The Sun. — London, England, 1846-02-16 00:00:00

trtf Zibition SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock. TATTERSALL'S-THIS EVENI NG. S O'CCK. CHESTER cur. 20 to 1 agst Best Bower 22 to 1 agst Whinstone 122 to 1 agst. Sweetmeat 25 to I agst The Baron 25 to I agst Mermaid—taken 30 to 1 ag3t Mickey Free 35 to I agat Cataract 35 to 1 agst Fitzallau 40 to 1 agat Hope 40 to I agst Arthur 40 to I agst Inheritress DERBY. 5 to 1 agst Sting 15 to 1 agst Brocardo 20 to 1 agst lago 30 to 1 agst Malcolm 33 to 1 agst Tibtliorpe7taken. OAKS. 8 to 1 agst Forth's lot 11 to 1 agst Vanish 20 to 1 agst Mendicant FEMALE SERVANTS' ROME SOCIETY.—(THIS DAY). A public meeting of this Society was held at the Hanover square Rooms this day, Lord ASHLEY took the chair at two o'cloble, and called on the Rev. Mr. Keane to open the proreedlogs with prayer. Lord ASHLEY said he thought it would be unnecessary for him to trespass long on their time, as nll of those present must be aware of the importance of that Institution. From the report lie had read he was deeply impressed tha tha t it Was of the greatest importan ce to the peace, welfare, and the honour of every family in the kingdom. In that he was ,borne out by a letter from Chel tenham, sent him by a gentleman connected with an institution for the same object, which had existed sevea years in that place, with the very best results. He (Lord Ash ley) was aware that young women were exposed to great dangers in coining up to the metropolis in search of situa tions, and were exposed to dangers and difficulties not only when in that condition, but after they had actually obtained places, since, from harsh treatment and extreme exactions, they might in a moment of excitement throw tip their situa tions and leave themselves friendless in the midst of society. The police reports gave them too many instances of . the bad results which often ;esued out of these casualties. Thei own comfort depended intimately on the welfare of that class of society. After their wives and children, their comfort depended on no class so much as on their domestie servants. Great fraud was used in intro ducing bad characters into their families. An individual of respectable appearance would take a lodging at some hotel, and there would furnish characters suited to the highest situations, or merely adapted to the humblest menial ser vice. It had been found out that so much as a guinea was the charge for the most common character, but, for those ascending to the higher flights, the amount exceeded any thing they could imagine, that vast sums of money were amassed by these means. At a time when They were review ing their whole social system (and for which he thanked God) he hopzd that a larger share of consideration would be given to that class of society for whose interests the Society existed. - His Lordship, after some more remarks, called on The Rev. Jolts BROWN, secretary, to read the report of the Institution. It appears that 2,000 female servants had used the advantage of the Society's homes, 4,714 had been regis tered free, and. 1,550 applications had been made to the So ciety for servants. .1. PAY E, E-q., moved that the report read should be adopted. He shortly remarked on the evil effects of the hasty dismission of servants from situations coming within his own sphere of observation in corroboration of what - had fallen from the Chairman. The motion was seconded by the Rev. Mr. DIBDTN. It was moved by the Rev. Mr. KEANE, and seconded by the Rev. Mr. PIZEY, that gratitude and praise. to God should be recorded by the meeting for his blessing on the Society. The thanks of the meeting were moved to Lord Ashley, - the chairman, by the Rev. S. JONES, which was seconded and caned unanimously. His Lonnsuns, in replying, referred the supporters of the Society to the happy effect which had followed his efforts. Twelve years ago, be said, out of the thousands of childretilfrom six to eight years old, working from twe've to fifteen hours a day, not one hundred had hadone hour's in struction, but now thirty thousand of them wrought but. six hours a day, and had three hours of good education.—(Hear, hear.) He would give them his own rule—first, they ought to consider whether the cause they took up was good, and if so to stand by it, though alone, till they grew grey beaded, and they would have the happiness to hear, if it • were on their death-bed, of the good resulting front their labours.—The meeting then separated. THE BANKRUPT and INSOLVENT LAWS.—(THIS DAY.) - A large public meeting of merchants, bankers, and traders in the City of London, was held, at one o'clock this day, at the London Tavern, Bishopegate-street, to receive a report of the proceedings of the Committee, appointed on the 27th of May last, to consider the Small Debts Act and the Act for the amendment of the Law of Bankruptcy sod Insol vency, brought into the House of Commons at the close of last session; and to det rmine on the measures to be adopted with respect thereto. On the motion of T. Moms, Esq., M.P., R. J. MASTER HAN, Esq., M.P., was called to the chair, who briefly stated that he had been requested to preside, as he had the honour to represent the City of London in Parliament. The Secretary, Mr. TaxvEßs, read letters from Lord Ash burton and Commissioners Goulburn and Fane, regretting their inability to attend the meeting, and expressive of their opinion that the present laws were defective, inasmuch as - they afforded the dishonest debtors the means of preventing their property from being divided amongst their creditors, and did not afford them sufficient protection, and suggesting various remedies. Lord Ashburton stated that it had been his fate to sit on many Committees respecting these laws with several great lawyers, who appeared to him much more occupied with views connected with their profession than those which had reference to the b "eat material and moral interests of those over whom these laws were practically des tined to operate. The report, after pointing out the hardships to which creditors were exposed under existing Acts, proceeded to point out the remedial measures contained in the Act introduced into the House of Commons last session under the auspices of Mr. Hawes and Mr. Masterman. The object of this Bill is to perfect and extend the Bank ruptcy Amendment Act of 1842, the object being to afford greater facility for bringing insolvent persons into the Court of Bankruptcy; to obtain additional security against their property being dishonestly made away with ; and to render exposure and just punishment more certain for those whose improper conduct shall have deserved them. To accomplish these objects, improvements are proposed in the first steps in Bankruptcy, relative to the summons of the debtor, and for the protection of his, or, rather, of his creditor's property, during the period which now properly elapses between the day of appearance before the Court upon the summons and the completion of the Act of Bankruptcy, and the taking possession of the property by the messenger under the fiat. The Committee, aware of the extreme im portance of providing against the possibility of abuse of this power, had endeavoured so to frame the provision as to preclude reasonable complaint on the part of the honest debtor. The Bill would also empower the Court of Bankruptcy at any time in its discretion to withdraw or suspend its protection from bankaupts and insolvents, and to make the withdrawal of such protection compulsory, when ever the bankrupt or insolvent shall fail to satisfy the Court that Lis bankruptcy or insolvenc • shah have arisen otherwise than from fraud, wit?' mis conduct, extravagance, or gambling, a s we ll as in those cases now punishable as felonies or misdemeanours ; thus put ting the proof cf honesty upon the debtor, not throwing the proof of fraud upon the creditor; the creditor being, bv the failure cf his debtor, the injured party, and the impossibility of prrring fraud being to well known to require expla nation. It proposed to give to the assignees, as well as to individual creditors upon the emission of their claims, the rights tI jutigiroint creditors against the person of the bankrupt or insolvent, which might be enforced immediately upon the protection being withdrawn; thus snaking the withdrawal of protection a previous. step to punidimeut at the discretion, cot of the Court,- but of the creditor, who then, and then only, may seize his debtor's person. The Bill provided security . also te. ; creditors against the wasting and loss of the effects of deceased traders, in default of the appointment of executors or administrators, and for the distribution thereof by means of the Court of Bankruptcy after the lapse of a certain period. It rendered securities by bills of sale, and inorty:eges of goods, and personal chattels and effects, in opefative against creditors unless filed within 21 days after xecution. The Committee were strongly opposed to the proposition for uniting the Bankruptcy and Insolvent Courts. They consider that a very diffinent course should be pursued in the dealing with the insolvency of traders and non-traders, under which latter description they include that numerous glass of persons w ho, whether traders whose debts are under 3001., or non-traders, avail themselves of the protection granted them Z)y the Court of Bankruptcy by the Acts of 4 74 , - et. and 1814, as it must be borne in mind that the of the creditor in making his debtor bank ruptt`.l is the distribution of his es'ate among his creditors; that of the insolvent petitioner, his own relief and Irtutectl "• Previously to the passing of the former of these Acts,'the effects otralers only Court of Ilankszcey. were administered by the The Insolvent Dobtors' Court dealt chiefly with the is to bring into the Bankruptcy The effect of these two statutes cations front persons whose Court a multitude of appli ee debts are less than 31)21. These cases are nearly all of a tr of f ud trivial nature, involving ordinarily few or no questions the debtors being nil, and their crrdirorrtsabnecien;g the ind i e v ff i d e effects iy o , f slightest hope of a divi for trifling amounts, and without d ell a. From their number alone they occ u py a very large portion of the time of the co ein a - not n h - ing official assignees ; and, from there Commissioners, and avail able assets, they of course contribute to wards the expenses cf the Court, which wholly borne by the creditors of the bankrupt t re e' e therefore ' petitions of these small debtors for protection might The dis posed of quite as efficiently for them in the Insolvent '6lt be di,- Court, and the Court of Bankruptcy reserved for bankrupt, alone.' The accounts showed but a small balancZiiciatsleies hands of the Treasurer. THOMAS BARING, EST, in moving the first resolution, stated that he could bring no arguments from practical ex perience to bear upon the question which they had met to discuss, for it was well known that bankers and general merchants had not that evory-day experience of the opera tion of the bankrupt and insolvent law which was obtained by those moving in a different sphere of comine!rce. They were not certainly free from the disagreeable misfortune of bad debts, but the app lication oi those bad debts did t come so frequently before them as • those engaged hose trade.—(Hear, hear.) engaged in other branches of He had stated this because—althongh he agreed with the sentiments contained in the report—he did not wish to pledge himself as to the course he should pursue with res wet to hese laws until he had had a further elucidetion of their effect upon the public, anti of the sentiments of the Legisla ture with respect to them. lie was saved from entering at. length into the whole bearings of time question by the very able and cernprehesteive letters which they had heard read from those whose e xperience and offici a l position_ entitled their opinions to the greenest •es t —(II ear ) Although tha banker and merchant had * had not so many op p ortunities of ob- , 'serving the effect of thos " e laws as the general trader, yet he was, nevertheless, as deeply thing which rendered interested in the issue for every unsafe must endanger th e one c i:ortion of the trade of the country that that question affected ttliteer portion also.—(Cheers.) So they were inclined to believe. m f erehantile classes more than believe that creditors had any , w t i , sl va s a mistaken notion to as justice could he obtained withou t : - °Paresis their debtors, hardships. He Must say, however, unnecessary a morbid sensibility created , that there was the public, for the hardship whi c h mind' el occurred under the old system of imprisonment for debt, and order that it was right that such feelings should be generated, in distress might be alleviated ; but that law must be bad, and operate injuriously upon the whole community, which gave an undue advantage to the debtor, and did not protect the honest creditor from injury and fraud.—(Hear.) The Le gislature, in his opinion, had been rather precipitate with respect to these laws, and the mercantile interests had not been sufficiently consulted with respect to their operation. He Men instanced the case of New York, in which the law, which was similar to our own, was abolished about 20 years ago, but three or four years after an attempt was made to renew it, as it was found that the new enactments did not give the credi tor sufficient control over the property of the debtor; thus showing, that in every commercial country it was highly in cumbent that the creditor as well as the debtor should be protected. He bad a perfect reliance in the opinions of those by whom the report was prepared, and a knowledge of his Honourable . Friend the Chairman, and his Honourable Friend the Member for Lambeth (Mr. Hawes), who had taken charge of the Bill, and he was perfectly convinced of the necesssity of commercial men tak ing the matter into their own hands, and with the aid of the learned profession, devising remedies for the existing laws. He, therefore, begged" to move that this meeting approve of the report, that it be printed aul circulated, and that the com mittee be empowered to take such measures as may be ex pedient to give practical effect to its recommendation , and also .to raise subscriptions to defray the expenses incident . - caster and Carlisle, by a line from Auckland to Orton. The length of the proposed lines will be about ninety-five miles, and the estimated cost is 1,950,0001. The engineers are Messrs. Rundell and Harris ' and the Parliamentary agents are Messrs. Burke, Pritt , and Co. The standing orders were complied with. LANCASHIRE AND NORTH YORKSHIRE. The case of this Bill having been called on, the clerk to the Committee stated that a petition had been presented against the Bill. The CHAIRMAN was of opinion that such being the case, the Bill must go before another GOmmittce. After some consultation, however, it was decided to call the party to the petition against the Bill, that is the East -Lancashire Railway Company. It appeared that the petition had not been properly entered • on the votes of the House, as it did not describe the proposed Bill by its proper title. No one appeared on behalf .of the petitioners, and the Committee decided to proceed with the Bill. There was a second petition from a Mr. llarley, in refer ence to which we understood the Chairman to say that he. Would not report on the consideration of the opposed parts of the Bill in the absence of the petitioner. The other particulars of the Bill were proceeded with. . The object of the Bill is to unite the manufacturing dis tricts of Lancashire, Yorkshire, and Northumberland. The prOjected termini are Elsiark and Scorten. The length of the line, 47 miles 5 furlongs and 4 chains; with the Clitheroe Branch of 13 miles. The cost of construction is estimated at 1,45004. The engineers arc Messrs. Hawkshaw and Gee, and st4e_ parliamentary agents, Messrs. Dorrington and Co. In the' cobise of the proceeding Mr. Dyson appeared on behalf of Mailey's petition. ;.. The CatartotAN believed that the objections in the petition applied only to the plans and sections. • • - Mr. DYSON said that such was the case. • The CHAIRMAN then decided that the Committee could not go into objections of that nature. 'The remaining portions of the case were then gone into, and the usual proofs were received; but the case lwas ulti mately adjourned till Thursday, to hear the opposition on the 'petition of the East Lancashire Company. HULL AND SELBY RAILWAY PURCHASE. The object of this Bill is to give power to sell the above named railway to the York and North Midland Company, to whom it had been leased some time ago. The standing orders were complied with. The Committee then adjourned. from Mr. Shirley ; but in fact the note Was not put into the Lox until it came into the house. No doubt my daughter put the note ;into the box merely to deceive me, and her papa. She told me all this at the inn, after went to pay for the bonnet. I cannot say if the bonnet is paid for ; but I believe it is. I went to Miss Wyman's shortly after this, and I may hive said that I did not pass the door without saying how sorry I was that this had occurred ; I won't swear that I did not ask Miss Wyman's to say noting about this story until the' trial was over; but I said some words to that effect. Pro bable I might have said that I wished the Misses Wyman to understand how it was. I might have said to them that Lord Farrers was to have sent my daughter a bonnet from London, but that he had not done s e but had desired her to order one at the shop, and that Mr. Shirley had told my daughter to order it. lam not sure of this, but I might have said it. I don't recollect saying to the Miss Wymans that my daughter was at her grandfathers, and that her father would not have her in the house. I am certain I did not say that. I believe the paper now handed me to be in my daughter's handwriting. The witness was handed a third paper, which she said was not very like her daughter's hand writing. She was handed a fourth, which she said was her daughter's writing. Shegave the same answer to a sth and 6th. She then continued :—There were two handkerchiefs sent in letters. I saw the beginnieg of one of these letters ; it be gan-with "Dearest Washington." This letter was posted at Tamworth, as my daughter told me that it was the Earl's particular wish that letters for him should not be posted at Appleby. The envelope now handed me contained the two handkerchiefs in question. There was a letter written by Mr. Smith after the letter of Lord Ferrers of the 24th of June. I put that letter in the office at Ashby Myself. When I was at Sias Court, there was a letter posted respecting the bills. This was before Mr. Smith's letter. My daughter told me that Lord Ferrets was visiting at the Deans. of Bangor and it was at a hotel at Bangor we were to meet him We stopped at Stafford, and as he did not meet us there, as my daughter said it was . , ikely he would, we returned back, for I said I would not ollow him. After we returned, my daughter wrote a letter 'rota Sias Court to Lord Ferrers, which I read. I posted that etter at Tamworth. The letters my daughter got front the Earl she told me had been put into her hand by a man named Atkins and another named James. I have spoken in the course of examinatioh of a Miss Neville. 1 do not recollect having shown her any of the letters pro duced in Court. I might have visited Mr. Neville in January, 1845, but Ido not recollect the precise date. The l e tteriot Lord Ferrers were then talked about. I believe that Miss Neville then remarked that the writing was very like Miss Smith's, tut I do not remember having said that the family had often been surprised at the similarity between the writing of my daughter, and the letters of Lord Ferrers. I do not remember having said that the reason of the similarity arose from Miss Smith when young, having had some writing of Lord Ferrers in her possession *hid' she had tried to imitate. Before she went to school I believe Lord Ferrers sent 'h4r a great number of scraps, and pieces of poetry, but they were de stroyed afterwards. I saw the pieces of wilting myself. I do not recollect having ever said that Lord Ferrers had had my daughter's handwriting, and tried to imitate it. I might have said when at Miss Neville's that the similarity arose between the two handwritings from Miss Smith having when young letters Of Lord Ferran' in her possession, and that she tried to imitate the writing, but I do not recollect it. I will not swear I never said so, but I have norecollection °fit. I was ranch excited at the time, as Mr. Green, the attorney, said we were all to be put in Warwick gaol. We were ac cused of being forgers, and I was too excited to think of a trivial conversation. I say again, Ido not recollect the con versation. I am a truthful woman, andwish to speak nothing but what lam sure of. The framiliy noticed in some cases a little similarity, but were not surprised at it. 1 might have remarked it to Mr. Smith, but do not recollect it. We noticed some slight similarity in the letters, but not in the style of writing; still we were satisfied the letters were of his Lordship's writing. I would much rather believe that Lord Ferrers had imitated my daughter's writing,' than that my daughter had imitated that of Lord Ferrers. We certainly were *Ur prised at the similarity between the hand-writings, but the only explanation we could give was that I have already given.. To Mr. Justice WlGirrmay—The correspondence did not begin till 1844. I believe my daughter never wrote to Lord Ferrers while he was elated. I csmot explain why it is that the letters of Lord Ferrers were similar to those of my daughters, seeing that my daughter had not written to hint at that time. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that pet haps this would be the proper time to make an application, which waste allow their witnessesto inspect the letters prior to their being put into the box, so that they might the better give their evidence the subject. The witnesses on the side of the plaintiff had bad every opportunity of deteeti• g the writing before being called ; and it was but right the witnesses on the other side should have the seine opportunity. - Mr. MONTAGU CHAMBERS objected to the application, as unusual. Ile could not acquiesce. He was willing that the witnesses, when put into the box, should have the letters placed in their hands, and be allowed to say yes or no, as to their belief regarding the band writing. At the suggestion of his Lordship, it was arranged that Counsel on each side should consult as to the course to be taken in this respect. His Lordship, howeVer, thought the best course would basthat the letters should be submitted beforehand to such wit- nesses as were to be called. That whatever parties were permitted to inspect the letters, should 'be put into the box and examined. Reexamined—Mr. Neville is an attorney at Tamworth. There were only some slight resemblances in the characters .of the writing, but the style and composition bore no ee- . semblance whatever. The first time I believe that my daughter wrote to Lord .Ferrers was when she sent him a note after lie had got his hand hurt. Regarding the scraps and notes sent to my daughter . when she was young, I am not aware that my daughter answered them, though she might have done so. The letter to which I have referred was posted at Derby, and was shortly after his Lordship returned f r o m abroad. • When the charge of forgeey was made, we then de termined to commence the action, to vindicate our characters, as we were sure the letters were written by Lord Ferrers. The Learned Counsel then read another extract, to the effect that the defendant wrote to the plaintiff to prepare her trousseau ; and that he did not like the plaintiff's cousin. • The le-examination was then resun•ed—When Earl Ferrers returned from abroad lie did not resume his position as pupil, but be renewed his atter tims, after an absence of two years. I believed him sincere in his attachment. This witness was not allowed to go down until four o'cloCk, John Lees was the next witness—He raid I am a farmer and have been a long time a neighbour of Mr. Smith. I have been in the habit of posting letters for him. I posted one in the latter end of February, 1814, which Mrs. Smith gave me ; that letter was addressed to Earl Ferran?, Chartly Castle. Upon another occasion I posted a letter a t Tamworth, I saw A white handkerchief put into that le' ter, this was in March, 1844. There is a road near Mr. Smith's house which is sunk below the level of the ground ; you might go along this road without being observed. Arronstny-GENEnan—That is if nobody was there to see them. Just so.—(Laughter.) Mr. Iloldgate-1 live near Liverpool. I was on a visit to Mr. Smith in June, 1844. He showed me a letter he had written to Lord Ferrers, and his Lordship's answer. Mr. Smith's letter was to the effect that he gave his consent to Lord Ferret's marrying his daughter. • Eleanor Holdgate—l am wife of the last witness. I was with him at Mr. Smith's, on a visit, in June, 1844. saw Miss Smith write a letter, but 1 did not read it. She put it in an envelope and gave it Me to post at Coventry, but 1 had not time, cud I posted it at Leamington. I went with Mrs. and Miss Smith to Ashby. Mrs. Smith posted a letter on that occasion, but I did not see it. Ann Smith, sister of the plaintiff; a very pretty-looking young lady, was the next si i ness. She said I often saw Lord Tamworth at church in the spring of 1843 ; on one occa sion I was going along a walk, epposite my father's drawing room window, and 1 saw Lord Ferrers leaning against the . chimney-piece. There was nobody in the room then. I saw my sister go into the room, and then I left. Upon another occasion, on the 9th of Decenf.ser, I went into the drawing room, and Lord Ferrers was there playing on the piano. I went cut again and met my sister, she had some cake and wine. She did not give me any, but brought them to Lnrd Ferrers.—(Laughter.) I was told I should be whipped if I went there again.—(Laughter.) I knew Joseph Atkins. I saw him near the house, when they had gone to Harrow - gate. Cross-examined-1 was thirteen years old last November. I did not lose sight of him. 1 always kept my eyes upon him while at church.—(Laughter). Ile went away, and SVA d absent some time. It was my mania who said-I was not to go into the drawing-room. She did not say why, but 1 guessed.—(Laughter.) She did tot tell me Lord Ferrera was there, but I found out. I lett my little sister in one of the gardens, and in passing the window I peeped in at the corner.— (Laughter.) When I . saw my sister come into the room I ran away. • . Ile-examined--.Whentit church Lord Ferrers used to look At my sister,L(Laughter.) Susan Hopley, servant in Mr. Smith's family . —ln Septem ber, 1843, Miss Smith asked me to put a letter in the post for her, which I did at Rugely. Gross-examined—Mrs ..Smith asked tine,: about 12 months after, if 1 could get some of Lord Ferret's hand-writing? He came to me, and wanted eititer me or my husband to get the writing. I didn't do so, but my husband had, and couldn't get it, and then 1 wrote to Mrs. Smith.• Ke-examined.—l don't think I heard of the action when this application was made. John Page, labourer, and Chelsea pensioner.— I know Lord Ferrers and Miss Smith 'by si,ght. I was in a field at the back of Mr. Smitn's_ house in July or August, 1843, and I saw Lord Ferrers and Miss Smith in the field. They were walking side by side, and'might be two or three yards apart.—(Laughter.) I was not near enough to see that they were talking. Cross-examined by the ATTORVEY-GENERAL-It is about two years ago since I did anything as a bailiff's follower. Re examined—l saw them a second time in the field. They were then four or five yards apart.—(Laughter.) Cuuar—This distance between them appears to have in creased. —(Laughter.) Here Mr. CHAMBERS applied to the Court to adjourn, as Mrs. Perry, who was ill, could not attend until to-morrow. Mrs. lloldgate was recalled with a view to ask he to whom the letters were directed, which she had posted for Mrs. Smith, but the question was not pressed. The Court then adjourned at half-past five. thereon" Sir GEORGE LARPENT seconded the motion. He said there was a general opinion amongst the mercantile classes that these laws required alteration, and that they were willing to lend all their a.d to further that object.— (Hear, hear.) It was very easy to be benevolent with other people's means, and to ebtain a character for philantrophy for relieving the imprisoned debtor, whilst the unfortunate creditor might be suffering in obscurity. lie admitted that a different mode of legislation . was necessary before the pre sent laws were passed, but the great and main object was not to give an unfair ad-..ntage to either party,but to obtain an equal distribution of the property of the debtor amongst his credit ors, and to compel them to give a guarantee for the payment of a portion of their future proceeds to their creditors befJre obtaining their final discharge. No little consideration was given to creditors who might perhaps suffer from the altera tion of tariffs, which might reduce the value of articles in which they had wisely speculated. They ought to give every party the facility of coming forward and to devote as much of his assets as possible to the benefit of his"creditors, and protect him from the operation of vindictive or malicious feelings. These laws should take especial care that the honest debtor was dealt justly with, and that the dishonest debtor should be punished.—(Hear, hear.) The language of the Learned Commissioners of , Bankruptcy was even, stronger than the Sub-Committee No. 6. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition.) BALLOCHNEY. This was the petition of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Rail way Company, who are the proprietors of the Ballochney Railway, for leave to bring in a Bill to make a railway about three miles in length, for mineral traffic, from a point on the Ballochney Railway, to the mineral fields near the Kirk of Shotts. The line was laid out by Mr. A. J. Attie, who esti mated its cost at 33,0001. ..One of the witnesses being absent, the Committee, at the request of the parties, deferred their decision. BTONIELAND AND KIRN.INTILLOCH (CHAPEIr-HAI.X. BRANCH). . , language they had used. - • ' Mr. Mt-min:ma M.P. expressed his entire concurrence in the opinions which had' just been expressed by the previous speakers. Ho would state an instance within his own ex perience. He had in one case been offered a composition of 2s; in the pound, which he had refused, because he thought no honest man ought to offer so spell a composition. He had caused the individual to be made a bankrupt, but the result was, that instead of obtaining any assets, he had had ti pay 301. towards the expenses. He thought the law of debtor and creditor had not been sufficiently felt, and he conceived that the measure of Lord Brougham had been a crude, imperfect measure, worthy of its author. In his opinion the commercial greatriess of this country was owing to the good faith which was observed in its trading transactions. He had seen something of the trade of France, and the con sequence of the bad faith observed in that country led to a great restriction of the dealing there. He thought that every one who became insolvent was bound to show how lie became so, and in all cases of fraud that a power of punish ment should be placed in the hands of an impartial tribunal, and he should therefore with great pleasure propose the fol lowing resolution :—" That the laws affecting the relations of debtor and creditor are of vital importance to the well-being of the mercantile community, and deserve the serious atten tion of the Legislature. That the present laws relating to bankruptcy and insolvency in this country are unsatisfactory and injurious, neither protecting the estate of the really un fortunate debtor from wasteful costs and unnecessary delays nor affording prompt and efficient means of coercing the reckless or fraudulent trader, whereby a most mischievous influence is exercised over the commercial character of this country." Mr. B. HAWES, M.P., rose with great pleasure to second the resolution as proposed by his Hon. Friend, the Member for Bridport. When Lord Campbell, about ten years ago, brought his Bill into Parliament to abolish arrest on meane process, he had done him the honour to consult him on its details, and to place his name on the back of the Bill, and he could assure the meeting that it was never intended to de prise the crediior of the power of punishing a fraudulent debtor. Let it not be :aid that this was any attempt to return to the old system of imprisonment for debt, for it was nothing cf the kind. But their o'ojeet was to remedy a great and acknowledged evil. and that was to render the confidence between the several members of a trading community as certain as possible, for on what, in fact, was that confidence based ? Why on this fact—that wherever credit was given, it was only, in truth, the transfer of capital from the hands of the .proprietor to the hands of another for the advantage of both parties ; and were this confidence then broken down, there would be a great impediment imposed upon that interchange. Of commodities which was the very vitality of trade. .At the close of the last session, a Bill had been brought into the House of Commons, with the consent of the Minister, not with any view to ca. ry it into a law, but with the intention to circulate it through the country, and obtain the opinion of mercantile men in different parts of the country, and he might say that in all the numerous communications which they had received they hail met with no objection from practical men of any moment whatever. They had found the most ready co-operation, and among other individuals they had obtained the approbation of the Learned Solicitor- General whose high legal authority was so well known, and whose present high position gave additional weight to that authority, and though he could not commit that high func tionary to any part of the Lill, but still he might say that that gentleman had expressed his approval of the several provisions of the Bill. Now.the object was to obtain the sanction of the Legislature and-obtain a permanent Act, and having these grounds to stand upon, he (Mr. Hawes) felt assured that if the Hon. Chairman and himself were empowered to carry the Bill into the House of Commons they would experience little, if any, opposition in that assembly. One of the chief objects of this Bill was to throw the onus prolarndi upon the party who ought always to have borne it —the debtor who failed to fulfil his engagements. It was well known that, as at present constituted, there was the ut most difficulty of reaching a case of fraud. There might be matter for suspicion nay, almost a certainty—that the deepest villany bad been committed, and vet them was no means whatever of ai riving at the truth. Por his own part, he would be one of the last individuals in the world to visit any man's misfortune with harshness, but he did feel that it had become necessary to take some active steps for the amendment of the bankruptcy and insolvency laws, and he should, therefor., readily second the resolution which had 3ust been submitted to the meeting. The resolution was carried unanimously. Mr Emaarr, in proposing the third resolution, after some observations respecting the necessity of supporting the good frith of the trading community, asserted his opinion that, without an efficient bankruptcy law, the middle classes of the community must be destroyed. He had looked deeply into the matter, and it was his decided opinion that the injury imposed upon the solvent portion of the population by those who failed in their engagements was equal to the whole taxation of the country. Indeed, he was sure that this loss was not less than 50,0001., and if they failed to carry out this object, out of either carelessness or a false considera tion for the feelings of the debtor, they would only have to carry their philanthrophy another step further, and .legalise the circulation of ibrged bills of exchange. With these impres sions he would gladly propose the resolution to the meeting:— "That this meeting accept the provisions of the Bill intro duced into Parliament last session by Mr. Masterman, M.P., and Mr. Hawes, M.P., as an important amendment of the present law, which it is desirable to obtain at once; but this meeting is aware of the necessity of further legislative provi sions affecting credit and its protection ; and is of opinion that a Government Commission, cotnpoted of practical and experienced merchants and traders, to inquire into their pre sent condition and effects, would be attended with the most beneficial results." Mr. Geococas briefly seconded the resolution, which was immediately carried without any dissent. Mr. Ileywatus, in stating that the business of the meeting was drawing to a close, expressed his complete concurrence in the proceedings of the Committee. With great pleasure, therefore, he would propose "the thanks of the meeting to the gentleman who had so ably presided over them on the present occasion, red that John Masterman, Esq., and B. Hawes, Esq., M.P., be requested to introduce the Bill to the Legis lature, lature, _and take charge of .it in the Hodge ofComMons." Mr. NICHOLSON sscondett the resolution, which was unani moualy.adopted. Mr. BIASTERHAN returned thanks; and, after several sub scriptions bad been handed in, towards defraying the necessary expenses, the meeting separated. This was the petition of the Monkland and Kirkintilloch Railway Company, for leave to bring in a Bill to makea mi neral branch from their Palace Cray branch to the Chapel- Hall Iron Yorks. The cost of the line was estimated at 25,8001. The usual formal process having been adduced, the stand ing orders were declared to have been complied with. CALEDONIAN AND DUMBARTON JUNCTION. This was the petition of the Caledonian and Dunbarton shire Junction. Railway Company, for leave to bring in a Bill .to make a line from Glasgow to Dumbarton and Loch Lo mond, with branches to lielensburgh, 31ilingavie, and other places. The length of the line anti the branches together is thirty-two miles, and the cost was estimated by Mr. Neil Robson at 390,000/. The Committee decided that the standing orders had been Complied with. *WILSONTOWN, MORNINGSIDE, AND COLTNZI3S. _ . _ - This was the petition of the Wilsontown, Morningside, and Cultness - Railway Company, for leave to bring in a Bill to make a branch of five miles and three quarters in length, from a poibt on the main line to Bathgate, the estimated cost .of which is 61,000/. The parties proved that they had complied with the stand ing orders. --- QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.) (Before Mr. Justice WIGIITMAN.) BREACH OF PROMISE.—MARY ELIZABETH SMITH V. WASHING TON LORD FERRER& The cross-examination of Mrs. Smith by the ArroR REV-GENERAL (continued from our Afternoon Edition) — Amongst the articles mentioned as presents, there was a pink silk bonnet, sent on the 29th of June, 1844. That was after the time I was made aware that the other articles had not been paid for. All the bills bad been paid at that time. My daughter did not say where the bon net came from. I understood that it was sent by Lord Ferrers, from London. My daughter did not tell me about it until the bill came in on the following Christmas. I went to Ashby and paid for it. Probably 1 did make some inquiry about it, as I did not. imagine it could be owing for. It was when the bonnet came that my daughter told me it was a present from Lord Feri crs. To the COURT—She told me before the bonnet came that she expected a bonnet from Lord Ferrers from London. To the ArronNEr-Gx.:4ERAI. — My daughter knew she had done wrong. She dial not explain to me particularly about it. showed her the bill, and said, " How is this?" and she made no reply. She did not say she had ordered the bonnet when I showed her the bill. She did deny having ordered it, or that it must be a mistake. She was conscious she had done wrong, and said very little about it. Did she deny having ordered it?—She did. When the bill came I learned that the bonnet came from Ashby. When the bill came I went wth Mr. Hammel, the attorney, to Ashby. My daughter and 1 went to Miss Wyman's. This was about January, 1845; I said to Miss Wyman, "You have sent me a bra ft.r a bonnet that I knew nothing of." Miss Wyman said Miss Smith had ordered it for herself; my daughter instantly denied she had ordered it; she said it must be a mistake, or " You must be mi s t - aken the pereon." Miss Wyman probably said, anything." " Miss Smith, if y o u would say that, you wo u ld say I do not, remember my daughter saying, if she stood there for hours she would deny it. Ido not remember Miss Wyman saying, "Oh, Miss Smith, I wonder Sou are not afraid of bei ng s t ruc k d ea d." Sh e may have saidit.l believe I did not say hi the presence of if my daughter would owni yman, that fy t o o u t o h rd e er l e , o d me l t b i ' would forgive h2r." I said, "my dear, the bonnet, say so." She looked at me, but never said a word, and we walked out of the shop. About this time I said my daughte r h a d tre ceived a bonnet from a noble individual, and that there w as a note in the box. Miss Smith opened the box. I saw the note, but. Ido not know - where it is now. it was a note pur port to he front Mr. Devoreux Shirley. That note was handed to Mr. Hammel, the attorney. The 4 ,- ToßNr s. GENF:RAI , asked for this letter, as it was produced on Saturday, but it could not be found for a consider. able time, and a goed veal olconfitsion followed. Having been at length produced, it was handed to the witness, but she said it was not the one that tale n . in the box. how that note came in the Did your daughter x box ?—She did; she said ) that Earl but Ferrers to fo ld her it he would send her a bonnet fro m London ; he hadfound incon venient to do so, but wished her to purchase one at Ashby, and she did so, as she had told her papa and but at. mamma that London hat she she was to have one from Mr. Devereux Shirley refused to do so unle ss would write a note stating that it had come from London. I believed then that it had come from London. Mr. Shirley gave Miss Saab, the note to enclose in, the box noteis is what my daughter told me, :and that she got the at Ashby RAILWAY COMMITTEES (THIS DAY.) Sub-Committee No. 1. LEICESTER AND nEnroRD. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition.) Mr, John Stapleton was called to prove that his property was not correctly shown on the plans and sections. Mr. (DATES admitted the allegation. Several other allegations were sustained, after which Mr. BuitkE proceeded with the petition of the Leicester and Swanington Railway Company. The first allegation was that there was no fixed point of junction shown en the plan where the proposed line was to gin the Leicester and Swannington Railway. Several witnes es were called on both sides, and the Com mittee decided that nu fixed point had been shown. Standing orders in this instance not complied with. THE LONDON AND SOUTH ESSEX. Mr. C. PARKES appeared for the promoters, and called the witnesses to prove the deposit of the plans, sections, books of reference, &c. Mr. Burke appeared on a petition against the Bill, but, in consequence of the absence of a material witness, the case was adjourned till twelve o'clock to-morrow. THE RUGBY AND STAIVEPORD. Mr. Venal,les appeared for the promoters. The deposit of the plans, ana sections, and books of re ference having been proved, the further proceedings were postponed till to-morrow. The Committee adjourned at half-past three o'clock. Sub-Committee No. 4. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition.) TORN AND CARLISLE.% It is proposed by this Bill to connect the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway with the Great North of England line, by a line from Northallerton to Clifton, near Penrith ; al so to onnect-the NeWcastle and Darlington Railway with Las. THE SUN, [MN DON, MONDAY_ EyENONG, FEBRUARY 16, 1846.2. ports—he found twenty- four distinct rates enume rated; but the only classification of them was this,—that to n were raised on the basis of the poor-law; 8 raised in practice, theugh not in law; and 6 rai!ed on other bases. The operation of the law was, that they were raised from property and practice. The distinction is hich he is ished to draw was this—that he wistied to distinguish those which were only for local purposes—which only interested those people for whom they were raised, and those in the immediate vicinity. Now he wished to make this distinction between those taxes and those rates %Oriels were imposed for general purposes, end those taxes and those rates which were im posed for peculiar purposes,—the one being borne for the benefit of the whole community, and the other only for the advantage of a particular district. The taxes which he would o 9 for local purposes were the drainage rates, the sewers rates, and the rote fur the rural police, and he should no more thick o imposing the ex penditure for the purposes of these rates upon tee eom munity at large than he should think of imposing the especial rates for towns upon the rural pope latiou ; as, for instance, lie should no more think of imposing the rate necessary for the improvement of the Marsh lands in the East and West Ridings of Yorkshire. on the inhabitants of towns from the peculiar burdens of the agricultural residents than he should think it ne cessary or just to impose the burdens which had to be borne by the residents in cities for Teculiar purposes, from which the rural population - de rive no advantage. The rates which he should designate as the rates which were particularly imposed on the inhabitants of towns were the paving rate, the lighting rate, the water rate, and those other particular burdens which were not all necessary for the mode of life of the inhabitants of towns, these were what he called the peculiar burdens of towns, and he should no more think of impos ing them upon the inhabitants who were charged with the cultivation and improvement of the marsh lands of the East and West Ridings of Yorkshire than ne should think . of imposing upon them the expense of affording a better supply of water to the inhabitants of Exeter. It was usual for these rates to be imposed by the inha bitants of towns, through the agency of public meet ngs, called by the inhabitants themselves, and ratified by a special Act of those inhabitants. Now the burdens imposed upon land for peculiar pur poses are the rate for drainage, the dyke rate, aad the rate for the support of the rural police. These rates were for particular acts, in which the rural population were specially interested. But there were other rates which were imposed for general purposes, such as those for the maintenance of the poor, public security, and the support of the ad ministration of justice ; and without protective duties he would no more think of imposing them upon land alone than he would think of imposing them upon the fundholders or upon any other particular body in the State. The maintenance of the pot). -rate was an object of pecu liar interest to all classes, whether manufacturing or agricultural. He trusted that he had said enough to convince their Lordships that the maintenance of the poor was a national and general object. If the militia were called out, it was not for the purpose of defending the mere acres—it was not for the purpcse of defending the capitalist—it was to defend the country generally, and, therefore, all classes were eqUally interested in paying the militia rate, which was made for the pro tection of every person, and not of peculiar individuals. Thus, the rates for the maintenance of the poor, the de fence of the cauntry, and the administration of justice, were common to all, and equally paid by all, and were distinguished from other rates levied for less general purposes. He wished to see how far the relation between real property and every other kind of property extended, and he wished to see the relative position of landed pro perty and property that consisted of houses The poor rate was originally founded on the same basis on which most other sates were founded. It was not real property alone that was liable to be rated for by an Act of Elizabeth. Every man was rated according to his means and ability, whether his income was derived from land, from trade, or from funded property. That had since degenerated, and now, by the law of the land only real property was liable to this tax. He would wish to know the effect of this law on the capitalist, whom embarked his money ie trade, as distinguished from the effect it had on thn agricultural community. If a person invested his money in building a mill, he 'would be rated according to the letable value of the mill. He would have to hire the mill, and the mill would be merely rated according to its rateeble value, and not at its rack rent, as in some cases land was. It would only be rated at two-thirds, or one-half, as in the county of Westmoreland. There land was rack rented, end houses were rated two-thirds, while mills were only rated one-half: That was the way . this great capitalist contributed to the pours'-rate, yet he made vast sums of money, for he collected from the entire neighbourhood far and near—from the agricul tural districts—ab!e, healthy labourers, capable of con tinued exertion ; and unless the manufacturer received some cheek in his trade, his profit would go on in creasing. Then what did he do ? He dismissed those persons by hundreds and thousands, and they were thrown upon the agricultural districts, which were obliged to support them. The capitalists derived the profits of their manhood, and the agriculturists sup ported their age. Now let them contrast this with the operation of the law upon the farmer. The farmer had no choice whatever, he was bound to employ those men or to increase the rates, and many farmers he knew in his own district employed a great many more labourers than the purely economical working of the farm required. That was the difference between himself and the capitalist, but let a glut come on the trade of the towns of Leeds or Manchester and the labourers would be obliged to re turn to the rural parishes, where the farmer was obliged to contribute to their support, and where he could not derive much benefit from their labour, because their pur suits had been confined to manufacture's, and these were, therefore, fitted to cultivate the soil. This was the diffe rence ho drew between the eff'ect the taxes had on the capitalist and the farmer. He would now proceed to show it operated between land and houses, or, rather, he would allude to some of the deductions which had been made from figures, which appeared in regard to difference of lands and houses, as placed in the report of the Poor-law Commis sioners ; but he might, in a parenthesis, state that, in his view of the case, the difference was not between land and houses, but between the propictors of real property and the rest of the community. It seemed that in the year 1826 the land paid at the rate of 69 per cent., while houses paid in the proportion of 26 per cent., whereas in the year 1841 the land paid in proportion to 52 per cent., while houses paid in the ratio of 37 per cent. In this statement it would appear that the burdens on land had gradually been reduced, while those imposed on houses had increased. But to this he would answer, that those whose eyes were open would see that there had been between the two periods referred to a gradual increase of towns and villages, thus in creasing the number of houses and decreasing the quan tity of land. Every day the number of houses was in creasing, while the quantity of land was decreasing, the latter being taken up by railroads and new towns. They saw day by day that which was formerly field ground used for the erection of houses, or used up for other purposes, taken up for railroadsor objects of a similar kind. This showed how it was that houses in creased and land diminished, and explained the ap parent descrepancy between the tiro returns. He tnigth illustrate the point by one or two strong instances. At Newcastle there was an extensive parish which formerly was land, but now it was occupied by a new town. He would also refer to Brighton, which formerly was a fiehing village, whereas now the houses had so much increased, that it had become a great town. There was another point to which he would refer, while speaking en this subject. It had b een said that houses were perishable property, and that therefore they ought not to be rated so high as landed property. lie was willing that this should be so, and he would take care on a future occasion, if the free-traders used it as an argument, to meet them with their own weapons. If perishable property was to be fa vourably considered, what was more perishable than the farmer's capital, that which depended upon the season, which might perish from a decay in the seed or a blight in the blossom, which a thunder-storm or any other destructive operation of nature might annihilate. He would say to them, do not use this argument, cr ha would take good care that it should be made to tell on behalf of the great question of protec tion.—(Hear, hear.) The issue would show how it would befriend the cause of agricultural industry. He would further say, let them look at the oppression of the oor-laws—he refeised to that part of the system re lating to settlement. To the old law of settlement he had an utter objection, as it operated most in juriously to the agriculturists without doing any real good to the manufacturer.—(Bear, hear.) What happened when there was a sudden check in the demand for manufactures? The labouring artisan re turned to the rural districts, and when the demand for manufactures returned then the manufacturers could with difficulty find men to work their mills, while the rural districts were overcharged with paupers. This had occurred lately in Manchester and in Nor wich. Their Lordships might rely upon it, that if they adopted free trade in corn, they must apply the same principle to_ the labour market, and the first step towards that must be the abolition of the present law of settlement. The law of settlement made the labourer a bondsman to his parish, and it prevented him going into the dearest market to dispose of his labour. To this part of the poor-law system he trusted they were ap proaching an end. He bad alluded to this matter in consequence of its halting been reported to be the intention of the Government to offer as a compensation to 'the agricultural interest an alteration of the law of settlement. That alteration, even if It should be carried out to the extent of Sir James Graham's Bill of last year, would not be satisfac tory. But he believed that the repeal of the corn-laws would be carried, and then the proposed alteration in the law of settlement would fall to the ground.--(Hear.) The present measure proposed by the Government was most objectionable. He considered that making a resi dence of a few years the means of obtaining a settle ment would lead to very enormous results. The mea sure would have a tendency to force women likely to give birth to children from one parish to another, in order to get relieved from the burdens of the chil dren born there, and as to an industrial residence of a certain number of years, as being the means of obtaining a settlement, he considered that measure to be impracticable ; it would be too heavy a burden on the towns. He believed that in time of a sudden check in trade, when hundreds were thrown out of work, the towns were scarcely able to support them• selves. He thought the measure wonld be no compensa tion whatever, the only remedy was to get rid alto gether of the law of settlement. His Lord ship then alluded to the highway rates. He maintained that the highways were as much for the be.,- nefit pf the town as for the country, through which the road passes. Indeed there were cases where two towns formed the termini of their being the only parties who derived any benefit from it. 'fifty are of little use to intervening co,ntry accommodati,n, and bridie roads a: e used by the farmer ; he has little or no business on the highway. lie had had an account taken at the several tolls of the number of vehicles which passed through, and the result had been that the majority belonged to the inhabi tants of the towns at the different extremit ivs. He would allude incidentally to the question of tithes. lie did nut, howev.r, consider the tithes were a burden on the land.—(Elcar. hear.) He did not wi,h to be misunder stood upon this matter. Previous to the commutation of tithes they were a burden upon the cultivators of the land. They objected t') laying out their money upon land, as they did not wish that the benefits of their labours and enterprke should be applied to uth2r persons. Since the passing of the Tithe Commutation Act, tithes did not intefete with dm cultivator of the land, as by the prGvisions of the Act they were constituted a certain debt upon the property greeting the burdens, upon land. Ile differed with the r'ob'e Lord in a considerable degree. He thought that the burdens on land were not only greater in some respects than he had represented them, but a :so there were brd in some material particulars which had not be u en ens referred to—still, though admitting the greatness of these burdens, he did not agree in the conclusions elrawn by the Noble Lord, namely. the proposition that the proer d p uty mode of compensation was by taxing corn by imposing on the importation of foreign grain.—( Hear, hear.) H e w ould not anticipate the corn-law debate by snatching a debate on the question before their Lordships. The question of the corn-ion ° would be brought before them properly, timely , and regularly ' as soon as the measure came from the oth er House. He: must say in the present inquiry he greatly lame nted the lea ! • ing out of view, in his opinion, the greatest of all the exch.. sire burdens of land. What he referred to was the position a of 11:e landowners and farmers, which was differen t from all other kind of employers. They had not the power of goinfi into the labour market, and selecting the chep est labourers all Workmen. The manufacturers had amongst them none lee that patriarchial relationship which ex isted in t,. agricultural district. 'I hey could turn off their wer:ir men in a day, whet her they had be en in t h • service a year or ten veers. They could turn t hem off at ar e time if they (the manufacturers) were able to get half b e tter a t ; cheaper workmen. It was not so K ith the farmers--, 08d labourers they employed were employed ueon what he I' iris Brougham) called the patriarchial relation, and th e y often c played a great number of workmen when they might procur e supply of labour at half the price. The °"Pe . t • tions of the poor-law did alone impose this, but at ts e arose from a feeling of attachment to those who had ate been engaged in the services of the farmers in th e cultivatil: of the soil. No one felt stronger than he did the force of tr ° particular burden. When a Noble Lord died he veryfofteern, left eighty thousand pounds or ninety thousand pounds 0 ,p ist) ,, sonal property, on all of which he paid probate and legacy One word with respect to the stamp duties to which his r•°,, 50 Friend had referred. There never was a greatest rror tr ace supposing Gat the late improvements which had ken `la in the law were not beneficial to the landed interest• bies, did they think i f the abolition of fines and r ecoveries? fl ee ee 5 d self, knew one landowner who had saved between 5, 0 v'," h 5 03 6,00 W. by the change, and he had known another friend ske c a b i c e delayed his recoveries until after the Act of 11:32 passed by; the he gained a large amount. Then there wa sthe changes' 00 11 law respecting leases. instead of ten sheets for a le a i ealf half a sheet was now required, and instead of ten skins ()ploy a skin was / required. There was no additional stator ee l upon that, on the contrary there was a large reductiTetber this reduction it was which made many persons doubt change,° „e the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not oppose tb ( jes He did not, however think it is duty to do so. He tante Brougham) certainlythought the landed interest h ad g rTsslie complain of the stampduties, perhaps more than theother at se et sive burdens. It was worse than the aleavala of spain. Thetesece duties pressed most heavily upon mortgagers, for t he woe ' 'rose might, at any time, say to the mortgager •' unless r ° lo ol your interest you shall change your securities, which tha t b, 16,000/. or 12,000/." He (Lord Brougham) w ished s '',, o o would not live long before he saw the tax on the hns-- property replaced by a tax upon succession. t of his Lord DACRE ( whose remarks in the opening P lit di/- speech were inaudible in the gallery) stated th at he cePreelsr protection to be giving a certain advantage to s onic Ptradederet application of capital, or giving some encouragement to.d.see to some particular enterprise, so hich might be cans' tee? ' particular advantage to the country who granted this p lat c niotP To this protection it is that the agricultural interest ~ b He consideree, from the great improvements which bad made, the facilities of communication, and the increaldre cation of the capital of this country, and from the 0 0 , o f pc' turns which had been made to this House, that this k !° t eed tection should be removed from the agriculture of this ; s erri ce (Hear, hear) —he considered also that protection write WV; t., maintain the balance or equilibrium of the court-tVelece from circumstances of taxation or some othe r cansfrest of the application of capital had been destroyed• dier has been destroyed by the protection which h as be e° d efeat; to personal property beyond all bounds of reason or d °p l oy He would not enter into detail but would tako his e rne eesa t bs broad brsis of the injustice which had been done to 0r n by the imposition of a grinding property-tax imPos e , d !te country in the shape of a 'poor-law . Justice sbon' b e ePi s to the farmer by the removal or equalisation of ,s °G t est i r e of taxes.— ( Hear, hear. ) He felt convince d t he 4 8 1. agriculture of the country. He felt convinced that' „tee. culture of the country was equal to compete with tb ture of she world. if they were "ranted equal till' t o I I ) application of labour—( Hear, lieat)—and an ea r, disposal of the products of that labour:—(" e ve lfr o The Noble Lord then went into some statistical detal sm , thi st i to the valuation of real property, and proceeded t ° , o - it rof e n great portion of taxation fell upon one-fourth of '.' eh O r el of England, to the exclusion of other property , ° 111 :"/ well entitled to be chrrged. Such was the position e we , e O5 property of England. What he wanted , therefore, lopAe taxation, and if that were carried out, and no and P a gfir to of taxation placed upon real property, the 8 511,, rists of this country would be able n ot 005 01; t 1 contend with, but to overcome the foreign c°o`soloos It was not from inadequacy, on the part of the owP oi o e - property, to meet the demands which were mad e p decti cli tir abolition,undefl:cted the u l e b,o x un i t a i n td g heee l m a p laws, se,nbst sense a o t fwt t iht h he e d y ri na s jw o ui u rny g g h w t h t i h e e h i r w. r- 0 1 d - 0 0 0 a port opl 0 , so taxes to which other portions of the c ol t i? 00 were subjected, whilst those peculiar to theme There s o4 to other parties were continued.— (Hear, hearel eo dreto another subject to which he wished to refer. nos and thousands of persons had established thentsse‘thelreoo: combination, and although he did not like to exPre-05tilstoest he could not forbear saying that it wus an °ll 3 o li o , combination, and as an old friend of the p r ivileges °, Ore, for for half a century, he could not too strong'looto.Bo the attempt which those persons were making t °, to obi s for ° , liament—to control the freedom of election, anu.„ o lele s i or ° B nomination of counties, and this, too, after the e° l- ; per e n' which the laws relating to the election of Member riglfette had undergone, and when they were aware that the t e d e el er' their elective franchise were derived from that 0 0;00 When he saw all this he hoped they would resist a ° , 1 •116,0 is which were ; forced upon them by these persons. „ Oh", Lead, during the whole of his address, was ha rd yd ,t 0 OJ the gallery, but during this part only detac h ' t co lO o so fie p could ba caught.) Then with respect t ° e ielt duty. There had been no consumption t ds u pared with the increased population, which thes e was an argument in favour of a modification of . st 00 1 4 Alalt was a commodity which the agriculturloletiBo apply to the purposes which were most al i t pslotolj out the fiat of the Exciseman, and Wit h te, l ede, duty of 30 per cent. on what he had prodn''ets If foreign timber was imported into this counta, g llooo,o duty, it wonld be an unfair competition with f ed taae l , the grower of which had been liable to increa b s ea t, fl ot consequence of it. So it was with English with te, e d wheat would be brought in duty free to consP" for fro duce of the English farmer, which had been r ated is ele• A st . 't, tax and every other tax to which property °;a 5 L 01 51 740 not intended to trespass on the time of theirf e t a nt o'oo length, nor did he intend to enter on the su") - se at f e e but he certainly thought that before protecti°° OOP ono der( ett all these points should be taken into eonahes 10 Noble Lord here made some remark referringeseateJoe' fry stood) to a speech of his that had been neisr e P r io tbel / Colo spoke in so low a tone that it was quite inaudible rej at e /,,0 He had there an extract of a speech deli Ass 00100,0 garden on the 18th of December. The extr efe s ttl d a Times, and he (Lord Deere) had taken Meat) ) . le r 9 r , eee' whether or not it was correct. " e „ s ilo t ee 4 read the extract, which, as near as We T — bope 0 0 8 0 the Noble Lord was searcel.o audible. ' „e t off will bear how great a terror has been er e d, name of 40s. freeholder, a power lately cre a 'ij e da s : 0 ' ) ,1 ";50 I eventually humble the proud aristocracy t° t the esiteLoei ing said this, he would toe grieved to imagh t , e o s epa l ?„tofF o li ter of that country would allow Parliament ', h i 040 passing some measure to restrict .." 9 AO 4 001 with the Constitution. —( Hear, bean( 5 , 8 fer ii hie ll llf:, reforme, he recollected the creation of t " e itb ,4 0 ",.. 1 e freeholders of Ireland, and the repugnance lisuss-reo; had passed that measure—necessity, howevee; to!f t lilpt' tnem. He did not, however, wish i 8 anY " 4 ,. l o vller e se ° : right of voting, either in county or boroughs Pli e be e 0f ,, , - t ie were conducted on constitutional principles' ern tog all dithulties would be removed if some arrang t he r „ 1 0 a re t to r e tered into to equalise taxation, and so see O e V Tie of the country. rne - hit Lord MOUNTEAGLE rose to move a ° s „nree s eees B si a B l motion of his Noble Friend. That all - t eerP . ssi t e 4 lieved, would not meet with any opposition 1 0 oes hie Friend or any of the Noble Lords on L'', s ee te r o e!e r eo' i t He begged here to say, he would be sorry t ° t ee. ; e t10 ,0 1 0 t ; t the doctrines which had been laid down h Y pr icie do etOn (Lord Beaumont). He did not wish a ° a t he e sfg" ; 09 t Of be ? t. of the inquiry, but he must protest aga• a r od w., laid down. His Noble Friend b ° House in a fair and candid man ner ' tb e i t e 0;4 made a series of admissions ° w inch o il,' Ol e There was one material point in, to e ) s sisd e • tained a similar doctrine to him (Lord Ag n ib $, hlere et/ ject of the commutation of tithes. if e SO ;poe t /cid depend on the same principles as re nt. d peati e be i soo t s ground for its protection unless he (Le t for / 41 0 9 , P 0 1 0 ,) tained that protection was due to it I ,, e ,(l o et ei t e "et the country at large but to uphold rent. wee sod ifir°o4o° would like any Noble Lord, or any t c-1 Jer• f ir o v e 0 0 11 show the difference between 25e. anaer ' e tb 61 i 19 "I ‘ lll° subject to tithes, and 20s. paid on land e ree-tetie ° ,,t, : g o to the clergyman. The effect would ite t pro'; rev, +l, and he could not see how they could tab' °, t ion t e tterle,„v . unless it was to be considered asptherete- co s ol t 0 0 not for the benefit of the clergy, lar vo ade, noe l /, He denied that the commutation of tithes ;la s eis i t eel d ef is in the question ; the principle of protectiono`tioaesf was precisely the same as before, and he ea r ight s b ee l q 1 0 1 ships of the great danger there was to the b had ve ll e sl9 i( 1- 1 supporting any clamour against rent tch t t e s, pre te ' r eler t connexion with this question Of " o n in t o e' o o o , l o r, lings payable to the landlord s,t d t, DE! C o p V( same position as five shillings peon, at s. t ioe r f ," and in arguing the question of protect-1, to et t he 8 o alike. if there was any inequality i° rt i 1, l e to °0 property beyond what was fair and itnPa te : t ton,, that inequality, but do not give Pr ° . o tbe" II to ° society or ;nterest at of et '' li r LORDS' SUgo• AN • eca 5 1 0 The LORD CHANCELLOR tOOl 1315 Woolsack at Five o'clock. for a d 4 0 repVeaalrieofutshepectoirteio..nieswweere presented. The Earl of RADNOR moved for e a / 50' the export of grain from Ireland• fo r e A r ' 2 ' O v encteceosfsitytheoofbfpaperbcgrouoat l t hit ie nh ac te rt o i .C °_ , to , l i t i t i f h r r : d ri e c e t e' 0, 11 0130: : ,fr went t r o d f a ßE C A:T m e m io i li tt T ee th w eit co r n os s e id t e o rt he t ea 000 lso liar burdens upon land, and es ie tP ler in which the Excise dilti e ; wil s by jar, " I landed interest. He had a' 0s sicupon or/ the e bj to ag to id ,ho so e l intimately connected that 11 bett j ' yeti to s° ' of e the other ought to be rem° _ crao va t ot; . 0 cwt the most continuance economical that th e • ts. Id r te could strike with was, c oh at i aliT -1)) o' son for this preference n...iess en _ lopt ee fav°tlr our ll° at t s i n o ( rn ie e p , e a n n d d ent en o a f bh fi l ) ae r e e ,w i n g ;c : witting their corn at a lower u".., an y chtl i ' t i o s , Fe l; t r i 'll o e :ti thought that they oa f l 4 sid'e'd the removal ° I of p i n the o leo ,1 renl ° ' l les apP e consequence of the o __ . o b s tacl es - be ev not ae icquiry to ter 7 _ cou re• to til l ministerial .00 the passing of the i w coo nib i siv a jt io oa S uch as e"eP r 01 l e , ~„s t :, rates, and po f mora , jo wl- there p th e e r treport3s e se r e m t vefarotihto.leLitichsePerom:;tratit;:vicwd.cre::: 7 0 : 7 1 ' ill fa' should not thio } : re tie loos ! TQ til e " profited by them, H one local elist riete, as 4 _ o th osiit g"" That was merely looking at the qua stiodin the light of buying, selling, and baiter. The produce of the soil was the same, and produced the same to the occupier as if the tax did not exist at all. It merely reduced the value of the fee simple. He looked upon the land-tax and the tithe in the same point of view as charges upon the land. He considered they were merely charges upen the lane', but did not interfere with the production of the agriculturist. He looked upon the tax as he did upon indirect taxes. In France, where land was sold under the in direct taxation, the loss sustained was borne by the seller, but it did not fall upon the farmer. This kind of tex diminished the value of the land in both countries. He would pass over one or two points ,shish he intended ,o refer to, as he did not wish to trt spass on their attention much long, r, anti he would come to the last point to which he wished to call their attention —he meant the malt-tax. It was said, that that tax was no burden on land, but he believed that this was an erroneous statement. The tax he admitted was equally paid by all, but that por tion paid by persons who wereconsumet s of beer, &c., fell in the end upon the agriculturist. In addition to t , is, how ever, he would point out the direct amount of duty which interfered with the agriculturist. It interfered with the agriculturist to the extent of the barley to which the tax amounted. If the tax, therefore, did not exist, the barley would be increased to that amount, and the agriculturist would be so much benefited. If any proof of this were wanting he would refer to the circum stance that, notwithstanding the increase of population or late years, the amount of duty did not keep pace with it, That was the burden, but that was not the only hard , ship—that was the amount of the burden, but the hard ship went still further—and by not allowing him to use his barley as lie likes for other purposes, they placed him in the same position as they would a manufacturer, if they were to say to him, " You may manufacture cloth, but you must not wear a coat made from it." They defied, they prevented him from using the barley produced by his own soil. That was a serious burden, in additios to the one he had named, and he could give a great many authorities— M•Cullochaand others--but he considered it unneces sary, because when the duty on printed cottons was re pealed, there was a great increase in the trade in that article, and he held that a similar result would ensue if the duty were taken off malt. There was another article of Excise which he thought particularly heavy on the owners of real property, and which, if it were not re quired for the purpose of creating a portion of the revenue, would be a great advantage to the proprietors of laud—he meant the article of hops; but if they came again to the general taxation of the country, he wished to know what portion of it the agricultural body was exempt from? They were exempt from the Cus toms' duties as they coetributed as much to them as any other body of the community ; they also consumed and paid duty upon innumerable articles which paid cus toms' duty. From what taxes then were they exempt ? They paid the Post-office and stamp ditties ; the stamp duty for the transfer of property fell pr culiarly heavy on them, and was so enormous that he considered it one of the greatest hardships under e hich any portion of the community laboured at the present moment.—(Cheers.) And he must say this, that if there was a subject which might obtain a moment's attention Iron Lis Noble and Ie arm: d Friend on the Woolsack it was this ; and if he would suffer him for a moment, he would say if there Was a department against which the ag:iculturists had reason to complain to the Noble Lord, it was the enormous duty which they were thus compelled to pay—(Cheers) —and he had especial reason to complain, because in all the reforms which had taken place in which the portions of the community participated, care was taken to con tinue the burdens upon land.—(Hear.) And again, when the law relating to the transfer of property was carried by the Noble Lord, it was found of such a nature as to be a difficult matter to get a conveyancer to adopt it, and in thousands of cases it was impossible to transfer property without being obliged tv pay fur six or seven sheets to an ettorney. Then how long had they left the question of the registration of des da unsettled? In every other country conveniences for the purchase of land were so great compared with those of this country, as to cast a blot on this country, and to induce every one to do all in his power to obtain some alteration in it. tie would, before he concluded, refer to that which his Hon. Friend intended to add as an amendment, and he would wish to know what were the numerous exceptions proposed in that amendment. The legacy duty was cer tainly a case in point, and he would allow it to be fair that it should be exempted. Certain property belonging to the agriculturists was exempt from insurance, The farmer's property, such as stacks, &c., was Irons its nature exposed to danger, and that property was not to Le se cured by insurance. lie was sorry to say the danger was increased in consequence of the very violent language sometimes addressed to the labouring people. The per sons who addressed it to them did not mean to do the mischief they did—they were emissaries from others, who were not aware or the high tone they adopted. tie, for one, when he used to read the strong language matte use of, used to remark :—" There will be some more steek-hurning in tee district." Ho had no peculiar ob jection t ) strong language ; he thought that it sometimes added to the interest of the debate, and lie was perfectly indifferent to the hard names which were heaped upon the agricultural body, of which he was a member. At the name time, he felt that he had not terms strong enough to use in condemnation of the violent language which sometimes led to so much mischief in the country. The Right llon. Baronet at the head of the Government had brought forward certain measures which he intended as a compensation for the withdrawal of protection from land. lie would say that these measures were no compensation, and if they did give any. the difficulty of ascertaining the benefit it would confer would be enormous, as they would have to ascertain the precise loss which the withdrawal of pro tection would cause, and the precise gain which the diminution of taxation would afford to the English farmer. He would then turn to another question, and he thought that if it could not be shown that the impositions on the protection of corn in foreign countries were commensurate with the imposition on real property in this country, they would fail to show that British-grown corn was in a condition to compete with foreign corn. tic had seen some attempts to render this assertion a fact to the minds of the people, but he thought it would be extremely improbable that any such attempt should succeed. If they were to take the whole amount of the taxes imposed upon towns, or what were properly called civic rates, and would compare them with the communes or department districts in France, they would find that taxes imposed in that country stood as live to four with those which were laid on the inhabitants of cities and towns here. This was no fair comparison with the impositions in France, but they would find that it was not quite so high as that in Eng land.—(llear, hear.) That was not the way to put the case—they ought to take the amount of costs imposed for realising the produce of one hundred acres of land in one country and the amount of costs imposed for obtaining a hundred acres in the other country, and if they could show the amount was the same they would make out a good ease. But by this mode of calculation they would find that in England the cost was nearly double that in France, that in the German States it was more than in that proportion, and that in Turkey and some parts of Russia it only bore the proportion of two in a hundred. It was even notorious that Great Brituin was taxed in a far greater degree than in any other foreign state, at least on Europe. He had now come to his conclusion and he felt compelled to say a few words with respect to him. self. He had always conceived that the system of protection was absolutely required by the peculiar burdens imposed upon land ; yet if he found the continuance of thatimposition was con trary to the tendency of public opinion—that it was likely to rase one class in opposition to another, he should feel it his duty to retrain from further opposition to the measure, and instead of wrapping himself up in a sulky humour, and aggra vating the evil of domestic schism, he would endeavour to pacify the conflicting feelings, and he trusted his Noble Friends would use their powerful influence in prevent ing that hostile disposition and unnecessary difference which might arise between the manufacturer and farmer. The Noble Lord then continued—My Lords, I have never joined in the abuse of the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government. I believe in the sincerity of his convictions—l believe that he thinks lie is doing for the best in the measure he proposes—l respect his courage. But this I will say, that if in the present Parliament he carries this measure, it will not be the triumph of opinion, but the triumph of par tiaanship—l say, not the triumph of opinion, because he will have carried it against the opinion of the country, as declared at the last election ; he will have carried it against the opinion of the House of Commons, as declared in various divisions ; he will have carried it against the opinion of the House of Lords, as also delared on numerous divisions ; but lastly, and above all, he will have carried it in defiance of the opinion of a majority of the Cabinet.—(Great cheering.) I :say, my Lotd , , that I shall submit to the triumph of opinion. Let the Government look to that point; let them appeal to the country; let them ask what the opinions of the country are ; let them follow that up by securing a majority of the opinions in the House of Commons, and again in this House, and I myself will no longer offer a factious opposition to the .measure.—(Cheers.) I believe that then your Lordships will no longer oppose it ; and if that shall be the case, it will be in . the fullest sense a triumph of opinion, but as it now stands it is merely an able mar. vivre of party politics.--(Great cheering. ) Lord BROUGHAM rose to second the motion, but was called to order by the Marquis of LANSDOWNE, who said that in that House it was not necessary that any motion should be seconded. On the question being put, Lord BROUG HAM said that he wished only to speak to their Lordships a very few words, in answer to his Noble Friend who had made mention of his name in connexion with the opinions he had expressed in 1820. Far from differing from the motion of his Noble Friend, he ( Lord Brougham) considered that the burdens he had enumerated fell exclusively upon the land, and he went even further, for he was very far indeed from taking his views on the subject of the tithes or land-tax. He did not admit, with the Noble Lord, that the land-tax or the poor-rates were not peculiar burdens. Ile did not wish to enter upon the subject to-night, there being no opposition to the motion of the Noble Lord. He would not therefore follow that Noble Lord, or enter upon the discussion, as the consequence would be to anticipate that which would be brought under their Lordships' consideration in a short time. It was not his desire to bring about a foregone conclusion in antici pation of the inquiry which must shortly takeplace. To enter upon the discussion now would be to forejudge the labours of the Committee. Ile would go into Committee, though Ise still entertained the opinions which he held in Ib2o and 1522 re. CALEDONIAN JUNCTION. This was another petition of the Wilsontown, Morning side, and Coltness Railway Company, for leave to bring in a Bill to, make a branch to connect their line with the Edinburgh branch of the Caledonian Railway, the esti mated coit of which was 123,3741, The Committee postponed the case, to admit of the attend ance of an important witne,s: .The Committee adjourned at four o'clock. THE EXPR ES EDITION. SUN-OFFICE, Half-past Eigh, MPE RIAL PARLIAMENT (THIS EVENING.) HOUSE OF LORDS . The Lord Chancellor took his seat on the Woolsack shortly after five o'clock. THE CORN•LAW S. Lord CLARENDON presented a petition from the Borough of blusselburgb, in Scotland, praying for a repeal of the corn-laws. Lord RADNOR presented a great number of pe:i tions from different parts of the country to the same effect. - MILITIA. Lord MONTEAGLE presented a petition nume rously signed from Leeds, praying the Parliament would not at this period sanction the calling out of the militia. IMPORTS FROM IRELAND. Th e Nom]; LOUD, before sitting down, begged leave f l,t o t 067 holy a b hri t d h 4 -e e :s t i n district to give notice of his intention to move for ee rt a i n re t urn s, to a 'Lich he expected the House would have no objec tion. They were as to tl o im ount of the imports of grain into this country fre m Ireland. • I ROTECTION TO AGRICULTURE. The Duke of RICHMOND presented upvsrds of 200 petitions from various parts of the country against the repeal of the present protection to agriculture, and praying that the House of Common s b e di sso l ve d b e f ore any attempt was made to decid e the question. The peti tions were from the counties of Wilts, Kent, Berks, and ledalrgf meeting in favour of agr i cu l tura l protect i on in Chelmsford, in E Sex ; also p e t i ti ons f rom Stockbridge, f Scotland, from farmer s an d Hampshire, places in Wicklow, lismp sh o Berk shire, and Yorkshire ; also a petition from distillers in the sou o thers in the county of Somerset, and Lincoln, all pray ing that their Lor dshi p s w ould not alter the present ex isting corn-laws, and also praying that the meibaires pro- I posed in another place (House of Commons), which were calculated to cause so - much damage to the agricultural and other great interests of the country, should not receive the sanction of their Lordships, in the event of the Bill being passed by the House of Commons. The Earl of STRADIMOKE present e d a num b er o f petitions from different places (the names of which we could not catch) to the same effect. PECULIAR BURDENS ON LAND. Lord BEAUMONT rose to submit to their Lordships the motion to which he had given notice to enquire into the peculiar, burdens on land, the impediments which existei to the improvement on agriculture as well as to enquire into the present system Of Excise duties. Although he understood that it was not the intention of the Government to oppose that motion, their Lordships might probably expect that he would enter into the reasons why he submitted so important a motion to their c - msideration, and why also those with whom he had hitherto in general acted, refused to comply with .a similar motion when moved by other persons. 'ffe had ever upheld that peculiar burdens on land, and protection to agriculture, were matters very closely connected; They must regard both subjects from. the same point of view. Either they mnst remove the peculiar burdens on land if they attempted to re move the protection which agriculture enjoyed, or they must, in common justice, continue protection if they permitted those bnrdens to remain. He found that he was fortified in this opinion by men whose authority was of considerable weight. Ile found that Mr. M'Cul loch, " Mr. M‘Gregor, and if he mistook not, his Noble Friend on his left (Lord Brougham) were all of opinion that there were peculiar burdens on land. The object of his motion was to inquire what those peculiar burdens were. If it were submitted to his . choice whether the burdens of land and protection to •agriculture should be removed or both allowed to con tinue, he would have no hesitation in selecting the con tinuance of the burdens. and the continuance of protec tion rather than the removal if both, and be influenced in coming to such a determination by national con siderations, by economical considerations, and by motives of a sense of justice to the colonies. He believed that the continuation of protection would be the most economical bargain that the country at large could strike with the agriculturists. If they granted a sum of money for general purposes, in which it was their desire that all classes should equally participate. He believed it was for the advantage of the country at large, that they should make an agreement with owners of real property to pay this large sum of money for these purposes, in considera tion'tliat they should be allowed a duty on the importa tion on foreign corn. The motive on which he preferred this choice of the two was because he believed it would tend to make this country independent of foreign na tions, and at the same time encourage industry at home. He further believed that the adoption of that system had one great advantage, inasmuch as it would enable them to give certain other advantages to our colonies, and enable them to admit their corn at a lower duty than that imposed on the corn imported from other countries. But there seemed to be no longer a chance of having such a proposition as this submitted to their, and bespoke rather in anticipation of the possibility of protection being entirely done away with ; because, had he not an ticipated such a possibility, he never should have thought of submitting such a motion to their Lordship!. He Might hero as well state that the object he had in view was not to delay the consideration of the qu estio n of protection, because from what he had already stated he thought their Lordships would see that he considered the investigation of the peculiar burdens with the inten tion of equalising them ,as the consequence of the repeal of all duties there, as a measure by itself. Having thus, he trusted, explained the motive and reasons why he selected that moment for submitting his motion, and by implication shown the motives which induced those with whom he was associated for refusing to grant it on a former occasion, be would proceed with as much brevity as he could, to consider the peculiar questions which he thought the Committee must take into their consie.era tion. In speaking of those taxes which ware raised from real property, be wished to draw a wide distinction be• tleeen the two classes, into which he intended to arrange them. He found in the Poor - levy 01— C mi ‘ 5 §.9401 re- ~„ ~- I Of i, tlit.