The Sun. — London, England, 1837-10-26 00:00:00

BRIG, THE QUEEN --- the in at:rox, WEDNESPAY.—It rained very f as t t luri N up , (n un,,c's but t owar d s t h e a f ternoon the v•l* - Jather clearcu tha r At half- past two o ' clock her Majesty, accompanied by o duch ess o f Kent, and attended by Lady Mary Stopford, 8 Dil lon, Lord Lilf or d , L ord Melbourne, Lord Palmer 'lTbns Colonel Cavendish, and Sir George Quintet', rode out horseback. The Royal party took the direction of the le 4 s, where they were sheltered from the north wind. T• he Countess of Mulgrave and Miss Paget took a car nage airing this afternoon. T he Quee n h onoured Mr. George Hayter with another si▪ tting this morning. Iv Baran Stock mar arr i ved at the Palace yesterday evening SiX o'clock, and had an audience of the Queen ; he after w4rds dined with her Majesty. a T he Royal dinner party yesterday, exclusive of the Queen, ue Duch ess of Kent, and the Royal suite, consisted of Lord a ru ct Lady J ohn Russell, the Brazilian Minister, and the untes s of Charlemont. The Brazilian Minister arrived yesterday at the York The Mi n i ster for the Netherlands left the Albion Hotel ti/i% mornin g for town. The Allrquis • C"Yng 'am I quitted the Palace this mor n i ng for Winds'or. -c "" jler M a j esty has given a donation of 201. to the infant ls, and another 201. to relieve the widows of three Pilots who were lately drowned off Shorc;nam harbour. ta ,_The Bish o p of Chichester has derived great benefit from Kin g the Germ an Spa waters. COURT CIRCULAR. 8t rc sidatch es were forward ed yesterday from Downing .„,'t, for Lord M e lb ourne , a t B r i g h ton . " e sPatches, d ate d t h e 30t h o f S eptem b er, were received 3 eB ; t ' 4 laY, at th e Foreiffn•office, from Lord P onson b y , t h e tish r ' t 'sh Amb assa d or at Constartlnople ; and from th e Bri ha tersbCum i rge d'Aff a i res res id ent at t h e C ourt o f S t. Pe cele rd l„ Glenel g t ransacte d b us i ness yester d ay at the Chan or of the Exchequer's Office. _ The Bi s h op o f N ova Scotia transacted business yesterday 4t the Colonial Department. Baro n de Cetto, the Bavarian Minister, transacted busi, n es4 - Yesterday at the Foreign-office. A IN Cole had an interview with Lord Glenelg yesterday 4t the Colonial-office. :IQS't Hu sse y Vi v i an, Master-General of the Ordnance, MFergusonr. P transacted bu s ine ss y ester d ay at t h e 4 leme Off ice. Backhouse, Under Secretary of State for the Fo -grl Departm en t, h as returne d to town from Sussex. Mr. Drummond, U n d er S ecretary for Ireland has arrived in to wn. v , The American Minister a n d M rs . S tevenson , an d M r. e 4 x, hi s P r i vate Secretary, returned to town on Tuesday n v ",ing, from Holkham, where their Excellencies have been 1- 43I ng some ti me , on a v i sit to the Earl and Countess of 4-,eicester. THE POLISH REFUGEES. colresterday the Committee appointed by the C o u r t o f lemon Council to make arrangements for the grand ball be given at the Guildhall for the relief of the distressed doles assembled, Deputy P eacoc k i n t h e Ch a i r. T he business commenced with a spirit worthy of the un uertaking, and ominous of its great success. It will be re "llected that the proposition of Mr. Deputy Peacock in the C ourt of C ommon C ounc i l was received with unanimous 4PPr)ukat iml ; and it was determined that the Hall should, on the a . e Occa s i on , appear i n al l i ts " Royal state." . We have r eason to belie ve th a t th e p reparat ions for the enter h4olent of her Majesty considerably exceed in magnificence a t were a t f i r st contemplated, and that the grandeur of fe s cene in w hi c h t h e P r i nce R egent an d the Sovereigns "'fled th e pr i nc i pa l sources of attraction will be far ex :e.ded by th e sp l en d our o f the approaching honour to the itt2 ens of London in their ancient Hall. The application r o f Lord D u d ley Stuart for the use of the Guildhall for the ice of t h e P oles, soon after her Majesty expressed her t enticn to dine with her citizens of London, was what i 4 1,44 be e x p ecte d f rom t h at benevolent friend of those 4tim ants upon th e p u bli c sympat h y, and it was responded o With kindred feeling by the whole Corporation. The following resolution to which the Committee came Yesterday manifest their determination to display the place 0f the Queen's entertainment in all its grandeur : M 44 THE DISTRESSED POLES.—The Right Hon. the Lord ayo r and the Corporation of the city of London having i l 'eee pleased to grant the use of the Guildhall and its cham bers, together with all the splendid hangings, fittings up, and illuminations provided for the grand civic entertain ment t o be given to her Most Gracious Majesty on the 9th of November next, for the purposes of a public ball in aid °C the funds for the relief of the unfortunate Polish refu fte.s, the Committee of Management beg leave respectfully t t ( } ) ,, l t nr i ZEß the Nobility, Gentry, and their fellow-citizens, ur; ( l, - ", e ,_ ball will take place on the 21st of November next, `ne most distinguished patronage." T he CHAIRMAN stated that a great number of applica ritLha_d already been made to him, and several members t • "e U orporatien, and that it would be necessary to limit "Ilennumber of tickets immediately. Pon the motion of Mr. ANDE , n'ON, who expressed his Perfect reliance upon an advantageous issue of the exertions ef th e . th e committee, Deputy worst, who was Treasurer upon occasion of the last in 1834, for the starving Poles, wher, 1 , • uPtvard s of 9CO/. were raised for their service, was "ri,pirnously che:,sen to the same office. p r be DEMITY assured the Committee that he anticipated ;.° ea , t thitlgs from the magnificent ball which they had just tiels!!'ve(i should take place on the 21st of November, and his exertions should not be spared. b e lt was then resolved that the price of the tickets should ladies follows :—Ticket for a lady, 10s. 6d., or for two • les, I/. Is. ; ticket for a gentleman, 1/. ls.; ands hat the tick t th should be ready for issue after the 30th istnt. Other resolutions and arrangements having been adopted, e Committee adjourned till Saturday. nRURY-LANE THEATRE. p ee l ' s he Play o f Th e llfereha. nt of Venice was last ni g ht re ented f or t h e purpose of i ntroducing to the town, in the vvharaeter of Shylock, a gentleman of the name of Ternan, 1 "Is acquired considerable provincial celebrity. Mr. th - o r , n 'tn's figure and features arc good, and his voice, ',Rh occasionally we could discover a slight degree of : e 'cness or lisp, is full-toned and pleasing. His easy self f",ession bespoke a man well accustomed to the business 1 e scene. So often has the part of Shylock been per ,,'e'rtlllo eel of late years, that it is scarcely possible for any 1 143, r, _ . even . of moderate acquiretnents, who has paid ordi 4voi ,attentlon to his art, not to sustain it so as at least to d e ,, cl Offending. Mr. Ternan, however, deserves a great 7' l more than such negative praise. He appears to have e u etl d ed the character accurately ; and in his two principal e s , those in the third and fourth acts, he manifested t ) "d discretion and judgment, if not genius. Some por e:4llls of his p er f ormance, h owever, b ordered too much on kr°quial tameness. His reception was highly flattering. mats: Lovell's Portia was altogether a mistake, without ani q 2" in the comic scenes, and without gravity in those ih:_serious description. Her triumph over the Jew, when q flielPounds to him the real state of the law, was that of 1 4 1 PPa nt girl, not o f a staid and learned jurist. Young 14"er Launcelot was capitally represented by Mr. Comp 14t :His humour was bold and original. Miss H. Cawse, ssi en, and M r. F razer, as Lorenzo, sang prettily. The n eed r o P°ss esses a sw ee t t enor vo i ce, b ut i t stan d s muc h i n f cultivation. vft ri, ( P i a nd Lady Roll o h ave l e f t Bi cton L o d ge, D e - Pa s , (4. Bath, where the venerable Lord and his Lady will 1 sever a l d ays. OC f or Z d and Lady Lorton have arrived at Cheltenham Lordeason• boy, Fitzroy S omerset w ill l eave town to day for f L O ',° join hi s f am i ly. bm • vAdolphus Fitzelcrence has arrived in town er * t tie. ir .:tobert Peel and family arrived in Frankfort-011- '4' l4 le on the 18th inst. l '' le °ny- ofthe Clergy b in In.'s jlio ucation n the 16th of November. ed L it t o l i e ni c, ll . igliness the ;juke of Cambridge . ar , d a , , L,5 Ship Hotel, Dover, yesterday evening, and "Ire 1,•itIt':Oloyal I tghness honours Lord and Lady Polti h The i i „ , "..npany to dinner. Nth , -8-onlad of the Princess Marie seems to be a * 11 , 1 4 4 4 f a l / 4 ,-%Z a ktii e g lad, but he is not very richly gifted either t 4 _. 3 f an her or conversational talents. The fair sculptor ti . 1 „,'" L a self in company with one of her own plaster tk.. ' ,.Prio;_ ne rl the Prince was asked whether IT would take d riquottlie voice for his wedded wife he replied, in a firm an "t " has Tl • • the longest and most elo- Ci fi • s P e eel h • Hs ls • ' F nce I\lvgri' c has spoken since his arriva ra . °ti e , e /'° wa s rof the yesterday morning - given by . the . sur wil9ther v4,,Parisli of St. Clement Danes, prohibiting carts_ standing in the various streets through tt r " e g ai n iz;v her : n la t iesty will pass on the ninth of November, or t ,-- winch barriers will be put up. Persons aeir b -rn ed against the erection of platforms in front , (1 11 kr°4ses• - Lond a t • din,e hi s Grace the Duke of Wellington had tli e ",„ 4l Th e r Party at Widmer Castle. Colonel Munro, ko r ,.'See rs n ' s ° ls (Royal Engineers), Major Brookes, and tio h - 2 " th e i 3 l ,the 69th were among the guests. To- Wo rk ' be r , i t . 114 e will preside at the annual Harbour Ses- I f or ju i 18 expected a trial will be made of the new Pr °ring the entrance of the port. PARLIAMEN TA RY PRIV ILLGE. TO TrIV EmpJA ‘,§i* reveWors 'ente?e'd by the Hoase of Commons on 34th MAS , I .Li, and that feeling of dissatis faction evinced by the House of Lords, induced Lord Denman to abandon his. to . ct f .'z'A 'relative to those resolutions, having estebitliod beyond all reasonable con troversy that the k . ,hief Justice, in his charge to the Jury in the case of Stockdalc v. Hansard, had stated that to be law which was not law, it only remains to be seeo whether such mis-statement was an error in judge - I'OA, titi• a wilful in fringement of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. Lord Denman is sworn to administer the law. By this it is to be understood, either, that he is sworn to admi nister every branch of the Lc.r Terrce, or some particular branches peculiar to the Court over which Ito presides. Now, as Lord Denman is not sworn to administer the Ecclesiastical Law, the Maritime Law, nor the law which governs the Courts of Equity, it is manifest that the first proposition cannot he the interpretation of his oath. He is then sworn to administer the Laws which obtain in the Court of Queen's Bench—namely, the Common and the Statute Laws. And this he is bound to do, unless estoppel by a competent or superior authority. Courts of Record in this country are divided into the Inferior, the Superior, and the Supreme. The Courts of Westminster Hall are the Snperior Courts of Record. The High Court of Parliament is the Supreme Court of Record ; and as the Exchequer is divided into the Pleas I side and the Equity side, so the High Court of Parlia ment has its Houses of Lards and Commons, which admi nister the Law of Parliament pursuant to their respective jurisdictions. The acts of either House, in the exercise of their functions, carry with them the sanction and authority of the whole Parliament. For, until the legality of the acts of one branch of the High Court of Parliament is disputed by the other branch, such acts must he presumed to be done pursuant to the Law of Parliament. The Supreme Courts of Record---constituted as they ere—can not be subject to the interference or control of the Courts of but comparative superiority, who administer other and inferior Laws. In Ferrer's case, 33 Hen.VIII., the KING said " And further more we be informed by our Judges, that we at no time stand so highly in our estate royal as in the time of Parliament, wherein we as head, and you as members, are con joined and knit together into one body politic, so as whatsoever offence or injury is offered to the meanest member of the House is to be judged as done against our person and the whole Court of Parliament, which prerogative of the Court is so great, (as our learned counsel informeth us) as all acts and processes coming out of any other inferior courts must for the time cease, and give place to the highest." The same principle is recognised by Holinshed, when speaking of the mode of staying proceedings in the Courts of Westminster Hall, by the House of Commons:— " Then forthwith," he says, "a Sergeant-at-Arms is sent to the said Court, not only advertising that the party so mo lested is one of the Parliament House, but also inhibiting and commanding the officers of the said Court to call in the said process, and not to deal any further against the said party ; for the Parliament being the highest Court, all other Courts as inferior yield and give place to the same." " The laws," says Chief Justice De Grey, " can never be a prohibition to the Houses of Parliament, because, by law, there is nothing supe rior to them." As the Judges are bound to follow the course of prece dents in the interpretation of the law, unless some manifest injustice takes the case out of the rule, we will proceed at once to the legal authorities, which are presumed to have governed the decision of Lord Denman in the case of Stockdale v. Hansard. The Earl of Shaftesbury was committed to the Tower by the House of Lords for a contempt, generally—the parti cular offence was not stated. He was brought up by Habeas Corpus before the King's Bench. JONES, Justice, said—" Such a return made by an ordinary Court of Justice, would have been ill and uncertain; but the case is different when it comes from this High Court. The cases where the Courts of Westminster Hall have taken cog nizance of Privilege, differ from this case; for in those it was only an incident to a case before them, which was of their cog nizance; but the direct point of the matter now is the Judg ment of the Lords. It is said (4 hist.) that the Judges are assistants to the Lords, to inform them of the Common Law ; but they ought not to judge of any law, custom, or usage of Parliament. This Court can neither bail nor discharge the Earl." WI , Li); Justice--" The return no doubt is illegal, but the question is on the point of jurisdiction, whether it may be ex amined here ? The certainty or uncertainty of the return is not material, for it is not examinable here." RAINSFORD, Chief Justice—" This Court bath no jurisdic tion of the cause, and therefore the form of the return is not considerable ; we ought not to extend our jurisdiction beyond its due limits, and the actions of our predecessors will not war rant us in such attempts. This Court hath no jurisdiction of the matter, and therefore he ought to be remanded." TWISDEN, Justice, was absent, but he desired Justice JONES to declare, that his opinion was, that the party ought to be remanded. In JAY V. TOPHAM, the defendant pleaded an order of the House of Commons, and concluded to the jurisdiction of the King's Bench to examine the matter further. The plea to the jurisdiction was overruled. Chief Justice Pemberton and Mr. Justice Jones were brought to the bar of the House. On that occasion the Chief Justice said : " The jurisdiction of this House I do not take to be in question ; nor the validity of their orders. I think there is no Judge that understands himself but will allow the privileges of this Houso : they are the privileges of the nation, and we arc bound to maintain them as much as any Member of the House. . . It is allowed by all people living. I think no Judge ever denied it, that the order of this House was suffi cient to take any one into custody. No Judge, I presume, ever thought otherwise. . . . If Mr. Topham comes an d pleads this by w a y o f bar, no Court will deny but it is a good ,Justification. . . . Finding no footsteps of law, nor any thing of this Honourable 'toast that could direct us, I did con sider then what was reasonable and fitting to be done. I knew we had a jurisdiction in the case of such an action as this is, and I found the objection against it was only one—that this House was a superior Court, of a higher nature titan the King's Bench, and of a greater authority ; and that the King's Bench bud nothing to do to inspect the actions of this House, or f.o examine what was done by virtue of any order of this House. . . . But I thought that the high authority and high nature of this Court could not exempt the King's Bench, being a Court of Law, to examine whether what was alleged to be done was done in pursuance of your authority or not. . . We did not question the legality of your orders, nor the power of them ; but the great business was, whether he had pursued this order of the House of Commons, and that was the thing properly examinable. . . These being my apprehensions, as a Judge of the Court I did think that I was bound to over rule the plea to the jurisdiction of the Court. If I was mis taken in this case, it was an error of my judgment. I had no mind or design to meddle with the affairs of the House, nor to pry into what was done here." Sir THOMAS JONES said—" I do Confess I did think there was a difference to be taken in matters that were merely trans acted by this House, and may be complicated of the authority and commands of this House, and of the execution qf tlw au thority and commands of this House abroad t and that was the Case that was before us in the King's Bench. . . There upon I think Mr. Topham was advised and told that he ought to plead this matter in bar, wherein there would be full con sideration, and perfect re gar d g i ven to t h e authority and com mands of this House, and all imaginable reverence if he had produced a copy at most of your Journal, that had been suffi cient, and no Judge would have been so silly, or imprudent, to have said that had not been a good and sufficient autho rity 'lnd upon these reasons, Sir, I did give my opinion at that time, that the plea to the jurisdiction of the Court should be over-ruled ; which, if not agreeable to your judgment, I must humbly beg your pardon for it." In the Hab eas Corpus case of Regina v. Patty et alios,— GOULD, Justice, said---" The prisoners ought to be re manded. This was the first Habeas Corpus that was ever brought by persons committed by the House of Commons that he ever heard or read of ; and therefore no such writ having ever been brought before, that is an argument that no such writ lies. He said, if this had been a return of a commitment by an inferior Court, it had been nought, because it did not set out a sufficient cause of commitment : but this return being of a commitment by the House of Commons, which is superior to this Court, it is not reversible for form. We can not judge qf the privileges of the House of Commons, but they are to debate them among themselves. . • • He said, the Parliament had laws peculiar to itself, and that this was de clared to be secundumlegem Parliamenti ; and that the Judges ought not to give any answer to questions proposed to them about matters of privilege, because the privileges of Parliament are not to be determined by the common laws. . . Accord ing to Lord Shaftesbury's case, if the return had been general, without expressing what the particular matter of contempt was, it had been good ; and though here the special matter was expressed, that would not alter the ease, because this Court had nothing to do with it, nor could gainsay the House qf Commons that the House of Commons were to be en trusted with the liberty of the people, and that nobody could suppose that they would make any invasions upon it. He con cluded that no Habeas Corpus would lie." Posses, Justice—" I am of the same opinion. . . . The sixth objection to the return was, that the cause of commitment is for bringing an action at common law ; and shall the Commons hinder a man from proceeding at law ? Now, in general speaking, that is the only use of privilege ; and the meaning qfprivileqe is, that it is a privilege against the course of law. . . . The House of Commons is a great Court, and all things done by them are intended to be rite acta, and the nuttier need not be so specially recited in their warrants. . . The Law of Parliament is as much a law as any; nay, if there be a superiority, this is a superior law. . . . . We must take it, that what the House of Com mons have done is warranted by their jurisdiction, and is well done. He expected some precedents would have bean brought to show that the King's Bench might inquire into the proceed ings of the House of Commons, and discharge persons com mitted by them ; but that the counsel for the prisoners had not brought one precedent, nor one bookcase, nor one opinion in point, to Warrant any such power in this Court. But he said the reason why there were no precedents of that kind was very obvious, viz., that it would be unreasonable to put the judges upon determining the privileges of the 'louse of cons- MOMS, of which privileges they have no account nor any foot steps in their books; that the House of Commons have the - - ][ i rlE SUN, LON DON, T R,S DA V., OCTOB Elt 2G, 1831 kecords of theM, and; as ocinSiOri requires, search them to fin, diem' the judges cannot resort to those records, ar.e. thereiOre it is indeed ipPossible, roi A,A to judge matters c privilege. It is 'Olio his imprisonment enquired into in thi ourt ; but where it appears to be a commitment bg th e Ile nior of Commons, he must be remanded. The Judges in my Lor Shafiesimry's case went upon their having no jurisdiction the cause." Pont; The Ceurt coild not judge of the bel*aNe th ti Gil cdrimiii.!ed Iv ailother Liw, an consequently we cannot discharge them by that law by %%Ili& they were not committed. There is a lex Parliamenti, for th, common law is not .the only law in this, kipgdom ; and th( House of Common' d,d riot cdrOit 137 the common law, but by she I'o* rarliament. He said this Court might jud g , of prit:ilege, but not contrary to the judgmrnt of the Zionse of Commons. . . This is drawing the plea ad aliud examen. and yet the House if Commons arc the syreme judges of theii own privileges. 11 , .1 said the Court of Perlis:merit was a superior Collit to this, and though the King's Bencl }the a power to prevent excesses of jurisdiction in Court!.. yet they cannot prevent such excesses in Parliament, because that is a superior Court to this, and a prohibiti on was nevei moved for to the Parliament. If the House of Lords should take upon them to determine freeholds, this Court could not pro hibit them. There was a case lately wherein the Lords made an order originally in a Cline, but the parties grieved could no: have come here for relief. So Skinner's case was brough originally in the House of Lords, and this Court could not have helped them. . . . If they should discharge these persons that are committed by the House of Commons for a breach of privilege, this would be taking upon themselvm: directly to judge of the privileges of Parliament. This want of jurisdiction in the Court cures all the faults in the commit ment. . . . It is objected, that in bringing these actions the prisoners have done nothing but what the Lords have ad judged they may do, and the House of Lords is the supreme judicature of the kingdom. As to that, he said, that if this commitment were for that reason an excess of jurisdiction, this Court could not remedy it, but it ought to be remedied by conference, and that was the proper remedy, where the Parlia ment assumes an excess of jurisdiction. Upon conferences the reasons upon which the Houses act will appear, and if the Commons have no reason for what they do, it is to be pre sumed they will never be chosen again ; and if the Lords are in the wropfkae other Housa will not rest until all is set right again.', l 7 HOLT, Chief Justice, said :—" That the legality of the commitment depended upon the vote recited in the warrant ; and for his part he thought the prisoners ought to be discharg ed, though in this, his opinion, he was so unfortunate as to go contrary to the Act of the House of Commons, and the opinion of all the rest of the Judges of England, whose assistance they had desired, and there had been a meeting for that purpose." The Chief Justice then argued at great length, and put forth a variety of irrelevant propositions, which were quite true as generals, but were inapplicable to the question. For example, he said, " If the House of Commons declare themselves to have privileges which they have no legal claim to, the people of England will not be estopped by that declaration." This is most true, and most constitutional ; but the Chief Justice falls into the same error that the three tailors of Tooley-street fell into—he puts himself and his learned brothers in the place of the people of England ! And, being a Justice of the Crown, he pretends to protect the commonalty from their representatives, who were presumed to have been " freely chosen by and from among them selves," for the specific purpose of guarding their rights and privileges from the encroachments of the Crown and the Peerage. In Murray's case, a commitment of the House of Com mons for contempt, WRIGHT, Justice said—" It is insisted upon at the bar that this is a bailable case, within the meaning of the Habeas Corpus Act. To this I answer, that it has been determined by all the Judges to the contrary ; that it could never be the intent of that Statute to give a Judge at his chambers, or the Kinces Beath, power to judge of the privileges of the House of Commons. Tho House of Commons is undoubtedly a high Court, and it is agreed on all hands that they have power to judge of their own privileges. It need not appear to us what the contempt was, or flit did appear, we could not judge thereof." Justice—" This Court has no jurisdiction in the present case; we granted the Habeas Corpus, not knowing what the commitment was, but now it appe a r s t o b e f o r a con tempt of th e p r i v il eges of the House of Commons. What those privileges are we do not know, nor need they tell us what the contempt was, because we cannot judge of it; for I must call this Court inferior to the House of Commons with respect to judging of their privileges. I give my judgment so suddenly, because I think it a clear case, and requires no time for consideration." FOSTER, Justice---‘‘ The law of Parliament is part of the law of the land, and there would be an end of all law if the House of Commons could not commit for contempt. We have no power at all in this case." The next case is that of Brass Crosby, the Lord Mayor of London. He was committed by the House. of Com mons for breach of privilege, and was brought up to the King's Bench by Habeas Corpus. Chief Justice DR GREY said---" If either myself, or any of my brothers on the Bench had any doubt in this case, we should certainly hare taken some time to consider before we had given our opinions; but the case scorns so very clear to us all, that we have no reason for delay This Court cannot take cognisance of A commitment by the House of Commons, because it cannot judge by the same law for the law by which the Commons judge of their privileges is un known to us, . . The Lord Mayor is committed by the law of Parliament, and yet he would have redress from the Common Law ; the Law of Parliament is only known to Parliament men—by experience in the House. The House of Conzmons only know how to act within their own limits ; we are not a Court of Appeal ; we do not know certainly the jurisdiction of the .House of Commons; we cannot judge of the laws dnd privileges of the House, because we have no knowlege of these laws and privileges. . . . The Coun sel at the Bar have not cited one case where any Court of this Hall ever determined a matter of privilege that did not come incidentally come before them The laws can never be a prohibition to the Houses of Parliament, because by law there is nothing superior to them. Suppose they should abuse the powers which the Constitution has given them, there is no redress—it would be a public grievance. The Constitu tion has provided checks to prevent its happening ; it must be left at large ; it was wise to leave it at large ; some per sons, some Courts, must be trusted with discretionary powers; and though it is possible, it is in the highest degree improba ble, that such abuses should ever happen. . . . Courts of Justice have no cognizance of the acts of the Houses of Par liament, because they belong ad aliud examen." GOULD, Justice---" I entirely concur in opinion with my Lord Chief Justice, that this Court has no cognizance of contempts or breach of privilege of the House of Commons ; they are the only judges of their own privileges. This Court cannot know the nature and power of the proceedings of the House of Contmons ; it is founded on a different law ; the lex et consuetudo Paz liamenti is known to Parliament men only. It is que this Court did, in the instance alluded to ( Wilkes' case), determine upon the privilege of Parliament in the case of a libel ' • but then that privilege was promulgated an d k nown; it existed in records and law-books, and was allowed by Par liament itself ; but even in that case, we now know that we were mistaken, for the House of Commons have since deter. mined that privilege does not extend to matters of libel." BLACKSTONE, Justice—" I concur in opinion that we cannot discharge the Lord Mayor; the present case is of great im portance, because the liberty of the subject is materially con cerned. The House of Commons is a Supreme Court, and they are judges of their own privileges. . . . No other Court shall scan the judgment of a superior Court, or the principal seat of justice. . . . Tie objections that are brought of abusive consequences prove too much, because they are applicable to all Courts of dernier resort : et oh abuse ad usum non valent consequentia is a maxim of law as well as cf logic. General convenience must always outweigh partial in convenience. I know, and am sure, that the House of Com- mons are both able and arc well inclined to do justice. How preposterous is the present murmur and complaint I • If any persons may be safely trusted with this power, they must surely be the Commons, who are chosen by the people, for their pri vileges and powers are the privileges and powers of the people. There is a great fallacy in my brother Glynn's whole argu ment, when he makes the question to be, whether the House have acted according to their rights or not? Can any good man think of involving the Judges in a contest with either House of Parliament; and yet this manner of putting the question would produce such a contest. The House of Coin mons is the only judge of its own proceedings. Holt differed from the other Judges in this point, but we must be governed by the eleven and not by the single one. It is our duty to presume the orders of the House of Commons, and their exe cution, are according to law." NAREs, Justice--" I shall ever entertain a most anxious con cern for whatever regards the liberty of the subject. I have attended with the utmost industry to every case and argument that has been produzed, and most heartily and readily concur with my Lord Chief Justice and my brothers." The King v. Wright (1799).---A rule having been ob tained, calling on the defendant to show cause why a cri minal information should not be granted against him for printing and publishing a libel on J. Horne Tooke— Wright was a bookseller, and had published a copy of the published Report of a Parliamentary Committee, without the sanction or authority of the House. Law, Gibbs, and Moore were now to have shown cause against the rule ; but after producing an affidavit made by the defendant, in which he stated that the libel on Horne Tooke was a paragraph contained in the Report of a Com mittee of the House of Commons, a literal copy of which he had published, and that he did not publish the Report maliciously, the Court called on the Counsel for the prose cutor to support the rule. Erskine and Warren argued in support of the rule, at great length. Lord KENYON, Chief Justice, said--" Whon the motion was first made, I suggested to the Counsel for the prosecutor e q u Reportes ti en f r e t a h l e l y H e o • u e s r e o o w f li c at om it m p o r n o s: that if the publieatioofn o f it es w se o d ul t d o b b e e' w a ro c n o g py to grant a rule to show cause ; but it not being then admitted to be a true copy, and it being surmised that the publication assumed a title that did not belong to it, w e granted a rule nisi; but as it now proves to be a true copy of the Report, 1 think there was not the least pretence for the motion. The application supposes that this publication is a libel. But the inquiry made by the House of Commons was an in q uisition taken by one branch of the Legislature to enable them to proceed further, and adopt sonic regtile.tititi3 for the • kt, tter t ieVVIVIIPpt of , tbc coltritr'• It t*,,l impossible, for tls to Ana that lltn, in . (itce(linas !If c4cr,ar, r Quad cr Parka-. meet is a libel; and yet t h at i s to 'De taken as the foundAloi.i, ,f this anplicatien, The case of R. V. Williams,•which was irincipally relied upon, happened in the worst of times; but :hat has no relation j.o the present ease. There the publica tion was the op d i: , .'cidU,il; and under pitteMe ,f the sanction of the I - I,use of Cottirlioiii di ilndiv.ldu,ll put 'ished ; but this is a proceeding by one branch of the tare, and therefore we cannot inquire into it. The Report in iuestion, being adopted lig flit blot se at large, is a proceeding ,f those who, by the donstittition i ate the, guardians of the 'ibertics of the Stibjeep; and„ We cannot say that any part of that proceeding is d Heil. f ant i therefore; clearly of opinion chat this rule ought to be discharged." GROSE, Justice--" This is a motion for leave to filo a eft,, ninal information for publishing a supposed libel, but, in truth, -'or publishing a proceeding of one branch of the Legislature then thoy were acting for the sarety of the State. Now, on looking into the judicial proceedings of this Court, I find no ,nstance of such an information as the present, The case of' R. V. Williams is most like this case ; but it must be ramem, tiered that that was declared by a great authority to be a dis grace to the country." LAWRENCE, Justice—". The chief ground taken by the prosecutor's Counsel is that, though the Report of the Rouse of Commons cannot itself be considered as a libel, the defendant, not acting under the authority of the Rouse, may be indicted for publishing it with a view to general circulation. The pro 3ecdings of Courts of Justice are daily published, some of which highly reflect on individuals, but I do not know that an infor mation was ever granted against the puhl , shers of them. The general advantage to the country in having those proceedings made public more than counterbalance the inconveniences to te private persons whose - conduct may be the subject of such proceedings. The same reasons apply to the proceedings in Parliament ; it is of advantage to the public, and even to the legislative bodies, that true accounts of their proceedings should be generally circulated ; and they would be deprived of that uloantage if no person could publish their proceedings without being punished as a libeller. Though, therefore, the defendant was not authorized by the House of Commons to publish the Report in question, yet as he only published a true copy of it, I am of opinion that the rule ought to be discharged." In Flower's case, which was a commitment by the Lords, tad an application to the King's Bench to discharge the prisoner out of custody,— Lord KENYON, Chief Justice, said--" Having seen the re. turn to the Habeas Corpus, we are bound to remand the de• fondant to prison, because the subject belongs ad aliud examen. Unless we wish to assist in the attempt that is made to overset the law of Parliament and the Constitution, we must remand the defen . clant." " GROSE, Justice—" This question is not new ; it has fre quently been considered in Courts of Law, and the principles discussed to-day and the cases cited were examined not many years since, and the result is very ably stated by Chief Justice De Grey. When the House of Commons (and the same may be said of the. House of Lords) adjudge anything to be a con tempt or breach of privilege, their adjudication is a conviction, and their commitment in consequence is execution. The Counsel at the bar have not cited one case where any Court of this Hall ever determined a matter of privilege which did not come incidentally before them. Having stated this, I think I need not add more in the present case." The next case, Burdett v. Abbott, was an action of tres pass and false imprisonment brought by Sir Francis Bur dett against the Speaker of the House of Commons, under whose warrant Sir Francis had been committed to the Tower for sedition, He also brought an action against Mr. Colman, the Sergeant at Arms, for excess in the exe cution of the warrant. Gentlemen could not understand the feelings which urged Sir Francis to harrass Mr. Colman with an action at law, when the only fault he had commit ted was an excess of courtesy, and for which he incurred the displeasure of the Speaker. Mr. Colman, on receiving the warrant, writes a polite note to Sir Francis Burdett, requesting to know when it would be his convenience to allow him to execute it. He then waited on Sir Francis. Sir Francis refused to go with him, and on his retiring bar ricaded the door. Popular excitement having by this time arisen to an alarming height, Mr. Colman was compelled to bring a detachment of the military, who were obliged to mash in the windows of Sir Francis's house in order to effect an entrance. And this at a time, says Lord Ellenbo rough, "when on the Friday night previous there had been such outrages committed, as have been stated, at the house of a Noble Lord ; and at Reddish's Hotel, the supposed habitation of Mr. Lethbridge ; when, on the Saturday and Sunday, there were such tumultuous assemblies in the streets; when the military were so much assaulted and ill•treated, And in two instances soldiers were wounded." All this was nothing to Sir Francis Burdett—he was determined to have a row, and to be the darling of the rabble. It would not suffice him to compel Mr. Colman to use gentle violence, sufficient to make a case. No, nothing but the pioneers, the guards, and an escort of dragoons, and a demonstration of brickbats and bludgeons on the part of the mob, would satisfy this raging demagogue—this champion of " An nual Parliaments al least —this modern Gracchus—this dear friend of the Democracy. A vain-glorious love of pre eminence and distinction often induces men to espouse a cause they detest. Could this have been the case with Sir Francis Burdett ? But, to return to the case of Burdett v. Abbott, which arose from the Tories having committed Sir Francis Burdett to the Tower for sedition—in that case Lord ELLE NBOROUGH observed, speaking of the privileges of the House, and the power to commit, generally, for con tempt and breach of privilege : " It is idle to contend, a* some have done, that as the House of Commons is a body which has begun to exist separately and substantively since the time of legal memory, and that as they cannot on that account claim by prescription or Imme morial custom," [the absurdity of the people, by their repre sentatives, claiming by prescription against themselves is mani fest,] " any power of commitment, and that no Act of Parlia ment since that time has expressly given it to them, therefore it cannot legally belong to them. lam glad that nothing of that kind has been advanced in argument upon this occasion ; but it is impossible not to have heard of its having been urged elsewhere, and on other occasions." . His Lordship thought the power and privileges of the Douse of Commons, from the very nature of the assembly, must be independent of any precedent. He confined him self so closely to contempts and commitments that few of his remarks are applicable to the question now raised. His extra judicial dicta, of course, are not to be noticed here. He concluded by saying : " First, it is made out that the power of the House of Com mons to commit for contempt stands upon the ground of reason and necessity, independent of any positive authorities on the subject : but it is also made out by the evidence of usage and y of le t g h i e sla c ti o r u 'e rt s s an o c f ti L or a t w a , nd in r a eco l g on n g iti c o o n , , irs a e nd of by we t l h le. ts b e jud g pra c tice, m en established precedents and authorities. Secondly, That the resolution of the House, that the plaintiff had been guilty of a breach of its privileges, and that the order made for his com mitment for that offence, were in conformity to their power." Mr. Justice BAYLEY—" It is said that the privilege of Par liament is examinable in this Court, and that it ought to have been averred that this party was guilty of the contempt, stating it as a traversable fact, which might be tried again elsewhere against those who acted under the authority of the House of Commons. If that were so, the fact would be examinable not only in this Court, but in every inferior Court throughout the kingdom, in which an action of trespass could be supported. Then, as the Courts of Justice must be considered as standing the same situation, in respect to their judgments, as the House of Commons stands with respect to its own orders, it must also be contended, that if this Court were to adjudge a party to be guilty of contempt, and were to direct an attach ment to issue against him, and to commit him for that con tempt, any other Court, however inferior, might try the same question again in an action of trespass; because it would be said to arise incidentally, whether or not the party was guilty of that fact of which this Court had adjudged him to be guilty, and whether that fact was a contempt of this Court. I cannot see how to stop short of going that length, if this action can be supported The cases upon the Ha liras Corpus Act were attempted to be distinguished from this, by relying upon expressions made use of by some of the Judges, that although they could not question judgments of commitment by the House directly, yet, that when those judg ments came incidentally before them, they would have full power to examine into them. And then it is assumed that in this particular case the question arises incidentally. Now, as it appears to me, the very object of this action is to make a direct attack upon the judgment of the House of Commons, and to bring that matter, and that matter only, into question : and would it not be absurd to say, that though we cannot dis charge the party committed from his imprisonment, because that would be directly arraigning the judgment of the House, et that he shall have an opportunity of recovering by action lull satisfaction for lying in prison ? And that in giving such satisfaction the judgment of the House is left where it was. But it seems to me that in giving the party full satisfaction for his imprisonment is, in legal contemplation,_ to do away all the punishment h e h as rece i ved; and if that be not bringing into question again the judgment of the House, I cannot understand how the point can be more directly brought into question." Those remarks of Baron Bayley are particularly worthy of attention, as being most applicable to the case of Stock dale v. Hansard. The question of privilege comes di/wily before the C ourt , w h en an order of the H ouse i s pleaded injustification, of the act complained of. The last case is that of Sir John Cam Hobhouse. In 1820 a Tory House of Commons resolved, that a letter published by Sir John was " a scandalous libel, and calcu lated to inflame the minds of the people to acts of violence," &e., &c. ; and ordered him to be committed to Newgate. Sir John was brought up by Habeas Corpus to the Ring's Bench, and prayed to be discharged. He urged the fol lowing objections to the return : " First, That the House of Commons is not a Court of .Judicature competent to decide on the alleged offence sug gested in the warrant. Second, That there is no adjudication on the face of the return. Third, Supposing the House of Commons to be a Court of Judicature, it has taken under its cognizance that which cannot be considered as a contempt, but as an offence at Common Law, and consequently punishable by the laws of the country. Foul th, On the face of the re turn, it do es not appear that .the party accused has ever h a d an opportunity o f making his defence, which is against every principl e o f English law. Fifth Assuming the House of Commons to b e a Cottrt of Judicature, it cannot condemn an P.nglighm. an to imprisonment. Sixth, That this Court has power, by virtue of the Habeas Corpus Act, t 9 liberate a per son committod by the House of C omm o ns . A n d, sev ent h , I That thcro i§ Mil ntkieotion to the form of the warrant of IcoMmitn:tent.'l The CoVit.,' aftet co'nsiciering the CAR for ;ctll'' de livered their jUdgrtient ads fiilloWs " Having conferred together uVon tee,. we are clearly of opinion, that, sitting in this Court, we dt tioi authorised to gtder into the discussion of any of the objections taken by the gen"eniiiit on Me jlaot to his commitment. It has been settled by many precedents, brought frotlt time to time before the different Ccdurts of Westminster Hall, and tinSlly in the case of Sir Francis Burdett v. Abbott, (which went by writ of error to the Exchequer Chamber from this Court, and ultimately to the House of Lords,) that it is competent for the tionse of Commons to commit for a contempt of their privileges, and that they are the jndges, AND TliE WaY3LIDGES, Of What is a contempt of their privileges: . . The cases of Lord Shaftesbury and RV. Patty, are det , isite authorities to show that the Courts of iVest minster Hall cannot jitclpß of any law, custom, or usage of Par liament. . . . It is tncontpelent for this Court either to ques tion the privileges of the House of Cotnntons, or a commitment for an offence which they have adjudged to be a contempt o' those privileges. . . . We cannot inquire into the form of commitment, even supposing it is open to objection on the ground of informality. We are of opinion that the prisoner must be remanded." Sir John was accordingly sent back to prison. Having gone through all the cases and legal authorities, From the earliest to the present time, let us now turn to the Bill of Rights. In the 36 Car. 11., an information was filed in the King's Bench for the publication of a , libel, to which an order of the House of Commons was pleaded. The plea was over-ruled, and judgment was prosecuted in the reign of James 11. Accordingly the Bill of Rights de clared James, and his Justices, to have " endeavoured to subvert and extirpate the laws and liberties of this kingdom, by prosecutions in the Court of King's Bench, for matters and causes cognisable only in Parliament." And the ninth article declares, " That the freedom of speech, and debates or proceedings in Parliament, ought not to be impeached or questioned in any Court, or place out of Parliament." Yet in defiance of this host of legal authorities ; in de- fiance of the Bill of Rights and the principles of the Con stitution ; and in utter, subversion of the rights and privi leges of the British people, my Lord Denman says—that he is " not aware of the existence in this country of any body whatever that can privilege any servant of theirs to publish libels of any individual. Whatever arrangements may be made between the House of Commons and any publisher in their employ, I am of opinion, that the pub lisher who publishes that in his public shop, which may be injurious to any one of the King's subjects, must answer in a Court of Justice to that subject if he challenge him for a libel." When some such insinuation as this, about the House of Commons assuming a despotic power, was urged before Mr. Justice Powys, ad captandzint vulqus, he said—" This is a very foreign supposition, and what ought not to be said by an Englishman. The House of Com mons are a great branch of the Constitution, and are chosen by ourselves, and are our trustees ; and it cannot be supposed, nor ought to be presumed, that they will ex ceed their bounds, or do anything amiss." And in Flower's case Lord Kenyon observed, that " the good sub jects of this country feel themselves protected in their li berties by both Houses of Parliament. Government rests in a great degree on public opinion ; and if ever the time shall come when factious men will overturn the Govern ment of the country, they will begin their work by calum niating both Houses of Parliament." The Examiner of the 4th June observed :—" Lord Den man is resolved to run his bead against the wall. He persists in his attack on the privileges of the Commons, and, to give a better grace to the matter, proposes to fight the battle over 1 1 again in the House of Lords l We have long observed that Lord Denman seems ambitious of the character of a Tory Judge, (which is a character much more easily obtained than that of a learned and able Judge) ; but let him beware that in making this enviable reputation he does not bring his office into jeopardy." In the debate on the' Lords Justices Bill," Lord BROUGH AVI " objected to the insertion of the name of the Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench among the list of Lords Justices. If such a combination of offices were at all proper, no one, he was sure, was so fitted to discharge the duties of them as his Noble and Learned Friend. But he thought it contrary to the principles of the Constitution to blend in one individual poli tical and judicial functions. Their Lordships should look at the course of precedents, and mark how that which was ques tionable led to that which was bad, and that which was bad led to that which was worse." Lord Denman alluded to the fact of the late Lord Ellenborough's having been in the Cabinet. Lord ELLENBOROUGII—" Recollected his Noble Father say ing that lie consented to sit in the Cabinet, because Lord Mansfield had done so before him, and because he understood that such a step on his part would greatly facilitate the forma tion of the Government at the time. He had also heard his Noble Father say, that if the thing was to be done again he would not do it." Lord BROUGHAM said—" After listening attentively to the different arguments which had been urged, his own opinion was confirmed, and not changed, by all that he had heard." However, Lord Denman and the Hanoverians carried their point. My Lord Denman having thus made provi sion for uniting in his single person the judicial, the legis lative, and the executive functions, it is not all wonderful that he should assume to control the Legislature, and to over-ride the Law of Parliament. Had he succeeded in this coup, he might then, without presumption, have writ ten—" Ego et Rex mews." A political judge, like a poli tical priest, is a bad member of society. Oh, my Lord Denman, my Lord Denman ! " Thou hest vraxed feeble amidst the luredoms of Babylon—the red harlot has taken possession of thy soul !" My Lord Den man !—You have fallen on an " ingenious device" fcr neutra lizing the effects of the Reform Bill ; and as the Commons will no longer do the bidding of the Lords, you, a Lord, have fallen on the device of taking cognizance of their pri vileges as a Judge ; by which means the power and privi leges of Ow Commons would ultimately be brought for de termination before the Lords. " The authority the Lords wield," says Fenimore Cooper, " and the power by which it is maintained, are the results neither of frank conquest nor of legally-delegated trusts, but of insidious innovations, effected under the fraudulent pretences of succouring liberty." If an order of the wholeCommonsof the realm, in the Supreme Court of Parliament assembled, were not a suffi cient justification for any act whatever before the Justices of the Crown, we would be living under a species of Vene tian tyranny and degradation, which the whole people of England, if necessary, should take up arms to resist. In my next letter I shall enumerate the cases in which the Justices of the Crown have assumed to decide ques tions of Constitutional or Parliamentary Law, and to con troul the Houses of Parliament—and I'll tell you what became of the Judges. A REFORMER. SALE OF THE LATE KING'S STUD. Everybody promised himself to be at Hampton yester day, to witness the dispersion of the magnificent stud. But the morning was enough to throw a damp—at the least — upon the most resolute intentions. It is not wonderful, therefore, that the attendance was comparatively small anJ unimportant, or that the people of rank actually present were to use an illustration suggested by the fluidity of the day— . . . . " rari nantes in gurgite vasto." Lord Chesterfield, Lord Siratibroke, Lord George Sey mour, Sir Gilbert Heathcote, Prince Lucien Buonaparte, and a few others might be seen, cloaked, and clogged, and segar-smoking, and soaked, and not apparently taking any marked interest in the proceedings. This, however, is not surprising, because it perfectly understood that persons of a certain class who mean to buy do not seem to be buyers ; the mechanical operation of bidding affords no due to the discovery of the b o na fide bidders. None of the Fitzelarences, or those supposed to be more immediately interested, were on the ground. All that had previously been said or written about combina tions or companies for buying the Royal stud might or might not, have been true, for aught that was obvious to the eyes of the uninitiated. The only thing that can with cer tainty be averred is, that the stud sold, taken altogether, at higher prices than had been anticipated. Of the foreign purchasers so largely announced none were visible in propria persona, save some score or so of be-whiskered and particu larly ill-dressed persons, who, from their observations, may , very reasonably be supposed to know as little of a race horse as of a donkey. It is of course impossible to say positively that these persons did not buy any of the stock, but the general impression was that very few—perhaps not more than two or three—of the more valuable animals arc destined to leave the country. The great lions of the day—if that be not a bull—were proved by the prices obtained, to have bcenNanine, a brood mare, and The Colonel, Actaeon, and the two celebrated Arab horses. About the merits and points of the three first there seemed to be no difference ; as to the Arabs, however, such was not the case. The crowd of pseudo knowing people—the c o ckney-conpoisseurs—who always abound on occasions like the present, were considerably di• vided on the subject. On visiting the box of the black Arab, some persons observed, notwithstanding his acknow ledged high caste, that he was too large for a high-bred Arab. "Ah !" said stud-groom, " and when the three mares were brought out, gentlemen said they were too small for Arabs. So, you see, there's no pleasing everybody." In plain truth, however, of the superior symmetry of these two illustrious strangers there ought not to have been a mo ment's doubt. _ _ _ " Nanine" was reported to have been bought for the Hon. Sidney Herbert, " Fleur-de-Lis" and " Wings" to go abroad, and " The Colonel" is still a mystery. He sold at by far the highest price obtained for anything, though at less by half than had been previously talked of ; but at the name of his new owner we have not the means even of forming a guess. It is not our business to detail suspicions. The equipages in waiting were sadly commoi place. De duct two or three teams, not remarkable for their appoint- ments, and a very few private carriages, and nothing re- Malned but a motley coPection of post-chaises, gigs, deg carts, and even London cabs. The whole affair was cold and Comfortless, and so far in utimn with the reflections that could not fail to arise our the dispersion of what Tattersall (albeit, no great orator) very truly described as "the most splendid stud in Europe." The extensive stud, about which so much Ino been said and written during the last six or eight weeks, catne to the hammer yesterday, in the Hampton Court paddocks,baving, like the late Sir Mark Wood's, excited extraordinary inte rest both at home and abroad. The company present in cluded some noblemen and gentlemen influentially connected with the turf, some foreign breeders and " commissioners,!' and a very large proportion of trainers, breeders, grooms, and others interested in the sale, either personally or from mere curiosity. The weather during the sale was favourable over head, but the rain in the early part of the morning made many wish that the auction had been at Garraway's, the Mart, or any place rather than the wet paddock—certainly not the pleasantest place in the world to stand in for nearly six hours. A good deal has been said about the propriety, in a national point of view, of disposing of till stud at all, and strong efforts were made to induce the Government to take measures for its continuance. Without entering into the question as to whether her Majesty's Ministers were right in resisting these efforts, it is clear that the executors of Mil barn the Fourth had no option but to sell, and that, as \op veral interests were concerned, they adopted the most pru dent and productive course by making the sale public. The catalogue contained 81 lots, viz., 43 brood mares, 31 foals, five stallions, and two half-bred two-year-olds. Of the mares the best priced lots were Nanine (dam of Glaucus), Fleur-de-lis, Scandal, Wing's (Caravan's dam), Young Mouse (the dam of Rat-trap), the Oscar mare (valuable as well for her shape as her " family connexions"), La Dan sense, Gulnare (winner of the Oaks, when the property of the Duke of Richmond), Lady Emmeline, &e. Fleur-de lis was purchased by George the Fourth from the late Sir M. Ridley, and was very successful as a racer, bath before and after she changed masters. She goes abroad—to France, we believe ; if so, her descent from Bourbon will per:laps get her snug quarters in the royal stud. We are also in formed that Wings, Rachel, Sarah, Locket, La Danseuse, Elizabeth, Maria, Black Daphne, and Mi's Clifton, , avere purchased to go to. France, Spain, and Germany. 'The young stock, having recently been, wearieJ, and some of them affected by the influenza, did not look well ; the best of them that out of Wings had suffered so severely as to go blind, his price being thereby reduced from 300 or 400 to 46 gs. The stallions excited great interest ; the first put was The Colonel, bought of the f-lon. E. Petre, after winning the St. Leger, for 4,000 gs. He broke down at Ascot in 1831, after running a dead heat with Mouchc, and it is a proof of the excellence of George the Fourth's judgment that when he first saw him after the purchase he pointed out the leg in which he would fail. He fetched four or five hundred guineas less than was expected, and goes from Hampton Court to labour in his vocation at Mr. Tatiter sail's, Dawley, near Uxbridge. He is the sire of Cobhant, winner of the two-year old stakes at Doncaster, D'Egville, winner of the Prendergast stakes last week, and many other winners. Actaeon, bought of Lord lielburne for 1,000 guineas, remains in England for the present, but is expected to go Russia ; the black Arabian goes to Germany, and his bay companion to France—they brought excellent prices ; the two last colt foals and the filly out of Espag • nolle go abroad. The general produce of the sale, which surpassed the most sanguine expectations, was as follows : —Brood mares, 9,568 guineas ; colt foals, 1,471 guineas ; filly foals, 1,1E2 guineas ; the stallions and two half-bred colts, 3,541 guineas. Total-15,692 guineas. In sub joining a list of the various lots and prices we are unable to give the names of the purchasers, nearly the whole of the lots having been bought on commission : BROOD MARES. GS. Grey Arabian mare, of the purest caste, covered by the Co lonel Ditto (from the Imaum of Muscat), covered by ditto ... l5O Ditto (from the Imaum of Muscat), covered by Actaeon . 1 05 Burden, by Camel, out of Maria, covered by Actaeon 115 Miss O'Neil, by Camillus, out of Birmingham's dam, covered by Actaeon Shortwaist, by Interpreter, out of Nancy, covered by Camel 60 Chesnut mare, by Oscar, out of Camarine's dam, covered by Actaeon Fleur-de-Lis, by Bourbon, out of Racket; by Stamford, co vered by Emilius Gulnare, by Smolcnsko, out of Medora, covered by Actaeon 395 Jewess, by Moses, out of Calendula, covered by Plenipo 2OO Narifa, by Moses, her dam by Rubcns, covered by Tauras 80 Zaira (Crutch's dam), by Selim, out of Zephyretta, covered by Rockingham Nanine ( Glaucus's dam), by Scrim, covered by Emilius Wing (Caravan's dam), by The Flyer, covered by Actaeon and Camel Scandal (Intriguer's dam), by Selim, covered by The Colonel 400 Lady Sarah, by Tramp, dam by Cervantes, covered by Ac taeon ...... 260 Rachel, by Whalebone, out of Moses's d., covered by Actaeon 180 Lady Emmeline, by Young Phantom, dam by Orville, covered • by The Colonel Sarah, by Whisker, out of Jenny Wren, covered by Actaeon 3OO Galatea, by Amadis, out of Paulina, covered by The Colonel 105 Young Mouse, by Godolphin, out of Mouse, covered by Ac- taon Maria, by Waterloo, out of Belvoirina, covered by Actaeon... Varien a, sister to Voltaire, by Blacklock, covered by The Colonel Delphine, by Whisker, out of My Lady, covered by Plenipo Locket, by Blacklock, out of Miss Paul, covered by Rocking ham Peri (dam of Sir Hercules), by Wanderer, covered by The Colonel La Dauseuse, by Blacklock, out of Madame Jaqui, covered by Action Ada, sister to Augusta, by Woful, covered by Rockingham... Marpcssa, by Muley, out of Clare, covered by Camel ... Sultana, sister to Sultan, by Selim, covered by The Colonel Spermaceti, by Whalebone, covered by Glaucus Leeway, by Aladdin, covered by Taurus Black Daphne, by Juniper, out of Spotless, covered by The 380 120 230 120 103 220 Colonel Young Espagnolle, by Partisan, out of Espagnolle, covered by ditto Elizabeth, by Rainbow, out of Belvoirina, covered by Taurus Codicil, by Smolensko, out of Legacy, covered by Camel Sister to Sailor (Cloudesley's dam), by Scud, covered by Rockingham Miss Clifton, by Partisan, out of Isis ' covered by Plenipo... Miss Craven, by Mr. Lowe, dam by Soothsayer, covered by Glancus Aricia, by Rubens, out of Diana (Actrcon's dam), covered by Rockingham Belvoirina, by Stamford, covered by the Black Arabian ...... Palatina, by Fiiho, out of Treasure, covered by Actaeon Icaria, by The Flyer, out of Parma, covered by Buzzard COLT FOALS. Chesnut, by Actaeon, out of Wings (blind) Bay, by Dr. Syntax, out of Sarah .1 Bay, by Plenipo, out of Zaire Chesnut, by Actaeon ,dam by Oscar, out of Can a ine's dam... Chesnut, by Acta''on, out of Scandal Brown, by Mulatto, out of Lady Sarah Bay, by Mulatto, out of Lady Emmeline... Brown, by The Colonel, out of Young Mouse Brown, by The Colonel, out of Black Daphne Chesnut, by Rubini, out of Galatea Cheamt, by Actaeon, out of Lcckct Bay, by Glencoe, out of Shortwaist Brown, by The Colonel, out of the first Arabian mare ' FILLY FOALS. Chesnut, by Actaeon, out of Gulnare 13rown, by Camel, out of the Sister to Sailor (lesnut, by Cain, cut of Elizabeth Bl Bay, by Plenipo, out of Rachel ... 69 flay, by C i psus, out of Variella Bay, by The Colonel, out of Young Espagnolle ... 70 Bay, by Rubini, on!, pf Spermaceti Bay, by Rubini, or Caii. out of Sultana... 7O Pay, by Glencoe, out of 111a,Tessa ' 6'2 Bay, by Actaeon, or Cain, out of Delphine 26 Chesnut, by Cain, out of Codicil .... 31 Chesnut, by CaM, out of Ada ' Chesnut, by Cain, out of Burden Chesnut, by The Colonel out of :Miss O'Neil 7O Bay, by Camel, out of Xaria • " 40 Chesnut, by The Colonel, out of La Danseuse •. •• 51 Chesnut, by Actaeon, out of the second Arabian mare .. . ...... s£i Bay, by The Colonel, out. of the third Arabian mare ...... .• 76 STALLIONS, &C. The Colonel, by Whisker, dam by Delphine, her dam Tipple Cider, by King Fergus, out of Sylvia, by Young Marske. Is the sire of D'Egville, Cobham, Drummer, Lieutenant, Skirmisher, Heiress, Arsenic, Recruit, Toothill, Post haste, &c 1,550 Actaeon, by Scud, out of Diana , sist er to Emil y (the dam of Emilius, by Stamford). Is the sire of General Chasse, The Stag, Burletta, Golden-drop. &c The Black Arabian (from the Imaum of Muscat) ... 580 The hay ditto, from ditto Blood ltoyal, by Royalist, dam by Sir Harry Dimsdale ...96 A bay gelding, rising two years, by Rubini, out of a well-bred mare A grey di;eto, rising two years, by Pachaf out of a well-bred mare The sale lasted till five o'clock. . Count Conigsmark, the Prussian Ambassador, lately riding out with his lady at Constanstinople, met the Sultan, and was going, with his company, to turn into another road, when the Sultan sent an officer of the Court to invite him to draw near. On this occasion the persons accompanying the Minister, and first of all his lady (of the family of Von Bulow), were presented to the Sultan, and most graciously received by him, a very uncommon circum stance. A numerous meeting of owners and occupiers at Halsted, i❑ Essex, has been held, to consider the best moth: of preventing the recurrence of fires, by incendiaries, which have of late been so frequent in that part of the county, and to adopt measures for the apprehension of such offenders. It seemed to be the impression of the majority of the meet log that the fires were by no means the result of . any ill feeling nith regard to the poor law, or the administrators of it. Mr. Vescy, an extensive farmer at Halsted, said the best feeling prevailed at all the fires, and expressions of contentment were heard among the poorer classes, unlike those which were heard in other parts of the county on milar occasions. It was, in his opinion, the work of porno r)litary individual, without any real motive, as in the in. stance of the man who confessed having occasioned 13 fires in C a mbridgeshire to obtain 7s. 6d. A committee was ap pointed to consider the measures that it might be advisable to adopt.