECIIELL, the Bill was read a second time and ordered to be committed on Friday next. PAKINGT6N, though' a member of the Prolestant Church, would gladly support the principle of the Bill, which he believed was to remove those enactments against Roman Catholics which had now become obsolete. But, at the same time, , though perfectly willing to make any concession to his Catholic brethren, be could not go so far as the principle contemplated in the Bill. He could not support a measure calculated to remove these safeguards of the British constitution' which were framed at the time of the 'easing of the Catholic Emanci pation Act in 1829. Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL . could say that he had been educated at a Jesuit college, and from what he had seen there, he believed that they were good Christians, enlightened gentlemen, and loyal subjects. Mr. NEWDEGATE thought that it would be found that the order of the Jesuits wou!d be difficult to be traced; he would:not deny,that there might be among them, some cha racters remarkable for their attainments; Several countries, hrnvever, which. the Hon. Member for Cork must be aware of, had found it necessary for the preservation of internal peace to banish them. Mr. O'CONNELL stated, in reply to the Hon. Member, that the ;fatty Missionaries he had alluded to had not been labouring.in England or France, but their labours had com menced at the Mores, and ended at Cochin China. Lord JOHN MANNERS could not see what possible good, it could do to the Honourable Member for Oxford, or any other. Protestant, to witness the continuance of these laws upon the statute-book. The Honourable Ba ronet . said he would remove them .when some prac tical grievance resulted from their enforcement, -but what was that but carrying out the old a d age of no t shutting the stable till the steed was stolen? He could not agree with the fears expressed by Hen. Members in refer ence to the Jesuits.. About 100 years ago a similar feeling prevailed in this country against. the Templar,. There was no: atrocity of which they were considered capable. The Spectator, a few years ago, stated that the feelings pre valent about Jesuits were " more suited to circulating libraries and romances than grave political discussions." These opinions were absolutely ridiculous. The Jesuits were a body of learned and intelligent men, and had of late earned the Gospel to China,, and. conferred a great amount of good on benighted lauds. Ile' thought they should rather imitate their example, as well as thaVof the Christian Brothers and the Cistercians of Mount Melleray, than sully the dignity of the British House of Commons by heaping aspersions upon them Which were utterly devoid of truth and unworthy of their character. Mr. ESTCOURT apprehended that the enactments of 1829 were not inoperative and useless, for the speech of the Noble Lord proved distinctly the reverse. The Noble Lord dwelt at some length on them, and considered them of little consequence; but he was old enough to remember that con siderable importance was attached to them when they were under discussion. lie should most willingly support the amendment of. the Hon. Baronet. Mr, P. BORTWICK supported the second reading of the Bill, because it was founded upon the broad principle of "cha rity—the child of Christianity and the mother of the Church of England. He considered the' works of Eggene Sue ex ercised a more Pernicious*inthience*On sociefy than any act the Jesuits had ever committed. -Mr. M. MILNES would have preferred that this discussion had taken place upon the Government Bill. ' He passed a great portion of his time in Catholic countries, and had even heard the service of the Church 'of England under the walls of the Vatican. He considered that the re moval• of these disabilities would have a good effect on the Itotnau Catholic religion abroad. He hoped that they would eschew these absurd delusions about Jesuits; and remove for ever from the statute-book- these odions penalties and dis abilities. Colonel SIBTRIAP said he would adopt in reference to this measure but one course, and that' was the consistent course, and the same that he had pursued in reference to the grant to the College of Maynooth. He did hope that the Hon. Member for Oxford would take a division on his amendment ; and here, let him say, that he did think that the Protestant religion was much indebted to that Honourable Member fur the manner in which he sit down by hdefended it. With regard to this measure he saying, that he would support the sug gestion of the Hon. Member for Oxford, becauss he feared that to leave the measure of the Right Honourable Baronet unsupported: would have the effect of undermining the Pro testant religion in this country. Captain HARRIS said he quite agreed with many Hon. Members that many of these penal Acts should be repealed ; but at the same time he should oppose the present measure, because he conceived it to be too general a measure. Lord J. RUSSELL said he wished to put a question to the mover of the Bill. He would wish to know whether certain penalties which had been alluded to would be repealed? Mr. ESCOTT said he would be very glad to introduce a clause to the effect of abolishing those penalties, though he believed that in the existing state of the law these penalties cOttld not be enforced.—(Cues of "Divide, divide.") Mr. P. HOWARD said the Hon. Member opposite was mistaken as to the existing law in reference to Jesuits. Mr. B. ESCOTT replied. He said the Bill would contain a clause to prevent procestions of Roman Catholics in this country ' which should have a malicious or offensive tendenc y . He had heard Hon. Members contend that other Acts affect ing other persuasions injuriously ought I.o.l4,iepesled, He fully agreed with them ; but then he wojald say, in liference to the Acts which this Dill prcpoted to repeal, that landowners on the line, who complained of omissions is the ' plans and sections of property of which the petitioners themselves were not the owners and occupiers„ while the property alleged to be omitted was situated at a considerable distance from that part of the country, while the petitioners' property was intersected by the railway. Mr. DEANS demanded that the consent of the occupiers or owners of the property alleged to be omitted to the presentation of the peti tion in question should be proved by Mr. Venables before he was heard upon it. Mr. VENABLTS apprehended that as this was an objection open to the general public, it was not necessary for him to prove such consent. Mr. AGLIONBY said it was true that it had already beau decided that mat allegations were open to the general public, but each cote must be taken upon its particular merits and particular facts, and it' the particular circumstances and particular facts of the case did sot justify the hearing of a general petitioner, not immediately interested in the property alleged to be omitted or incorrectly described, it was competent for the Committee to refuse to hear evidence or arguments upon such petition. That was the opinion of the Committee in the present instance, and the petition therefore could not bs admitted. Several allegations urged by other petitioners, of omissions and defects in the plans, sections, and books of refeience, were substan tiated, and allowed by the Committee. The Committee then adjourned. THE SUN, LON DON, THURSDAY EVENING MARCH 12 1 1845. January, 1837, it appears that there remained in the tin box 10,000!. of Exchequer-bills belonging to the plain tiff. These Byrne delivered to the respondents to receive, as they had done before, the interest thereon, and exchange them for new bills, which was accordingly done. At this period Byrne had a ba lance of something more than 1,500/. standing to his credit at his bankers, and certain bills of exchange of Byrne's became due at this time, and being presented for pay rnent at the banking house, Messers. Barnett advanced Byrne a sum of 3,2001, which, with the balance of 1,300/. belonging to Byrne, was required to pay these bills. This transaction made a balance of 3,2001., in their books due to them from Byrne. The Exchequer bills belonging to plaintiff, amounting to 10,1001., which Byrne had last given to Messrs. Barnett, to receive the interest thereon, and exchange them for new ones, not having been returned to I yrne as usual in due time, he applied to Messrs. Barnett to return them to him, to be deposited in the tin box, as he had been theretofore in the habit of doing. Byrne, at this time, it appears, be came embarrassed in his pecuniary affairs, and owing Messrs. Barnett a balance of 3,200!., they refused to return him the Exchequer-bills in question, claiming a lien upon them, according to the general custom of bankers in such cases, in order to secure the payment of the balance due to them from Byrne. The appellant, under these circumstances, brought an action in the Court of Common Pleas against Messrs. Barnett, to recover his Exchequer-bills, or the amount thereof. Messrs. Barnett, in defence to that action, claimed as bankers the right to a lien (according to the general custom of bankers in their behalf) of the Ex chequer-bills in question, which Byrne had handed over to them, in order to secure the repayment of the ad vance they had made him. They had never been in formed by Byrne, or had any notice, or the slightest notion, that any or all of the Exchequer-bills which Byrne kept deposited in the tin box, and which from time to time he delivered to them edes,rs. Barnett) to receive the interest thereon and exchange for new Exchequer-bills, were the property of the appellant; but they had con sidered and treated them as the property of Byrne, and therefore as such were liable to be retained as a security by them. The appellant's case before the Court below was, that the Exchequer bills were never deposited with Messrs. Barnett, by Byrne, in the course of their busi ness as bankers ; they were never entered in their books to the account of Byrne, and the fact of their being always deposited in the tin box by Byrne, who kept the key, and being delivered by him only for a special pur pose, from time to time, to Messrs. Barnett, and then returned again to him by them when that parti cular object was attained, showed clearly that Byrne was not dealing with them as his own property, and that, even if they had been, the bankers never became possessed of them in such a way as would entitle them to have a general lien on them for advances they might make to Byrne. Upon the trial of the action a special verdict was given for the appellant, which was afterwards turned into a special case for the opinion of the Court of Common Pleas sitting in banco. Upon argument the Court gave judgment in favour of the appellant, holding that under the particular circum stances of this case Messrs. Barnett had not, through Byrne, obtained or were entitled to a lien of these Ex chequer-bills, the property of the appellant. The case was then carried to the Exchequer Chamber, upon a writ of error, by Messrs. Barnett, and the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas was reversed, the Judges being of opinion that Messrs. Barnett were entitled to a lieu on the property. From the decision of the Exchequer Chamber this appeal was brought. Their Lordships, at the conclusion of the arguments, postponed giving judgment. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. HOME CIR :WlT—Maidstone, Tuesday. The Commission for the county of Kent was opened on Monday. • There was nearly a hundred prisoners for trial, and on' the civil side 29 cases are entered, three of which are special jury cases. 'rhe Lord Chief Justice sat at Nisi Prius, and Mr. Baron Alderson presided at the Crown Court. CROWN COURT. _ James Bowray,24 - , wai indicted for a misdemeanour, in having unlawfully thrown a stone upoa the Gravesend and Rochester Railway, and thereby endangered the safety of the passengers travelling upon the line. Mr. Smith conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Russell appeared for the defendant. From the evidence it appeared that some time prior to the 20th of January there had been repeated complaints of persons throwing stonbs at the trains as they passed upon the line ; and, on the day in question, as the five p.m. train was passing under Higham•bridge, the de fendant was seen to throw or drop a stone, which fell upon one of the carripges. He was taken into custody, when he admitted that the stone fell from his hand, but he said he had no intention or idea of doing any mischief. Mr. Baron ALDERSON, in passing sentence, told the defendant that he believed that it was very probable that he did not intend to do any mischief, but still the effect of his acting as he did might have been most serious, and might have occasioned the loss of life. Under the se circumstances, and with a view to deter other persons from the commission of a like offence, he felt it to be his duty to pass a sentence of some severity, which was, that he be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for six months. CIVIL SlDE.—(Before the LORD CHIEF JUSTICE.) when the Lord'Chief Justice intimated that nothing had been proved to effect the.plaintiffs claim. The jury accordingly returned a verdict for the plain tiff for the full amount claimed, 1171., over the sum he had received on behalf of the company, from Mr. Beaumont. NORFOLK ClRCUlT.—Bedford, March 9. The commission for this county was. opened on Saturday afternoon amid great numbers of people, attracted, not only by the fineness of the weather, but also by the gaiety of the sheriff's equipage, which far outshone those heretofore "spotted" in this county by his predecessors in that ancient and honoured office. The nisi Arius business is not beyond its usual length, if the causes are numbered, there being only three on the list ; but there is one case among them which is to be tried by a special jury, in which the parties are master and servant, and the cause of action the alleged invasion of the latter's marriage bed by the former. The Attorney-General is spe cially retained for the defendant, who is a justice of the peace and a rector of this county, and, moreover, a man of near " three score years and ten ; 'so that, as may be expected, the case is in everybody's mouth in the town. The calender is heavy, containing the names of 37 pri soners, and embracing 25 cases, including arson, horse steal ing, poachiag, and a variety of minor (Mena& CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice na1. 11 .- Charles learner and William Farr were indicted to; steal ing 19 fowls, the property of Mr. Hunt, at Luton, oh ae 23d December last. Mr. GUNNING conducted the case for the prosecution, and from the testimony of the witnesses called by the Learned Gentleman it was elicited that the prisoner Warner was on the premises of the prosecutor, who is a respectable solicitor, on the Bth of December, working in his farm-yard, and that 'he had made very particular inquiries both as to the num ber of the fowls on the farm, and also as to their nocturnal resting-place, which turned out to be an open shed, the door of which was only secured by *a button. On the 22d of December the fowls were counted and found to be correct, ';their number being 31, but on the 28th only 12 were to be found. For some time no trace whatever could be discovered either of the fowls or the fowler who carried them off, 'though the fowl. boy saw Warner, and said he wished some body would find his fowls for him ; adding. that he knew the two cocks very well, for they bad Been fighing the day be fore the robbery, and their combs wets very much pecked. :Not long, after this a clue was found -- ta the thieves in . the testimony of one Dilley and his son, from which 'it appeared that on the 22d Warner, who lodged at Dilley's, said to Farr that " he knowed of a place where he could get a precious good haul of fowls for their Christ mas dinner, and that it was at old Hunt's." These worthies ,now appeared in the box against their friends, and more over swore that on the night of the 23d the two prisoners came home with a lot of fowls in WarUer's pockets. which were plucked and made into a Christmas pudding, of which the whole party partOok. This done, "Old Dilley" became compunctious, and ordered his lodger to take away the rest of the fowls out of his house, and accordingly War ner and young Dilley having cat off their beads and feet re moved the carcases to a place of security, while they threw the heads, feathers, feet ; and offal into a hedge close to the Rabbit publk-house, where they were accordingly found by Dilley and the policemen, on the 10th of January following. When these relics of the departed fowls were produced to the fowl-boy, he had no hesitation whatever in swearing to the heads of the two pugnacious cocks. So that the case being clearly made out, both the prisoners were found Guilty. Mr. Justice ILtuas then proceeded to pass sentence upon the prisoners (who were but 19 years old), -and in co doing pointed out to them the folly of their ways, as exemplified in thejr conviction to-day, on the evidence of their friend " Old Dilley," who, like all old thieves, had the wit to keep out of harm's way, while he contrived to profit by the crime of . others, whom he afterwards assisted to bring to punishment. This, he hoped, would be a warning to them when they should have accomplished the sentence of the law, Which was that they should each be imprisoned for the space of 12 months. MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—Lincoln, March 9. , - The Right Hon. Sir N. C. Tindal and the Hon. Mr. Justice Coltman arrived in this city shortly before 4 o'clock on Satur iday, and immediately opened the commission, and charged the grand jury for the city at the City-hall ; after which their Lordships proceeded to open the commission for the county at the County-hall, in the Castle-yard. Their Lordships attended Divine service at the Cathedral yesterday morning, and took their respective seats in the County-hall at 9 o'clock this morning ; ➢ir Justice Coltman presiding in the Crown Court, and the Lord Chief Justice on. the Civil side. Both the Learned Judges commenced with the trial of the city prisoners—the former until the time arrived for, and again after, charging the county grand jury, and the latter until the nisi prius jury were ready. - There appeared 8 causes for trial for the county, and 1 for the city, which latter, and 4 of the others, have been dis posed of to-day. besides one withdrawn ; so that 3 only re ,main for to-morrow. The calendar, as will be seen, is numerically, as well as in point of the heinous character of the offences, more than ordinarily' heavy for this county. It presented the names of 39 prisoners, and 27 cases for trial, of which latter 4 were of ,burglary, involving 9 prisoners; 1 of sheep stealing, involv ing 4 ; 3of robbery with violence, involving 6 ; 2 of, un natural offence; 4 of arson ; 2 of horse stealing ; 1 of forgery (a Post-office order for 31/.); I of sending a threatening letter; 3 of being armed at night for the purpose of taking and killing grime; 2 of uttering and having in possession base money; and 1 of concealment of birth. CIVIL SlDE.—(Before the Lord Chief Justice TIIIDAL.) THOMAS BROMHEAD TKOMAS SPARLING. This was an action on the case to recover damages for an injury sustained by the plaintiff by being bitten, and having his clothes rent by a ferocious dog, kept by the defendant. The'declaration charged that the dog was used and accus tomed to attack and bite mankind, and did bite the plain tiff. First plea,, not guilty ; second plea, that the defendant did not keep the dog. Mr. Whitehurst, Q.C., and Mr.. Wildman conducted the plaintiff's case Mr. Humfrey, Q.C., and Mr. Willmore ap peared as counsel for the defendant. The plaintiff is a journeyman blacksmith, and the de. fendant the keeper of a beer shop in Far. street, Horncastle. As the plaintiff, shortly after ten o'clock at night, on the 27th of May last, was passing the defendant's house, in his way along Far-street, two dogs of the bull-terrier breed, one being of a red and white, and the other of a black and white colour, rushed upon and attacked him, and the latter, having bitten and rent his clothes near the shoulder, very severely bit his right hart& A .neighbotir df the de fendant, seeing what was occurring, came out from his shop on the opposite side of the way and. halloed to the dogs, upon which they ran away up the defendant's yard. The plaintiff then pursued his way until he met s policeman, to whom he made complaint of what had happened to him, and showed him his terribly lacerated hand, and who ac companied him back to Sperling's, and went up the back yard, where he saw the red arid white dog, but not the other. He then went to the defendant and asked him where his dogs were, and he answered that they were both locked up. The policeman then said that he bad just seen the red and white one up his back yard, upon which he demanded to know what business he hid upon his premises, and stated that the other was locked up. Tho constable said, " Yes, but it was not locked up a few minute.' ago," and the de fendant replied that it had been locked tic all the evening. and a man named Attercliffe could prove it. .Thepojiceman to this answered that the man Attercliffe wouit, swear to anything for a pint of beef, and he would not beliePs him upon his oath. Thomas Wilkins in, a lad in the service of Mr. Cooke, a veterinary surgeon, living next door to the defendant, de posed that he kept a Tom and Jerry shop (beer -shop), and two dogs, one of which was red and white and the other black and white. The latter was of the bull-terrier breed, and very savage, and bit him (the witness) when he was going to Mr. Day's bakehouse, carrying the bread. He was on one side of the road, and the dog on the other, and crossed over to him, and he did not see him until he got held of hint. Both the dogs were at the plaintiff, and the black and white one bit bra hand. Mr. Hewett, a potter, called out, and then both the dogs ran up the defendant's yard. He had fre quently seen them there, and knew them both very well:. Other witnesses proved the ferocious character of the deg, and that it was used to attack people, and left no reasonable doubt that it was kept by the defendant. The plaintiff had suffered great pain, and been ill for se veral weeks; he bad also incurred some small expense in ef fecting a cure. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 25/. CROWN COURT.—(Before Lord Chief Justice TIDAL.) Two Irish labourers, of the names of Welch and Glynn, were indicted for a rape, within the precincts of the city, on the 22d of August last, upon the person of one Mary, the wife of George Lee, a monstrously dirty member of the gipsy tribe, at the . age of about 80. Mr. DEyncourt conducted the prosecution ; Mr. Macaulay defended the prisoners. It appeared that there was an encampment of gipsies in Greetwell-lane, in or near the cit 7, on the night in question, which, at the dead hour of the night, whilst the tribe slum bered in peace was outrageously stormed by a party of wanton Irishmen, who remorselessly demolished their tents, and sought' to defile the female members of the tribe, succeeding successively in their base assault upon the prosecutrix, whilst her husband was engaged in running after his ass, which had made off down a lane with a load of blankets at the out break of the engagement. She, with her husband, reposed in one tent, -her two daughters, of whom one was a widow, in another, and a kinsman and his wife in another. She had also a son, twenty-six years old, who seemed to have acted as patrol. The assault opened with an attack upon the tent of the daughters, which, after they had refused to let the Irishmen go to bed to them, was carried, and razed to the ground ; but the Irishmen being, by recourse to throats and nails, repulsed in their - further attack upon the daughters, turned off to the old woman's tent. While Glynn succeeded with the mother Welch held the widowed daughter, after which the prisoners interchanged their posi tions. There was a party of nine or ten Irishmen behind the hedge. The unhappy aged victim of Irish concupiscence deposed tnthe leading facts. The parties first began heaving stones. The two prisoners did it. The other nine or ten did not in terfere or throw stones. They knew previously that the men wanted to go to bed with the young women, who wouldn't have it on no account. One of the men hugged and ravished witness. Welch began. Welch then threw her down and ravished her. She struggled as much as she could while she had strength, but she was an old woman, and hadn't much strength left. Welch, with the blunt edge of a hatchet, be longing to the camp, struck her under the right ear after both had had connexion with her. They then dragged her about the road with violence. Each held the daughter Susan while the other proceeded with her. Cross-examined—One of those she called her daughters was a wife, and large in the family way, and was glad to run away in her chemise with her baby tucked under her arm. Had no means of knowing where her husband was while she was ravished. They stoned him away. (The ex amination of the husband before the magistrates was here put in, which was upon several points very materially at variance with her statement here to day.) Welch used the hatchet. If she before s stated it was Glynn it was because she was so frightened. Could take oath that both had connexion with her. They lost blankets and clothes, her husband's hat, and some strops. Her husband went right off towards Lincoln. After the ravishing they struck the daughter a blow, which made her reel across the road. Susan. Herring, the widowed daughter, deposed to the same story that the old woman told to-day. The men came to their camp, and wanted to go to bed with them. They began to pull up their camps—her camp and another. All the rest but she and her mother went away. Glynn held her so that she couldn't assist her mother. [She then de scribed what was done by Welch to her mother.] They threatened to murder them if they gave any alarm. Welch afterwards dragged her (witness) about the road by the legs, and used her very bad indeed. She now said (baying before the magistrates, like her mother, said as to both mat ters quite the cortrary), that it was Welch who struck her mother with a hatchet before he ravished her. The men all went away because they thought they would be murdered amongst so many. The mother and daughter both told their tale with an air of nonchu'ance, and quite con amore. eorge Lee—Was the husband- of the old woman. The two prisoners came to the-camp and began to stone them. WEST LONDON RAILWAY, The half-yearly meeting of the proprietors of this rail way was held at one o'clock yesterday, at the London Tavern, for the transaction of the ordinary business of the company. But a small number of shareholders were present. H. Grounds, Esq., occupied the chair. The advertisement convening the meeting having been read, and the seal of the company affixed to the register of proprietors, The CHAIRMAN said he had great pleasure in meeting the proprietors, as the directors had succeeded in bringing the affairs of the company into a very small compass. They had indeed hoped to have had it in their power to have reported this day that their affairs had been finally wound up, but circumstances had prevented the full accomplishment of so desirable an object. They, however, fully expected that the two or three small out standing matters would be satisfactorily arranged in the course of a few weeks, when, as he stated at the last meeting, the expenses of conducting the business of the Company would be reduced to the lowest limit consistent with the proper protection of their property and interests. He was happy to inform them that the lease of the line to the London and Birmingham Company had at length been executed, and that the counterpart was then on the table. The delay which had occurred in getting this important matter concluded, though it had caused the directors a good deal of anxiety, had been unavoidable. In the expectation of being able to lay before them the award of Mr. Hudson, Mr. Glynn, and Mr. Stephenson in the matter of the reference respecting the shares, they delayed calling the meeting until the last day allowed by the Act of Parliament. It had, however, been found impossible to get it ready in time. They were assured, however, that it was in the course of preparation, and as soon as they received it, a special general meeting would be called for the purpose of submitting it to them. A delay of no more than two or three weeks would take place. A Bill had been introduced into Parliament for the London and Birmingham and Great Western Companies jointly, for the improvement of this railway and for extending it to the Thames, and he believed that, not withstanding a temporary obstacle, it would receive the sanc tion of the Legislature. The line which had been adopted was on the opposite side of the Kensington Canal to that pro posed last year, in order to avoid the estate of Lord Kensington. As soon as this extension line was constructed—and they were informed that the works would only occupy a short time— they might expect a large traffic from both the London and Birmingham and Great Western Railways over their present line to the Thames. The traffic on the Kensington Canal had greatly increased, and they were of opinion that a further accession would take place, but they considered that it would be necessary, during the ensuing summer, to expend a sum of money in permanently repairing it, and as soon as they had ascertained what surplus would remain out of the 60,0001. to be received from the London and Birmingham Company, they proposed to call a special meeting of the shareholders and to bring the subject before them. The SECRETARY then read the report, which was simply an echo of the Chairman's address. A statement of the receipts and disbursements for the twelve months ending 31st December, was next submitted to the meeting, of which the following is an abstract :—Re ceipts to June 30, 236,740/. 3s. 71d. ; London and Birming ham Company, on account of purchase-money. 3,711/. ss. 6d. ; interest on debentures due Dec. 18, 1845, received from that Company, 497/. Bs. 1d ; calls on original and first-class preferred shares, 10.5/. 16s, 10d. ; furniture and share account, 81/. 171. sd. ; Kensington canal traffic and canal and railway rent:9, 3971. 10s. 6d.; drainage 50/. I total, 261,584/. ls. 01d. Disbursements to June 30, 256,307/. 14s. 11d. General disbursements, including land and compensation in terest on debentures and debentures paid off, gratuity of 5001. to secretary, &c., 5,0041. ss. 4d.; leaving a balance in hand of 2721. Os. 91d. On the motion of Mr. GUNTER, seconded by Mr. HENRY, , • , the report was received and adopted. In the course of a prolonged discussion it was elicited that the Bill introduced into Parliament bad a twofold object, namely, to carry the line on to the Thames, and across the Great Western Railway to the Paddington Canal, where it would form a junction with the Loudon and Birmingham Railway. One of the plans which had been deposited at the Board of Trade had beets lost. It specified the way which they proposed to cross the Great Western Railway, and could not therefore affect the proposed extensions. They had, however, no reason to apprehend that this accident would prevent the ultimate passing of the Bill . They would participate in the benefits arising from - these extensions without contributing anything towards their construction. Some disapprobation was expressed at the execution of the plans of the line by . Mr. Chappins, the draughtsman to the London and Birming ham Company, .instead of .Mr. Goodwin, the gentle man whom they employed, but it was explaieed apparently to the, satisfaction of the shareholders, that as Mr. Chappins had executed similar plans for the Birming ham Company, which were approved of by that body, time and expense might be saved by employing him to furnish them with copies, and that Mr. Goodwin had seen them, and was satisfied of their accuracy. However the plans were ordered to be forwarded to that gentleman, in order that he might go carefully over them again. Mr. WHITE considered that the Queen would rather travel in her journeys to and from Windsor by their line from its junction with the Great Western to 'a station as contiguous to Buckingham Palace as possible, instead of going . to Paddington. By using the West London Railway, her Ma jesty would save several miles over her ordinary route. On the motion of Mr. RIGBY, 595 shares, which stood on the books in the name of the Secretary (Mr. Thompson), were ordered to be merged in the undertaking. Mr. GUNTER moved that the deed be printed, and the plans annexed lithographed and circulated amongst the shareholders, which was seconded by Mr. J. WIIITE, and carried. The retiring directors having been re-elected, and votes of thanks passed to the chairman and directors, and Mr. Rigby, for the assistance which he.rendered to the Company in the preparation of the deed, and suitably. acknowledged, the meeting separated. • GOWNSMEN'SBRAWLS AT CAM. BRIDGE. -- (From the Cambridge Independent.) We very much regret to state that Tom Thumb's exhibi tion was considered by the " gentlemen" of the University a good opportunity for favouring this town with one, or rather a series, of those disgraceful rows, in the indulgence of which they appear to take great delight. On Monday evening a performance was given at nine o'clock, at the reduced price of 6d., to enable the humbler classes to be present, when a "band of fierce barbarians," in academic costume, meanly availed themselves of the lowness of the charge to go and make a disturbance; and not content with an exhibition of ruffianism to women and children, they damaged the Town hall, for the repair of which General Tom Thumb has had to pay 51. At the conclusion of the performance they com mitted several assaults upon townsmen in the Petty Cury—a disturbance and fight were the consequence, and as usual with these silly gentlemen, they ran away, glad to escape chastise ment, at the expense of their caps, two or three of which were afterwards found in the Cury, and served as footballs to the little urchins who were attracted by the disturbance. On the following evening the same conduct was again displayed, and for several hours the Market-place and its vicinity were disturbed by fighting and rioting, the indecent violence upon unprotected females, exceeding, if possible, that of the pr.:- ceding evening. The police interfered, and on Wednesday morning warrants and counter warrants were granted against several of the parties, and the cases heard on Friday. Surely the University might adopt some steps to prevent the repeti tion of such disreputable proceedings. POLICE COURT, CAMBRIDGE, FRIDAY.—The Hon. G. Calthrop, an undergraduate of Trinity College, was charged with assaulting p.c. Freestone on Tuesday night, at Tom Thumb's levee. Mr. Calthrop bad also taken out a warrant against the policeman ; but when the case had proceeded to some length, and as the magistrate (Mr. Fisher) said, proVed against Mr. Calthrop, our chief constable of police, Captain Bailey consented to abandon the case, and each party were ordered to pay their own evpenses. However, the public shall have a full report of the proceedings next week, and they will then bs able to judge for themselves. At the same time another person was charged with an assault, who did not fare so well as his aristocratic co-defendant. His name was " Billy Moden," who was fined 10s. for an assault on R. Freeman. Mr. Calthrop had been requested to take a seat, and Moden, until removed, persisted in occupying the same place, saying, amidst the laughter of the Court, " he had as much right to sit as the other gentleman." LAW INTELLIGENCE. HOUSE OF LORDS, March 10. The House of Lords sat to hear writs of error. The peers present were the Lord Chancellor, Lord Brougham, and Lord Campbell. BRANDAO v. BARNETT„ The arguments in this part-heard writ of error, were resumed and concluded to-day. The case has already occupied five or six days, and we have refrained enter ing into the facts, until the arguments were concluded. The case came before their Lordships upon an appeal in the nature of a writ of error, against a decision of the . Exchequer Chamber, (sitting in error), whereby a Judgment of the Court of Common Pleas, given i n favour of the appellant, was reversed. The facts of the case appear to be be these :—The appellant is a Portuguese merchant, residing abroad, and the respondents are bankers in London. For some time previous to Jan. 1837, the appellant employed a person named Byrne as his London agent, and he in structed him (Byrne) to buy for him, supplying him with money for that purpose, from time to time, cer tain amounts of Exchequer-bills. Byrne accordingly purchased for the appellant such Exchequer-bills as he required. Byrne kept at this period an account at the respondents' (Messrs. Barnetts') bank ; and ho also, fur the safe custody of all such securities as he might become possessed of, kept certain tin boxes at the banking.- house of Messrs. Barnett (as is customary with bankers to allow their customers to do) in which he, from time to time, deposited his securities, locked up, he ke ping the keys himself. As Byrne purchased Exchequer-bills for the plaintiff he deposited them in one of these boxes, locked up, keeping the key himself; and when it became neces sary that the interest On them should be received, and that they sho u ld b e exc hanged for new Exchequer bills, Byrne requested his bankers to do him the favour to receive the interest and obtain in exchange new bills. On those occasions Byrne took the . Exchequer bills from the tin box, and handed them over to the. bankers for the purpose aforementioned, and as soon as the bankers had received the interest thereon, and exchanged the bills for new ones, these latter were, it Was alleged, handed back to Byrne by th e bankers, and they were again deposited by - him and locked up in the tin box. Byrne had from one period to another purchased for the plaintiff Exchequer-bills to the amount of 30,0001., which were deposited in the box, and taken out occasionally by Byrne, and placed in Messrs. Barnett's hands for the purpose already stated, and they were always returned again by them to Byrne, who re-deposited theta•-3a their iOriner -:,ustecir' ~~i l. t` ~`~ HARTWELL V. CURLING. This was an action brought by the plaintiff, who the proprietor of a newspaper published in Surrey and Kent, calle3 the Mercury, to recover the amount of his bill for advertisements connected with one of the pro jected Kentish railways, and to which the defendant acted as solicitor. _ _ _ The jury found for the plaintiff. WEDNESDAY, MARCH CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Lord Chief Justice DENMAN: 111`DOWALL - V. DUNNINGTON AND OTHERS. This was an action brought to recover the amount of a bill for printing books of reference, oircul ►rs, and other matter in connexion with a projected railway called the London, Nottingham, and Sheffield Direct Railway. Sergeant Shee and Mr. Lush were for the plaintiff. Mr. Prentice appeared for the defendant. The plaintiff is a printer in Fleet-street, and he had been engaged to perform the work specified in the decla ration. The defendant, and other persons mentioned in the record, had taken proceedings in connexion with the railway in question, and they were now sued as the parties who were responsible for the payment of the plaintiffs claim. The Jury having consulted for a short time, The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE told them that there was no defence to the present action. The defendants had suffered their names to be put forth to the public as part of the managing committee of the scheme in question, and they were legally responsible to the plaintiff. A verdict was then returned for the plaintiff, for the sum of 1671. 17s. 6d. FINLAYSON V. PILBROW. This was another railway case. The plaintiff is an engineer, and he sued the defendant, who is the well known atmosphcrio railway projector, for a balance due to him for services rendered in making surveys for the Gravesend and London Direct Atmospheric Railway, for which the defendant was the engineer. Sergeant Shee and Mr. Willis were for the plaintiff, Mr. M. Chambers and Mr. Lush for the defendant. David Finlayson, the brother of the plaintiff, deposed, that iu the beginning of October last he was in the Hall of Commerce in London, where he saw a person named Beaumont, who required the services of the plaintiff to survey the line, and make the levels for the proposed London and Gravesend Railway. An appointment was afterwards made to meet at the office of the Company, in King William-street, and they there saw the defendant, who said that any arrangement made with Mr. Beau mont was just the same as if made with himself ; and it was then agreed that the plaintiff was to have three guineas a day, but it was stated that he would not have any money on account because the deposists had not come in. In consequence of this agreement the plaintiff proceeded to make the necessary surveys, and was occu pied in so doing until the 16th November. Cross-examined—lie was not aware that Mr. Pilbrow had disposed of his atmospheric railway patent to a company, who were to work it on their own behalf. There might have been something of this sort, but he was not aware of the fact, and he always considered Mr. Pilbrow the responsible man. He took away one or two of the prospectuses, in order that he might see whether they contained. the names of any responsible persons from whom he might recover the money due to him one of these odd days.—(A laugh) The company was in • debted to him 321. or 331. for services he had rendered. Witness was employed by Mr. Beaumont, who was the engineer, to take bearings upon the line. Mr. Arthur Benjamin Burke, who described himself as a wine-merchant, gave similar evidence as to the character of the agreement. Cross-examined—Before witness was a wine-mer chant, he used to go on messages for the plaintiff and assist him in his business. Sometimes he gave him half-a-sovereign, and sometimes a sovereign, according to the manner in which he employed him. This was the plaintiff's case. Mr. CHAMBERS said, the defence he bad to offer to this action was that the defendant was not liable to the plaintiff, and had never entered into any such agreement as the one referred to. The fact was, he was the pro jector of a new principle of railway traction upon the atmospheric principle, and he- had disposed of his in vention to the company in question, and the only con nexion he had with them was that he was occasionally consulted with regard to the details of his invention. The actual engineer was Mr. Beaumont, and he it was who made the arrangement with the plaintiff, and he was liable to him if any body was. Mr. Beaumont was called as a witness—He deposed that he was appointed engineer-in-chief to the Graves end and London Direct Railway. About the beginning of October they were desirous of preparing to go before Parliament. He went to the Hall of Commerce, and saw the plaintiff walking about with a level on his should: r.—(A laughter.) Mr. Chambers—l suppose that was to indicate that he wanted a job.—(lmmense laughter.) Witness—He supposed it was. As there was a great demand for persons of that class, he entered into com munication with him, and eventually offered him three guineas a day, but as witness, at that time, had not, him self, made any practical engagement with the company, he was desirous of communicating with Mr. Pilbrow before he competed the engagement, but when he did so, it was entirely up in his responsibility. He had paid the plaintiff 721. 10s., and he considered this was 'a great deal more than he was entitled to. All he bad for this sum-was the small plan, which he now produced, and there was an error of fifty feet in the levels, which if they had gone to Parliament, would have had the certain effect of throwing out their Bill. :In cross-examination the witness admitted that the defendant was frequently consulted in the course of the proceedings, and that he was considered a responsible party. sergeant Su was about to reply upon this evidence. SUPPLY. The House then resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, when, on the motion of The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, 800,0001. was voted to the use of her Majesty. TIIE METROPOLITAN BUILDINGS BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. . The report on the South Sea Company's Bill was then brought up, and agreed to, LACE FACTORIES BILL. Mr. THOMAS S. DUNCOMBE presented a petition From 3,426 individuals'engaged in lace factories, praying the House to pass a Bill for the limitation of the hours of night labour in all factories where bobbins and net and warp lace Machinery was in use. They stated that the present hours of labour were so long that their health and morale were destroyed, and they prayed that the House might pass a Bill to shorten their hours of labour per day, commencing at six o'clock in the morning and closing at not later than ten at night. ' Ordered to lie on the table. The Host. MumnEn then introduced a Bill grounded on the above petition, and as that petition had been received by the House he hoped that no opposition would be offered to the Bill. Sir JAMES GRAHAM had always had an objection to interfering with the hours of labour. The Hon. Gentleman had stated very fairly that he had not refuied his assent to such a Bill as this being brought in. He did this because until he had enjoyed an opportunity of considering its provisions, he had always understood that the 'lace trade was different from those in which machinery wars-tbes-obief-4n-earis of - production ; and that, therefore, ,there was not the same objection to long hours in this business; but when the Bill was brought in he would be able to state more explicitly his opinion respecting it. Mr. FOSTER said that the Bill thus announced was in direct opposition to the rules which had always ;been laid down of not interfering between the adult labourer and his employer. It was going in the teeth of all they had been doing during the last twelve years. He had another ob jection to this Bill, for it appeared that it would allow children 'of tender age to be engaged during the excessive hours of from six in the evening till ten at night ; and he thought, there fore, that it would be but wise, in the Hon. Gentlemen who were about to bring in this Bill, to attend to this particular point. Colonel ROLLESTON had observed with pleasure that :the Hon Gentleman opposite had presented a petition from the men of similar spirit to that which he had presented from !the masters, and he should be happy to give his feeble aid in the promotion of any measure which was likely - to abateso great an evil as that of which the petitioners, both masters and j_kei D . ,_complai ned. Mr. HEATIICOTE stated, that he had found it beneficial to his own interests to reduce the number of hours in which the persons were employed in his manufactory; he would support the introduction of the,Bill. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that the proposal of his Bill was ;not to compel the persons employed in the lace and ;bobbin-net trade manufacture to work for sixteen hours a day, but to prevent them working at all :hours of the night. He thought it would be better, in conse quence of the peculiar nature of the present case, that, after the second reading of the Bill, a Committe should be appointed ito inquire into the circumstances of the case. Mr. FEILDEN said it had been proved that in many cases young children were compelled to work twenty hours a-say, and that with two sets of hands, who worked ten ',hours each ; he thought that there could be no necessity for such night work when there was so much machinery. Sir J. GRAHAM said, perhaps the Hon. Member would allow some time to elapse before the second reading, in order that he (Sir J. Graham) might have an opportunity of r making some inquiry with regard to this very important subject, as considerable caution was required before any alto - I:ration could be introduced. _ . _... Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. . Mr. BROTIIERTON .moved for a return of the number of bricks upon which duty has been paid in each year, between the sth day of January, 1838, and the sth day of January 1846, in England and Scotland ; distinguish ing the number of bricks upon which duty has been paid in each county, and the amount paid thereon respectively (-in-continuation--of Parliamentary paper-\o. 217, of-session 1838). —Agreed to, Captain PECHELL moved for copies of all letters from the Poor-law Commissioners and the Assistant-Commissioner, from the 21e1 day of March, 1842, to the 7th day of November, 1845, respecting the erection or alteration of buildings or places for mills or other machinery for the purpose of grinding bones and preparing bone dust ; likewise, copies of all rules, orders, or letters issued to the 'several boards of guardians respecting the employment of vagrants and pau pers in pounding or grinding bones.—Agreed to. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Half-past Five. RAILWAY COMMITTEES (YESTERDAY.) Sub-Committee No. 2. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) CALEDONIAN (CARLISLE DEVIATION). The Committee found that the standinz orders had been complied with. CALEDONIAN (GLASGOW TERMINI AND 33R.A.NCIIEB). The object of this Bill was to enable the Caledonian Railway Com pany to form certain branch and terminal railwayS in the vicinity of Glasgow, which were as follow, viz.: a branch from the Polloe and Govan Railway, near Govan ironworks, to Clyde-terrace, in the barony of Gorbals, and thence across the river Clyde, to or near Dunlop-street and Argyle-street, in the city of Glasgow ; a branch from the raid proposed branch to join the joint line of the Glas gow, Paisley, and Greenock, and the Glasgow, • Paisley, and Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railways ; a branch from the first. mentioned branch, to join the last-mentioned proposed brinch ; and a branch from the Polloe and Govan Railway, near Cook•street, 'Tradeston, to the river Clyde, with depots, stations, &c., on those proplaed lines. Parliamentary agents, Messrs. Grahame and Co. The Committee found that in the ease of this Bill the standing or ders had bsen complied with. C.&I.ZDONX.iLN (LANGROLIVE BILAMCII). The ohjoct of this Bill was to enable the Caledonian Railway Company to make a branch railway to the town of Langholm. Parliamentary agents, 'Messrs. Grahame and Weems, London. The Committee found that the standing orders had been complied with. CALEDONIAN (GLASGOW, GARNXINIC., AND COATBRIDGE PURCHASE). The object of this Bill was to enable the Caledonian Railway Company to purchase the Glasgow, Garnkirk, and Coatbridge Rail way, and the petition set forth that the same would be of great public advantage. The Committee found that the standing* orders had been complied with. SCOTTISH CENTRAL (ALLOA BRANCH). Tht cbject of thißill was to enable the Scottish Central Railway Company to make a branch railway, by the Alloa Ferry, to Tilli coultry. • _ _ Parliamentary agents, Messrs. Grahame and `Peens, London. The formal evidence having been heard, the Committee found that the standing orders had been complied with. SCOTTISH CENTILIII. (car Err BRANCH). The object of the promoters of this Bill was to be empowered to make a branch railway to Crieff, in the county of• Perth. Parliamentary agents, Mews. Grahame and Weems, London. The formal evidence having been completed, the Committee found that the standing orders had been compiled with. SCOTTISH CENTRAL (DENNY BRANCH' The object of this Dill was to enable the promoters, the Scottish Central Railway Company, to a branch railway to Denny, in the county of Stirling. The estimated cost of the undertaking was 50,0001., and the petition prayed that the promoters might be authorised to raise any further sum that might be necessary for the completion of the undertaking, in any manner that might be agreed upon at any extraordinary meeting of the Company held for that purpose. . . Parliamentary agents, Messrs. Grahame and Weems, London. The formal friideitce having been heard, the Committee found that the standing orders had been complied with. POLLOC AND GOVAN AND CLYDESDALE JUNCTION AMALGAMATION. The consideration of this Bill, which had been postponed, was re slimed. • The object of the Bill was to amalgamate the Polio° and Govan Railway with the Clydesdale Junction Railway, and to authorise certain deviations of the Clydesdale Junction lino. Parliamentary agents, Messrs. Grahame and Weems, London. The formal proofs not being completed, owing to the absence or some necessary evidence, the further consideration of the Bill was postpoaed till to-morrow. arnsia-Naartram MIDLAND JUNCTION. The object of the promoters of this Bill was to obtain powers to construct a railway from the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway to the Scottish Central, to be designated as above. The amount deposited was 15,0001. ; rarliamentary agents, Messrs. Grahame and Weems. The formal evidence having been heard, the Committee found that the standing orders had been complied with. STRATIITAY AND BREADA,LBANE. The object of the promoters of this Bill was to obtain powers from Parliament to construct it . rallway from the line of the Perth and Inverness Railway to Aberfeldy, to be called the Strathtay and Breadalbane Railway. Parliamentary agents, Messrs. Grahame and Weems, London. The formal evidenee having been completed, the Committee found that the standing orders had been complied with. CALEDONIAN NORTHERN DIRECT. The object of this Bill was to make a railway from the Forth and Clyde Junction Railway, to be called as above. Parliamentary agents, Messrs. Grahame and Weems, London. The formal proofs having been heard, the Committee found that the standing orders had been corn,.. - licd with. This was the last case on the list for to-day, and the Committee adjourned shortly atter four o'clock to twelve o'clock tomorrow. Sub-Committee No. 3, The Committee resumed its sittings at the usual hour this morn , fug, in Room No. 8. There were present Mr. Aglionby (in the chair) Mr. Aldan, Mr. Stanfield, and Mr. E. Buller. DARTMOUTN, BRIXNAM, TORBAY, AND EXETER. The object of the petitioners in this case was to make a railway from Dartmouth, Brixhain, and Torbay, on the south coast of De vonshire, to the city of Exeter. The capital of the Company was 700,0001., and the cost of the line was estimated at 650,0001. The line was opposed by several petitioners, and only the formal proofs were taken to-day. OXFORD, WITNEY, CHELTENHAM, AND GLOUCESTER. The opposition to this case was then resumed. Mr. VENABLES appeared to support the petition of two occupiers of property near Cheltenham, which was proposed to be taken for the purposes of the railway, but the promoters had neglected to give them notice of this fact. The same petitioners also complained of aligged omissions-and defects in the plans and sections. One allegation was that a cottage near to Cheltenham, proposed to be taken by the railway, was not marked on the plans. Mr. DEANS. en behalf of the promoters of the 11111, admitted this allegation. It was not a-cottage, as alleged by the petitioners, but a small brick hut. -Mr. -A.nxionar did not find any exception of small brick huts in the standing orders. Standing orders not complied with. • - - The petitioners then proved that their icittiges,. for - ; which -they paid a rent of 41. per annum, were placed upon the plans and sections, but no notice had been served upon them to that effect. Standing orders not complied with. Mr. VENIBLZS said he had a raitiou against the Bill, glittOd by i :----------- le c 4. The two prisoners began to pull t heir tents dog". I str uci . lected their things and set them on his SO. IlleY IDS 0 him, and he thought they had broken his thigh. 0f when. he had packed it, bolted and went up a P n A it ill bolted after it, caught the excited animal, and P' 2 " ; , b 10 a close. He was so hurt that he lay down in a dil l 1 , 1 0 yards from the encampment. Heard the m two boo' his wife and daughter—a ravishing of his wife, bu t iep tioh, a close look out upo si"`n his ass. I n answer to ? ‘ , (1 7.50, 1 whether he assisted the women at all. lie only alga followed my ass." Heard the cries of his wife and (15 Still tea from the camp, but he was so frighte ned that he after his ass. _, O t t . Thomas Ashton, police-constable, of Lincoln, tle . ., 04 shortly before three o'clock A.M. on the 22 d 01 Atir—totO the son and kinsman came to him. Went with theloote encampment ; saw the tents all torn up in the Mos t 0 00 state. Saw Mr. Lee about 30 yards from the cso:E" hil iss o Lincoln. A quarter of a mile off found 50 or 60 0 15 j ot! a barn. He first secreted himself, and saw the two P!„j e t • in the yard. Took them into custody. The rer o3 .; 5 ,0 the 50 or GO Irishmen were all undressed, 1 1 11 , r d ,A i dolll' coming up to their throats, all lying in a row, be""— This being the case for the prosecution , , ns el fer_.,. His LORDSHIP intimated to the Learned ''' ll.- re c'''' c i prisoners, that in a case where there were such gr a ba rgs derations, he lived sot address the jury' upon the c uer ,o l , felony. As to an assault having been committe, t'entsoo evidence confirmatory of the story told by the w"lt ilat. he g rr i .. g s h Di t :AEc i yA f : h 00t. % t uy h ß o dT u ,i g d h s t o p b ro ri p efl er ; address the PI U P ° ~,n p ut i t üb ' the depositions having v---- tilt, behalf o f the prisoners, replied, and ssis t as o the The Learn ed JUDGE briefly summed up whereupon ° 0 0 r,t The jury retered a verdict of Guilty of a re o—° t hat 1 1 The Learned JUDGE observed that it was c lear_ uit , 5 prisoners had been guilty of a very . atrocioue 0%01 sentenced them respectively to be impisoned ill the F ats gaol of this county, and kept to hard labour, for the. erx calendar mont hs. - hi reit I° ' WESTERN CIRCUIT.—SoIiskrY, a a 1.) r o, CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Barco . I ° o 00 1 , 0 Daniel Gallagher, a private in the Ist Dr2 l rGall + P was indicted, charged with having shot at Au" 4 0 his wife, with intent to kill and murder her. oner Mr. Ball appeared for the prosecution. The Pr i 4 „g tP undefended. Sho The first witness called was Ann Gallagher -- ; A te If l she was the wife of the prisoner, who Wei a Pr''efd Ist Dragoon Guards. In December las t she lir ity , husband in the barracks at Trowbridge, in this o: th o f r; had had a fortnight's leave, and returned on the l' e g 17 1 1 cember. During his absence the wife had that ct barracks, and when he came back she told him ,Ith ooto had been set afloat that she had been cohabiting gge,ll'et the sergeants during her husband's absence, and b l e d 10 ,1 0 he would inquire as to who was the perse, ii lthe t,, rt the report going. Upon this they went beg" ihooPq of the prisoner's company, who said that he, i „' was clear that the woman had only been Yec l "'";" 0 o'o B good nature, for the sergeants in the companTac, 0 46 1 out their rooms, &c., and would not leten,esbit,Los matter. The witness, it appeared, had been int' e t he ir P;o s her husband was, at home, of cleaning about treA te', to and cooking for them. However, as the cePtl iti gt id matter lightly, the husband was not satispeu,..L, a - 001', Do! the canteen. This was about four in the AT - 0 41) 1 90 witness then went back to her room, soon obe husband came home. Between six and se v e ld riot , him if he would have some tea. He Said he t t u for t e : went out of the room, and she did not see b r ibe dot; ao nutes. He then came' back. She met him saw that he had something in his hand, u1: 10 ° ;Dtov:, the away, being afraid he would strike her. She ro l ," ri on ' O O l room at the end of the passage. There was a tvf tb room. He followed his wife, who ran to the ~r e th oil ed 0! by the table. He then fired his carbine. id .e a st i , ° g ored traeted and out of his mind. He was quite not attempt to fire when he saw her in the Pe b eted . .ll'ereft / at the corner of the room. She was at the ottie,ro ( it 1 ,0 table ; she could not tell how - far, but quite is liof direction to her. He did not appear to ltetw i r d 0 0 ' about. The conduct of the wife was 14 01°1-9 ti to the satisfaction of the husband. bee ° Cross-examined by prisoner—He has 1111/-4 ' too' 1 r to me. Alla. the Ellen Allen—l am the wife of William ‘7, - be irs e f ere' Bugby. Was in a room in the barrack , Itun;tolll,e 0 1 ; 6 I heard a scream, and Mrs. Gallagher csnie - 'fbr'g and wished the door to be locked, and it weedoor , otlei three raps at the door. Bubb opened the o f 111 1 o tel lagher came iuto the room. He appeared ° til os V ei t ~tt " Did not seem to know what lie was abort. / D oltr his piece towards where his wife stood, h . tit gbt e° whether he intended to injure her. I was - tbe I became insensible. 1 , +l4 Job Bugby—On the 29th of December I o „,r O de ' No.' 11. Mrs. Gallagher came in. Soon IT eot i [oe; followed, who came in very drunk. He 'a l - a ); know what he was about. Ile fired his eerw - Aftor. he . c r. ' A i' the direction of where his wife was standinkLo li e re from the stable we searched the room, and,' iz.o 1 bullet had gone. It was more than a you woman was standing. 0 ° 101* By the JUDGE—The prisoner came in ii/ l i t e ette e'l i fired his piece. The bullet went into the corP e ° r ti t of about a yard from where she stood. She Wag r ` about:a yard. ° ir one etf This was the case for the prosecution. -• t t ° bo ot; for the defence, but r e d t l/s o o bad The prisoner addressed the jury, and Sts A t b e tel time he fired the carbine he knew not what ott/"$0110 he was mad through jealousy, and had dun e to tl3, Do .1 never done since` he had been a soldier- - g oe , gi te, o lF! d and got drunk. Scarce knowing what he 'o' oo l.44,o o j e ei g seized-his carbine but at the moment win tire ( ' I f - s sv Doi his wife his heart had failed him, and he 1 0 , h ,t it a to the mark. He also submitted to the jurYj c ", for a . "oou that he could not have meant to shoot his wh';1 0 00 he could not have missed her, as she was so- 11° 5 be at the other side of the table. n es ce 0- 4 The sergeant of his company gave hi m racter, both as a soldier and a humane wog " - ell''' . The Learned BARON having minutely surOar . The jury immediately acquitted the pri° ll- „ -- 1 , 44CP POLICE INTELLItit'' , r 0 0 1 MANSION-HO CIO. ( terl ° A young woman of very fashionable 'lv 9 ;4° appeared before the Lord Mayor, tuldier, t hef e a,,,, r Maria Jarman, spinster, was charged uno, e ,',. of '„,pie.„' s ugly circumstances. "Miss Frances NV ow e ' c i o ° is ? ';( street, stated that on Monday she got iti t° , at King's-cross, for the purpose of corli ill 3 of ,be City, and carried with her half-a-Po ten „lef i "Deo the which she had paid 2s. -74 d. She der '; 0 0, 1 4,,,b0 Which was in a blue paper, on the he ,44t omnibus reached Old Street-road, she vhe 0 0 4 omnibus, of course, proceeded towards t .. e ttri'f, bad not walked far when she missed he' :41 rets,l it of' and she immediately called a cab and 'e: rho 0 4 , os to go after the omnibus. At the Band 511 0 1 • 0 1' the omnibus, which was then empty, a u ce° th the conductor of her loss. The parcel. P 1 1 ,r i he lj or e believed, that which she had left bellow or, nibus. She recollected that the defer e, 06,10 Lord Mayor, sat in the omnibus by her d t he e t eto Federick Ane, conductor of one iiiss I r ! s a Man r omnibuses, s stated that the c 00 3 5- . n 1 : 0 5. defendant were passengers in his 0 1 !," 1 4 tre (4 10e',04 nlainant got out at the cornerof c'D.,O O O l t oe 0 catb z , up to him at the corner Of DOW or b s o l 1 1 0 said sh& had forgotten a parcel in the 00 on iv of g I 1 ` that the defendant who was the last P er lbe ° o V P' t ed, of the omni:.'ns, was walking toward s fie o r change, he kn.:wed and overtook her. ~v a rl,c.llo her to return with _him, and in turning 1- aret l I, l o ' oo tr i tie mew-lane, she said sb: had taken uP 5 P oo lpf a h l odevi i nibus, and wished to revs'irn it. The x e st If ;00 ° came up, and the defenciN'nt hut:o,' j e dia we e parcel to her, saying, 4, ldy dear 10,,Y: 0 1 jot: with any bad intention, but I thoug— y0. 0 ,0` again." the Cr i for Mr. Boni. attended as solicitor • Celt' who was bound over to appear at the Court. i'SI Qt :4'oo rid" "0 "Ir- 0 SitO P ;SO r'' London: Printed and Published by 11% Strand, Printer, at The Sun Ottice,Alo,,a• aloof, of the ,Savoy, in the Col laty of A 12, 1846. Court. rr -- ................. ...,... 0 0 46 , , ir R O, NOTICE TO M S. 1 ARIS,-•-- i Hydrographic Office, AdmiraltP ,mrt);4,,, WEST INDIE, ..gra mi d tfr V REVOLVING LIGHT AT I' u l' ,l at O le "660 A revolving light has been establiabsuporto o g. A the harbour of St. Juan, in the Island 0 .,,,f ' s od i°6010: 4 . lighthouse stands in 18 deg. 20 min' '')forr e e ifri 7 min. 15 sec. West of Greenwich , on the, o f te ib icli, at an elevation of 187 feet above the le'r e ,,„o3s •,, pi ... revolution is completed in two minutes, and ' • val the light appears only for six seconds, a u I f the distance of about five leagues. „..... -_-_,---__— o.rozo k take n 1 A ,4 SUPERSTITION IN THE FENS.---- .d 0.414 at Ely, named Bartingale, being latelY he bi1d,,,,,0rd that a woman named Gotob-d, who'll sowelotrigro one of his houses, had bewitched iliu t '„, d eed Vl,l l l , sembled in the sick man's chamber, " - t he " r • of be 4100 .1 way to rotect him from the sorceries hoo ds # send fort he blacksmith and have three _ od ifol; 0 0/ the door. An operation to this effect Nva" st `iirs t er te 1 0 to the anger of the supposed witch, wh e b i d re l d 0 a11.,0 to the Dean, but was laughed at bY nii , JO?, v a r., then rushed in wrath to the sick man's I. 7 d slynst t ;frik to tell passed the Rubicon despite the bat is i c ): : p . o wonder ceased when it was discovered tna ted jOO the most by the job Vulcan lad suberillg. stit u .„,.. it ": !F fr The patient is now happily recoir I Ad verliser. .443_ A AQUATIC.—A match has just bee a '— nLea 0...- C a mbridge and Oxford Universities, to roW Mortlake, on the 3d of April. - " al . BIRTHS bee, stir .l 4 On the sth inst., the lady of Wary T. Lara Kent, of a daughter. Wife cit ;, 9 On the Bth inst., in Stuffolk•Place , the _, A g ' 4 . Esq., M.D., of a daughter. Zda'a .- - Or/ On the kith inst., In Soho-square , 3I TS . to WO' daOnuhter. g the Bth inst., at Kent-place, Blac kheath - 00' O. • Bagnold, of the Bombay .A r my, of a s nare, th e ~ il On the 10th inst., at rortman-square, ' of a son and heir. • MARRIED. fon, Ott 4th lest., at Southport, Lane,tshif:c!,hter:o4 Reedness, Yorkshire, to Frances Maria, d c!, Esq., of Southport, and of Heath -ban, Cl__la_"-..".. O On the 9th inst., at St. James's. Piceadulig-rd darr ~ , fa 100 , of the Quadrant, to Miss Elizabeth 310,e8,,,m„.. Mr. James 3loyes, baker, of HeinMing s 1" ) f l _ WE , - ol d II -: Oa the Ilth inst., at Curzon Lodge, rod f or. „I beloved wife of William Jude, Esq. , in ft t e th e Cr" Os the lidh of September, 18 45 % a vir, ' ;o4 000 0 1 Zealand, Elizabeth, the wife of the haeve.tb, tn. ~ On the let ult., at St. LUCIA, EliZ I , o ak 1 .0 Esq., Asslstatit-Commissar) - GeDener.tiess-tillire, . i , r On the 26th ult., at the Croft, Inv ' . p. VP ‘' ter of the late W. Cameron, Esq. , Lori On the Ist inst., at Cambridge, Jame ow _ .a . ti s , o p On the sth inst., in Great Uc ' li g Ure. Richardson, aged 86. rel On the 7th hist., in Bath , rear -A drai _ n , e ar ' On the 7th inst., at titian -wide Lout. 4 . 0 0. r.: A. O'Halloran, Esq., aged 42. 0.01101.0 fr.,. Two"' , On the Bth inst., at itioitiry, ~,,r in g ~ / On the 9t inst., at ate, mtg. the V. 4 lit. On the 9t h i ns t., at llMaritcg hat, Herm 00 o° 00 • of On the 10th inst., Elizabe th, the wire r . / Claremont-square, Peatonvile. PO _ . ,,,,0 c , On the Silt lost., Robert John harper. S. itg #ll4.' al" wood Forest, Stafford, aged 81 ' , tus WO ' Obi , On V'e Bth inst., William Auguo „. 00 14 iti 1 road, aged 78. On the 9th inst., at Edmonton, TiO n— i'l pato r mercial Sale Rooms, Mincing-Mll,. o f gr. D' eg o .. On the 10th inst., Henoria, vidla 0110 • , l it grove, Mile-end, aged 63 • of pm re o, On the 10th inst., Julia, claUgh te io . _ A. 1 d il Clare House, near Maidstone, aged - ___--- tl ynot 10 ------ -- 2:110 l_fiddttlld'' ih th„ 0 1 Ilt, n j