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

THL THEA.TRt .lIAYMARKET. madame Anna Thillon made her first appearance at reis theatre last evening, in the character of Juanita, in 'Auber's celebrated opera of The Black Domino. The English public is already %miler with the plot of Le Domino Noir, from the various dramatic versions of it which have been produced at almost every theatre in London, but no one can form the remotest idea of the capabilities of the character of the heroine who has not seen Madame Thillon. in the part. The Haymarket is the theatre for this fasci nating actress. The play of her expressive features, and the delicate intonation of her delicious voice, can be much better appreciated in a theatre lik« the Hay 'narkPit than in the va s t area o f a l arge theatre. It is use' ess to disguise the fact, but our so-called rational theatres are too large, and the decline of the drama is 'more to be attributed to the enormous size of our na tional theatres which overtaxes the energies of artistes, and renders the delicacies, and consequently ' the beauties of acqing inappreciable to all who are at a greater distance from the stage than the third row in the pit, than to ally other cause. It is impossible thoroughly to enjoy a laPay in a theatre larger than the Haymarket. In the first act, which may be entitled the Masquerade, Madam Thillon gave us one solo and some et lightfully axecu.ted concerted music in cor.junction with Miss P: Ilr,rton and Mr. Hudson. He'r burst at the conclusion Col the act, when the clock strikes twelve, and she dis covers that she cannot regain her convent fur the tight, was magnificent, and drew down repeat( d rounds of applause. Her Fipanish masquerade costume became her exceedingly, and she managed her mask in the most eoquetishly fascinating manner imaginable. The second act passes at the residence of Don Alphonso (Mr. 11. Roll), to which Juanita in her distress, has been at tractcd.by a light, and w h ere B ona (Mrs. Caulfield), Al phonso a housekeeper, gives her refuge, pass ing her off as her niece, a peasant girl, from Arragon. Her acting as the pretty peasant, to whore the rollicking roues assembled at Alphonso's ine7ke love, was an exquisite mixture of naivete and tspeglerie, and the concerted scene was rapturously en cored. Her acting, too, when among the guests she re cognises Felix (Mr. Rudson), whose heart s h e h a d c aptured, was admirable ; and then comes the castanet Song, which she s:aig with the g rea t e' t t aste and b eauty, d acted mo st b ew i tchingly. This song created q ui te a furrire; its repetition was loudly called for. The audience were completely carried away by it. Bouquets were showered upon her, and from that moment to the b4 e nci of the opera every scene was for Madame Thillon a 1 41111 "P l a- The gem of the opera, however, was her -esOciptive scena d'entree, in the third act. This r c -na afforded her opportunities of which he well knew ow to avail herself. Irresistibly comic s was her de cription of the adventures of the night, fascinatingly espieg/e ; her description of her adventure with the gal lant captain, who having been permitted, in return for his - b red boors, tQ take one kiss, took advantage of his situa tion by taking two ; and when at the conclusion she aang the Gitana, her soft, sweet, clear, flute-like flexible Organ seemed to revel in the melody, and, like some atveet bird, to shed an atmosphere of song around. t ierfioriture was marvellous. Rich beyond the powers of description, yet most delicate and most tasteful, it adorned the melody tc the utmost possible pitch, Without overlaying. Anything more graceful, more eczquisite more perfect, than Madame Thillon's _ecution of this scena it is impossible for musician to imagine, even i n hi s happiest 4' rea ms- At th.e conclusion the st age was a perfect IreteLre, &ore, the bouquets innumerable whi c h were called °"" to !ear. At th e f a ll o f t h e curtain she was 44 Fel' ewe and led fo rwar d b y H udson, by whom, 1 7, an0 her lover, and by Miss P. Horton, as th ro V l 's, she had been most efficiently supported th r ighout. The theatre was crammed, and will con ). as to be crammed every night of the engagement of -aadaree Thillon, if there be any taste for acting or tausic extent. VICTORIA. trio Another novelty, entitlr-d Barnard, the Victim Pa t I or the Double Pratricide, was produced at this l ' ue atre on Monday. The author has founded his drama Z°l the " Glorious Itevolution of July," at that period rn the selWitled Charles the Tenth endeavoured to bad back the monarchie of seventeen hundred, which 1 , , 11 (1 become obnoxious to the people. The hero of the w rt h es ?t dr ama is one Barnard Don a y (M r . E. F . S av ill e) in 4 .nduced to join the i nsurgents . Thi s h e does, and :" e melee which ensues he kills his brother; he is means unnerved, and in the course of the action •?tleded. He appeals to the Chamber of Deputies for Cha t seated in the chair, and presiding over the duelist a, he finds Francois Bardin (Mr. W. Searle) a and t t a nd a coward, who insults the wounded patriot, din i n d -37 ar e about to fight, when the cowardice of Bar t° Car him to apologise ; this he does, but is obliged hanger ave the Chamber. Alter a variety of vicissitudes, d and the pain of his wonnd accelerates his death, and e expires in the arms of his wife, within an hour of thes year, by which means she is entitled to the pension, .ordained by the Chamber of Deputies. Mr. Saville as the e•-ithusiastie patriot, acquitted him rself his usuP.l style, and apparently much to the cation of the company present. Mr. Searle, it f needless to say, was perfect in the delineation of the Lerociou7, revolutionist, who is at heart a coward and a ;Piggiv:t. We have before spoke in terms of praise of t;entleman's acting, which is, if possible, becoming '' e successful every evening. The other princ ipal ,rtittracters were sustained by Mr. T. Frederic k s ( Pierre an aY), Mr. Ranoe (Valton), Mr. E. G. Burton (Theo -14-aitle John Butl er ), Mrs. G. Lee (Madame Donay), 4188 Treble (Mariette), &c., in a very creditable man arhet Some excellent scenery was also introduc ed, ng ti:le chief of which were " Suburbs of Paris, t r ,7„ 40 4' d to La Vendee, th e e Barrier, and distant coup 144 ;4 - " Ball of Deputies," &c. The house was well 43. DES TRUCTION OF DOGS IN MAN- It I,„ c CHESTER. rit. ong been usual in Manchester for the autho dc''s to issue orders for the keeping-up or muzzling of wii gs during the summer and autumn months, during donich hydrophia is most prevalent. Formerly this was tais:., under the now defunct Manchester police corn atre I"ersi by a man going constantly about the d own e ts with a sort of hatchet, with which he knocked uluzzi the dogs that he found at large in the streets un tiotZtl ar tw LY the poor aa i ma l escape d a f ter receiving a blow Then°,land much u nnecessary crue l ty was perpetrated. stre ets or a time a man was employed going about the this was any d og unmuzz l e d and at large ; but passi"as o ccasionally very alarming t o l a di es an d ot h ers °ll f or n g at th e t i me , an d not always without some risk ; th es ,,, ‘ "e occasion a boy, who was near a dog that was at, received a large portion of the contents of the • g ll ° in his leg and then this practice was abandoned ; toe t h e l ast 'f ew years, under the corporation, a b, 411 , e4 More humane system of destroying the ani- F. a 'S has been adopted. In 1843, the number of 'es() animals suffered to go at large increas e d greatly as to become no small nuisance. Vigorous leasures were, therefore, taken. Two men were con stantly going about the town, seizing all d ogs t h at ' e re found in the streets unmuzzled, and these were / e ouve •ed to the town's yard , Clarence-street, and U , htroyed e v ery evening, by the application of a M ail quantity of prussic acid on the tongue of the 4nilnal. In this way the number of dogs destroyed in t h i f five m ont h s , f rom t he Ist of May to the I st of Oc tober, in the y ear 1843, was little short 7 ;00 in the -nine peri o d o f 1844 , a b ou t 600 dogs were destroyed ; li 1845, abo u t 600 ; but this year the work of destruc °n has commenced somew h at l a t e r—viz., on the 10th of 111 3 7 —and from this cause, and the fact that the — umber of animals has somewhat thinned by the destruc tion of former years, and that the survivors . are either Zuore kept up or are more generally provided with the p e n wire Muzzles—(which, by the way, are .in finitelyi preferable to the close leathern ones in s s till lately, being much less heating, besides en -4131,6'1 th animal to breathe and to drink freely, en ling the leathern ones did not)—owing, we say, a Le se causes, the number of dogs destroyed this e le , -B °o, before the Ist October, will in all probability not i a " - "ed 500. The present system pursued is to h trace .s a a r e g e e °l3l °, and then summon the ()Airier before t e nin him t°lnnnittee of tke c,uncii, end ihe option is g ven _ e tl ° o l ; a y a fine of 2s. 6d. or to deliver up the dog to b t. - 1 8 f r °Yed. There are 10 stations whither dogs are ' 4 .eh for this purpose, viz., the town's yard, Clarence /street , the Oldhaw-road police station ; the scavenging • mannre yards in Choriton-streer., Portland-street ; 'ollard-street • Rochdale -road ; Bridgewater-street ; Itnti t -, . Gl oucester street (Oxford-road) ; also to the irorlton town-h a ll, f or Chorlton-on-Medlock and loae ; and the Ardwick t owns hi p yard. The d og ' s ' o 4.,outh being forced open, about halt a small teaspoonful ▪ the prussic acid is placed upon the tongue, and in a seconds the dog is dead. T 1.43 bodies of the animals destroy toed are removed daily, so that there is no danger fr te P their caresses being lef t to putrify. At re,ent, _ o e daily r über destroyed does n ot reach a scor e ; ika the d og -d a y s the number d estroyed will probably be Ititich greater. We are not aware of any large town in the kingdom where so large a number of these aninaals is annually destroyed ; but here, we are, fully persuaded the work of destruction is a work of necessity, t o k eep down the immense number of dogs that would other wise overrun the town.—.2lfancliestcr Guardian. ROYAL VISIT TO THE NAVAL SCHOOL, GREEN :!!'scH.—On Tuesday afternoon her Royal Highness the Duchess of , noucester, accompanied by their Royal Highnesses Prince George ,„ ° i r Cambridge, and the Princess Mary of Cambridge, Lord Adolphus tzelarence, Hon. Csotain Liddell, &c., paid a visit to the Royal Naval School, at Greenwich. Mr. Wa g httrn tett London on Monday evening for Aden, rid Trieste. We understand that Sir Robert Peel, the E ar l e 0 1 e.llenborough and St. Germans, and Mr. Glidstone, have each for- Warded their subscription in aid of the testimonial to Mr. Waghorn's 'Services. ROYAL SAPPERS AND MINERS.—Two non-commis stoned officers and 18 privates of this branch of the Ordnance service Woolwicher yesterday morning for Windsor Castle, where they lo ed in tunne ling, under the command of Lieut. Hon. 1 ,7.75eY Fa e ne p Ke Y ane, son of the late gallant officer, General Lord Keane, distinguished for his services in the East Indies. ` °l tomATloN OF OSCAR I.—The coronation of Oscar I. „,, 1 , - Zuls consort, Eugenic, daughter of Prince Eugene do Beauhar 07,Lis Rine an w d (fueen of Norwa, is fixed to be helon the owhich occasion the Storthing willbe convoked. 15th 3 esie DELaT E POPE.—The Presse s :—" We received surgical a letter from Rome of May 30, which states that after a vtr ea l cPeration, Performed on one of the legs of his Holiness, a ,1„.ellt Inf lammation took place there on the 26th. The evil had e , s a eca so rapidly that on the arrival of our correspondent's letter It , s l3 'sicians no longer entertained any hope of saving the patient. ir, 0,1 ;1 1 1 known that Gregory XVI. suffered from a chronic affection day At us caused by the habit of passing the greatest part of the Wag ti nt 8 desk." According to this letter, the death of the Pope V., euddea es stated in the telegraphic dispatch, LI TERATURE. WESTMINSTER RE VIE TV. No. LXXXIX. Our great living philosopher, Professor Faraday, whose researches upon the most primitive elements of the physical sciences have acquired for him a more than European celebrity, receives in this number of the iVestrninster Review an instalment of that approbation to which his genius and his labours have entitled him, and which, if denied by the niggardly spirit of his contemporaries, will be unstintingly awarded by pos• terity. Unlike many of his predecessors, Faraday has abstained almost entirely from theorising; an hypothesis, however specious, or however feasible, has possessed no charms to him in comparison with those appertaining to the acquisition of novel data. Acting upon the largest principles of inductive philosophy, he has tested the ac curacy of his suppo s iti o ns b e for e admitting theminto his calculations With Leonardo da, Vinci, he has ever regarded "experiment as the general and theories as the soldiers." Indeed, what we are the more inclined to regard as admirable in the scientific advances of Pro fessor Faraday is the cautiousness of his admission of a truth rath: r than the brilliancy of the truth admitted. Rej=cting that impatience with which the immortal Kepler endeavour. d to hurry an effect to some suppo sititious cause, Faraday has nevertheless partaken in ,some measure of the capacity for suggesting schemes as • keletons for first discoveries which so particularly cha racterised that most wonderful man ; in this manner both philosophers possessed a hypo helical imagination. As we have just intimated, however, the imagination of cur Enelish experimentalist is in a great measure suc cumbed, or rather modulated by the interposition of a stern end inflexible prudence. Circumspect in the ac knowledgment of a conjecture, he has invariably given that coo jecture some degree of form, and solidity and character by the most industrious analysis before he has even dreamed of venturing upon its publication. And from these very circumstances, from his captious treat ment of mere theories, from his repugnance to pro nounceupen any unfamiliar phase in natural philosophy-, it h as b een e l a b ora t e ly t es t e d an d scruti nised ii. all its bearings, an announcement from him, however startling, or however contrary to all previous experi ence, comes upon us with peculiar weight. Incredulity is scared away by a consciousness of the announcer's, reverence for mathematical precision, and his intimate acquaintance with the rules of logic, as well as with the laws of matter. On these accounts our sentiments were restricted altogether to those of astonishment on the declaration of Professor Faraday, which started before the scientific and the general world towards the close of 1845, that a hitherto unknown affinity existed been light and electricity—that if those two great forces were , not absolutely identical, they possessed a subtle correl lation with each other, and in proof thereof, he (Pro fessor Faraday) had succet elf d in magnetizing and elec trifying a ray of light, and in illuminating a magnetic line of force ! Wonderful and prodigious as was the nature of this professed discovery, we were neverthe less fully impressed with the actuality of the truth, not from any blind credulity in the progression of science, but from a recollection of that cha racter for accuracy in the elucidation of philosophical fact which our illustrious countryman had acquired. For many long and arduous years of experiment and in vestigation, Dr. Faraday has been pursuing in silence hi: inquiries as to the nature of the analogy between these two marvellous departments of nature ; for years he had maintained silence; and not until a few years since, when the matter was throughout proven by experiments as simple and beautiful as the fact which they tended to demonstrate, did the discoverer divulge the nature of his discoveries. This we conceive to be a pattern to all who would aid in macadamizing the road to knowledge, to all those who have the real interests of science at heart, to all those who would expound even the smallest of those unnumbered mysteries with which we are sur rounded in creation, and the subtlety of which have as yet baffled the research of the most astute intellects. To these important events, the first paper in the West minster Review is devoted. and the history of the disco veries which preceded, and relate in some measure to those of Professor Faraday, is given with singular per spicuity, while the manner of the writer evinces his hearty relish for the theme. With the intention of in troducing his commentaries upon the recent assertions of Faraday, the author prefaces them with a rather microscopic narrative of the progress previously effected in this division of science. From the time of Pytha goras and Pliny the loadstone has attracted, not wily fragments of iron, but the attention of every successive philosopher ; nevertheless, it was not until 1200 that, according to Di Vitri, we find this strange phe nomenon applied to the purposes of navigation, through the medium of its polarity. Again, it was not until as recently as 1590, that a surgeon of Rimini, am bitiously christened Julius Caesar, detected the fact that all ferruginous substances contained a certain amount of magnetic power. That the magnetic fluid, or power contained in these bodies was composed of particles re pellant to each other, " inversely as the squares of tin distance ;" and that the particles of this fluid and the principles of iron possessed a reciprocal attraction each. to each was an hypothesis reserved for the ingenious mind of Epinus, in 1759. No further advances whatever towards the development of magnetism appear to have been made until 1800, when Coulomb defined, with the assistance of the torsion balance, " the correct law of magnetic attraction and repulsion ;" be proved that the magnetism of iron was merely superficial, and so forth. In 1820 CErsted discovered the connecting link between electricity and magnetism. Such are the broad outlines of that preliminary history to which we have referred, and from a perception of the somewhat narrow boundaries which had been overleaped in the organisation of data upon so wonderful a field in science, the advantages which must ultimately accrt.e from such discoveries as those of Dr. Faraday, are obvious. Having demonStrated " the magnetisation of light, and the illumination of magnetic lines of force," philosophy will not tarry long upon the mere threshold of one amongst her noblest strudtures : she will advance boldly to its still hidden mysteries, cheered on by the success with which her votaries have been already crowned, and yearning for the practical employment of her revealed secrets, as a motor in some definitive manner. With the asserted discoveries of Baron Richenbach, to the effect that magnetic patients have beheld in darkened rooms " a luminosity like a moving flame at the poles of an electric battery, and Around powerful magnets," we must acknowledge we have but a comparatively feeble sympathy ; and, but that the translation of these " Researches" bears the sanction of Dr. Gregory's signature, we should have rejected them as altogether fictitious. The paper under notice should be perused very generally ; it is teeming with informa tion, and is penned in a generous and popular strain. " The Tendency of Puse) ism" is a copious retrospect of the tractarian movement, but the dogmatism of many sentiments in the disquisition we conceive to be rather clumsy and inadmissable. "The Lost Senses" is It charming review of a publication, written by Dr. Kitto, upon the most melancholy calamities of body to which humanity is subjected. With all deference to the amiable Doctor, we regard the comparative wretched ness resulting from blindness or deafness as peculiarly afflicting, according to the idiosyncrasyof the patient, not from any inherent preponderence in the one or the other. Deafness to Beethoven must have been a more horrible privation to that musical Titan than possibly the loss of all his other senses combined ; whereas blind ness to Milton, who had loved the glorious phases of creation through his visual organ, must have possessed a proportionate intensity. The argument, however, in either instance is solemn, and of ineffable melancholy. " The Oregon Question," with " Railways and Metro politan Improvements," are singularly elaborate and in structive articles : in both the writers are intimately versed in their different subjects, so that to all who are ignorant of the merits of our American squabble, the former will prove a most comprehensive informant, while to those doubtful as to the influence of railway specula tions upon our large towns, but especially upon our vast metropolis, the latter will enable them to form a definite opinion. N um b er e i g h ty - n i ne, though not quite gloriousso as the ninety-eight of the Corn Bill majo rity, will be welcomed as of a kindred spirit. THE ROBBER. By G. P. R. James. " The Robber" forms the eighth volume of Mr. James's works. This series, every volume of which is orna mented with an engraving, is wanting in some of the necessary adjuncts of good paper, type, printing, and " getting up." It will be very acceptable to the author's admirers, who will be able to procure all his works in a compact form, and when we consider his prolific power, it must certainly be an advantage to have them in one volume instead of three. THE MARCHIONESS OF BRINVILLIERS. By Albert Smith. Standard Novels. The histor) of the celebrated " poisoner of the seven teenth century," which for many months interested an d appalled the readers of the Miscellany, now appears in the neat and attractive form of a standard novel. Tho name of the author will be a sufficient passport to many who are acquainted with his more genial and attractive compositions; and the title itself will charm, and the contents will not disappoint, the lovers of the horrible, from which class, h6wever, we beg to be excepted. THE PRYINGS OF A POSTMAN. The Postman of Stockgate, with unblushing effrontery; does not scruple to inform us that every letter which passed through his hands, was, in opposition to all rules of honour and propriety, by him duly examined and pe rused. He Las even gone so far as to transcribe the most interesting, which furnish a volume of considerable amusement. The affairs of individuals of all characters, good, bad, or indifferent; their various thoughts and feelings, m h o p es an d f e ars, are freely unfolded to us , in the most and natural manner possible , by t he p erusal follow en su ite, pprivate correspondence. Many of the letters siderable and furnish a little history of themselves; amusement. and however much we di sa pprove the conduct of the postman, we must confess th a t his peccadilloes afford con - B A 00K OP HIGHLAND MINSTRELSY. By M rs. D. Ogilvy. Wi t h Illustrations by .R R. Wan. g book of ighland minstrelsy ! Is not ' the name esimpleio u h D h ? a l l a d o s e , Hit th e not rberfulg m b e e l f oedies uosf tthe m wild t a a n i n d land? The fanciful and heart -stirring legends of the north are peculiarly the poet's theme ; and the High landers, with their fie rce passions, clinging superstition, romantic chivalry, ge neros i ty, and devotion, are the Heaven-made heroes of minstrelsy. Such are the ma terials from which Mrs. Ogilvy has formed her book. Many an old custom or wild tradition is here converted by her pen into a poem. The metre is very various, but well assorted to the subjects. One of the most beautiful pieces is the first, " The Exile at Culloden." The long lines of many syllables have a degree of mournful majesty very appropriate to the theme; and the picture of the heart-broken e xi l e , hiding his brow in his bonnet, is among the most interesting of the illustra tions with which the work is bountifully adorned. The binding and "getting up" of the volume are unexcep tionable, and the crimson cover, bordered with thistles, displays an ancient minstrel leaning over his "Harp of the North" with a mixture of sadness and affection. Tilt SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MOitIVING, 11, 1846. WORKING POWER AND SPEED OF THE LOCOMOTIVE. SEVENTY MILES PER HOUR WITH A TRAIN OF NINETY TONS WEIGHT. Much misconception exists and much error is current respecting the extraordinary working power of a pas senger engine—the first of a class—that has been em ployed in propelling some of the express trains of the Great Western during the past week. A few years•since the world was unwilling to believe that 20 or 30 tons could be taken at 13 miles per hour by a locomotive. Learned men ridiculed the absurdity of the proposition. They lectured and wrote with great display of scientific knowledge about adhesion and the resistance of the wind, and demonstrated " by mathematical data" that it was absolutely impossible to reach a velocity of 20 miles an hour with 20 or 30 tons. We . have now a new broad gauge locomotive, scarcely in working order, daily taking the Great Western heavy express trains, composed of first and second class passengers, at a maximum speed of sixty-nine and seventy miles per hour, and at an average rate, exclusive of stoppages, of more than sixty miles per hour, over a line nearly 200 miles in length. Some serious but quite uninten tional errors respecting the performances of the engine heve been published by a morning contemporary, and as a deep and general interest is felt in the progress of the railway system towards perfection, we proceed at once to give the actual working of the engine from the notes of our own reporter, who was present and timed the working of the engine. The first trip of which our contemporary, upon the euthority of a correspondent, gives the working, was an experimental one, made from Paddington to Swindon arid back. It is stated by our contemporary, in noticing sane power of the engine as displayed in the journey, that the engine and tender weigh fifty-six tone', and that it was ascertained the engine could, with a load of 140 tons, travel at the average speed of 55 miles per hour. This is incorrect. The engine and tender, taking the average weight of the latter with her compliment of water and coke over the whole distance run, weigh 43, and not 56 tons; and the average speed to and from Swindon, deducting time lost ill stoppages, was 50, and not 56 miles per hour. Our contemporary states that the engine, without her water, weighs 36 tons, whereas it is, with water, 28i tons only. Her maximum speed, with the 140 tons, un a falling gradient of four feet per mile, was 57 miles per hour. But the trip in question was an experimental one, for the purpose of ascertaining how the engine would work with a heavy passenger load. It was found that the engine did not work at the required pressure; the blast pipe was therefore reduced, end she is now in very good working order, and running almost what the engine-drivers call " sweet." The chief errors of our contemporary's correspondent are in the details of the working of the ordinary 9h. 45m. morning express down train of Monday last. On that occasion the new engine took the train from Pad dington through to Exeter. He states that the 1934 miles were performed in 214 minutes, whereas the actual time was but 208 minutes. The extra six minutes reduce the actual speed of the train nearly two miles per hour. He makes the .ime occupied in run ning the 53 miles to Didcot 55 minutes, whereas it was hut 52 minutes. This mistake reduces the rate of speed hree miles per hour. The time from Didcot to Swindon, 24 miles, is stated to have beers 30 minutes, whereas it was but 25m. 50s. This error makes the velocity above four miles less than it really was. It will be found that travelling at the speed attained by the engine on Monday, and in fact every day she has been at work, an engine loses about five minutes in slackening her velocity when ar riving at, and getting it up when departing from a station. The engine made five stoppages be tween Paddington and Exeter ; therefore 25 minutes have to be deducted from her working, exclusive of the time lost while the train was at a state of rest at the stations, in order to arrive at the actual working speed of the engine. Deducting, therefore, 25 minutes for the de crease of speed when arriving at, and the getting into speed when leaving, the five stations, it will be seen that her average tractive power, with the ordinary heavy express trains of the Great Western, can accomplish 194 miles in 183 minutes, or at a rate of something like sixty- three miles per hour. Bat even this does not fairly show the real power of this extraordinary loco motive. If we exclude the comparatively slow rate at which the engine driver ran down, not up, the inclines, and the loss of time when arriving at and departing from the stations, and if we also leave out of the calculation the whole distance from Taunton. from which place to Exeter the power of the engine was reduced to prevent the train running into the latter station too much before her time, the rate of travelling varied from about sixty-two to sixty-nine miles per hour. The 34 miles between the 13th and 47th mile posts were performed in 31 min. 30 sec., in clusive of the time lost by shutting off the steam, while going through the Slough station, at or nearly 65 miles per hour. In this distance there are about 4 miles of falling gradient of 4. feet per mile; about 8i miles of level and about 20i miles of rising gradient, 18 of which are 4 feet per mile. At the 91st mile-post, we come to a rising gradient of 8 feet per mile, which reaches beyond the 98th mile , post. The 91st mile-post was passed at 11 hours 45 min. 53 sec., and the engine came abreast of the 98th at 11 hours 52 min. 46 sec., performing, therefore, the 7 miles up the incline in 6min. 53 sec., or at rather more than 61 miles per hour. The train left Bristol (118 miles), at 12 hours 39 min., and by the time it reached the 125th mile, it was proceeding At nearly 70 miles per hour. A portion of the road from Bristol to Taunton is practically a level, the remainder being steep undulating gradients. The engine took the train over the line, between the 125th and the 161st mile-posts—viz., 36 miles, in 33 min. 25 see., orat a rate of more than 64 miles and a half per hour. The jour ney from the 166th to the 191st mile-posts, running up in incline of 1 in 70, and 1 in 80, at an average speed of nut quite 48 miles per hour, was performed in 28 min. 18 sec., or at the rate of 53 miles per hour. The power of the engine was, as we have already stated, reduced after passing Taunton. But with this reduction of speed the train got into Exeter 9 minutes before time. Between Swindon and Bath the engine was worked much below her power. The distance, 294, was done in 33 min. 15 sec., hat it could have easily been gone over in 28 minutes. The keeping back the train between Taunton and Exeter, occasioned a loss of about 6 min. The time lost in stopping at the stations was, in conse quence of the engine arriving at them before the stated time upwards of 52 minutes, whereas the time should not exceed 22 minutes. If we therefore deduct from the 4 hours and 21 min. occupied by the journey from the station at Paddington to the station at Exeter, the 30 min. unnecessary delay at the stations, and the 10 or 12 minutes that might very easily have been saved between Swindon and Bath and Taunton and Exeter, we see that this class of engine could work the express train over the 194 miles in 3 hours and 40 minutes, in cluding the refreshment stoppage of 10 min, at Swindon, as well as the four other stoppages, or at an average rate between platform and platform, of nearly 53 miles per hour. With engines such as this Birmingham might be reached in about two hours, Liverpool and Manchester in four hours, and Edinburgh in eight hours. Dover, by its present circuitous and most incon venient route might—as only one stoppage to take in water would be requisite—be reached with ease in an hour and a half, and with a direct line in an hour and a quarter. Upon a line worked with these powerful en gines, the traveller might leave London at six o'clock in the morning, reach Edinburgh at two in the afternoon, remain an hour in the city, and return to London by eleven o'clock at night. In other words, he might breakfast in London, luncheon in York, dine and trans act business at Edinburgh, and yet eat his supper in London on the same day. On Thursday the express train, weighing 90 tons, and worked by the same en gine, travelled from Didcot to Paddington, 53 miles, in 51 minutes—that is, from station to station. The speed between the 47th and 2d mile posts averaged seventy miles per hour ; and yet, twenty years ago, it was de monstrated to be impossible to make a locomotive take 20 or 30 tons at 13 miles per hour. —Herald. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 10. The SPEAKIR took the Chair at Twelve o'clock. REPORTS. The reports on the following Bills were then brought up, and agreed to :—Banffshire Roads; Belfast and County Down Railway; Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle Railway ; Hud dersfield and Sheffield Junction Railway (Darfield Branch); London and Blackwall Railway (Widening); Marquis of Donegal's Estate; North British Railway (Carlisle Exten sion) ; Sir George Dunbar's Estate; Sheffield, Ashton-uniler- Lyne, and Manchester Railway. (Barnsley Branch) ; Sheffield, Ashton-under-Lyne, and Manchester Railway (Worsborough Branch); Sheffield, Rotherham, Barnsley, Wakefield, Hud dersfield, and Goole Railw a y ; Stockton Gas; Airdrie and Bathgate Junction Railway; Argyll Canal; Birming ham, Lichfield, and Manchester Railway; Blackburn, Clitheroe, and North Western Junction Railway; Caledoniaa Railway (Glasgow Termini and Branches); Edinburgh and Bathgate Railway; Fleetwood, Pres ton, and West Riding Junction Railway ; Glas gow Municipal, Police and Statute Labour ; Glasgow, Airdrie, and Monkland Junction Railway ; Glasgow Southern Termini Railway ; Glasgow, Paisley, and Gree nock Railway (Polloc and Govan Branch) ; Gloucester and Dean Forest Railway ; Grand Junction Railway (Huyton to Warrington); Grand Junction Railway (Huyton and Aston, and other Branches); Great Grimsby and Sheffield Junction Railway and Grimsby Dt.cks Consolidation ; Har rogate Waterworks; Huddersfield and Manchester Railway and Canal ( Huddersfield Diversion and Cooper Bridge Branch); Lesmahagow, Dalserf, and Coatbridge Mineral Junction Railway ; London and Croydon Railway (Thames Junction Branch); Monkland and Kukintilloch Railway (Chapel Hall Branch); Midland Railway (Burton-on-Trent a( . am N b o r rf id o g lk e R to ail te y edo E n) ; Ex tensions to Nuneaton Branch and Ashby C ana l P urc h ase ) ; Mi d l and C°untiesanßd R ilw ai a l y wa C y and E Morecambe rnaste Harbourtensions (Yarmouth Extension); Railway; Pier and Rail way; Schoolmasters' Widows' Fund • Sheffield, Ashton under Ly-ne, and Manchest er Railway (Whaley Bridge and Hay field Branches); South W a l es R a il way (N o. 2 ) ; Yeovil Market and Fairs. SECOND READINGS. The following Bills were read a second time :—Midland Great Western of Ireland Railway (Mullingar to Galway); Scottish Central and Caledonian Junction Railway (by order). THIRD READINGS. , The following Bills were read a third time and passed : Ayrshire, Bridge of Weir, and Port Glas g ow Junction Railway ; Ballochney Railway (Shotts. Branch) ; Bridgwater and Taunton Canal, Railway, and Harbour; Bristol and Exeter R a il way (Crewkerne'Branch); Bronas , grove Improvement and Small Tenements (No. 2); Buckingham Railway (Tring to Banbury) ; Edinburgh Paving ; Great Griin.by Gas ; Leeds and Thirsk Railway (St. Helen's Branch and Deviation); Leeds and Thirsk Railway (Knaresborough Branch Extension); Leeds and Minsk Railway (North Eastern Extension— Wrath to Hartlepool); Leith Paving; London and South Western Railway (Farnham and Alton Branch); London and Birmingham Railway (Camden and Euston Stations Enlargement); Manchester, Sheffield, and Midland Junction Railway ; Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland Junc tion Railway; Midland Railway (Leicester and Swanning ton Alteration and Branches); Midland Railway (Notting ham and Mansfi&d); Newcastle-upon. Tyne Improvement; Reading, Guildford, and Reigate Railway; Scottish Central Railway (Alloa Branch); Scottish Central Railway (Perth Termini and Stations); SittinAbourne Improvement. gerous experiment. It is, in fact, virtually getting rid of the control which the House has established for the purpose of preventing an undue expenditure of the public money. It is truly a dangerous experiment, because it would rot put a limit to the ex t ent to which these claims may go.—(Hear.) If during the war with Denmark you are prepared to give the sufferers by that war the sum of 250,000/., or a quarter of a million of money, because the country with whom you were at war did not make certain regulations as to the capture during the war, there is no telling to what extent these claims m a y now, and at future times be made, for if the prin c i p l e o f this grant of with regard to D enmar k , the princi le mo iney is good respect to every co un t ry with which you s good with may be l at war, whatever their positi on may b e, and larnvev means as to trade ; an d I say, therefore, that i e t r is a ht e du t t h ;o ir f those who have any care for the mode in which the public money is to be exp en d e d, t o oppose this first step, which shall introduce this new p r i nc ipl e th at you are to indemnify your own subjects f or l osses at sea during a war between this and any other nation. Sir, observe I am not here standing up to defend the rights of the Crown, I a m d e f end i ng the rights justicethe people of of this country gen era ll y . Y ou tell me there is claims of these individuals whose property has been c los t ° t a b e r i fired at sea, and that th ese merc h ants who have ir ships and cargoes during the war have sustained a loss for which you are bound to show them commisseration and to make them some compensation. Sir, whether it be right or wrong, captures at sea during war are the inva riable practice of nations, and that, as a totally different question from captures on land, is not the question now before the House. In fact, captures of cargoes at sea during war have always been considered to be rightful captures. That has been the uniform practice and rule with all nations at war, and I have no doubt that it ever will be the practice in future. And if you permit a sense and feeling of justice for these in dividuals to be imported into this discussion, bear in mind that by granting their claims you impose a heavy tax and great burden upon every other class of the community, and you should also make them compensation for what they have suffered during the war by contributing to its expenses. I say, therefore, that you will act most unjustly in granting these claims, for you will thereby lay a tax upon the people of this country.— ( Hear, hear.) If you think fit to remunerate one class, you should also remunerate another, but you tell me that the war itself was an unjust one, and that, therefore, those claims should be paid. Whether the war was just or not, I say the principle will equally apply. I would assume as a fact that it is perfectly just that these parties should be compensated for the loss of their property, and that the sum of 250,000/. should be handed over to them; but whilst these merchants have lost their property, the whole of the people of this country have been subjected to heavy burdens for the purpose of carrying it on. They have borne those burdens cheerfully, they have paid the taxes for the purpose of carrying on the war, and in some twenty years afterwards you discover that several persons engaged in trade during the war have, according to the law ofnations and the ordinary practice of war, lost their property, and you agree to a vote for the purpose of compelling those people who have borne the burden of that war to pay another tax of 250,0001. I think in a claim of this sort you are acting not only in contradiction to the ordinary practice of nations during war, but you are doing an injustice to this country; and not only to the extent now demanded, but you are establishing the principle that during all future wars with this country compensation shall be made for the cap tures that may be made.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, this case hat really been so often argued that it is with great difficulty that I can bring myself to enter into any further discussion upon it. I think the ground upon which it has been stated by the Hon. Gentleman who has brought forward the subject is, that there was no war between Denmark and England. If there was no war between this country and Denmark without a declaration of war on the part of England, then England has never been at war with any other nation. A declaration of war was made on the part of Denmark on the 16th August, 1807. That declaration was made by the King of Denmark, who said, " We do hereby make known, that on the 13th of this month hostile operations commenced between Denmark and England; and we therefore call upon our faithful subjects to take up arms in the first instance against the enemy, and to repel all hostile attacks." This Danish declaration was made on the 16th day of August, 1807 ; and, sir, it is perfectly true that a declaration of war was not made on the part of England, for it is not the policy of this country to make declarations of war. This country has been in the constant habit of suspending for a long time all hostile operations against other nations, and the war does not commence until all hope of conciliation is abandoned. Wars have, by these means been often prevented, and, Sir, I should be unwilling that any course should be taken by this country that should operate against that prac tice. In the year 1812, when America declared war against Great Britain, what was the course pursued in this country ? Great Britain, as the House may remember, made no declaration of war with America. Two or three months elapsed while captures were made by us on American property, as she had declared war, but we not having declared war, remained so until the September following. It is no argument in the case to say that we were not at war, and that we could not justify the capture of any property until the 2d of November following, the date of our declaration. Let us see how this case has been construed by competent authorities. I have looked back on many de tails on this subject which have never before been under my consideration, and I will now state what was the view taken by the Government at that time with regard to the position of Denmark and this country, in reference to this war. At the period of which lam now speaking (August, 1807), certain privateers cap tured a number of Danish ships in different parts of the high seas, near the shores of Great Britain, on or about the th of August, 1807. On the 29th of August in that year, the Treasury had before it under its consideration the cases of the captures made by these Bri tish privateers. They had speculated on the chances of war either with Spain or with Denmark, and had fitted out ves. sell, thinking that in either case they should make some thing by it. The Treasury came to the conclusion that their speculation on the chances of war was so bad a prac tice that they would give no captor of a ship under these speculative circumstances any remuneration. The captors of these vessels came to the Treasury, in order that they might have the ships given over to them, and also the property contained in them, What was the decision of the 'Treasury ? They were referred to the law officers, stating that the commencement of the Danish hos tilities had been pressed on by the circumstance of these speculative attacks, and that there would be enough to do to remove the imputation of rash pro ceedings. The declaration of hostilities by Denmark has been ascertained to have been on the 16th of August, 1807, and the mission of Mr. Jackson was concluded on the 13th, and then an order was issued with reference to all his Majesty's ships on the coast of Denmark. All these were public events, and it was more or less known to all individuals what would be the probable result. The Treasury said that it was expedient to consider the 16th of August the date of the Danish declaration of hostilities ; and, in reference to the decision they had already given, they acted against their own interest to say that there had been no declaration of war but they acted against their own interest, and in conformity with the justice of the case. They revoked the order with regard to the speculative captures in favour of the individuals who made them; they awarded to these private ships rewards in proportion to the various sums taken. In short, everything affirmed the declaration of war upon the 16th. I see no doubt as to the existence of that war; it was acted on as a war by all of our authorities, although no declaration of war was ever issued by Great Britain until the 2d of November following. Another argument of great weight is that the Danes made their captures because we made captures to a large amount on the Danish property. The Danes succeeded in taking from you a large amount, and you took a large amount from them, which was paid to the public account. I do not admit that fact—it is no greater ground for remuner ating these parties than any other favourable circumstance they can allege. It is unfortunate that from the mixed mode in which the accounts of the registry in the Court of Ad miralty were kept it is not possible to devise what is the amount which was paid on account of the Danish prize -money. Two of these accounts are, however, quite clear. The Danish claims realised a property of a million sterling, and out of that sum Parliament has voted to parties suffering from the confiscation of book debts no less a sum than 278,0001., and the proportion of the captors' share in respect of the remainder is very considerable. We gave to the cap tors in the navy concerned in the capture 348,0001., making a sum of 626,000/. out of the gross sum of a million. No ac count of what was specifically paid to individual captors of private vessels can be obtained, but it appears to have been considerable. The accounts laid on the table of the House say that it varied from one-half and two-fifths to four-fifths, according to the amount taken ; so that if we take from the total amount paid into the registry, and apply that to the total amount paid in compensation to parties who had suffered, and other expenses, the balance would possibly give an idea of what the average proportions paid to private individuals were. We are now called upon to make a serious inroad en the public revenue, and are called on .also to impose on the country a tax of 250,0001. to repay those people who sus tained losses of property in the war. The Honourable Member, as I understand, says that he has abandoned the question of the justice or injustice of the war. I am very glad to hear him say so; we have had enough of that argument, and on that point I shall not address the House, but I shall content myself with proving to the House that these captures made during this war stand on no different footing from those captures made during any other war. If you are prepared to remunerate those merchants who have lost their property during the war, you must after wards extend the principle to persons who have suf fered in property during any other war. These are the peculiar circumstances which entitle me to your con sideration. On these grounds I think it my duty to oppose this grant. It is important that the payment of a vast amount, and the great expense also, should not be en tailed on the country. The principle is not a safe one, and it is for the House of Commons to consider well before they allow such a measure to pass. Mr. HAWES—Sir, the Right Hon. Gentleman who has just sat down has made certainly a singular assertion. He says that from time to time the advocates of the Danish claims have forced a few arguments in their favour, and have then ventured to refer them to this House. It is the natural course of debate, that as . you find an argument adduced against you to examine those arguments you have already urged before, and if you can find matter to overcome the arguments against you, so to do. If I were compelled to communicate beforehand all that I am going to urge to the Chancellor of the Exchequer (and I would do so with great pleasure), he would naturally seek in any place for argument to refute it. The Right Hon. Gentleman has exerted himself to show that there was a declaration of war, and a declaration of war on the part of Denmark ; he has adhered in all points to the faith held when the declaration of war took place, and with that faith he has endeavoured to decide that question. I have here before me the of which her Majesty's Solicit or -G enera l on this case, _ was sub mitted to him, a n d w hi c h I will give to the House, as it is very short. H e s t a t e d h i s opinion that the declaration on the part of Denmark, on the 16th of August, was not a decla ration of war; the language is precise and explicit, and I will take the lib er t y of reading it very shortly ; this' is his opinion :—" I am of opinion that_ the instr umen t o f t h e 16t h of August, to whi c h reference has been made, is not a decla ration of war, and that it merely orders an embargo on Bri tish ships, and not the confiscation of them." (I beg the House to mark th a t . ) " There is a distinction between an embargo and a confiscation. It is stated by the law of Eng land and of nations, that an embargo directs only the de tention of the property from the owner,_ and a confiscation takes away the p roperty altog ether. There is nothing in the instrument in question which authorises the taking away permanently any British property." It would be presump tuous in me, against the experience of the Right Hon. Gen tleman, and against the opinions of the law-officers of the Crown, to enter upon a legal argument ; but, in order to entitle myself to the consideration of the House, I can quote the opinion of her Majesty's Solicitor-General, in answer to the Right Hon. Gentleman. The case must not, however, be allowed to rest there. The Right Hon. Gentleman has said that I have never raised the question of the justice or the injustice of the war. I have never argued that question in the discussion of the Danish claims. The Right Hon. Gentleman has assumed the complete justice of the war, and on that he has proceeded to argue that, supposing the war to be just, and the Danes to have declared the war, that all that was taken was the prize of the captors. Against the Bight Hon. Gentleman I am sorry to oppose this argu ment. The Right Hon. Gentleman has said that it was a great war on the part of England, and that Denmark declared war. If that be so, every state paper published at the time of the war is in direct contradiction to the Hon. Gentleman's statement. We went to the Court of Denmark and said that we wanted, as friends, to continue the nego • tiations which were pending before we went there. We have seen the declaration that passed between the two nations, and we have seen the convention, on the part of Denmark, was kept. Now, then, can we say that it was a just war on our part? We went there for the purpose of effecting a particular object by means of negotiation, but had not declared war at the time—so it is asserted and recorded in all the state papers of the time—thatwe were not at war, that we went as friends, and desired to continue FO. The Danish Minister never left this country until the 20th or 22d of November, and Mr. Canning said that we were then proceeding with negotiations. But if this was to be argued on the ground that some British vessels bad also been taken, then I say it should not be for gotten that the Danish Government did not confiscate our vessels until the month of December, that is to say until we had confiscated theirs, and then the Danish Government re solved upon the course they adopted by the issue of what I may call an order in council. Well, then, we have had it stated to us by a British Minister of the present day that we were at war with Denmark when this was done. But suppose we were, a negotiation subsequently took place, an d yet, notwithstanding that, in one month after, or rather more, the English Gov ernmen t con fi sca ted the Danish vesse l s one month before they confiscated ours; ce V i l arn a v t be i em s r. t b o erß, sa u i ds w ut e phpayo c s o ie n no t g i n s fi c : abe t e e a d t eß t d g. e oh i u r t r s v H e i o s s n e i t l h a Ge i e n nmt t io h enm e t h m a n o o n ft t o h Dbe o e right in what h e s t ates, let him not _ f * forget that there was a convention immediately after which should have set matters right. I beg t o refer ......thepl.ktiegHhtoHn.oAt n i . em n e tl Gentleman to the 7th rule of the con ven ti on . re rule he referred to, whi c h was to the effect that from r t a id d th ae e of that document each p ower s h ou ld afford the other protec l tion to property, and that there should be a good under standing and a harmony of feeling between the two nations.] I therefore say, that if it be an argument as against me, that there had been a declaration of war, then I say there can be no doubt but at the time when this act was done we were not in a state of war or hostilitywith Denmark, or that the avowed hostility alleged to have existed was not such as could warrant this proceeding. I say further, that even if the facts were as the Right Hon. Gentleman had re presented them, still there were circumstances connected with this case of a nature so peculiar as to take it out of the list of all ordinary cases of two nations opposed to each other. Again, the Right Hon. Gentleman urges as an argu ment against my proposition, that there was no surplus left out of which to pay this claim, and therefore there were no funds from which to pay them; he also stated that 60,0001. had already been paid, as well as certain grants, the amount ,of which he has not named; then I say, if the Right Hon. Gentleman admits that, he cannot say that there was no sur plus fund. If there was no surplus fund, I ask why were these claims referred to a commission, in order that the claimants should hare an opportunity afforded them of making out their claims, and to produce proof of them, and then to bring up their report before this House? That •ommission did sit, and heard the nature of the claims, which they reported upon, to the effect that, amongst other matters, they had reduced the amount of claims from 524,0001. to 225,0001., which amount they re ported to have been proved. If, then, there were no claims, why was this Commission appointed to adjudi cate upon them?—(Hear, hear.) Let the House bear in mind this fact in reference to these claims, that upon five distinct occasions you have, by your vote, recognised the justice and fairness of those claims ; and that they were not deemed to have been illegal or unjust by the Commission to which they were referred, is proved by the fact that that Commission, after having heard the whole state of the case, reported that claims to the amount of 225,000/. had been made good ; and on these grounds, then, I say that the present Government have no right now to withdraw from that report. If the Government now adopt this argument then it would be arguing that the Commission appointed by the Government to make the inquiry had come to an erroneous or an unjust conclusion. Bat, surely, after this House had decided upon the justice of those claims no fewer than five times, and after a Commission appointed by this House had reported to the effect that those claims were just and fair, the present Government should not now turn round and say that this was a seizure which had been made ac cording to the law of nations, and that, therefore, there should be no inquiry at all granted now. Ido say that such a course would not be correct or becoming to adopt. But there are other circumstances connected with this case to which I would wish to call the attention of the House. I think I have now satisfactorily shown the House that that which has been stated by the Right Hon. Gentle man to have been a declaration of war, was not a declara tion of war ; or that if there was, this House did consider the case one of such . great peculiar hardship that it was re ferred to a Commission for examination, and that Commis sion reported in its favour. I must now refer the House to what De. Lushington said upon the subject. (The Hon. Member then read an extract, which was to the effect that though this seizure of the vessels was not contrary to the law of nations, yet it was not fair or equitable.) I want to know then (continued the Hon. Member) upon what grounds am Ito rest these claims, if not upon these grounds? The Right Hon. Gentleman has stated that the public bore their portion of the expense of that war, but the Right Hon Gentleman should not forget that those claimants also bore a portion of those expenses.—(Hear, hear.) If this were an ordinary case perhaps I would not be warranted in thus urging it on the attention of the House, but I contend than this is not an ordinary case, but that, on the e,ontray, it is one such as never occurred before, and such as perhaps never would occur again, and therefore no precedent could be quoted in support of it. And here I mutt say that it appears to me that the Right Honourable Gentleman has deserted his old arguments with great facility. I remember the Right Hon. Gentleman urging, as an objection against those claims ;that such a pre cedent should not be established ; but that is a point upon which no previous Chancellor of the Exchequer ever said a word ; and when an opportunity offered when this question might have been easily settled to the satisfaction of all parties, that opportunity was suffered to pass and was neglected.—(Hear, hear.) When this question was first argued before this House, Lord Althorp was Chancellor of the Exchequer, and he acceded to this motion, and expressed a wish that all just and fair claims should be paid. It has been said that those claims were not legal, and that if they were not, then the ground was taken from under me. Upon this point we have the opinion of a distinguished lawyer, the late Sir W. Follett, who said that they were not legal, but that they were just and equitable. Well, it is not upon the grounds of the legality of these claims that I advocate them, but upon the grounds of their equity and justice.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman has said that it was very important that these claims should be resisted, lest any canvassing should be going on, and other similar claims be brought before the House. Undoubtedly there may have been some " canvassing " going on ; but if it was practised on one side, so it was on the other. Ido not think that any of my friends have canvassed in my favour, though I venture to say that the Right Hon. Gentlemen has taken the ordinary means of securing an attendance of his supporters. I say, then, that Ido think that these claims are just and equitable, and therefore I ask the Govern ment. now, after this House has already decided four or five times in favour of these claims, to grant this inquiry. But in whatever way you deal with it, let it be done be it has not been done before. Heretofore it has been dealt with in a slovenly and careless manner, but let it now be done clearly and distinctly. My Hon. Friend near me will resist the application upon the ground that there had been a declara tion of war when this occurrence took place, but take that argument away from him, and no other remains ; and in order to — defend that - argument, I do not now see any law officer of the Crown in his place ; but I still say that this is a question which does require a little more attention than has hitherto been given it, ind if it does not receive that attention now it never will receive it. With regard to the declaration of war, if my Hon. Friend centends for that, then he must encounter the opinion of the Attorney-General and other eminent authorities, expressed in the year 1807 ; for it appears that at that time there could have been no state of hostility between the nations, for some of the British ships, in passing by the Danish batteries, were actually saluted by a discharge from their guns.—(Hear, hear.) I do not think my Right Hon. Friend can even find a techni cal ground on which to refuse this motion But Ido not put it on anything like a technical ground—l want him, and I ask him, to put it on a large and comprehensive ground. I hope my Right Hon. Friend will take the case of these merchants and shipowners into their consideration simply on the grounds of justice. On the 27th of July Lord Cathcart set sail, and the bombardment took place on the 29th. It is true that the Hon. Member for Hull called the attention of the House to a very important document, which made out that a declaration of hastilities had taken place. If that was the case, it should be remembered that it was not by the inter ference of the British authorities, and therefore the parties who suffered must be considered en titled to our protection. I have endeavoured to con fine myself to the legitimate limits of this case, and I trust that after the House itself having allowed the justice of the claim by the proceedings on a late occasion, it will not now stultify itself by refusing a Committee. I trust it will not be considered unreasonable of me in asking that the House shall now allow a Committee to settle these claims. One word more—this case has been brought for ward by men of great authority, and the equity of the claims has never been denied, but it has been set aside simply on the grounds that it was a dangerous one, and that to comply with the justice of the claims would be setting up a dangerous precedent. This is a most unworthy view of the case, for it should be borne in mind that justice never sleeps, and that though n o t a t one moment to be had, yet it would in the end assert itself. Mr. CARDWELL—My Hon. Friend who has addressed the House said that he was willing to have this question settled by fair and legal argument, and for that reason he has quoted the opinion of the late Sir William Follett. Now, Hogno e ur n ab u le po M n the Honourable Member should have born e e mleb ii er,l, how u d .t u th p a o t n e t q h u a i t teh o lo pi gr nio o n und w e. as The not v ever, did not quite forget that the opinion was only an opinion on equitable grounds, and for that alone is it that he now asks this House to have the question argued upon comprehensive grounds. My Hon. Friend has laid much force upon the_ opinion of Sir W. Follett, and I cannot help thinking that he has relied a little too much upon it. The whole of those claims turn upon the fact, that if a COM pensation was due to the claimants by any act of the British authorities, that that compensation should be gran ted to those subjects. W ere th ose s hi ps t a k en w h en th e law ofnations was respected by both the British and Danish Govemmate, and in open defiance of the law of nations, or were they es at a time when no such law existed, and was not respected, in fact, at a time when both nations we re at war ? That was the whole question. Sir . James . Mackintosh took care to draw a clear distinction between these two points, for there was difference between the distinction which should cargoes of ships in defi ance of the l a w of nations, and the seizure of ships during b tw e o Mad H e ebe tookws en care the t o s ei make zur a e frn great difference theat hostilities. Th e merits of the present question upon t hi s point alone. The lonourable Gen d that when the seizures took place nothing like war existed, and upon that he grounds the jus- f the present claim. I hold in my hand a document Gen tleman a n sai tice o which proves that war did exist, and that hostilities had actually taken place between England and Denmark. I would remind the Honourable Member that he is about to establish a most dangerous precedent, and I beg he will well consider of the door which he would open up , in such cases by the arguments which he has advanced. Mr. HAWES rose and explained, but in so low a tone as not to be heard in the gallery. Mr. CARDWELL—The Hon. Member was wrong when he said that, even if a:war had existed, that it was broken up, or considered to be broken up by the convention which had taken place. Now, he should have remembered that this was a convention which had been come to for the purpose of saving the town of Copenhagen from all the evils which would otherwise accrue to the property of the inhabitants, and it was such a convention as was rendered necessary to the safety of the people. On the 9th of the month after this notable convention the hostilities recommenced. Now there is a document which shows that, if a declaration of we. vnia not mule, hostilities and gll the Accompani. RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS. LEEDS, JUNE 9. STOCK Excmisoz.—The sales are—Eastern Counties, York Ex tension, 7s. p.—Great Grimsby and Sheffield Extensions, % die.— Huddersfield and Manchester, 225. dis.—Huddersfield and Sheffield, 5% p.—Leeds and Dewsbury, 28s. 9d. p.—Leeds and Thirsk, dis. —London and Croydon, 21% —Manchester and Leeds Extensions, 21. Gs. 6d.—Newcastle and Berwick, 9% p. —York and North Midland Extension, is p.—Chelmsford and Bury, 16s. dis.—Clitheroe Junc tion, 255. dis.—Essex and Suffolk, 14s. 6d. dis.—Grand Union, 15s. 6d. dis.—Lancashire and North Yorkshire, % dis.—Leeds and York, 28s. 6d. dis.—Leicester and Bedford, 6d. p. —Liverpool, Ortnskirk, and Preston, 13s. p.—Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland, 13s. p. Midland and Thirsk Junction, 21s. dis.—Northumberland and Lancashire Junction, 15s. 6d. dis.—North Staffordshire, 21. 19s. P.—North Western, 6d. p.—Sheffield and Lincoln, Is. p.—south Mid land, dis.—Welsh Midlands, 1% dia.—West Riding Union, 4. HULL, JUNE 9. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Hull and Selby, Half Shares, 85%—North British, Half Shares, 325. —Ditto, Carlisle, 31s. 9d.. Ditto, Dalkeith, 6—Buckingliamsre, 65. dis.—Chelmsford Bury lls. 6d.—East Lincolnshire, —East' Coast, I6s.— Gran Union, 12s. 6d.—Huntingdon, Wisbeacli, and St. Ives, 1 %—Leicester and Bed ford, 245.—Leicester and Tamworth, 255. 9d.—London and York, 40s. —Manchester, Buxton, and Matlock, 2/. 155.—Nottingham and Mansfield, ss. dis. —North Western, 225. 9d.—North Staffordshire, 51. 4s. 6d. — Northumberland and Lancashire. Junction, 275. 6d.— South Midland, 31 C—Shrewsbury and Birmingham, 2/. 12s.—West Riding Union, 4/. 4s. SHEFFIELD, JUNE 9. STOCK EXCLIANOE.—The sales are —Midland (Sheffield and Ro therham), 35% —Sheffield and Manchester, Quarter Shares, No. 3 (Scrip), 7s. P.—Grimsby and Sheffiekl , 3 1 , 2 dis.—Ditto, Quarter Shares, 7s. dis.—Shetileld and Lincolnshire, Is. p. HUDDERSFIELD, JUNE 9. STOCK ExcHionn.—The sales are—Oxford, Worcester, and Wol verhampton, VA —Great Eastern and Western, 21s.—Grand Union, %—Huddersfleld, Halifax, and Bradford Union, 91. 15s.—Leicester and Bedford, 265. 6dc-London, Salisbury, and Yeovil, 1/. 16s. 6d.— Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland, 3. YORK, TUNE 9. • SToe EXCHANGE. — The sales are —Eastern Counties. York Ex tension, 78 —Grand Vnion (Nottingham and Lynn), 128. 6d.—Leices ter and Bedford, 11 . 4 5. 6 d. —London and York , 2 /. 4s.—Malton and Driflleld Junction, 21. N.—Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Mid land, 21. 16s. 6d.—Newcastl e and Berwick, 2 4%—Newcastle and Darlington Extensions, Si. 14s.—North British, Carlisle Extension, I%—Ditto, Dalkeith, 31 —North Western, 11( —West Riding Union, 4% —York and North Midland, New (East and West Riding, 101. Ils. 3d. EDINBURGH, JUNE 6. STOCK Excustmz.—The sales are—Carnwath and West Linton, 248.—Direet Northern, 375. 6d.—Dundee and Perth, 171. 103.—East Indian Railway, 94. 11d. —Edinburgh and Balhgate, 42s.—Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle, 42s 6d.—Glasgow and Lesmahagow, 48s.— Inverness and Elgin, 21s.—Perth and Inverness, 31s. 9d.—Seottish Central, 16%—South Midland, 30s. . _ GLASGOW, JUNE 8. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are — Ai rdrie and Batbgate, 775. Indian Rail way, 12s. 3d.—E cl i nburgh and Northern, 5N —Glasgow General Ter and Ayr, N ew, Kilmarnock, — Ayr and Galloway, 26s.—Caledonian and Dumbartonshire Exten sion, 245. 6d.—C a l e d on i an Di rec t N or th ern , 34s.—East ' fli nt's. 9 14—Glasgow and B e lf as t U n i on , 43 3 . —Glas gow , Kil 31 /.—GlasgoW, Dumfries, and Carlisle, 40s. 6d.— Glasgow, Kil marnock, and Ardrossan, 325. 6d.—Glasgow, Airdrie,' and Monkland J unction, 478.—Lanark and Lothians 44s.—Larne, Belfast, and Ballymena, 48 .—Lesmahagow, 50s. 6d.—London,Dristol, anidSouth Wales, 19s. 6d.— Manchester and Southampton, 325. M and and Eastern Counties, 13 5 .—P er th an d Inverness, 338. S dl cottish Central, 161, FAMINE AT GRAVESEND. Sunday such was the unexpected and great influx o f visito r, at Gravesend, that notwith standing the great preparation made "in the victualling depart ment" by the skopkeepers, there was the greatest scarcity of re freshments. The number of visitors exceeded that of any day this season. In the evening it was impossible to obtain refreshment at any price, and eyen bawl was sold at double the ordinary price. RAIL WAYS. Mr. GREENE moved to repeal the following standing orders :—The order as agreed to by a resolution of the House, April 3, 1846,in lieu of standing order 135 repealed, and to sub stitute the following :—" That seven clear days' notice be given by the Clerk of the Committee of Selection to the clerks in the Private Bill-office of the day and the hour appointed for the meeting of the Committee on every private Bill that shall have been referred to the said Committee, that in case of Bills not referred to the Committee of Selec tion seven days' clear notice, and in the case of a re- committed Bill three clear days' notice, shall be given by the agents for the Bill to the clerks of the Private Bill-office of the day and the hour appointed for the meeting of the Committee on every private Bill, and that all the proceedings of any Com mittee of which such notice has not been given, shall be void." —Agreed to. The standing order 137, and to substitute the following in lieu thereof :—" That notices in writing be given by the Clerk of the Committee Committee fnunSeitletece lißill-office Selec tion to the clerks in the Private of the postponement first have meetingbeenany of referred to such on a private of Bill, the whic Committee on the day on which such postponement is made; and that in case of Bills not referred to the Committee of Selection, one clear day's notice shall be given by the agents of the Bill to the clerks of the Private`Bill-office of the post ponement of the first meeting of any Committee on a private Bill."—Agreed to. The order made on the 20th day of February last, for referring the Mold Junction Railway Bill to the Committee of Selection be read ; that the same order be discharged; that the said motion be withdrawn.—Agreed to. The Hox. MEstmea then moved that the Committee on Curtis's Divorce Bill have leave to sit and proceed on Friday, at three o'clock.—Agreed to. The HON. MEMBER also moved—That it be an instruction to the Committee on the Worcester and Porthdynllaen Railway Bill to entertain all petitions which shall be presented against the Bill on or before the 11th 'day of this instant June.— Agreed to. That the report from the Select Com mittee on standing orders, in the case of the Great Munster Railway Bill, be read, and that the said order be discharged and the Bill withdrawn.—Agreed to. That the report from the Select Committee on Standing Orders, in the case of the Ban don and Bantry Railway Bill, be read, and that the said order be discharged and the Bill withdrawn.—Agreed to. That the report from the Select Committee on Standing Orders, in the case of the Cork, Macroom, and Killarney Railway Bill, be read, and that the said order be discharged and the Bill withdrawn.—Agreed to. Mr. SPOON ER moved that the Midland Railway (Burton and Nuneaton Railway and Ashby Canal Purchase) Bill be re-committed to the former Committee, with leave to sit and proceed to-morrow, and to report forthwith.—Agreed to. The Lords' Amendine Tits on the following Bills were then considered and adopted : Brighton and Chichester Railway (Steyning Branch) ; Brighton and Chichester Railway (Bognor and Little Hamp ton Branches) ; Brighton, Lewes, and Hastings Railway De viations, and Eastbourne, Hailsham, Seaford, and Newhaven Branches; Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway. Amendment and Branches (No. 1); Glasgow, Paisley, Kil inNao. rn o 2 r ; , Glasgow,a nd Ayr Railway Amendment and Branches Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Rail wa y Amendment and Branches (No. 3) ; Midland Railway (Sys ton to Peterborough); Sligo Harbour Improvement. FREE CHURCH (SCOTLAND). Mr. FOX MAULE presented several petitions from mem bers of the Free Church in Scotland, complaining of the eT zS petitionseo p t r l e a s u eo d nn . t et h H e re fusal of sites for church es , w hi ch they experienced from the flanordy:-. ivu e r n s N in wsn vi e s e seu h vb a ejr d eac t lt o , present b o y n e t w h u e n n t d y r !o d e and thousand persous.—(H ear.) m t THE MILITIA. ham, praying against the calling out of the militia, or any thing which would have a tendency to induce war. PUNISHMENT OF DEATH. petitions from Birming- Mr. DUNCAN presented several petitions against the pu nishment of death. The Hon. Gentleman also presented se ral petitions in favour of the members of the Free Church in Scotland, which alleged that sites for the building of churches had been refused to them by the landed proprietors in Scotland. The petitioners prayed that the House would take some measures to remedy their grievances. RAILWAY LEGISLATION. Mr. EVELYN DENISON gave notice, that he should to morrow put a question t o the First Lord of the Treasury, whether he was prepared to make any statement on the subject of railway legislation farther than that already made ; and whether he would have any difficulty in laying on the table of the House memorials which had been pre sented to Lord Dalhousie on the subject of railways ? THE DANISH CLAIMS. On the order of the day being read that the House resolve itself into Committee, for the purpose of taking into conside ration the Danish claims, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose and said—Sir, although the House on a former occasion con sented to the motion of my Hon. Friend (Mr. Hawes), that on the present day we should go into Committee on this subject, I think there are strong reasons why the House should not fulfil the object of the vote which they came to on that day, and I therefore rise at this early stage of the discussion for the purpose of moving an amendment to the motion of my Hon. Friend. I am sensible, sir, that in doing so I labour under very consi derable difficulties, because I have always found, upon every successive occasion when these claims have been brought before the House, there has been stated in the course of the debate some new circumstance apparently calculated to in fluence the decision of the House adduced at a period when it is difficult to afford a reply to them—statements are made for the purpose of inducing the House to support the pro positions which are made to them with respect to these claims, yet on another day those very state ments turn out to be altogether void of a just foundation, and to be such as should not influence the de cision of the House. Now, fur instance, on the former occa sion the Hon. Gentlema n oppos i te , i n t h e course o f hi s reply, ' adduced an additional argument which we had not heard of before in support of these claims. He did not for a moment dispute that there had been a war between Great Britain and Denmark, but he stated that a declaration was made in the same year, which cured the previous declaration of war, and restored peace to Denmark; and that, therefore, Great Britain made no attempt to declare the illegality . of the cap tures, because the declaration of war was not issued until November. He impressed, therefore, upon the House that it was just and proper that the House should restore to their former position those persons that had suffered in consequence of the war. But, sir, was there no foundation for that judg ment? Of course when Copenhagen was surrendered there was a capituletios which provided for the restoration of such goods as had been taken during the war. The D an i s h Government itself issued an order in which it was stated that during the war certain regulations were to be observed as to English subjects, expressly nullify ing the assertion of the Honourable Gentleman, when he wished the House to believe that these capitulations were not made during the war ; expressly nullifying the declaration of the Government in seven days afterwards, that the war was then in force, and that certain hostile measures with respect to British sub jects were to be taken in consequence of the war. A new case was adduced by the Hon. Gentleman on the former occasion, for the purpose of inducing the House to agree to his propositions. Sir, I have thought it my duty on various occasions to oppose an address to the Crown for the purpose of remunerating the claimants on account of the Danish losses, and I have done so, Sir ; first, upon what I consider to b e a most im portant constitutional principle; and next, because I do not admit that there is any justice whatever in the claims which are submitted to the House. Sir, this House has very wisely determined that they will not admit any grant of money, or any remission of duties due to the Crown, unless it come down to the House, recom mended by the respectful suggestion of the Crown ; and they have done it for the best of all reasons, in order that the House may not be imposed upon by specious or plausible statements made in the course of a debate on an uninvestigated claim. The object of that determination has been that individual Members may not be influenced-- that they may not rashly vote away the money of the people to parties who by means of great exertion, active canvassing, and constant representation of facts more or less accurate, have acquired an influence over the minds of Mem bers, and who persuade them to vote away the public money. And, Sir, this House has laid down a wise rule, and I am not quite prepared to get rid of it by a sidewind proceeding. When the case was submitted to the predecessors in the office that I hold, and when it had been submitted to m e a l so, we eac h of us, acting under a sense of our public duty which is not to recommend to Pa rliament to ma ke a grant of mon e y unless we are satisfied that the grounds on whi c h t h e claim is made are just—have refused to assent to the petition to for the granting of th ese claims. this House, praying And upon the same principle, I will not wil lingly consent that the Crown should be plac e d in the situation of having an address presented to it, when the Crown has not been advised to recommend to Par- Wont the paywat of Ogle chino. Sir, this yery cum. • ments df a war existed. The Hon. Gentl• la has said that no declarittion of war was made by Gr. Britain by proclamation ; but should it be contended )hat Great Britain was to wait till a proclamation of war .efore Sheis to defend herself from the aggression of an enem • ?\ Hon. Gentleman proceeded to read several don V.s / iu M.:l 7 dar support of his arguments, but so rap idl y an d i n di s 1- ed not to be clearly understood in the reporter's gallery.) The Hon. Gentleman said that the opinion of a great lavryer was taken on the subject and that that opinion was in favour of the claimants. Now he should remember that when. the opinion of Sir W. Follet was taken it was a period when he was not in that House, and when he had not air opportunity of hearing the question argued on all its merits —it was taken when the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was not a member of the Government, when he had nothing like an official capacity to guide him in giving an opinion upon the true bearings of the whole subject. In fact, it was an opinion given in answer to a case laid before him as a pro fessional man, and it was well known how the cases for such opinions were prepared, and it was also known that on the manner in which they were prepared depended the opinion of the counsel. Was that opinion expressed after Sir William Follet had heard the speeches on the matter in that House? Was it given after hearing the speech of the Hon. M em b er f or Worcester? On the contrary, it was given without knowing the grounds upon which the case rested, and simply upon equity, and not law. The Hon. Gentleman has said that after cutting down this claim very considerably, we now refused to poy it. This is not the fact, for the justice of the claim is not made out. But the Hon. Member has adverted to a document quote.i by the Hon. Member for Hull, and he admitted,' not only' on former occasions, but on the present, that if that document was not got over it was fatal to his case. He, however, said he considered that that document was cured by the notice of the second of September. Now, Sir, I put it to the House, and I put it to the Gentleman himself, has he not been under a mistake in the view he has taken of that notice from the documents which I have quoted, which plainly prove that war existed on the 9th, two days after the tne r hao r es i t e ef n icu d r l otn y hu statefurther of things which he alleged existed? Does not this then prove the Hon. Gentlemen in error, and on his own showing, I put it to the House, has he made out his taorruoetu only n trouble that onee will l) a li r i r t o t u w s lo f . gb h oy a ,; ntt h ho s eai rn n; r t e ps legal iht iotwi arguments, m h a a n t edn h tsl e , fenailshuoedruelldy weary I jeaea w ryv il e l t o h T th e h e e r case l o i b or published documents, which are before the public, and there Right Hon. Friend the ChancehosTaelj which depends on written Chancellor e3o a rr t. observations eErwxitt Exchequer se g w sua h ei rd i i h t ash l a e y Com plained that new arguments been introduced into this question. Now the Hon. Gentleman was not quite ri g ht of that assertion. What my Ri g h t Hon. Friend com plained of was, that new arguments were introduced in the Hon. Member's reply, which it was impossible to re ply to, and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) only desired that the House would review a hasty and erroneous decision to which they were induced to come by specious arguments. Mr. HAWES—There has been no decision yet. Mr. CARDWELL—Yes ; that decision, which now calls upon us to go into Committee, which de cision, I say, was palpably influenced by new arguments introduced and brought forward by the Hon. Gentleman for the first time in his reply. Ii the cases where compensation was given and refused by the Treasury the decision turned upon the same point—whether there was or was not a state of war existing between Great itri tain and Denmark. The Treasury, if a state of war did not exist, would have refused to have made the payments which had then been made if there was not some claim, founded upon justice, for the demand—and they would have equally been ready to meet other claims also founded in justice. The pre cise question at issue was, whether there was, or was not a war ; and, in 1810, when the decision was given that there was one, although it was then adverse to the Treasury, they abided by it, and have done so to the precut moment. The Honourable Gentleman called upon them to reverse a decision on grounds upon which Sir James Macintosh had never ventured to rely—(Hear, hear)—grounds from which he was most anxious to disconnect his case, and on grounds which are now for the first time brought under the notice of Parliament. The Hon. Gentleman says that the question has been always kept alive. But the question was first brought under discussion in 1839—the war existed in 1807—nearly thirty years after the time of the occurrence, not to mention that the grounds on which the House are required to come forward to give their decision have been carefully kept back. I, therefore, Sir, believing that the pre cedent will be dangerous, beg leave to second the proposi tion of my Right Hon. Friend that the House resolve itself into a Committee on this question this day six months. Colonel SIBTHORP—f wish to call the attention of the House to those Members who did vote upon the question in 1841, and who are not present now. I find that, on the occasion of the division in that year (1841), the ayes were 127, and the noes 96 ; and I find on that occasion the names of the following gentlemen, who are not present now The Solicitor-General (Fitzroy Kelly), Sir Frederick Trench, the Attorney-General, Sir Charles Douglas, and Lord Eliot, who is now Lord St. Germans.—(Laughter.) Where are all the Hon. Gentlemen gone?—(Hear, hear.) Will no one tell me ?—(Laughter.) But I would say on this occasion that you have spent sums of money in ornamenting Tra falgar-square and other public places, but that it would be much better for you to be just before you become generous. I do look upon this whole transaction as a mean one on the part of the Go vernment. Your merchants, who are paying an income-tax of five millions a year, have a right that their pro perty should be protected. Let us pay our debts, and when we have a surplus let us give away. This will be the proper mode of proceeding with our business. I have nothing whatever to do with these claims; I am no way interested in them, but I think tlisem founded on justice, and as such ought to be discharged. The House thpn divided, when there appeared— For the motion .. 58 Against it B5 11i,• —27 .....ajority against going into Committee... - - The House consequently by this division reversed its former decision. _ _ 3 PLACES OF WORSHIP (SCOTLAND) BILL. Mr. FOX MAULE then move the second reading of the Places of Worship and Sites (Scotland) Bill. The Right Hon. Gentleman after going at considerable length into the disruptions that had taken place in the Church of Scotland, stated that the present measure had been rendered necessary by the course that had been pursued by many of the landed proprietors in Scotland refusing to grant sites in that country for the erection of churches by the members of the Free Church in Scotland. Among those who had refuseci to grant sites were Lord Macdonald, who had large property' in the Isle of Skye. Sir James Riddell, Lord Murray, Lord Seafield, Mr. Campbell, of Lochnell, Lord Ailsa, Lord Cawdor, Lord Forbes, the Duke of Buccleuch, and the Duke of Richmond—all these persons had in his opinion acted with great intolerance, and inflicted hardships upon the people of Scotland that were unworthy of them. He contended that the honour of Scotland was en gaged in the refusal by these noble personages of sites for places of worship for the members of the Free Scotch Church. It was necessary that some remedy should he applied to the evil, and the only remedy he could devise wars that which he had laid down in this Bill. The free church of Scotland, in addition to all that it had done since its establishment, was about to erect a noble col lege in the city of Edinburgh, for which institution 216 individuals had subscribed the magnificent sum of 21,0001. This Bill to build gave the same powers as were granted in Lord Rollsbury's Act, passed a few years ago, for the purchase of certain sites. All disputes this Bill would leave to the decision of the Sheriff of the county in which the site sought for might happen to lie. He admitted that this Bill was an inter ference with the rights of property, but he conceived that the circumstances in which the free church people were placed by the owners of land justified such a measure, and lie conceived that if Parliament refused to adopt this measure they would not be acting justly towards a portion of the people of Great Britain. The duties of private pro perty had been grossly abused by the landed gentry to whom he had alluded. He would ask the Hooe which of the two alternatives they preferred? Whether it wag not more desirable that the House should pass a BiLl• which, at the discretion of a certain judicial officer, responsible to the Government, should convey half an acre, an acre, or at the most two acres of a certain individual's land,which was to be applied for the erection of churches ; or was it better to adopt the other alternative of engendering, by refusing to adopt this Bill, a spirit of discontent in a large portion of the people of Great Britain—a spirit of hostility to the Government and the landlords: under whom they lived? He called upon them to endeavour to put a stop to the present persecution towards the people of Scotland, for some day or other it must end by some Fti--rg or other. He called upon them by eanctionili& Itvhhisichßill mustto partnevicetnt in ignorance time a greatbarbar ashort im portion of the people of Scotla nd. Let them p revent religious toleration, which was the boast of this empire , front being nothing but a farce, and so secure the affection and, respect, not only of the class to which he belonged, but of every right-minded man in the world. The lion. Gentleman concluded by moving the second reading of the Bill. The SPEAKER having put the question, Sir J. GRAHAM said he could avow with great truth that he approached the discussion of the subject a second time with heartfelt pain. He thought that the conduct of thil Members who seceded from the Episcopal Church of Scots land was pure and disinterested.—(Hear.) He was also prepared to admit many other grounds maintained by the Right Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. But it was said that this sympathy on his part was only sympathy in words on the part of the Government, but the Earl of Aber den was the very first landlord to grant a site for the erection of a free church. Instances of refusal had bead adduced, but they were not many or important, for the Right Hon. Gentleman had admitted that several of the landlords who had been instanced as opposed to the granting of sites, refused to give sites with the hope that the disruption might be healed. He would not follow the Right Hon. Gentleman through all the moral and the cases he had entered into. The Right Hon. Gentleman here referred to the case of a Noble Colleague of his, and had admitted that he had in every way promoted religious education of the people, and neh offeredd every facilities to the buildingof places of wor ship. a also re ferred to the name of others, among w h om was Dr. Chalmers. In passing, he would observe that he could never hear the name of Dr. Chalmers mentioned without bearing testimony to that enlightened and christianlike zeal witliwhich he had a l wa y s promoted any measure calculated to be beneficial to soc i et y in general. There were two causes which had ope rated very much to cause the present ill-feeling. Those who had originally seceded from the Church had inveighed against it in no measured terms. Such terms being heard by those who still remained with the Church and revered it, naturally caused against those who maligned an Establishment which they respected. Another reason was, that a spirit of bitterness and anger had been generated in consequence of the ministers of the church having given way to their feelings, and denounced the pro prietors to their own tenantry. That such a course had been taken was much to be regretted, and it was the true cause of the angry and acrimonious feelings which had lately shown themselves. The Right of the ra h i s proper oft tehl ev t e y pt t ah h rei e s r hN e w o cb e hl r eu e rDe twelve h ina p d a r sg i c s r h oa tn e l s ta n , e d andd had site.at, Osd Hon. Gentleman mentioned the case of the D u k e of elevenßich nThe°n d out om O o o n t built 600 churches, and 40 more were in progress es and a million of money was in th e h ands of those entitled to take care of the funds of the Society. If they extended the principle to Scotland, they should also extend it to Ire land. It was the duty of a Legislature to have a church under the sanction of the Legislature, within a reasonable limit of the centre of a district, in which the people can worship. lie could not see any benefit which would arise from such a measure. His conscientious belief was, that it would create an immense deal of mischief; and, not seeing any nec essity for it, he could not support it. Th ere was n o precedent whatever for legislation on such a subject, and the Established Church it self had not such a power ; if it had, it was so strictly guarded and so little used that it was a mere nullity. Believing, then, what he had stated, he would move that the Bill be read that day six months. ' Sir ROBERT INGLIS considered that religious freedom and religious toleration should be extended to all, without any distinction. As far as he could see, looking at the question in all its bearings, they would find that it Ras only in a very small proportion of cases the griaytkuco