The Sun. — London, England, 1846-04-28 00:00:00

LORD MAYOR'S COURT. (Before the RECORDEa.) PRE FREEMEN AND NON-FREEMEN OF THE CITY OF LONDON. —THE CHAMBERLAIN OF THE CITY OF LONDON V. STURT AND MITERS. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)l The SOLICITOR-GENERAL hoped his Learned Friend would reserve his observations till his proper time for addressing the Court He apprehended that, although they did not in as many words admit the unindifferency of those who made the return, yet as they had not denied their disinterestedness in the counter plea, he maintained that as the challenge im puted their unindifferency, and they were silent on that head in their counter plea, they did in substance, and in point of fact, admit the charge. It was invariably the rule that where a plaintiff did not deny the averments of a defendant, he did in fact admit them. The counter plea in this case was what was called a confession and avoidance 2 • the plaiatiff admitted the allegation of the defendant, but he maintained that the proceeding was le galised by a custom from time immemorial. Now to that answer he gave a complete and direct denial; he maintained that they could not protect themselves by any such custom. The question, therefore, that would have to be tried, if the defendant's answer to the eounter plea were allowed, would be not the unindifferency of those who had made the return or the jury, but the validity of the custom pleaded. And he apprehended that if the defendant's answer to the counter plea of the plaintiff were allowed, there would be no departure And now, to come to th e grea t ques ti o n before them, he would admit that his Lea rn ed F r i en d had a perfect right to say "We have joined i n th e demurrer upon the question Friend presented in your replication ;" but his Learned had said that the replication was bad inpoint of the counter Ile (the Solicitor-General) would " eemi?unt,, and impugn counter plea of the plaintiff as bad likewise, and he appre hendedi that he was entitled to the judgment of porous, of the Court. He alleged that the return was made Viz., the aldermen and inquests of the wards; and he main tained that it could not be saidinr were in eply to his objection to their unindifferency t hat the proceedings accord ance with an immemorial custom. .He maintained that, by the law of the land, no freeman of this-city could act as a j uror on a case in which the City of London was interested. In sup port of his argument, the Learned Gentleman then proceeded to quote the case of Easthope v. Braddock, 3 Burrows, in which the defendant was sued by the corporation of Chester for having (as in this case) carried on his trade within the limits of the city of Chester without having previously purchased the freedom of that city. The defendant objected to all the proceedings, which were precisely similar to those of the present suit, and on the case being argued in the superior courts it was de cided that the corporation could not plead a custom in sup port of their illegalities; and when it was urged that if the sheriff and coroners of Chester could not return juries for the trial of such cases, the reply of the judges was that that was the fault of the corporation themselves; and so in the pre sent, if by the decision of the law, which prevented interested parties participating in a case in which they were interested, the Corporation of London could not return a jury for the trial of these actions, it was entirely their own fault. They made these cases triable in their own court, in which their own laws prevailed, and to which the ward inquest only were empowered to return the juries who would have to try them. If they chose to make a law, giving themselves a share in the penalties to be recovered and make them only recoverable in their own courts, in which they themselves appear to demand these penalties, they were indifferent, and therefore incompetent to try cases of this nature. It was objected that they were interested, and that no trial could be made, because it would be tried by themselves, for it was only by aldermen of the City of London that juries could be returned. The REcoRDEn—It is an oldish law, made 240 years ago, when Sir Henry Montague, afterwards Chief Justice of Eng land, was Recorder. The SoacCiTeß-GENERAL said, he need not tell his Lord ship that time would not validate that which was bad. It was not every one who had spirit, patriotism, or money, to enter into a contest with the City of London on the subject. It happened that the defendant, Mr. Sturt had, and therefore, it was that his Lordship was now called on to decide the question. The RECORDER inquired how it happened, if all the points had been decided, as stated by the Learned Solicitor- General, that the Queen's Bench sent them invariably for trial in that Court ? The SOLICITOR-GENEntae said the Court of Queen's Bench haa invariably and wisely abstained from giving decision on the question on the motion for a procedenda, in order that it might be put on record, so that the parties, if they thought proper, might ultinretely appeal to the hi g h es t courts i n the country— weich parties, from their poverty or other causes, had been unable to raise this question. lie should ask his Lordship to decide this question. The RECORDER said the City of London was different front other corporate bodies in the country, because it had within itself the power of achnidietering the I•iie, and the making of laws, which had from time to time received the sanction of l'a rl lament. The SoLICIToR-GENERAL said he was one of those who hoped that that transcendent power of the City of Lon don might last for ever; neither did he wish to see its institutions placed on the same footing with other cities in this country, nor to see it placed Ruder the management of the Municipal Corporations Act. But he wished to impress on liis Lordship that if it was held that the City of London, with all its power and privilege, should retain the power and privilege of trying cases in a court that involved the subversion of the very first prin ciples of the administration of iunice, lie thought that that power would not last long. It was true those powers and privileges of the City of London were greater then those of any other city in Europe, but he apprehended that this was no argument at all in support of the practice of trying their actions in their own courts, and deciding penalties, and determining whether parties were liable to pay them or not. Sir T. WILDE then read the cases of Chamberlain v. Phil lipps, and Chamberlain v. Audrey, which were similar to this case, in which it was ruled by the Recorder that the challenges against the array, on account of unindifferency, 111 u9l. 4...• 11, uc .i.ltilut Lida been tried in this Court, and because the objection had often been taken before, but had never prevailed. It was how ever, sometimes the practice to disfranchise witnesses win) were freemen, in order that they might give evidence as non-freemen. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said the principle was as appli cable to juries as to witnesses, except that it was of tenfold importance with respect t o those constituting juries. The RECORDEa said that was saying that we ought not to have the means of local redress. The .SOLICITOR -GENERAL said he did not mean that—he meant that the penalties ought not to go into the pockets of those who were the ministers of justice, Tll9 RucoaDEß—Are you right in your distinction? The SOLIciToR-GENLEAL—W hat was the distinction ? Were not the citizens and aldermen part of the city? And it the penalty was recovered, would it not belong to the Cor poration ? The RECORDER asked if persons in qui tam actions did not sue for themselves and the Crown? Into whose pocket did the penalty go? Sir T. WILDE—By law it will go to the Crown. The Somerroa-Gexaeae—lt does not go into the privy purse. The RECORDER said the aldermen sat in that court in a different capacity than when they sat in the Common Coun cil, as they sat here in their executive capacity. The money did not go to them, but was devoted to public purposes. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said they expended the money at their discretion. He had so lately enjoyed the splendid hospitality of the City of London, that he would say no more. —(Laughter.) It went to the revenues of the City, but is applied to purposes in their discretion. The RECORDER—You are quite mistaken if you suppose that the Corporation paid for the dinner of which you partook the other day.--(Laughter.) The SOLICITOR-GENERAL read the opinion of Lord Ellen borough, on a motion for a procedenda in a similar case, which set forth that for two centuries and a half it had been the custom to try questions of this kind before recorders in all courts in the kingdom, and to remove them if necessary to a higher court. The RECORDER said his opinion showed that it was the intention of Lord Elleaborough that the case might go to a superior court, and be sent back again. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL would be glad if his Lordship would give such a decision, and also decide pro forma on behalf of the demurrer. The RECORDER said he was prepared to overrule the challenge. He was quite prepared to put the case into the fullest and best course of inquiry. It was arranged that this should be put on the record, and this exhausted the argument for the challenge, and it ac cordingly was about to proceed, when the Recorder stated that he did not intend to overrule the case cited, to which the Solicitor-General asserted that he understood it was done provisionally. The RIO ORDER suggested that twelve should be selected ' who were not freemen. The SOLICITOR-Gestaaase inquired what course the counsel for the City wished to pursue ; and it was ultimately ar ranged that the first juryman lair. Thomas Jenkins, should be challenged, on the ground of eing a freeman and there fore an' mintre.rpested par ti—the same objection to Mr. Henry of the r. Roberts, Mr. Edmonds, and others jury, to ihe tu nn eta tlter of eleven, pro forma. The ju r y were Mr. HILL they opene w d e t r t n i ancasde, which was an allegation against the defendant of e actina as warehouseman, deale and Chapman under aye Patting the matter, without being free of tliegMetil:rrerrentity subjecting himself to the penalty of 51. for the offelCe.tilere Sir T. WILDE then proceeded to say that the apparen count was that which h a d b een j ust stated at theeuit of the t Chamberlain of the City of London, but which was oa asrally instituted to ascertain whether gentlemen carrying busi ness in the City should be compelled to take up their free dom. The jury were aware that in all the affairs of life the authorities were obliged to proceed on general rules, which, it must be allowed, were not sometimes applicable to the justice of each particular case, It was the necessity of abiding by these general rules which had obliged them to occupy so much time on the preceding day and on this day in arguing the proper mode of abiding by them, and ascertaining whether the panel had, in the first place, been properly made; and, secondly, whether the gentlemen who were brought to try this cause were properly brought there. There was no intention whatever on the part of the coue:sel on either side to allege that there was partiality whatever, eith e: in the jury or the several officials who had been instrumental in bringing them together, but their object was to ascertain whether, in a great question like this, a bye-law, passed many years ago, and which might beperfectly just at the time it was passed, was applicable to this case. If, consistently with this bye-law the cause could have been tried in another and a foreign court, much of this objection would have been obviated, but such could not be, as this was the proper court, in consequence of the judge being acquainted with those facts which would elsewhere have to be proved iu evi dence. The real question was, whether gentlemen of stand ing respectability and considerable wealth should partake of all the advantages, legal, social, and otherwise, with out bearing part of the expenses which were necessary to secure these advantages. All knew that it was of the utmost importance to the Corporation how it was cons!i tilted. In times of the utmost distress the voice of the Corporation had been loudly raised, and constitutionally in nu ential, and even in periods of great doubt and difficulty, If Parliament itself had even City for refuge. If they we flown to the corporate breodt i n e l s, ook to the lists of the nobility and of other sprung from the would find a large portion to have wholesale dealers aauf oortrion of Londom ; and if, then, the were to refrain from takineern respectabl reints in the ' City would be iota to the C orp 'o 4tio li n eir freen' a great advante. Then, if they were to idol: to the several causes of th,eril;tteorit:ure, they would :-es another sufficient reason, _,cbithe criminal juri diction, the watching and the lightin by the non-fa ors were ad vantages which were partaken of be borne as by the freemen, but the bulk of the expenneereeefistinsesesnew'well by the City. Now was it fair that these Should be enjoyed by parties who did not contribute to the esre ee „ s To constitute such a principle would be altogther contrary 'to justice. He was aware that it would be alleged that the wholesale dealers were entitled to be exempt front thee* •expenses. But the ground fur such an allegation was 'altogether untenable, and although he was not goieg to make a parade of ancient learning, yet thus much he - might advance, that in the olden times, when the trade of 'this City first arose, every individual enjoying the benefit its commerce, entered into what was called a " frank THE SUN, LONDON, TUEFDAY EVENING, APRITZ'ss, ma. pledge," by which they were bound to support each other and bear their share of the expenses. The usages of that day had passed away, but the thing itself remained; trade was still carried on; common advantages were enjoyed, and common expenses had to be borne ; and it was not because there was now a class called wholesale dealers as well . as retail dealers, that the principle was in any way negati t ved New forms had arisen, upon which it would appear tha w r the ancient law no foreigner, that was to say, a person the -o had not purchased the freedom, could sell goods limits of the City, because it was supposed that thwseelidn,tweremnied diate profit of the middle-man, who bought and variety of - prejudice the trade of the City . of London. A jury of the City trade. He "' Were created. The re solutions were consequently imposed to ld pr i e t v et ent anstheertaininat what period those resolutions meant a man who word " wholesale" at that time the citizens in the bulk ; who, m brought his goods to the City e C t, That word had been main parcel, without opening h iet s y old an h d is b ao a l l d e, b to ox, &c and sold his bales, Leeds, and Bradford , ~ Manchester, opened their boxes or bales, and sold twined to apply to such a t g e e m nileman as brought goods from &c., entire, but such as the goods bulk was broken were said to be the contents in parts, were said to be retail traders. As soon as the sold by retail. The wholesale trader w a s compelled by the bye-law to contribute two portions towards the preservation of peace, &c., by purchasing his freedom. The object of s uc h a law was beyond all doubt that all who received the benefit of the government of the City, and whose interests were protected by that bye-law, should fairly contribute their proper share of the expense of carry ing on the government of the City. In ancient times these corporations were of the greatest importance. They were most essential to the preservation of civil and political liberty. To the existence of those corporate bodies it was that we owed one of our most valuable privileges. They constituted a bulwark for the pro tection of our liberties. The history of the Corporation of London was lost in its antiquity. Nobody could tell when the Corporation of London did not exist. It had been found to exist in the earliest period to which the mind could revert, and no doubt was cre ated either by the Crown or by the Parliament— by whatever name, whether Wittena gemote, or by any other name, or probably it existed even before the creation of the Parliament, as it is at present constituted. Its antiquity had been acknowledged and recognised from all time immemorial • it was admitted even by Acts of Parliament. What was the date of the bye-law for the infringemnt of which the defendant had been now brought before the Court nobody knew. If it were impeached, they might as well impeach the most valuable rights passed by these corporate bodies—they might, in fact, as well im peach the Parliament itself. They found the Corporation of London had power to enact such bye-laws as were found ne cessary for the government of the City, and it would be per fectly useless to talk of their ancient customs if they had not the power to make such bye-laws. The bye-law in, ques tion provided for several things—it prohibited the show ing and exhibiting of goods for sale, by retail, by a party who was not a freeman of the City. The bye-law began by recit ing, that whereas by ancient charters, customs, and fran chises, and liberties of the City of London, and in conformity with sundry Acts of Parliament, any person not being a freeman of the City of London should not be allowed to sell or put to sale, as wares or merchandise within the City, by retail, under a penalty of 51. for every day he should presume to carry on his trade. The allegations were to the effect that the defendant, not being a freeman, did use a certain trade within the City of London, that was to say, the trade of a warehouseman, dealer. or chapman. The defendant, who was highly respectable, and carried on a most respect able trade, admitted the charge, and he (Sir Thomas Wilde) had no idea as to the defence which would be set up by his Learned Friend. The Sommon-GexErtat, wished to know from his Learned Friend whether he intended to proceed with all the counts? Sir T. WILDE said he did, but it was not intended to en force any more than one penalty. The Soucafroa -GENERAL said that he should like to have the assurance set forth on the record. Sir T. WILDE—I will do it, if the defendant is alarmed. The SOLICITOR GENERAL—The defendant is not at all alarmed. Sir T. WILDE continued by reading all the various counts, remarking that, as his Learned Friend would not be absent if a loophole presented itself—(Laughter)—he was deter mined to proceed on al the counts, but there was no inten tion to enforce more than a single penalty of five pounds. The fifth count stated that he occupied a warehouse in the City of London, and there exposed goods for sale. These were the several charges. It was agreed between the parties that the 'defendant carried on the business of a warehouse. man at No. 90 and 91, Wood-street, and that he sold cotton, linen, woollen and other manufactured goods, which were purchased from manufacturers in Manchester, Scotland, and other places; that he received them in bales, which were opened and exposed to parties wishing to purchase them; that these goods were purchased on the usual terms— namely, a credit of two months, or a discount of t wo-and-a half per cent. for cash. These were the charges, and it was specially provided by the bye-laws of the Common Council, that persons came within the category of " freemen," if they car carried on any " art, trade, occupation, handicraft, or mystery," io the City of London. Now, he maintained, that this was clearly proved, because he exposed his bales for sale, and employed clerks and others to assist him in his business. These provisions were made in order that parties, who carried on retail trades, such as he contended was carried on by the defendant, might contribute their fair proportion of the charges of the City. " Botchers, tailors, and cobblers," were excluded, because they did not purchase or sell by retail ; for instance, a tailor sold you a coat, but did not sell the bales of cloth from which it was made. This was done that a certain class of persons ' who at the passing of the law were not, perhaps, in a fit condition to take up their freedom, might be excluded from the responsibility. Now what was the difference between the dealings of a mercer in Cheapside, who sold a piece of cloth, and a warehouseman next door, who sold cloth in a bulk, and who would not sell it lu pieces ? Practically there virns nn Alit:malice._ beside°, their property was guarded by the police as well as the property of the retail dealer; and why should they not pay their share of the expense of supporting the police, and to the other expenses of governing the City? There was no reason why the retail dealer should contribute his share of those expenses, and why the wholesole dealer should be exempt, for the one just as much kept a shop as the other. He therefore submitted to his Lordship and the jury that the defendant came within the meaning. of the clause, that he could be compelled to take up his freedom, and take his share in the various offices which freemen were called upon to fill, and that the plaiatiff was entitled to a verdict on each of the counts. The Soucprott-GENEnAt. then proceeded to address the Jury on behalf of the defendant. He agreed with his Lord ship that there were but two questions for the jury to decide —first, whether the trade of warehouseman, as carried on by Mr. Start, came within the definition in the bye-law; and, secondly, whether the trade or occupation of a warehouse man, as described in the admission handed in, was a trade or occupation within the meaning of the 3d bye-law, which set forth that wholesale traders should be exempted from taking up their freedom. Before entering on those questions he should feel it neces sary to enter upon that topic which had already occupied so much time, and to which his Learned Friend had adverted. It was scarcely necessary to say, that he had not the slightest intention of imputing improper bias to the jury adjudicating upon it, for the Learned Judge was aware, that he believed that the jury was as little capable of an improper bias as the Learned Judge himself. But he must question the assertion of his Learned Friend:that they came here to try only whether a trader could carry on his business in the City of London before taking up his freedom, for they came there for another purpose—that of ascertain ing whether such a system as that which was sought to be introduced into the adjudication of this cause, was not recognised by any other portion of the realm of England. It was the boast of this country—and long might it be so—that no person was allowed to interfere with the administration of justice who was in the slightest degree interested in the result of any particular case; and he did not hesitate to say that the bye-laws under which this case was brought was a blot upon thewhole administration of the justice of the country. By the enactment of this rule the corporation of the City of London levied, without the authority of any other law than that which they them selves had instituted, a penalty upon any of the Queen's subjects who might come into this City to carry on their business, and this penalty was to be levied for their own particular benefit. It was alien to the law of Eng land that any person should interfere in his own case, and yet here did the Corporation of London come into their own court to try this case before their own judge, and by the instrumentality of a jury impanelled from among their own body, for the purpose of putting money into their own pockets. If such a principle were to be admitted, there would at once be an end to the purity of trial by jury. Supposing the ease were to be their own—supposing it were an exception to a bill of exchange, how would they like to have the cause tried by a set of individuals who were directly interested in a verdict against them ? It mattered little what might be the sum, for it was of no conse quence whether it were 51., 5001., or 500,0001 ; for if the principle were once admitted, it broke through every principle of the law of England. He had already had occasion to observe that the Corporation of the City of London were placed in a peculiar position, and he wished, with every sincerity, that the Corporation might long con tinue to possess those immunities arid privileges which it had so long enjoyed. B u t if the effect of those privileges was to infringe the grand principle of the law of England, by the existence of such a bye-law it would, not be the same regulations long - .. brf v The Corporation of the Citi of parts as . this, he trusted that as othe o r re it was placed ander different position from every othe e n o °,no was as the Corporation was not compefierf. into, hich it came into possession, to, for ° l a n p it y provement of the town, but might be purpose, whether of a dinner or otherwise, price it might choose. In making these of the kingdom. placed in a oratton, inasmuch the funds, rie, the im app.hedo any which In its c observations he a anxious to show that he did not in the • impute partiality to them, that upon the record which before a superior court, and if it came into consideration before would now turn to the question and the first was the charge was because he was anxious to put which unquestionably arise It should be remembered that in all Acts involving was certain to be raised s the f House of Lords. lie ofo which . he had spoken ; a warehouse. clauses were to be construed strictly, pa: titularly to put before his Lordship. tlemrse then went into a definition of the term v so orng . penalties the Tho th i r he begged . ed Gen . - 1 dsaler," which he described as intimating a person wtiorkteapit a shop where goods in small quantities were sold, and stated that the word came from the Italian word retainer, to sell by cut, or to sel!and cut again, as was the case where ayard of muslin or woollen doth or any other small portion of goods was sold. This was expressly explained by the statutes themselves, the differ ence between retail and wholesale dealers having been ex pressly recognised, and cited the 2d Richard IL, chap. 1, in • which the difference was expressly explained. That statute provided that all parties might freely sell in the gross all sorts of goods in the City. of London, as well as all other ;cities and towns in the realm of England, but not by retail. The statute clearly said, " You may sell by the bale, von may sell by the piece, but you s hall not sell by retail." Why, if there were any diatinctne , s in legislative language, it was in the very statute which lie had quoted. If the Legis lature were called upon to declare in express and clear terms what was the line of demarcation between dealing by the gross and by retail , it would , be imnossible fir them to use clearer and snore language than was distinct used Li the statute of Richard H. He had showed that the manufactured goods from defendant imported or received her plaess, and sold them in bales en ti ,. e. Marchester and other sub-division of his goods within the There was no cutting o i r , They found by the statute of Richard bye-law. . y .., terms 6 g the wish out let or hinderance, that all parties, wi, ion any 11., cap. I.f • were pern fitted to se ll g oods by the entire piece. The byelaw in questi o n was said . i to be of very great .antiquity, : being mad e two MnO(lred and forty years ago , it must have h h custom, to be good for any been founds el on a custom. -Ix . —ic • thi ng , must be from time immemor ia l. But we had the 1 that no such statute of Ri c h ar d, which declared expressly f bye - law sh ou ld h ave f a rce either in the City o London or any other corporate town or city in England. The isecoßiax T'are other statutes in reference to a— nere this question. The Somcrr OR-GENERAL said there were, but none bearing so directly I r ma the questionlas that which he had quoted. The case of N'z' ngoner v. Fish, which was generally called the London case, might also be quoted. It appeared from Barnewall's report of the case, page 287, that the Recorder of London, in giving his judgment, said it was clear that a merchant who sold his goods entire was not compelled to become a freeman of the City for the purpose of carrying on his trade, but that those who sold by the yard or by retail were liable to the operations of the bye-laws ; and, therefore, that being so, there was no room left for argument in this 1 case. _ .... The REconDEß—Then you contend that you have brought yourself within the description of the Act of Parliament. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL-NO, my Lord, I say they have net brought us within the description of their bye-law; and I submit to your Lordship it is incumbent on the plaintiff to do so if he is to succeed in his prosecution. The RECOADEK--118 shows that the defendant sells by retail. The SomaDm-GENERAL—Yes; it is not for me to enter into the variety of the illustrations, and to consider whether a pair of scissors, or a hat, or a knife, or any other article— The REcormen—No; you have merely to show that your client sells within the description of the statute so as to en title him to the privilege it confers. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL did not wish to impose upon his Learned Friend the duty of a ga i n a dd ress i ng hi s L or d s hi p or the jury —(Laughter)—by referring to other Acts of which his Lordship was no doubt already perfectly aware, but he would again remark that they had here a bye-law which sought to impose a penalty, which bye-law, he contended, must be construed like all other penal enactments in the most strict sense, and he submitted that it was incumbent on the plaintiff, who sought to exact the penalty from the defendant to show clearly and beyond all reasonable doubt, to bring him within the meaning of that bye-law. The RECORDER observed, that it appeared that the Solici tor-General was not quite so ignorant upon the merits of the question and the laws of the Court as he at first professed to be.—(Laughter.) The SOLICITOR-GENERAL replied, that he was happy to say that his Learned Friend had been kind enough to furnish him with information upon the practice and laws of the Court, for which he was greatly indebted to him. The plaintiff had given no evidence whatever of what retail trading was at the time when this bye-law was made, or what was the definition of wholesale or retail trading at that particular time. They could there fore only judge by the light of their own reason, and he had already referred his Lordship to the statement of Richard, which was made pari materid with this bye-law. It appeared that, although the plaintiff sought to recover penalties from the, defendant, he at the same time admitted that in payment of his goods he received acceptances for four months, or cash with an allowance of two-and- a-half per cent. Now, was that symptomatic of retail dealing ? The mode of paying, namely by acceptances of four months, OT 2% discount for cash, showed that it was dealing in gross, and came within the category of wholesale dealing. There fore he held that the jury must decide in favour of the de fendant on the two last counts, those only which referred to retail dealings. The meaning of the provisions with respect to retail dealings was simply this, that no one should expose goods for sale by retail. It was clear that the defendant did not expose goods for sale, and if the assumption of his being a retail dealer was held to be good by the jury, solicitors, bankers, and others, would be brought within the category and be liable to hold the offices which were assigned to freemen. After referring to a case decided by the Court of Queen's Bench, namely, Clarke v. Denton, in which it was maintained by Lord Tenterden that a person was not a retail dealer unless he sold his goods by piece, he proceeded to say that the defendant did not come within the definition of a retail dealer, as set forth in the bye-law of the Common Council. The Act of Richard 11. was amended in the seventh year of the reign of Henry IV., and again amended in the ninth year of the reign of the same sovereign. The amendment of the law made in the 9th of Henry IV. had not been printed, but was included in Lord Coke's account of Waggoner's case. The 7th of Henry IV. merely legalised the selling and buying of goods, and clearly legalised the sale in gross, so that if it were now in force deal ings of that character would be perfectly legal in a non-free man, and could not be repealed without the intervention of another Act of Parliament. Then the subsequent enact ments left all dealings in gross just as they were, except sel ling in gross by non-freemen to non-freemen to sell again was forbidden, and that was r:ow the law within the City of Landon, but within which he held the defendant did not come. Then comes the subject of the bye-laws there being no Act repealing them ; the effect of which was, that those two Acts of Parliament clearly showed that it was legal for mer chant-dealers to sell to merchant-strangers, but not to sell again. They denied the power of the bye-laws to defraud the Act, and the question was whether they should put it in the limited or in the enlarged sense. If in the former, the law was conformable with the statutes, but in the other sense it was a violation of the statutes. He therefore sub mitted that on those three several accounts the statute ex pressly went to restrain retail dealers, but not to wholesale dealers. Sir. T. Wilde was about to address the Court, when the Solicitor- General interrupted, and a discussion ensued upon the question as to whether the plaintiff's had a right to speak upon Waggoner's case, in the statute of Henry VII. The RF.coxprat decided that new matter having been in troduced, the plaintiffs might be heard. Sir T. WILDS said, out of respect to the Court, he should be extremely short. As to the statute of Richard 11. it referred to certain kinds of goods, as merchant strangers might sell corn and other victuals vices and small wares, to whom they pleased, whether the King's subjects or other wise. But this was only to be done by freeman, for whom it nas alone lawful to undo and cut parcels, and this showed the selling of entire par c els as imported, and it was evi dent that the reference was first to small wares, and then it came to great wat es, which the citizens only were able to break and sell in small quantities. When they con sidered counterpanes, and curtains, the peculiar features of the case would be evident. Then as to the statute of Henry IV., which repealed part of this statute which authorised the selling, when his Lordship recollected the state of the times under those reigns, this would be still more evident. The Learned Gentleman then read other portions of the statute to prove his case, and to show the custom was as he re presented it, especially stating that burgesses and citizens were entitled to sell in gross as well as retail. So they can abolish what was selling in gross, and he was quite read, to abide by the exposition of the Act of Rickard 11. Then as to Waggoner,s case, the statute was as distinct as it could pos sibly be, particularly that part which said that no person I should keep a shop or other house for the purpose. The thing might be done covertly, so they first imposed a penalty, and then they laid down that no non- freemen should keep a shop or other place for the purpose of getting a living, in the City at the cost or expense of the country. Then, as if to include everything, they used the term " art." His Learned Friend had stated that he would not quote Coke— hut another edition, where the matter was more distinct, and well he might, for it was not in Coke---as to Waggoner's case, that no man was to be allowed to follow any art, trade, or mystery, which embraced everything. Thirdly, as to the objection that the matter there referred to goods bought and sold, and did not extend to tallow-chandlers or other arti ficers of similar kind within the realm, it was held by the whole Parliament that the 7th of Henry IV., chap. 9, which had been before explained, completely ruled the whole of the case. Having read several extracts from the amended Act of the 9th of Henry IV., and commented upon it, he sub mitted that the defendant came within its province, and held that the jury must so decide. The RECORDER then proceeded to charge the jury. He said the Chamberlain of London, in virtue of his Glace, and in accordance with an act of Common Council, passed so far back as 1806, in the fourth year of the reign of James 1., sought to recover penalties, because the defendant had violated the Act in carrying on the trade of a warehouseman, dealer, and chapman without being free, that he carried on the art, trade, occupation, an d mystery f a warehouseman. by selling goods and merchandise without being free. The question then which they would have to decide was, whether the occupation of a warehouseman brought him within the act of the Common Council. He was of opinion that he followed a trade, but that of a wholesale dealer did not come within the province of this act. He would not enter into the right of the Council to pass the bye-law, because in his official capacity he might have to defend that right elsewhere. Having read the admissions of the defendant,he saidthe pay ment for goods by acceptances at four months, or by cash at two and-a-half per cent. discount, showed that his dealings were of a more extensive character than those of a retail dealer, the ordinary nature of whose dealings were, that he received the money for the goods he sold across the counter. The defendant further stated that he invariably supplied invoices with the goods which he sold, thus showing that his transactions were not of a retail character. If they had been, it was possible, and in fact was g enera ll y the case, that the goods so purchased by retail would have been paid for on purchase, the purchaser being able to per ceive that he was properly supplied with the goods he came to buy. He further stated that he occupied premises at 90 and 91, Wood-street; that he received his goods in bales from Manchester, and from various parts of Scotland and Ireland, in the disposal of which he employed a number of clerks and other persons. It was unfortunate that they had not been informed of the size of the bales of cotton, woollen, &c., because they were unable to judge whether they con tained only a few or a number of yards. The jury were, no doubt, conversant with the bnsiness of a warehouseman, and if the defendant exposed his goods for sale in bulk, exhibit ing one bale and then another, and employing persons who acted virtually in the capacity of shopmen, he should advise them to find for the plaintiff: He put it to the jury as traders in the City of London, and as men of experience, to say whether the defendant came within the province of a wholesale dealer or not. The facts were extremely meagre ; he was unable, therefore, to direct them better, because his personal experience of business in the City was not surncient to characterise the difference more distinctly. He considered that the bye-law did not apply to wholesale dealings, and that a warehouseman did not carry on au art, mystery, or handicraft within the meaning of the bye- law or act. After considerable discussion between the Counsel and the Recorder on mere points of form and exceptions, the jury retired at half- past five o'clock to consider their verdict, and returned into Court at six o'clock, with a verdict for the DEFENDANTS ON ALL THE COUNTS. The Court then rose. THE ALLEGE D ATTEM PT AT MURDER IN DRURY-LANE. BOW STREET. John Braham, the alleged assassin of the unfortunate man Blewitt, was placed at the bar before the sitting magistrate, Mr. Henry, to answer the charge made against him, shortly after the night charges had been disposed of this morning. There was, as usual, a great crowd assembled in Bow street from the time the various prisoners were led across the street from the station to the court up to their final removal in the prison van. There was, however, less ex citement and less interest shown in regard to this case than in others of recent date, which were attended with more re volting circumstances. The prisoner was placed in the dock at two o'clock, when he appeared perfectly composed and self-possessed. He was defended by Mr. Humphreys. The charge on the police-sheet was for shooting and wounding Thomas Blewitt, and thereby endangering his life. The first witness called was Louisa Cooke, who said—l live at No. 12, Great Earl street, Seven Dials, and am servant to a Mrs. Dowling. At about five minutes past eight on Saturday night I was going down Princes-street, Drury-lane, towards Clare market, when I met the prisoner, whom I had never seen before, at the corner of Princes -street. I accidentally pushed against him, and he said, " You —, what made you do that ?" I said, ~ You puppy, what made you call me that? could you prove me one?" Ile tried to catch hold of me by the arm, and I ran away. He followed me, caught me by the arm, and used the same expression to me as before, adding, " If it wasn't for one thing 1 would do fur you to-night" Ile then took a pistol from under his arm, but I am fiat sure whether it was the right or the left arm. I think i give him in c h arge, and t ' "and he ran away. He app eared very ut rig " l i i ) t o . lic l e, sa a id I would timid and wishful. c " a 'a ll s ed t h o e wishful " the term she replying that it was, Mr. Henry she used ? and on her re Mr. Hamphreys asked whether " was Id and as if "he would do that looked wild she meant he _ _.,, in quired what the wanes] ) i d neaut by " wishful ?" She said something to her if he dart. William Hathaway, of37, that at about twenty minutes before nine o'clock on Saturday l e Hertford-place, Drury-lane, said e, and walked towards d night he was passing through Drury - an , and the prisoner crossed the road from the opposite al him, presenting a pistol towards him. He was very much alarmed, and tarred aside, m that the prisoner passed him, and he immediately heart the pistol go off, and a man's voice crying out, "I'm shot." The prisoner stag gered against him, and then ran awry. He (witness) was so frightened that he was not able to run after the prisoner, or to assist the wounded man. A man came up to the spot at the moment, took the wounded man upon his shoulder, and car ried him into a chemist's shop. The wounded man was going the same way as he ( witness) was, for he had passed him hardly a moment before. He did not see th( prisoner for more than a minute after the report. He was so confused that he hardly noticed anything. He would know the wounded man again. Charles Baker, policeman F 32, seid that he was on duty in Drury-lane on Saturday night, and that at about twenty five minutes before nine o'clock he was passing by Princes street, and heard the report of a pistol. He saw a cloud of smoke at the door of a cook-shop, et the corner of that street, and saw the wounded man with his hand to his breast stooping, and crying out, " 0 dear ! 0 Lord !" He went towards the spot, and met the prisoner, who was running. He caught him by the wrist, and asked him what was the matter, or something to that effect, but he could not say what were the exact words he used, as he was very much confused at the time. The prisoner's reply was, that "It was a pistol that went off by accident." At the same moment a number of voices exclaimed, " A man has shot himself," and he then let the prisoner go, not seeing any weapon about him, or having any reason to suspect him. He then went to the assistance of the wounded man, who had been carried into a chemist's shop, and he afterwards saw him conveyed to King's College Hospital. He afterwards returne Ito Drury lane, and met the young woman who was first examined, who made a communication to him, in consequence of which he took her to the station-house, where she made the same statement as she had given this morning. Witness said in the prisoner's hearing that he had met the prisoner in Drury lane, and that he said It was a pistol that went off by acci dent. The prisoner said it was purely by accident. John Fisher, who described himself as a chimney-sweep, and said that he lived in Rose-street, Drury-lane, deposed that on Saturday night he was passing up Drury-lane towards Long-acre, and heard the report of a pistol. The prisoner immediately afterwards passed him, running, and he saw him putting . the pistol into his pocket. Several people called out " police," and " stop him,' and as no one was pursuing him, he ran after him himself. The prison;; ran at a great pace, and witness ran at his greatest pace to catch him, in consequence of which he fell. He got up, and again ran after the prisoner. He followed him to the corner of Little Queen-street, in Great -Queen-street, where he overtook him, and caught him by the arm. He asked the prisoner if he knew what he had done? To which he replied, " Have I harmed any body ?" Witness said, whether or no he must go back to Drury-lane. The prisoner begged of him to let him go, which, of course, he refused to do, and they went towards Drury-lane. The prisoner was shifting a pistol from one of his pockets, and witness asked him what he had got there? To which he re plied, "only a little pistol, that I just let off in Drury-lane. I was going to the shooting-gallery in Drury-lane." Wit ness thinking the pistol might be loaded, took it from the prisoner, who said, " You may take that or anything else, only let me go." He then took him first to the surgeon's shop, and then to the corner of Bow-street, where they met a policeman, to whom he gave him in charge. Policeman Durston, F 83, spoke to taking the prisoner in charge from the last witness. The prisoner asked if the man was hurt, and said that it was done by accident. Witness did not make any reply, or even speak to the prisoner, al though the question was repeated several times. On search ing him at the station, he found a powder-flask in his left hand coat pocket, and five balls in his right. (The witness produced the articles in question.) The prisoner said at the station that the occurrence was accidental. - --- Edward Mailers, of 129, Drury-lane, a dealer in pawn broker's unredeemed pledges, said that about five weeks ago the prisoner came into his shop, and said he wanted a percussion gun. He chose one, and said that he had a gun and pistol which he would exchange for it. He agreed to give the prisoner the gun he wanted for the other gun and the pistol, and 133. in money, The bargain was struck, and the prisoner took the gun away. He after wards repurchased the gun and pistol for 1 ls., by which witness had ls. profit. The pistol was the same now pro duced. Mr. HENRY asked the witness how old he would suppose the prisoner to be ? To {which he replied, about eighteen. Mr. Humphreys said the prisoner was fifteen last February. Mr. HEN/Li said that shopkeepers ought to be more cautious than to sell pistols to such young persons as the prisoner. . The witness said, that since the case of Wicks (who it will be rem em b ere d , h a d p ur chased the pistol with which he committed the murder from this witness) he had been very unwilling to sell guns or pistols to lads such as the prisoner, but that he saw no objection in this instance as the prisoner had already the gun and pistol in his possession when witness first. dealt with him. . . Mr. IIE;-;.vil;t1;iiseTilie witnesss Fisher to be recalled, and said that he considered it necessary to observe, that he thought his conduct worthy of great commendation, and that it would not be forgotten. Tile witness Hatha wa y w as then recalled, and stated that he had seen the wounded man at the hospital since giving his evidence, and that he had no doubt of his identity. Mr. Superintendent Pierce and Mr. Inspector Black, of the F division, proved that the prisoner said at the station, that the occurrence was purely accidental. The name of the wounded man was Blewitt. He was said by the surgeon to be in a very dangerous state, but he was expected to recover. Mr. Humphreys declined to make any observations on the case, and Mr. lixxxY remanded the prisoner to Saturday next. RAILWAY COMMITTEES. (YESTERDAY.) GROUP VI. This Committee met to-day at twelve o'clock, Sir J. C. Hobhouse, chairman. DUNDEE AND PERTS. Mr. ANDREWS appeared for the promoters of the Bill, and after addressing the Committee, Mr. TALBOT said he appeared for the magistrates and town council of Perth, to object to the line, inasmuch as it was h tended by the promoters to have a general termini for all the rail ways running into the town at a place called the " Inch." Ilis clients objected to this ground being interfered with (amore patrex), as it had been the pro)erty of the public for the last three hundred years. It was a place mitich the inhabitants held in high veneration. It was the ground on which " Henry of the Wind" performed such wonders before one of the Kings of Scotland, and of which Sir Walter Scott gives so glowing a description. The Learned Counsel went into the merits of the case at great length, and after some cross firing between the Learned Gentlemen engaged on both sides, The Committee orderec the room to be cleared. Upon readmission, the Cuatustax said that the Committee had agreed to hear the opponents by counsel an d ev id ence. The proceeding's were tien adjourned to twelve o'clock to-morrovi, when the case will be gon3 into in detail. GROUP XIV. SOUTH-EASTERN AND BRANCHES. (Continued from out Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. ALaXANDER said that he intended to call a military officer of eminence to show that the South-Eastern scheme with reference to the Dockyard was not only feasible but advisable, but he could not say that that gentleman was authorised sr commissioned by the Go vernment to express any opinion on their part. Witness (in eontinuation)—Mr. Vignole's plan for entering the dock-yard was more expensive than the South-Eastern plan. Had caused different borings to be made on the proposed route sf the North Kent Railway in the tunnels through Roughton-hill. The turnings-out showed clay to the depths of 26, 7, 13, and 7 feet respectively. At the eastern end of the tunnel there is a cutting of 1,402 yards in length. The borings show that the clay sapping of the other strata varies lu depth from 28 to 9 feet. These borings were all made within a distance of 350 yards. There is on the western side of the tunnel a cutting 1,400 yards in length, and the bo r i ngs ma d e there gave 28, 6, 12, 8, and 9 feet. Is of opinion that the Bsughton-hill cutting should never have been made. The Deal branch and the Union-street branch on the North Kent branch are perfectly useless. In the event of t!.e forma tion of the North Kent line, Eastern Company would be the result, or else a ruinous compet i t i on must be carried on. an amalgamation with the South- By the CHAIRMAN—ShouId hare preferred .ontinuing the Green wich line through Greenwich Park. Had formed plans for such a line, but it was opposed by the Admiralty, The CHAIRMAN said that he should like to see the correspondence on that subject. Mr. STEPHENSON said that the line enforced by the Admiralty was a far inferior one as to expense and accommodation. It would in crease the expense 101,000/. The railway would not interfere with the Instruments at the Royal Observatory in the Park, by any vi bration. The Astronomer Royal said that the experiments already made were not sufficiently conclusive, some experiments himself. oft and he proposed instituting Mr. John Clutton, examined by Mr. MEIREWETIIER—Is a surveyor , and had valued the land required for the South-Eastern line. The cost of the main line in land would be 304,2651., and that of the loup 162,235/. From Canterbury to Dover would be 104,4691., and from Maidstone to Rochester 111,651/. Mr. G. Wakley was the next witness examined, after which The Committee adjourned until to-morrow at twolre o'clock. GROUP XIX. BRIDGWATER AND TAUNTON RAILWAY AND BARBOUR. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) The formal proofs, in accordance with Mr. Duncombe's resolution last week, were then put in. Mr. TALBOT, on behalf of the opponents of the Bill, took a preli minary objection to the further progress of the Bill, on the ground that even if the Committee granted the line, the promoters had no power to raise funds to construct it. The Committee would remem ber that the first Act alluded to by his Learned Friend, was an Act passed in 1811, for making a Railway from Bristol to Taunton, but that Act was abandoned, and another passed for making a canal from Bridgwater to Taunton. Now the first Act gave the par ties power to raise 420,0001., but on the abandonment of this Act of course the powers ceased. The other Act gave them power to raise 520,000/., and of that sum they had already used 171,200/.. leaving a balance whirl' in ramnurtt Willi 50,0001. loco !lawn tho cetiwate for the construction of the proposed works. Mr. Sergeant WRANGLIAI4I contended that this was an objec tion which ought to have been urged be the Standing Orders' Com mittee, and the present Committee had, therefore, no power to deal Ultimately, after a l ong with it. well-known Dublin and Galway Mr. TALBOT, relying upon the Committee on the Bill. c case, i o t n t e t c e n l d e e ft d t t h m a s t t m h e a y t t h e r a d t o ; b be u t the de e f i a d c e t d w b as y the th e Standing Orders' di s cussion, it was decided that the Com mittee should adjourn till to-morrow at twelve o'c lock, and in the meantime the de c i s i on of the stan di n g Orders' Committee was to be ascertained from th e Chairman o f th e Committee before whom the matter was discussed. first time, in room 28 GROUP XXVII. The Committee, to whom the consideration of the merits of the lines of this Group Nes.,refei T ed, met to-day at one o'clock, for the inittee consisted of Sir C. Lemon (West Cornwall), the Chairman, Coin- Mr. Marshall Carlisle), Mr. Wawn (South Shields), Mr. Bright (Durham), Mr. mpden (Great Marlow). The lines in the Group were the Derby and Crewe Junction, the in the new Houses of Parliament. The Leicester and Bedford, the North Staffordshire (Chuniet Valley), North Staffordshire (Harecastle to Sandbach), North Staffordshire (Potteries), and the South Midland (Northampton and Bedford).; Alter the different :petitions presented against the lines were read over, a discussion ensued as to the order of precedence with regard to their consideration, when it was ultimately arranged that the 31 1 . 1 n r . ...A „ u , 5.rt threel Staffordshire tines should be taken first. fr. TOWNSEND objected to this arrangement, on the ground that the Amalgamation Committee had as yet made no report, and if the c onsideration of the lines be postponed till that report were made, such a course might save trouble and render any inquiry with re gard to them unnecessary. 1113 " 33 STAFFORDSHIRE (3 LINES.) of the line ,""ult.l then opened the case on the behalf of the promoters three s, afte r WI P. Bidder, civil engineer, was which Mr, George examined, wheu ' adjourned until twelve o'clock to the Committee morrow. N 9 pith whom were Mr. Talbot, Mr. Murphy, and Mr. GROUP xXix. This Committee assembled to -day, shortly after Twelve o'clock, in worth No. 8. Present, Mr. Labouchere, (Chairman), Sir W. Moles -4 were ui i 11, ous, i S d i e r r J. ,, l rt M a c in kw el o a r u th s , Cionlotileel i lt ii a ll w . don, Sir J. 11. Smith. SOUTH Ivry... The clans." The CHAIRMAN said he believed the Committee had agreed to the AND, nIYNTINGD ON .BRANCH. preamble of this Bill under certain contingencies, and they were now to r. MecAULEY, COUll e S s el fur tile Bill, having answered in the affirmative, clause 24, The CHAIR MAN said that th e Committee expected that t he same of tolls should be i then gone through seria t i m, and ou coming to d as they (the Committ ee) had a g reed upon in another lull. inserted _ ll r. MAC Of toll as t c Y said, that If they were restri cted to the same rate tons as th e London and Birmingham they cou ld n ot proceed. The rate of tolls here charged Bills t , y that corn coming ,0 C l ause 39, It was subsequentilY. that the rate of tolls should be aPewed Y agreed to as Put forth by company, coals being charged at the , was the same as that sanctioned before in usual rate. , the On 4 w hi c h made this branch dependent upon the main lin e , Mr..MACAULRY said he h a d to submit on the part of the promoters that this dependency should not be enforced. After some short discussion, the room was cleared, and on our re admission, The CHAIRMAN said that the Committee could not comply with the application, and must adhere to their former determination of making this Bill contingent upon the other. BOSTON, STAMFORD, AND BIRMINGRAM (sTAraronn AND WISBECH). Application was made, on behalf of the Corporation of Bedford Levels and Wisbech, to postpone the consideration of this Bill until the parties outside who were interested should be heard. The CHAIRMAN said he thought unless all parties were agreed he could not consent. Such was not the case, and the Bill was proceeded with. Mr. DaniELLs (on the part of the promoters of the Bill) said, he considered it right to state briefly what were the circumstances of the present Bill. It was of ancient date. In the month of last April certain gentlemen in Birmingham, who originated the line, found themselve deficient in communication eastward and westward from that town. It had a most imperfect commnnication with Leices- , ter, and there was an entire absence of seaport communication. It was evident, therefore, that in this case there was a call for improved facility of transit, which, as regarded these two places, would be afforded by the proposed line. Besides, the communication with the important towns of the district would be greatly facilitated. Ile would also show from the traffic tables that the trade here was ex tremely great, and they would be enabled to perceive from the route of the line that the Bill must necessarily bo advantageous to the dis tricts through which it proposed to pass. There was also a great want of a more direct communication between the Baltic and Birmingham than by the present circuitous route. It was well-knowu that there were large numbers of cattle in Norfolk which suffered severely from having to be driven from the various places where they were fed, consequently a railway communication, by affording improved facility of transit, would be of considerable advantage in that case. He did not think himself authorised to enter into any details respecting the advantages of the line. He must, however, offer a few further observations. The line pass. sing through a level country there would be no engineering difficul ties to be encountered. The great obstacles with which they had to contend were the fears that were entertained of their disturbing the range of the country inlaying down their line. But they had suc cessfully completed their plans without any detriment in this particular. The objections in the petitions relating to the liver Neane were net sastained, and he could not help considering that, as there were some proposed lines which would also cross the river, that the pre sent had been mistaken for one of these, and hence originated this opposition, The fact was, that they had selected a crossing, which was the least objectionable of all. He would be obliged to trouble the Committee with some evidence, which he would make as brief as possible. - The estimate, 250,0001., had been subscribed. The works would be executed within the period stated, and sessional orders had been complied with. He, therefore, trusted that the Committee would consider the work in the same light in which it was received in the district through which it was to pass, namely, as one of considerable public advantage. A question here arose as to whether parties had a right to inspect the documents of the promoters lodged under the sessional order of last Thursday, relating to this subject. The room was cleared, and on our re-admission, The CHAIRMAN said, the Committee had considered the question, and would not object to any parties then inspecting the contents of these documents ; but would not allow their contents to be contra vened, or made matter of argument before them (the Committee). Some evidence having been heard in support of the Bill, The Committee then adjourned. STANDING ORDERS' COMMITTEES. HOUSE OF LORDS. , Their Lordships met this day at the appointed hour. The Noble Lords present were the Earl of Shaftesbury (in the chair), the Duke of Richmond, and Lord Ilawarden. LARNE, BELFAST, AND BALLYMENA RAILWAY. This case came before the Committee on second reference, and as many of our readers may not know what the meaning of second reference is, we will shortly explain it by stating that this Com?any started into life at a period when a deposit of five per cent. on the pro posed capital was all that was required by the Act of Parlian cnt. But a subsequent order of the House having rendered a deposit of 10 per cent. necessary, the parties came before their Lordships to prove the additional payment of five per cent. The certificate of the Accountant-General having been proved, their Lordships decided that the Bill had passed the standing orders. BALLYMENA AND BALLYMONEY RAILWAY. This case came before the Committee on the same point, and having put hi the necessary proofs, the Committee decided that the company had complied with the standing orders. OMAGH, DUNGANNON, AND ARMAGH RAILWAY. This ease was adjourned until to-morrow, for further proof. LONDONDERRY AND ENNISKILLEN EXTENSION RAILWAY. This case came before the Committee, in order to prove complianm with Lord Wharricliffe's order. And the necessary proofs having been entered, their Lordships intimated that the standing orders in this case had also been complied with. Their Lordships then adjourned, at five o'clock, REINFORCEMENTS OVERLAND • TO INDIA. (From the Bombay Times.) Some of our Calento. contemporaries are, we observe, speculating on a rumour—a somewhat foolish and im probable one, as it seems—which appears to have got afloat as to the likelihood of reinforcements being sent out to India from England through Egypt. From the answer the Pacha is said to have given to an application reported to have been made to him on the subject, there does not seem to be any probability of his Highness throwing obstacles in the way. If any such application as that referred to has ever in reality been made, Me hemet Ali might most probably have discernment enough to see that he might enjoy all the benefit of a gracious promise where fulfilment was never likely to be required at his hands. It shows a sad disre gard of all consideration of the delay and difficulty incident to the details of transport, to dream of the superior celerity of the transit of ten or even five thousand men through Egypt, where previous preparation was impossible, and where everything must be done in haste or on the spur of the moment, celerity being the only thing in.view in preferring this to the more, cir cuitous route by the Cape. We shall suppose the diffi culties of the sea transport overcome, and that the first class steamers, with five thousand men, occupy no more than three weeks from Southampton to Alexandria ; less we could not allow thorn : it is a very different matter even when a lightly-laden packet, expected at a given day, and all well prepared for, arrives at Gibraltar or at Malta, and gets coaled and watered in ten hours, from having ten vessels with 5,000 passengers and about 1,200 of crews to provide for. A month under these circumstances would be more likely than twenty-one days to be occupied on the voyage. The Bombay Government meanwhile must have a corresponding fleet of steamers—for sailing vessels would go as soon round the Cape as to and from Suez— i. e , the whole of the Indian navy, waiting to receive them in the Red Sea. These two classes of arrangements we shall, for argument's sake, suppose accomplishable enough—though on this side particularly we suspect there would be found not a few obstructions in the way of their accomplishment. Let ns now inquire how the distance from Alexandria to Suez is to be traversed. It must once more be remembered, that in such a case no previous preparation of any moment could be made— that the Turks and Bedouins are anything but remark able for their activity, and that on such an occasion as this it would be the interest of all those on whom we sere entirely dependent for the means of transport, to detain us as long as possible amongst them. Such a descent of Englishmen—such deluges of British gold would be a perfect godsend to them. For landing at Alexandria, and embarking the first division on the Mahmoudie canal, three days may safely be allowed. To find boats on the Nile, for the transport at once of more than 1,500 men with a requisite allowance of baggage, would, of course, be out of the question ; three trips would, at least, be necessary; and though steamers ascend the Nile to Cairo in twenty-four hours, four days is near the ave. rage for sailing-boats—say seven for the going and re turning trip, and one for debarkation at Boulack, another for the embarkation of the second division at Alexandria. Some sixty boats must be employed. We shall take no account of the possibility of accidents. The last division arrives at Cairo twenty-four days after its debarkation at Alexandria, and now the desert has to be crossed. The distance is eighty-five miles, with no shelter, not one drop of water, and a temperature which put the idea of marching later than nip in the morning and before three in the afternoon out of the question. Water, provi sions, and camp equipage have been sent on with the first division, so that from this source of delay those who follow are exempt. The desert is crossed in five forced marches, 17 miles each, and the rear guard, 2,000 strong, arrives at Suez 50 days after its departure from England. Betwixt the anchorage and landing place at Suez, three miles of shoals intervene, and the distance is rarely tra versed in less than two hours ; 24 hours at least, would be requisite for embarkation—as much more for bringing up the baggage and getting it on board. Ten funnel— we must not, we presume, say sail, of steamers are now on their way to Bombay and we may safely allow them 20 days for their passage —if even in this it could be accom plished ; and th e di stance is thus traversed in 72 days. This we should cons i der a remarkably rapid passage and journey for tr oo p s ; yet a month more only would have been required f or t h em round the Cape, with 10,000 acci dental causes oul d notof the themonein case the oth whicher ; mightte times alto gether n w the toil and the casualties ; and more than ten times the expense. A mere handful of men—a regiment or so—if any conceivable advantage could be derived from it, we might occasionally bring overland ; the idea of the transport of a serviceable division is altogether chi merical. India, to be secure from the mischievous consequences of war by being at any time able at the shortest notice to meet them, must always maintain a peace establish ment of troops in strength much beyond the require ments or exigencies of tranquillity. It is our destiny— the penalty we pay for the maintenance of dominions where the rulers are, and always must be, strangers— where, while it is so, all our movements are regarded by our neighbours with the most intense jealousy and dis trust. The guilt of unprovoked aggression in which we have too often indulged, has besides brought with it its punishment. Our best -meant measures are misunder stood or misrepresented. We never stir but we create alarm. Those around us are always ready to assail us, to anticipate or ward otf attack ; and the hour of our imagined weakness or necessity is taken advantage of because we have too often employed a giant's strength with the tyranny of a giant, and it is feared by them we may always so employ it. ROMANTIC ADVENTURE —A few days ago the ship Young England arrived in the St. Katharine's Dock from the Cape of Good Hope, under the command of Mr. Adams, whoaswmaszve a wrecked a few years age on the coast of New Zealand. soner by the natives, who treated him with ile barbarousand w crue u l g ty h , terof would have put him to death but for the intercession of a daughter adopttheir one of the chiefs. He was tattooed an over, c a o n ni d p c a o n m y p t e h ll e e m d too n the same mode of life as the native s, and accompany food was fish and the fishing and hunting capeditions. His flesh of the wild animals he killed. tie c underwent a variety of ad ventures, and repeatedly attempted to make his escape, but was so closely watched by the natives that he was unable to do so until lie hadbeen among them three years, when lie succeeded in eluding their vigilance, and made his escape in a canoe. After a good deal of suffering he was picked up by a ship bound to the Cape, where lie was appointed commander of the Young England. His wife, who had long given him up for lost, and had worn widow's weeds, was quite overjoyed on his being restored to her, and the meeting, after so oug an absence, was most affecting. ATTEMPTED SUICIDE. —On Sunday afternoon a respectable-looking man, considerably advanced in years, was brought to the Denmark-street station, charged with the intention of committing suicide. Ile passed the charge-room in a state of great excitement, exclaiming at intervals, Oh, why did I not do it effectually 1" A cabman, who accompanied him, stated that being at the Irongate-stairs, near the Tower, he heard the prisoner ask a lad, who had charge of a boat , what would be the fare of ferryage across the river, as he had particular business over the water. The cabman observing something very peculiar in his demeanour, stopped to see the issue, and the lad's father, who was also present, observ ing that there was something bulky in the prisoner's pockets, Girt perceiving that they were heavy stones, suspected his purpose, and refused to let his son have anything to do with the fare. The old gentleman, finding he was observed, walked away in great confusion, followed by the cabman, who with praiseworthy hu man i ty kept hint ' in view until they met a constable near the Mint, when he was given I into custody. On searching him four large stones were found in his coat pockets, deposited there, in all probability, to secureitiheerivceerr tainty of his sinking, should he succeed in plunging into t He refused to give any account of himself, b u t a paper addressed to , W. Black, Esq., 27, Mark lane, was found on him. Inspector Donegan, who was on duty, sent the prisoner, under the care of Ser geant Eves, to Mark-lane, when it was ascertained that he resided at Lansdowne's-cottag e s, Lower-road, I s li ngton, where he was taken,' and the attendance of Mr. Dawson procured, the family physician, who took.charge of Mr. Black, promising t o h old an immediate con : saltation with his friends as to the best mode of proceeding. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LOR PS, April 27. EMPLOYMENT OF DISCHARGED PRISONERS. The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a petition, signed by a large number of the inhabitants of Winchester, praying their Lordships to take into consideration the state of dis charged prisoners, and provide some means for their employ ment Messengers from the Commons brought up certsin Bills. SEES OF ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR. Earl POWIS presented a number of petitions against the union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor. CORN-LAWS. The Marquis of SALISBURY presented a number of pe titions against any alteration in the corn-laws. SUNDAY TRADING. Lord CAMPBELL presented several petitions from different parts of Wales, praying their Lordships to adopt some mea sure for the prevention of the sale of spirituous liquors on Sundays. Earl FITZWILLIAM presented a petition from Halifax against the sale of spirituous liquors on the Sabbath. The Bishop of St. DAVID'S presented a similar petition from Lanroost. THE IRISH GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE moved the third reading of this Bill. The Duke of RICHMOND thought the Bill ought to be postponed, as a petition had been presented from shareholders representing 800,0001. of the capital, praying that the Bill might be withdrawn. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said there could be no objection to postponing the Bill. He had moved the third reading, because he believed that those Bills which had arrived at a third reading would not come under the regulation re specting Railway Bills which had lately been established by the H ouse. The Bill was then postponed to Friday next. THE CORN-LAWS. Lord BROUGHAM wished to call the attention of their Lordships to five returns to which he was about to move, con nected with the importation of foreign flour, and the importa tion of corn from Ireland. The production of these papers could net be objected to, because they had already been laid before the ether House of Parliament. It would naturally suggest itself to their Lordships that he was rather premature in moving for these returns, which affected the discussion of a question which he was going to say they were about to enter upon, but which he did not think they would enter upon at present. This important matter, he perceived by the votes, had at various times, and in different manners, occupied the attention of the other House of Parliament for many weeks in the present session. He perceived by the same votes that no considerable progress had been made in this question during the last three or four weeks, partly from the intermission of alt business during the recess—partly from the intermission of actual business since the recess. The situation in which the business of the country had been brought, according to the votes, which was the only record he had access to, was such as to excite grave doubts in the capital from which he had lately returned, respecting expediency. Many persons there, with whose political opinions lie did not agree, quoting, as they were wont to, that great author Tacitus, who said of a Government composed of King, Lords, and Commons, Regis, primores, et populus. The measure was easily commended, but feared more. He had endeavoured vainly to explain to them that what they looked upon as a radical evil in our system was merely of a passive and accidental nature, only to be accounted for by the various caprices of fortune which placed certain men in certain positions, of which they availed themselves, affect ing to be for measures which in their hearts they hated, and affecting to be against measures which in their hearts they loved, and which they only complained of because they did not go far enough, but using the opposition to the measures they loved for the purpose of postponing measures which they hat e d. He had given this theory to his French friends, but they had said in return, " Effects are against you—you don't get on— your business is stopped—week after week passes away—you do nothing there is an incapacity to carry on the business of your country. How long that is to last, anti what is to happen if such a state continues, who can tell ?" His answer to this was—there is that in the nature of the British constitution, that when there shall happen to arise any temporary injury from accidents in the machinery, or a resitance to the medium in that machine, there is in that system of our great political engine the perfection of human policy, as I believe it is, which will regulate the constitution. A power acting by means of a well-represented system ; there is a power within itself of self adjustment, self-correction, and self-education to the nature of the evil which has given rise to this temporary obstruction, and to restore harmony to the working of the great machine; and accordingly their Lordships possessed the power of applying a corrective and administering effectual relief, and if any person should entertain the desperate hope that they could have the power of frustrating the intentions of Parliament and of the country by endless vexations and delay, and that they could postpone the arrival of that great and, in my conscience, most salutary mea sure, till it should be too late to discuss the question—which God forbid, should be passed without —their Lordships had then the power of anticipating the discussion, and coming to a well considered and deliberate opinion. That was the reason for his moving for those returns, and, if in the course of a fortnight, or thereabouts, he should perceive the same obstruction to this and to all other business, he should then feel it his bounden duty—as their Lordships had an unquestionable right to discuss the question without waiting for the Bill—to give their Lord ships an opportunity of discussing so great and important a measure. When they had discussed it, he hoped, and he believed, he might venture to foretell that the passing of the measure would very soon follow. It was for this reason that he felt him self bound to bring the measure thus briefly before their Lord ships that evening. The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from the Synod of Aberdeen against the Bill for the abolition of tests. HIGH CONSTABLES BILL. The Duke of RICHMOND reported this Bill with amend ments. CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL. The Earl of ELDON presented a petition from Marlborough College, praying tobe exempted from the operations of this Bill. RAILWAYS. , The Earl of DALHOUSIE then rose to propose the new sessional orders of which he had given notice with respect to railways. Since he had given notice, similar resolutions had been adopted by the other House of Parliament, in which cer tain alterations had been made; and as it was desirable the re solutions of each House should be similar, he had made the same alterations which had been made in the resolutions of the other House in the resolutions which he had now to propose. The Noble Lord then proceeded to state the nature of a num ber of alterations to the resolutions, which have already been published, namely, when they came before the House of Com mons, and concluded by moving their adoption. Lord MONTEAGLE thought that the sessional orders should not be altered upon any essential principle without pre vious notice. He thought it was not right that their Lordships should be taken by surprise upon the Noble Lord's proposition. The meetings where the parties would consider their interests was the proper place to consider the question. He was op posed to relaxing the rule in favour of some Bills, and enforc ing it in others. The steps they had taken were neither wise nor manly, as they were throwing responsibility from them selves to ether parties. Their duty was to see that those railway Bills which ought to pass were adopted, and to reject those which were unworthy of being passed. This was the course they ought to have taken at an earlier period. Ile certainly thought the proposed resolutions would do good as far as they went, but something further was required. Another thing he complained of was, that, under the present system, a railroad Bill that was unopposed passed almost as a matter of course, and nothing could be more absurd than this ; for it very often happened that a line of great public utility was sacrificed for a line of secondary consideration. This would always be the case until some one was appointed to represent the Executive Government in those Committees, or until the Legislature took upon themselves more general power, and considered these matters in an impartial light. It would be improper for him to speak now of the best remedy for this evil, but he was sure that every Noble Lord who had listened with the least attention must be convinced that their present system was deficient, and could not possibly be defended. The object sought by the Government bad been frustrated; their intention was to release shareholders from dif f iculties in which they were placed ; the resolutions of the House should not have been postponed till the present time. By this un necessary delay a director who had, say 1,000 shares, and who had reserved 500 of them, would be enabled to issue out in small parts those 500 shares which they had reserved, and 500 independent shareholders, who might w i s h th e Bill to b e sus pended, would be out-voted by the 500 shares of the directors. It gave the power of making what was called in Election Com mittees the creation of occasional votes. There never was a greater mistake made than by the introduction of such a mea sure as the present. He perfectly agreed with the Noble Lord in the object which he had in view, but still lie thought that that object ought to he accomplished by some other means than those which he had proposed, and that if they intended to stop those projects before they came to their third read ing, they ought to have some plan by which to save expense to the projectors. They should recollect the expenses and the vexations to which those several pro jectors had been subjected. If his Lordship and the Govern ment had taken this view of the case, they should also recollect that they were, at the same time, putting a stop to those great public works of which the country appeared to be in want, and the principle of which they had already adopted—of those great works of which the country was in need. If these works were to be stopped, why not stop them at once? The Noble Lord had said, that they must go back to the House of Commons, but if they were to go back they should recollect that an enor mous expense would be incurred, and he did not see any reason why it should not be saved to the projectors and the country. He remembered that in the last three years a great effort had been made to give effect to railway enterprise in Ireland, and he knew that within the last two years this had been successfully carried out; but he deeply regretted that the Act had not been so constructed as to avoid the Irish lines. No one was more impressed than himself with thee a a t t tn dustry, diligence, and and great merit of the Noble Lord ith the the head of the Board of Trade—(Cheers)— g and hu exer tions which he had made in order t . o .e h tt ri . n these he deeplya ters into something like a manageable mnl regret the decision of the re gretted at the decision to which the ie re ßoard over which he presided had arrived. Still more did theyconsidered and obtained their view of Committee, for if t* means to accomplish the projects the case, from the w which had been laid a b n e t for o e Parliament, he conceived that the Irish lines might have been left out, and that the view which had blsee The taken was erroneous on that point. Duke of RICHMOND felt that great credit was due to the Noble Lord at the head of the Board of Trade, for the manner in which he had conducted the business of his office daring the early part of the last session of Parliament, and if the speech of the First Lord of the Treasury had not been made with regard to railways, he felt assured that the recom mendations of the Board, over which the Noble Lcrd pre sided, would ha ve had thei r full e ff ec t w i t h Parliament and the country. But after the speech of Sir R. Peel, the several railway companies thought it better to take the chances of the chapter of accidents rather than submit to the decisions of the Board of Trade. It was upon this that the chief objections were founded to doing away with the Irish Bills before the third reading. He could not say that he knew anything of the lines, but this he mu s t asser t , t h at unless a rider were added to the Bill, he thought they would be unjustly dealt by. He said that under th e c i rcumstances of the case the Bill would be anything but justice without the rider attached. Suppose the House of Commons were to say, you shall go on with your Bill, b ecause we believe that there are valid grounds for its passing; but it should be recollected that the mere in troduction of the clause which was of moment to the Bill, would entail excee di ng expense, and he thought the Govern ment' ought to have made a provision for that purpose in the Act. If he understood the thing right, the p urc h ase of the land was t o b e l a i d open for five years, which wa s a greater advantage th an t h e companies desired. He thought it would have been better to have made a temporary arrangement. Lord ASHBURTON gave great credit to the Noble Lord for his exertions and industry in his official duties, and he thought that the resolutions which had been propounded were at this moment exceedingly important, and entitled to the sup port of th e H ouse and her Majesty's Government, inasmuch as they made a provision for the exigencies of the case at the present moment. It was certainly true that the promoters of all the plans never considered the consequences that were likely to arise from them, except in so far as they affected their own interests. They had no relation whatever to the exi gencies or means of the country, still less did they care for the classification of the Government; and certainly it would seem with this impression they could not by any means become par ties to the resolutions which the Noble Lord had read. With respect to Scotland and Ireland, he thought that the Govern ment had come to a wise judgment, and that it had appeared in the course of the discussion that nothing had been more foreign in the compilation of the Act than the want of foresight. It should be recollected that at the commencement of the last session the Board of Trade had declared that, under the circumstances, certain classes should be recommended as objectionable., that others should be delayed, and that others again should be recommended for ap proval ; but to this the Committee had turned a deaf ear, and a now classification had been adopted. There were, first, those lines which had obtained a certain standing in Parliament during last year. There were, secondly, those which were proposed by the existing companies. Thirdly, those which were promoted with a view to the coast defences of the country ; and, lastly, those which proposed to shorten the distances between places on the existing lines. With regard to some of those lines it was stated, as in regard to the Great Western and the approaches to Exeter, that they went thirty miles round. There was no doubt but that it was highly de sirable to shorten these distances to the public, whenever that object could be accomplished with safety and economy. The Earl of ICKLOW hoped that an alteration would be made in the resolutions, requiring the meeting to be held be fore the committee on the Bill, instead of before the third reading. Parties would then be saved the great expense of bringing up witnesses and obtaining evidence. Lord REDESDALE said that many alterations might be made in Committee, which would alter the character of the Bill altogether, and therefore it was essential that the meetings should be held after the Committees had disposed of the Bills. Ile would just say, that in his opinion railway companies ought to be allowed to borrow money ; they ought to call up all their shares. The Earl of RADNOR objected to the resolutions alto gether. He did not see why parties who in a gambling spirit had got themselves into difficulties, were to be relieved by Par liamentary interference. Parliament was stultifying itself by such a resolution as this. They had rules, and to those rules they ought rigidly to adhere. He looked upon these resolu tions as holding out an encouragemelit for a revival of the system which they had just passed through. He believed the resolutions were altogether unnecessary. Earl FITZ WILLIAM did not object to the resolutions, but he must say that the state of things which had called them forth was a rather disgraceful feature in the conduct of the Govern ment. They were by this side-wind going to get rid of the difficulty in which they found themselves, which might have been prevented had proper steps been taken at the proper period. He approved of the resolutions, because they were a loophole by which the present difficulty could be avoided. But after all, they were trust tug to the chapter of accidents, for they had no security tlat the good lines would be adopted and the bad ones rejected. He thought that a board for the control of these matters should be ap pointed ; and he only regretted that more confidence had not been plac'd in the Railway Department of the Board of Trade when it was in existence; but he trusted the Government would remodel it, giving it an efficient staff of engineers to work with. The Earl of DALHOUSIE replied, he did not believe that such a traffic in scrip would take place as to influence the meetings that were to be called. He had consulted those who were practically acquainted with the subject, and their opinion was that nothing of the sort could take place. As to another objection, that of scrip being surreptitiously issued by pro visional committees, it must be recollected that no scrip could be available at the proposed meetings that had not been issued prior to the 31 st of Alai-eh last. With respect to the Bills which had reached the third reading being allowed to pass the House, it must be borne in mind that a resolution precisely similar to the one he now proposed had passed the other House of Parliament, and therefore any Bill which passed the third reading in the House of Lords would be subjected to the reso lutions of the other House of Parliament. The resolutions were then agreed to, and the House ad journed. HOUSE OF (01111110 AS, April 27. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. BRIDPORT ELECTION. Mr. C. WOOD reported to the House that the Committee appointed to inquire into the merits of the Bridport election had decided that Mr. Baillie Cochrane had not been duly elected to represent the borough of Bridport, and that Mr. Romilly had been duly elected to serve in Parliament for that borough, and ought to have been returned. The Clerk of the Crown was ordered to attend to-morrow to amend the ieport. GENERAL TERMINUS AND GLASGOW HAR- BOUR RAILWAY BILL. On the further consideration of the report on this Bill, Mr. HumE was about to make a motion, for the purpose of having the further evidence laid on the table, when the Hon. Member was interrupted by The SPEAKER, who said that it would not be in order to make such a motion until the second reading of the Bill. The report was then arced to. I%lr. E SCO`re moved that Mr. Smith O'Brien be ordered to attend on the Committee, of which he was appointed a member. Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN observed that he was there to re present his Irish constituents, and not to serve on the Com mittees of English railways. He should, therefore, refuse to attend. The result of the motion was that Mr. Smith O'Brien was ordered to attend. SECOND READINGS. The following Bills were read a second time, and ordered to be committed, viz. : Holme Reservoirs. Cambridge Improvement. Forth and Clyde Junction Railway. Scottish Central and Caledonian Junction Railway. Glasgow Municipal, Police and Statute Labour. Oldham, Manchester, Liverpool, and Birkenhead Junction Railway. Alliance Gas Company. Portbury Pier and Railway. Sheffield, Ashton-under-Lyne, and Manchester (Whaley bridge and Hayfield Branches). Ipswich and Bury St. Edmund's Railway (Extension to Ely, with a Brach therefrom). London and Birmingham Railway (Weedon and Northamp ton). West Cornwall Railway. Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway. Wilts, Somerset, and Weymouth Railway. South Devon Railway (No. 2—Amendment and Branches). Midland Railway (Clay Cross to Newark). T. REPORTS. _ . The following reports were brought up, the amendments and alterations agreed to, and the Bills ordered to be engrossed, viz.:-- Electric Telegrah Company (further proceeding on considers , . tiln of report). Perth and Crieff Direct Railway. East Lothian Central and Tyne Valley Railway. Helensburgh Extension and Police. Helensburgh Harbour. Glasgow Union Arcade. Glasgow Harbour Mineral Railway. Colchester Navigation Improvement. Leicester Improvement. Great Western and Wycombe Railway. Great Western and Uxbridge Railway. Saint Austell Small Debts. Burnley Improvement and Waterworks. West of Scotland Junction Railway. Stafford New Gas. Eastern Union and Harwich Railway and Pier. Ashburton, Newton, and South Devon Railway. London and Brighton Railway (Wandsworth Branch). Rugby and Stamford Railway. THIRD READINGS. The following Bills were read a third time and passed, viz.:— Scottish Midland Junction Railway Branches. Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ardrossan Railway. Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway Amendment and Branch es Clyde Dock and Harbour. South-Eastern Railway (No. 11)—(Rye to Rye Harbour). South-Eastern Railway (No. 7 )—(Extension of Stations se Ashford). Exeter and Exmouth Railway. Midland Railway (Syston to Peterborough Deviation and Branches). Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway—No. I. Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway—No. '2. Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway—No. 3. Weston-super. Mare Pier. Brighton and Chichester Railway:(Bognor and Littlehamptorl Branch). London and Brighton Railway (East Midland Branch). REFUSAL TO SERVE ON COMMITTEES. Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN—Sir, I understood you t o put a question from the Chair, to the effect that I should be ordered to attend a Committee of this House to-morrow. I stated at the time that it was InY intention to attend this House as the representative of my con stituents. I deny the authority of the House to compel me to attend the Committees; and I beg leave respectfully to state that it is my intention not to attend the Committee to morrow. Mr. HUME presented a petition against the proposed amalgamation of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway with the Forth and Clyde Canal Navigation Company. Mr. GRAINGER presented a petition from Durham in favour of the Roman Catholic Relief Bill. Sir HO WARD DOUGLAS presented a petition from Essex against the union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor. Mr. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Norwich against the Irish Coercion Bill. Thir. ESTCOURT brought up the report of the Standing Orders' Committee. Lord G. BEN TINCK presented a petition in favour of the Erewash Valley Railway. IRISH FISHERIES. Colonel CONOliii;;;;Eee that he would on to- I r S e l l l: nd, IN p l r ß es E en L te A d ND e few morrow present a petition against the Salmon Fi s h er i es (Ire land) Bill, praying for a repealof ofthe same. Mr. POWER moved thatsae. leave e be given to Cols W A es i t r e . nr j a o .— H A N gr o e , e c d o to N . N ELL moved that the returns wit h regard to clime iCnR Ireland, days ago, be presented.—Ord ere d . THE MARQUIS OF W ATERFORD'S PROPERTY EVICTION OF TENANTS. On the ord er of the day for the adjourned debate being read' Major BERE SFORD rose and said, that having been temporarily a b sent from the House, he took the present oppors , tunity of referring to a transaction that happened the other night, when illusion was made to the Marquis of Waterford' 0 property. Before, however, entering into that matter, 1 i must protest against the doctrine, (though no landlord 11 5 more honestly discharged the duty th an th e N o bl e M ar quis that every individual shoulsl be made subject to Parliamenta r ,21 inquiry and comment on mere prima facia evidence bas: on newspaper reports.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear. 0 In such cases as these it was necessary that the person r friends and relations of the parties accused should come fe ward in order to protect them against these accusation fl Having presumed so much he wished to state that he had o f complaint to make against the Hon Member for Kilken for bringing this case forward. The Hon. Member h, te , found a s t atement f nrn i s h e d w i t h t h e most circumstant i a l r e de tions, and considering that the report was correct, had lea arl use of it in the course of argument. The only remark he b to make was that he was a little astonished that the Ho to ourable Member should be so ready to give credence a report furnished from that source from which (if his mew! ad. served him ri g htly), no t a l ong ti me s i nce some re ports , r issued with regard to his Learned and Hon. father. I Hon. Member for Kilkenny was the individual, who public address, declared the statement to be f a I s and who published a letter declaring that source from which the information was obtained was incorrect one. Under these cirumstances, he wished that it Hon. Gentleman would have had some degree of caution led making his statements affecting the property of other peel Sr, With the permission of the House, he would read the sta sa ment. The Hon. Member here read from a newspaper, 4 ;:i article, stating that a villa ge on th e es t a t e of Lord Wilt ford, containing 150 families, or 277 persons, been rased t o th e grou n d, an d th e families turned out destau. Now he would state the exact truth of the case. It see n r, that about thirty or forty years ago there were a number. ;s r . small tenements let to a number of persons; these occupy' tenants permitted a great number of cabins to be built froth ; the property ; a great number of these p ersons came distance, and were not reared upo n t h e pro perty a s al was stated When the lease expired, the age nt vin„ r tl to Kilmaetemas, and offered to each of them a sum of for pulling down their own wretched houses; the offer thankfully accepted, and w ith t h e i r own han d s they Pu l l', down the cabins; the a gen t t h en went a way, an d