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

IMPERTAL PARLIAMEN I'. HOUSE OF LORDS, June 5. Tbe Earl of SHAFTESIIIIter took his seat on the Wool few minutes before five o'clock. RAILWAY TRAVELLING ON SUNDAY. The Bishop of LONDON pr esen t e d a nume rously signed petition, complaining of the desecration of the Sabbath by the present sYstern of railway travelling en that day. The Right -ttee- Prelate proceeded to make some observations on the ettbioct, and was followed by he Earl of FITZWILLIAM, who said he entirely concurred in everything which had fallen from his Right Rev. Friend. Be was decidedly opposed to all commercial traffic passing on railways on Sundays, and he thought it was the d u ty of P ar . Lament to prevent t he ' present Sabbath desecration on rail ways. Lord CAMPBELL addressed a few words to the House in favour of some restriction being made between commercial and passenger traffic on the Lord's day. The subject was then allowed to drop. MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS. Messengers from the Commons brought up certain Bills. NORTH BRITISH RAILWAY. The Earl of H ADDINGTON presented a petition from the inhabitant s o f C o ld stream, against the proposed branch of the North British Railway from Berwick to Wooler, which was ordered to be referred to the Committee on the Bill. LUNATIC ASYLUMS ACT. The Duke of RIs'HNIOND presented a petition from the rate-payers of Ross, in the county of Hereford, complaining of the operation of the Lunatic Asylums Regulation Bill, to which he would call the attention of the Government. The 11111, he thought, was the worst of the many bad Bills that had been introduced into that House, and one which he thought should have been referred to a Select Committee at the time. There was one clause at the end of the Rill to which the petitioners particularly referred. It declared that every idiot was a lunatic. In consequence of this great alarm was excited in the minds of the petitioners, as well as throughout the country at large, as through that in terpretation harmless idiots, instead of staying with their relations or being maintained in an inexpensive man ner in the workhouses, were sent to lunatic asylums. Re considered that in the majority of cases a great affection was entertained by the parents for their children affected with • idiotcy, and they would feel an insuperable objection to having their children taken from them. He considered that Govern- Inent should take under their charge all the lunatics of the courAry, and that they should establish a separate institution for those persons affected with the earlier stages of madness or idiotcy, where, by a system of kind and, gentle treatment, the inmates might be restored to their e'ight and proper senses. The Noble Duke also presented a eirdtion from the board of guardians of the Ross Union to a similar effect. The petitioners stated that their expenses, 'Which now amounted to 8001. per annum, would be increased to 3,6001. solely for the charges of the maintenance of these persons. Lord ASHBURTON presented &petition to the same effect. Earl KINNAIRD presented a number of petitions from Manufacturing towns praying their Lordships to pass the New Corn-Bill as speedily as possible. LORDS HARDINGE AND GOUGH'S ANNUITY BILLS. The E ar l o f RIPO N then moved that the House resolve Itself into a Committee on these Bills, and observed, that as he had already had an opportunity of addressing their Lordships on the subject of the important services which had been ren dered to this country by these two illustrious individuals, be would not detain their Lordships for many mo ments. The first of these ails gave to Lord Hardinge an annuity during his own life, and during the lice of his two next heirs bearing the title, the annuity:of 3,0001. per annum. He was sure that their Lordships would not think that sum was Vlore than the justice of the case warranted or the generosity of parliament called for. But there was a peculiarity in that Bill, and also in that which related to Lord Gough, to which it w as his duty to call their Lordships' attention. The East Compan:r, as their Lordships were aware from what )iad fallen from him on a previous occasion, had granted very liberal annuities to Lord Hardinge and Lord Gough, and this Bill proposed that the annuities to be granted by Parliament should be suspended whilst the East India Company continued their annuities. The Bill relating to Lord Gough gave 2,000/. a year to him during his li . e. He would therefore move that it should go into Committe. Lord MONTEAGLE said he had a strong objection to the PeiPciple of the Bill, and he was sorry some more influential Lilly had not addressed the House upon the subject. rißills contained a provision unjust and unbecoming. and ch he considered would be detrimental to the public service. r°NW -ion was to the clause which suspended the public eatitude to those distinguished men because the East ss d ia Compa n y h a d recogn i sed them. What will be the con 37014e*tice in futu re ? Wh y , t h e East India Company will sse step forward, b ecause t h ey w i ll find that they w not backinmostg a miserable saving to th e E xc h equer. N ow he would strenuously protest against any such narrow principle ving adopted b y t h e i r L ordsh i ps ' House, because he believed ththat if they did adopt it they would en ail a bad principle upon treistuntry, which would finally do exceeding harm to the y. The grant of the East India Company ought not diminish the grant of Parliament. They ought not to allow t hat to i n fl uence them to curtail the grant, but it ought rather Fi rn ? he a m o ti ve f or i ncreased liberality. It was well for the ast India Company to reward them for services performed to then, but it was also the duty of the Government and the British people to reward these distinguished officers for ser s_Vieessnot done fur a commercial b o dy, b ut f or t h e nat i on at age. The conduct of the East India Company should be a teason for an increased allowance, instead of the grant being t Ortailed, stinted, and abridged, as it had been by the Go *eeroment.—(Hear. hear.) The Duke of RICHMOND hoped that he should have an °PPortunity of recording his vote against the Bill. It ap tared to him a shabby, mean, and saving piece of economy, 4i2 l 2 , ittent with the desert of the gallant o ffi cers, and was a fr i t, to the credit of the country. He was n ot p re p are d t o pritte4ple os sanction to a measure which he considered wrong in Th t 'ut most shabby in practice. In ih e e l a ri of RIPON said that he would be the last pe rson tordshi ps °ll " to propose anything mean or shabby to their ecos iorn The curt a il men t was not ma d e upon a pr i nc i ple of c ec i ent. 9, bat the Government had acted entirely upon pre- The Marquis of CLANRICARDE supported the suggestion of th e Noble Lord (Lord hlonteagle,) and he hoped he would !stillest it to the Committee in such a manner, as would not fetter the Bill. thThe Earl of WICKLOW considered that an adjournment of e question should take place, in order to give time to search 10r precedents upon the subject The Earl of RIPON considered that such an adjournment 'would have no effect, as he admitted there was no precedent to be found. The Earl of GALLOWAY said, it was impossible for the Rouse to estimate in money the services which these distil,- Stashed men had done for the country. It seemed to him that these individuals were entitled to a much larger amount than these proposed , and he for one should rejoice if her Ma- Bills b sty's mi n i s t ers h a d thought proper to propose a more li. berg sum. The House having then resolved itself into Committee, The Duke of RICHMOND moved that the 3rd clause, which Provided that the annuities proposed by the Bill should be sus- Pended as long as the East India Company continued to pay the annuities w hi c h th e y h a d gran t e d t o L or d s Hardinge and " l etteh should be suspended.-..( Hear.) The Eal of rapoN said, if they acceded to the motion of rue Nobler. Duke, the Bill would be destroyed. It ought to be 5 „,.." in mind, that the grant of the Government was pro ssr•ed to be extended to the two generations next preceding, "'doh did not apply to the grant of the East India Company. The Duke of RICHMOND said, that nothing was so easy as 414 Tor sh e , Commons to bring in a fresh Bill s h ou ld th e ,71vonent be agreed to. b he Marquis of CLANRICARDE supported the view taken Y the Noble Duke. Lord MONTEAGLE followed on the same side. Suppos '4 the E ast I nd i a Company had not made the grant, would t they h ave considered it their duty to have rewarded these t leti eßuished officers ; or supposing that Parliament made the .tit before the East India Company, and should the latter e or ra rY agree to a similar grant, would that be any reason Thee Government suspending their grant? aro Marquis of NORMANBY considered that if the the e nts proposed by their Lordships were not theereceivd by other House, they could bring in a fresh Bill on sub ject. The Earl of ST. GERMANS stated that had Lords Hardinge ~.4 111 1 Gou g h b een persons o f l arge proper ty no p ens i on wou ld hive been proposed at all. Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared-- Non-Contents Contents Majority against the Clause The Amendment was then agreed to. The Duke of RICHMOND then proposed that the same alteration should be made with reference to Lord Gough. The Earl of RIPON would not trouble their Lordships to divide upon the question after the opinion already pro llonnced in Lord Hardinge's case. The Amendment was then agreed to. RAILWAY LEGISLATION. Earl FITZWILLIAII rose to move the resolutions of VlLieh he had given notice, with referen ce to railwaylegisla tion,From a return which he held in h i s hand, the Bills „ " in progress before their Lordships involved an expendi t-i, ,of 90,000,000/. The greatest loa n that was ever is'e ain this country was 0,000,00/. The sum requ ired l e these railways was, therefore, nearly double the amou nt of t hat sum. He expressed the feelings of every individual cog- ent with monetary affairs, that it was necessary a stop shouldA be put upon railway speculation. He was not so a dded to any plan of his own, but that he would withdraw R - 2 Portion of his resolution , if a better one could be sug fh-u;ed• The great misfortune connected with the Bills was, tra m the were considered as private Bills. It was evident tC" the arrangements of both Hou ses of Parliament, that fn eY considered them something more than mere private Bills, th ey had classified them in groups, acordine to the wants of certain districts. The Government should take some large t nd c omprehensive measures with reference to them -,,0b1e Earl then proposed the followincr resolutions :-1. That all to:S il j ay Bills, which had been read a second time in their a That House, should be re f er r e d to a Select Committee. it be an instruction to select Bills not exceeding the t ni t e h n e n t H o o f u sixt y eof It,ilions. 3. That a message should be sent railways aa swe Commons, reque s ting a conference upon such Earl then moved t t h hen eiz o l ut i o. pending in Parliament. The Noble Earl D LH 0 might be to limit rally,. thought that, however desirable it Litt d to put a , n 4enterprise, and however they might tutted that after what had ta t° ke r n a 'iwaY speenlation, still he sub liament their Lordships could no placi• in both fleui,es of Par port the resolutions of the Nobl e tgarv;ith common justice, sup- At the commencement of this session a Committee was at , ". Parliament to consider the proprietr7 ted in both Hou-es of the Bills before the Legislature. h o ot Z ' o akin g c e a m m b e y to th a e a selection of report that it would not be advisable _ireveake these Bills. There was no intimatio n l a d der the - a selection of Gove , nment as to any course they g number of these Bills bad been now five 'h t should l „ dm u i h u ; ; sot t e eh . A great aideration of Parliament. They have expendedu Money, and no few of them have obtained the d elijo g r e a; lums of tion of Parliament. In common fairness they could neotsanc turn round and say to them, " shall now select th o , e 1 1 ) 7 1 7 . which we consider the best to be passe4." It would be tant e Mount to a breach of faith on the par t of Parlia ment. They had also interfered by establii , hing a sort of locus penit •htitrie in the shape of sessional orders. The prti-s had held meetings under these orders, they had setts. fled the tests which their Lordships had impos e d upon them, and it would certainly be unfair to turn round upon them and say that they could make a selection of those Bills. With reference to limiting the capital to be expended to 60,000,0001 , he was not prepared to say that that was the limit to which speculation could fairly be carried. Their Lordships had a remedy in their own hands, in the strict exer cise of the powers intrusted to them in committee ; if they would come to the consideration of the Bill, not so much with a view of determining if there was any fatal objection to the Bill, but whether they would, under the present circumstances, be advantageously made. He hoped, therefore, that their Lordships would not support the resolution of the Noble Earl. Lord KINNAIRD quite agreed with the Noble Earl who had just spoken, that it would be a breach of faith on the Part of Parliament to compel these companies to eo before another Committee. He did think that if time were given to the parties for consideration it would have a desirable result, while it would not be a means of preventing any good lines 1 from being proceeded with ; and also by limiting the time for making the calls it would greatly tend to relieve the labour marker. But he should deny that it was in the power of the Committee to remedy the evil, as the Noble Earl appeared to think, because in some cases lines of railway came before the Committee and were not opposed, and then the Committee had no remedy but to pass them. Lord ASHBURTON could not clearly see his way through the difficulty with which this question was surrounded ; but he did think it would be a means of inflicting great hardship upon individuals if railways which had made a certain progress were now to be stowed. The Duke of W.t.LLINGTON would like to see the in struction intends d to be proposed by the Noble Lord before he could consent to it. He thought it would be very inconve nient to allow all the Bills to be collected into one mass, before any step should be taken to limit them, and that would be the effect of the first resolution. Lord MONTEAGLE was of opinion that if some step should not be taken to put a stop to these railway speculations, the Legislature would find itself surrounded by difficulties. Many railways had been started, not because they were useful public works, but because they were mere speculations. He was of opinion that it would be weal to give parties, under certain circumstances, at least twelve months' time for consideration. The Duke of RICHMOND quite agreed with his Noble Friend in the observations he had made about speculative rail ways, but he found it would be an act of injustice to some to stop them, if they were now in progress ; bur, he would suggest that some measure should be taken to remedy the evil by the next session, and he thought the best way of doing it would be by limiting the means of borrowing money. He was also of opinion that the standing orders ought to be revised, and made more decisive. After a few words from Lord KINNAIRD, Lord REDESDALE admitted that there were de. fects in the standing orders, and they ought to be remedied, bui if they restricted the time of taking land, they ought to en large the time fo,.prepaiing the preliminary plans and sections. Earl FITZ WILLIAM spoke a few words in reply, and with. drew his resolutions. Several Bills vnthe table were advanced a stage, and their Lordships adjourned. HOUSE OF GOMMOIVS, June 5. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. EDIN G H AND NORTHERN RAILWAY (BRANCHES FRO\I THE DUNDEE AND AR BROATH RAILWAY, AND TAY FERRY IM PROVEMENT). This Bill was raid a third time and pas;ed. DUNDEE NEW GAS BILL. The Lords' aTnendmentson this Billwere considered and agreed to. STIRLINGSHIRE MIDLAND JUNCTION RAILWAY BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. GREAT NORTH OF SCOTLAND (EASTERN EX TENSION) BILL. This Bill was also read a third time and passed. ALFORD VALLEY RAILWAY BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. NORFOLK RAILWAY EXTENSION BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. GREAT GRIMSBY AND SHEFFIELD JUNCTION RAILWAY—( HUMBER FERRIES). This Bill was also read a third time and passed. BRISTOL AND SOUTH WALE"; JUNCTION RAIL WAY AND FERRY BILL. On the motion for the third reading of this Bill, Mr. H. BERKELEY proposed that the standing order No. 121 be suspended in the case of the amendments pro posed to be made on the third reading of the Bristol and South Wales Junction Railway and Ferry Bill, of which notice has been given in the Private Bill office. The amendm-nt wa. agreed to, and the Bill was read a third time and pasted. CALEDONIAN RAILWAY (GLASGOW TERMINI AND BRANCHES). The report on this Bill was brought up and agreed to, and the Bill was ordered to b. engr , s*ed. SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY BILL (MAIDSTONE TO STROUD, NEAR ROCHESTER). The report on this Bill wns brought up and agraed to, and he Bill was ord.r , d to be engros,ell. LEICESTER AND REDFORD RAILWAY. Mr. PACKE moved the consideration of the report on the Leicester and Bedford Railway Bill. Mr. V. SMITH objected to the consideration of the report, on the grounds that there was no traffic on the line. He would. therefore, move that it should be postponed until next session, such a proceeding could do no injury to any one. He hoped the Bill would be postponed till next year, when all the five Bills involved might receive full inquiry. Under the circumstances, he would move the further consideration of the report that day six months. Mr. HUDSON second 'd the motion. Sir CHARLES LEMON, as chairman of the Committee, would not have sp , ken had not the Honourable Member who had just sat down made some insinuations about the proceedings of the Committee. All he could say on the matter was, that everything the Hon. Member had urged against the Bill was as well stated, if not bitter stated, before the Committee than it had been now before the House ; and yet after a careful investigation and deliberation on the merits of the Bill, for ten days, the Committee decided unanimously in its favour. There was not the least doubt entertained by any of the members, and, therefore, he thought the result ought not to be interbred with by the House. The amendment was then withdrawn; and the report adopted. GREAT GRIMSBY AND SHEFFIELD JUNCTION RAILWAY. This Rill was read a third time and passed. READING, GUILDFORD, AND REIGATE RAILWAY. Mr. MANGLES moved that the report of the Reading, Guildford, and Reigate Railway 8,11 be brought up. Captain PECHELL said he had been waiting to ascertain what Hon. Member of that House would have had the courage to move the adoption of the report of the Committee upon this railway, far he should say that the line had been supported by the most extraordinary documentary evidence he had ever heard of, and which inflicted upon the committee very consi derable labour. The tati`es of traffic that had been produced were such as he thought would not he justified had they been produced by the London and Birmingham Company. The amount of traffic in carriages and horses and passengers hail been estimated at a higher figure than had been known to have been received upon the Lo ,don and Birmingham line. He thought that the reasons ought to have been stated why the Committee approved of the preamble on the single vote of • the Chairman. He should therefore move that the second reading of this Bill should be postponed till this day week. On the motion being put, Sir C. DOUGLAS said that he wasready to give thoreasons of the Committee which the Hon. Member had requird. He would beg, as one of them, to remind the House that in the report which the Committee had made they had stated that, in consequence of the circumstances pleaded by the opponents of the Bill, the Committee had delayed its consideration for several days. This circumstance they had stated in their report to the House. if the Honourable Member would refer to the last paragraph of that report, he would find that this circumstance was stated as a reason why, instead of re porting strongly, they had left it to the election of the House whether the report should be adopted or not. Certainly in the opinion of the Committee there were sufficient reasons for its adoption, and amongst thins was the fact that the number of shares in the company was 40,000 at 201. each ; the amount of deposit required by the Ac! was 24,0001 , but the money actually deposited was 92,000/, and considering that this sum had been paid in for fully fivemonths, the Committee telt fully justified in reporting favourably, although, in the ahsence of one member of the Committee, it was carried by the casting vote. The House then divided, when the numbers appeared to be-- For the motion For the amendment 5 Majority — 66 Mr. BARRY BALDWIN presented a petition in favour of the London and Warwickshire Railway. IRISH MIDLAND GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY. The Midland Great Western (Ireland) till (Mullingar and Galway) was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. SION COLLEGE ESTATE. This Bill was read a third time and passed. GORBALS GRAVITATION WATER-WORKS. This Bill was read a third time and passed. DUBLIN AND KINGSTON EXTENSION RAILWAY. This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be com mitted PORTSMOUTH HARBOUR PIER. This Bill was read a third time and passed. TOBACCO DUTIES. Dr. BOWRING begged to give notice, on behalf of his Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume), that he should, on Monday week, bring under the attention of the House the inordinate amount of crime and misery which is suffered by the country by the enormous duties on tobacco. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. Mr. YOUNG moved the adjournment of the House at its rising until Menday next, when he was interrupted by Mr. G. BA NKES, who rose to present a petition from Bridport, but he was interrupted by The SPEAKER, who declared him out of order. The motion for adjournment was then carried. BRIDPORT ELECTION. Mr. G. BANKE S resumed by stating that this vies the last day, under Lord John Russell's Act, far presenting public peti tions, and he trusted, th ere f ore , t h e H ouse would hear from whom it originated. It was signed by six persons, who stated themselves to be free and independent electors of Bell port, and that at the last election they had been par tisans to neither of the candidates. They stated that at the preceding election serious acts of bribery and cor ruption had been practised ; that these acts had been preva lent for a long series of years, and that this bribery and corrup tion interfered with their rights as tree and independent electors. The petitioners went on to state that some measure ought to be taken by which to protect the electors of the borough from being overborne in this way in the exercise of their franchise— that in presenting this petiti,n they were wholly uninfluenced by any private feelings, but they hoped that their Honourable House would show to the country in general and this borough particular, that the electors would b e p ro t ec t e d in the firm and independent exercise of their electoriat duties. THE POST OFFICE. Mr. G. BERKELEY begged to ask the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department, a question in reference to the puritanical attempt which was now being m:tde to close the post-offices in country towns on Sundays. He would wish to know whether it was in the power of the Postmaster-General to do this? Sir JAMES GRA ti AM said that the Hon. Member had been so obliging as to nave sent him notice that morning that it was his intention to rut that question during the sit tit , g of the House to-day ; and, .in answer, he begged to say that since then he had had no opportunity of consulting the Postmaoer-General upon the subject. He believed that the Postmaster-General had the power to regulate the hours of closing and opening the post offices of country towns on Sundays ; and he believed that re gulation was, that the letter-box was to be open during the whole day, and that the non-delivery of letters was coi,fined only to the hours of divine service. But the question of the Hon. Member was one of a legal character, which he was not at present competent to answer. POOR-LAW IN IRE 7 .AND. In reply to quest:ons put b Colonel RAWDON, as to the proceedings et the Pcur-law Commissioners with respect to a parish in ire•a-,d. were Alr. S. HERBERT stater! that the Poor-law Commissioners iss ts: n ot of the circumstances ; that they had a com e m ° appointed i er to inquire into the f.c *ewho had made a re port. whi c h h e should have no cbjecatinr: laying on the table, together with any correspondence. m o i f ate4 , l e th i r her BRITISH Sir ROBERT PEEL inti rented, in reply to ;he address Majesty had con (A:Pols Eiarn€reur:noui: —Re money to the Commissioners of the Britis u h se :ii to grant a sum of k Y for (:(3 the i P f ---._. Mr. H. movedRIC R H AIi turn of all Moneys to be raised under the Acts, whereby Railroad Companies have been incorporated , theb the lst day of January, 1844, and the let day of January,wee n 18464 distinguishing the sum to be raised as principa from the sums to be raised by loan or mortgage. Return of all money ;liable to be raised by A ets tor thu incorporation or for the increased powers of railroad companies, and for which Bills are now before this House; distinguishing the sum to be raised as principal from the sums to be raised by loan or umtgage, and claoifying Om according gl they hue paned ing out the Bill, but he did consider that a union-settlement was in principle a very good one. If the question came to a division he would support the amendment of the Honourable Member for Melton, and his only fear was that it would delay the Bill. which was so important to the poor of this country. Sir J. GRAHAM said on the abstrsct merits of the question he would not trouble them at any length, as it was the very same Pill he had brought in on a former session. The Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government, when he mentioned the introduction of the measure to the House, said it was a measure to limit the removal of the poor, but that it would not interfere materially with the law of settlement. Now that was the real nature of the Bill. His opinion on the mea sure remained unchanged, and he considered the measure would remove many of the abuses which at present existed. The law of settlement was a grievance in itself ; and that view of it was ably maintained by the Hon. Member for Derby. Adam Smith, if he remembered rightly, also strongly disapproved of its existence, and considered that it inflicted more injuries on the labouring classes than any other enact ment on the statute- hook. The law as it now stood was liable to grave objections, but he did not think tee evil would be al together met by the instruction of the Hon. Member. The d were several parishes at present in which the land was in the to hands of a few great propri e tors, and no person was all marry in such parishes, or to remsin in them should theyhap pen to get married. To meet such cases, therefore, he co ; - sidered there should be a new arrangement, so as to extend the operation of the law of settlement over a larger tract of c ountr y than these restricted parishes. By that means the proceedings of such persons as he had referred to would be counteracted.— ( Hear, hear.) He had had a communication from Mr. Chalk, the Chairman of the Board of Union , strongly in supp o r t o f t he substitution of unions for parish settlements. The Right Hon. Baronet read the document in question , which was in substance , that there was 14,500 parishes in England, and but 600 poor-law unions ; and that the substitution of union settlements, for the present system of parish settlement would allow of the free circulation of labour, and get rid of the evils of the present system. The Right Hon. Baronet read a letter from the Reverend Mr. Alcroft, Chairman of the Medway Union, to the same effect. He had a letter from another Rev. Gentleman, connected with the manage ment of the poor, to a different effect; his objection being that the able-bodied and strong labourer would alone be able to take advantage of the extent of range allowed under the present law, and that the weak and inactive would not be able to go beyond the limits of their parishes. If that objec tion were of any force, it would be that the present law was in favour of idleness—( Cries of " No, no")—or of those who were not disposed to make any exertion for their own main tenance. It was, therefore, no argument against the proposed change. Such were the opinions of those who had had expe rience of the management of the poor ; in addition to which he would add the testimony of Mr. Tuffnell, the Assistant Paor law Commissioner, who, in a report made in 1844, pointed out in a forcible manner the evils of the present law of settlement, and the necessity there was for such a change as that now proposed. The changes of the lion. Member, he considered were vo;un tary, still he did not think they were proposed in the manner they ought to be, and that in their present shape they might interfere with the proper working of the Bill. He had al ways thought the various laws relating to the removal of the poor should be consolidated into one general Act, as was now proposed in the Bill before the House. When they went into Committee he would then be prepared to give every explana tion on the various provisions of the Bill that might be required. In reference to the operation of the law as at present, and the changes which were now proposed, he would call their atten tion to the relative number of persons in the locality where they resided to those from other quarters, in the manufacturing districts as compared with the rural districts. In 1841, in the city of Westminster, 114,000 were born in the county ; 188,000 born elsewhere. In Liverpool 180,000 were born in the county; 103,000 born elsewhere. In Manchester 1Q3,000 were born in the county ; 55 000 elsewhere. In Birmingham 06,000 were born in the county; 41,000 elsewhere. In Glamorganshire 126,000 were born in the county ; 41,000 elsewhere. In Surrey 156,000 were born in the county ; 154,000 elsewhere. Compare this with the state of things in the rural districts. In the agricul tural county of Buckingham 127.000 were born in the county; and but 28,000 elsewhere. In the East Riding of Yorkshire, 174,000 were born in the county ; 20,000 e l sew h ere. In Anglesea 48,000 were born in the county ; but 9 ,860 else where. And in three hundreds of Norfolk 54,000 were born in the county; and only 65 persons elsewhere. This showed the law of settlement pressed on small agricultural localities. In conclusion he must say, that believing the in struction of the Hon. Member ( Mr. E. Denison) to be founded on a correct principle, should he press it to a division. he (Sir J. Graham) should feel it to be his duty to give it his support ; and in the event of the House affirming it, he %Tonle he able in a few days to submit the amended Bill to the House.—( Hear, hear.) Sir. BROTHE RTON considered that the principle of union settlement would be beneficial to the working classes, and at all events it would be much more just to the rate payers. The present system was attended with great expense, which he considered would be removed by the adoption of the suggestion. would be greatly Hear, he ar . ) Sir R. INGLIS could not see why, if the Right H on . Gentleman entertained such a strong sense of the value o f th e principle, he did not introduce it in the Bill f or w hi ch he now TheH sought en. r o e o mh h t a e i r n the sa td sanctionthat theof the treasureH o House.—( s e w .---- prejudicious to the manufacturing interests, and yet he said it would not be opposed by them, as they believed it would work immense good. But he contended that it would be most be neficial to the manufacturers, as they had congregated (for their own good to be sure) an immense c oncourse o f people around them, of many of whom they wou ld b e relieved. The measure had been announced with great triumph by her Majesty's Government, as one of those remedial measures intended to be introduced as a boon to the agricultural interests. But he considered it a very small gift, and quite unworthy of the Government. But the amendment would certainly be pre judicial to the measure, as, if it were adopted, it would throw it over to the next session. He looked upon it as another attack upon the parochial system, and that it would weaken the local ties which bound society together, and give parishes a tempta tion to relieve themselves of those persons who were no longer able to work, by throwing them on the union ; and believing this, he would reject, as far as in him lay, the amendment. Mr. C. WOOD could not take any step which would have for its object the severing of any of the local ties which hound society together. He did consider a union settlement was most necessary to remedy the evils which would flow from the immovability of the poor from particular parishes. If the Bill did not give settlement, he would vote against the Bill.— ( Hear, hear.) At the same time he was quite ready to vote that the Committee have a power to introduce a clause for union settlement. to a first, second, orthird reading ; and stating the term of years within which the works so provided for are to be completed. Agreed to. POOR LAW REMOVAL BILL. On the order of the day being read for going into Com mittee on this Bill, Mr. EVELYN DENISON rose to move certain instruc tions to the Committee connected with the law of settlement, but he was interim fted by Mr. I'. DUNCOMBE, who rose to a point of order. It was not competent, he said, for an Honourable Member to move an instruction to a Committee, if the Bill to be committed would accomplish the object the Honour able Member bad in view. Now, he maintained that the object of the Hon. Member for Nottinghamshire could be ob tained under the provisions of this Bill. It might be done by moving clauses on the Bill when it went into report. The Bill affected the whole law of settlement, and recited every Act of Parliament at present in existence connected with it. It was quite unnecessary, therefore, to have any discussion, or to waste their time upon any views of the Hon. Member. The SPEAKER said the Bill was to amend and consolidate the law relating to the removal of the poor, and without in-tructions from the House it would not be competent for the Committee to consider the law relating to the settlement of the poor. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE repeated his opinion that the Bill did in fact involve the law relating to settlement. Mr. G. B ANKES would not presume to offer any observa tions upon the opinion g iven from the chair, b u t h e did o bj ect to the lion. Member for Nottinghamshire having precedence on that occasion, because it should be recollected, that it was distinctly understood on the second reading of the Bill, that the discussion of its principles should take place, at this stage of its procedure through the House. If, therefore, they allowed that opportunity to slip by them, the prin ciple of the Bill could not be considered at all.—(Hear.) He certainly thought that he had a right of precedence of the Hon. Member for Melton. It would be in the rec Alection of the House, and especially or his Right Honourable Friend the Secretary for the Home Department, that no discussion should ensue on the second reading. And this course was adopted with the express un derstanding that whatever dispute might arise it should not interfere with the principle of the Bill, but only affect the provisions by which that principle should be carried out. He did not think it right that the Hon. Member should introduce any such material alteration as this, and he had in fact intended to ask some Member of the Treasury bench what course they intended to pursue in the next stage of proceeding? Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that his Honourable Friend who had just sat down had been perfectly right in the assumption that on the second reading of this Bill there should be no discussion of its principle, though he did think, from the point which had been started and the reasons assigned by the Honourable Member for Finsbury, that there might be some instruction given to the Committee to regulate its provisions. The Bill in no way interfered with the law of settlement ; it only had to do with the removal of the poor. The Hon. Member for Melton would introduce another prin ciple into the Bill, and he thought that the Chair was per fectly correct in the view which it had taken. of giving instructions to the Committee. He did not think the House was competent to introduce any alteration or principle whatever at this stage, and he conceived therefore that the House could not entertain what the Hon. Member proposed to do. Mr. HINDLEY thought the House ought to know what course they ought to take, for, if the speakers were correct, it was only another instance of the great inconvenience that would arise upon their usual mode of proceeding in such Bill , as these. Then with regard to the settlement question ; this Act would repeal the clause which it had been stated would not be meddled with, and then they would have to go back to the 13:h and 17th clauses of Charles 11. By repealing the clause which gave a settlement after forty days residence, this Act would give a settlement without any residence, at all. Another clause relating. to the law of settlement would also be repealed, though the Right Hot,. Baronet had stated that this Act would not interfere with the law of settlement at all. Now he considered that most important questions affecting the law of settlement were involved in it, at least so he thought as he had read the Bill, though he might be wrong ; but if the House agreed to turn over this Bill, by agreeing to have it read this day six months, it would be tvachirg a good lesson to those who had introduced this Bill.—( Hear, hear, anti laughter. ) Mr. DUNCOMBE would wish to a-k, did not this Bill in fact prevent persons who had had a settlement from being re moved ?—( Sir James Graham was understood to assent. ) Then he (Mr. Duncombe) would say surely that the Bill did open the whole question of settlement. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said it would only affect those who had had a settlement of five years. Lord JOHN RUSSELf, said he thought the more regular mode of proceeiin g would be to di scuss thi s ques ti on w h en t h e Bill should go into Committee on the second reading. But he did not see how the course the lion. Member suggested would effect the object he had in view, for as he (Lord John Russell) understood him, his motion would have the effect of remodel- hug the whole Bill. He conceived, also, that it was perfecly competent for the Hon. Gentleman to do that on the third reading which the rules of the House prevented him from doing now. Mr:. DENISON was very anxious to meat the convenience of the House. He trusted that after the discussion which had taken place, the House would allow him to proceed with the instruction to the Committee, of which he had given notice. He could not help considering that great inconvenience had arisen from the title of the Bill, which stated that it referred to the removal of the poor, whereas it would raise the poor rates in every parish in the kingdom, therefore every person who paid poor-rates would be affected by it. It was introduced as a measure intended to be reconcileable to country districts as regarded great towns, and was received with great approbation, hut it appeared to him that it would work such great injustice between different parishes, that he was anxious to draw the attention of the House to the subject. At present what was the state of the labouring poor, and the chief evils under which they suffered? They suffered from bad cottages, and from too few of them. Men were crowded together into small and single groups—that was one of the greatest evils from which they suffered. Lord Stanley had stated that one of the greatest evils from which the industrious classes suffered was bad accommodation. He (Mr. Denison) regretted to say that that inconvenience was not confined by any means to great towns, and the same warning voice which made the remark with respect to towns misht with equal justice have been applied to country districts. But it was not necessary for him to offer his own opinion on this point, beeaue there was an authority in existence to which the House could not refuse to attach importance. It was the Report of the Commissioners appointed in 1843 to inquire into the state of the children employed in agriculture. Mr. Aus tin and the Rev. Mr. Gutch, in that report stated, that the want of accommodation in the cottages of families employed in agriculture was the cause of much of the demoralisation which existed in this country. If this were to be allowed, the labourers would in some sort have a right of retaliation; within the depths to which they were thrown there would be still lower depths. This system prevailed throughout a large part of the country which surrounded the borough which he had the honour of representing, and might be said to prevail largely throughout the wolds of Yorkshire. In that county it was the custom to drive the labourers into the small towns, where they were obliged to take houses for their wives and families. But with this arrange. ment the farmers were not content. They required the men to be near to their employments, and consequently the men were obliged to sleep in some loft or stable, whilst their wages were to be paid partly in money, and partly in food. The wages, which were sufficient for the maintenance of a family when together were quite insufficient for their nutriment when they were separated ; and not only was there the evil of a de privation of food, but all those evils which arose from a division of a man from his family, and he thought this was a matter mweelnl tof worthyfive years,of consideration.tfie probability f i they s,t that we reno to m w a a n i t w f o o u r l a d osebtitalein a settlement at all. In his part of the country there were what were called close and open parishes. 'What was meant by a close parish was, where one owner alone held the property. In the southern district there were 60 parishes, of which 28 were close, and 32 open parishes. In the Loughboro' district there were 12 close parishes and 23 open. In the Sharillow district, 23 close and 23 open. In Bayscord 23 close and 33 open. In the Malton district there were 31 close and 37 open; and he had understood frem an Hon. Friend of his there were 41 parishes in his district, of which 29 were close and 21 open. He did conceive that this opened up a principle which ought to be taken into account. If these parishes were all thrown open, and the settlement was made a union settlement, it would obviate the great evil. It would remove the inducement to pull down cottages, and would prompt the individual proprietors to care for the destitute poor in their neighbourhood • it would prompt th em t o p rov id e em pl oymen t whilst the peopl e were in health and strength, and would occa sion a feeling for their maintenance when old age rendered them unfit for labour. The Hon. Member for Cornwall had said, that the first effect of the repeal of the eorn-law would be to awaken one thousand farmers from their sleep. The first thing they would discover would be the inadequate employment and remuneration of their labourers. They would find that the labourers were employed in their work at a distance of 4 and 5 miles from the houses, and that distance theyhad to return at night. There were many farmers who would prefer the building of cottages on their own farms for the accommodation of their labourers, to a diminution in their own rents. He believed that if this Bill were to pass, and the provision of which he had given notice were to receive the favourable opinion of the House, there would no longer exist any apprehension from the working of any antagonistic principle. The measure would re sult most beneficially to the interests of the labourer and the farmer. Their predilection for ancient statutes with respect to the parochial system should not prevent them from correct ing existing &Rises. He found that the total expense con nected with the poor-laws amounted, in the year 1834, to 7,597,0004, and in the year 1814, the corresponding expense was 5,440,000/. ; so that a saving of upwards of 2,000,0001. was made, owing to the superiority of the working of the new law over the old law. The Hon. Member concluded by thanking the House for their patient attention, and moved the adoption of the resolutions of which he had given notice. Colonel WOOD was sorry that his Hon. Friend should persevere in pressing his motion. He was opposed to the motion because it contemplated giving the poor man a union settlement instead of a parochial settlement, so that, as far as the individual pauper was concerned, the parish in which the union-house was placed would be charged for his maintenance, instead of the parish which was legally chargeable with the man's settlement. He believed that the day was not far dis tant when funded property would be rated to the relief of the poor, and that a rate, not exceeding sixpence in the pound, would be levied on funded and other property, which would furnish a settlement for the whole of the poor in the kingdom. He was opposed to any proposition which, after a certain number of years, would deprive the poor of their proper set tlement. Mr. HENLEY considered that the Government had taken a most extraordinary course in reference to the Bill. When the Government introduced the Bill they clearly said it shculd have no reference to settlement ; yet, notwithstand ing, the Secretary for the Home Department got up, and said he was quite prepared to carry out a suggestion which conferred very great powers of settlement. How such a course could be pursued he did not know. If the benefit to the poor was not clear and certain, they had a right to look at the inconvenience the measure would cause to the rate payer. He did not think that the man who was physically incapacitated from hard work should be put on the same level with the full-bodied labourer, and thrown into the union be cause he was unable to work. If the maxim of buying in the cheapest and selling in the dearest market was fully carried out, the inferior labourer would be immediately thrown out of employ. If the parochial settlements were to be broken down, he thought that the principle ought to be carried much further than was at present contemplated. He could not agree wilt the proposed instruction to the Committee. He was afraid, that as labour was the great charge upon agriculture, and as facilities would be afforded for procuring union settlements for the weak and infirm, inferior labourers would, of necessity, be tt rmn out of employ. He thought it was unfair to deal with the question of settlement as at present proposed, and should therefore vote against the motion. Mr. VERNON SMITH thought that the course pursued by the Government on the present measure was a most in jurious one. The aoveroment had interfered, on various oc casions of late %ears, without laying down any definite or practical principles. The law of settlement, as at present constituted, was a most unsatisfactory one. He should cer tainly vote for the instruction moved for by his Hon. Friend, because it would place the law of settlement on a satisfactory basis. He thought the Hon. Member for Mahon would find a difficulty in assimilating the averages he had taken with re spect to the unions. The only argument he had heard with t ka h ne e ed pl p o o rt o hd r ae,m o ff wfhr t oo h m e p r be p ef a ei r nr i rg s e h db ow, giving un a gs s o c mt r h i e b e e tm d o to the generosity of the l dispo se d to go so far as that, and he thereem p p p e l n c a y r t t s o h e . r t i h t , e i e passingorder gas u o o t f t o should give his support to the motion, because he thought it would lead to satisfactory results. Mr. NEWD EG ATE said that the present subject had been most fully canvassed in the district with which he was con nected, and he was assured that his constituents were as much opposed to the proposed alteration in the law as they had been to the measure of 1844. It would create feelings of dis satisfaction and discontent among them Mr. GRAINGER was of opinion that the principal argu ment upon which the Hon. Member had foended his motion for the instruction to the Committee had totally failed, and he should oppose the motion. Lord MORPETH said he would confine his observations to matters which fell beneath his own local experience. Many evils arose from the system of parochial settlement; in the welds of Yorkshire, near where he resided, more than three fourths of the persons removed had lived from their parishes more than five years ; he would therefore support the instruc tions moved for by the Hon. Member for Melton. Mr. PA CK E considered that it was most preposterous for them to come to a division on the subject, seeing that the country was not generally aware of the change about to be introduced into the Bill. Petitions might be presented against it, which might have weight with the House, and he considered the mea sure would only aggravate the evils which already existed, and he would therefore object to the instructions. Mr. DUNCOMBE said that he would have been content to have supported the Bill, had it remained the same as it was at first introduced by the Government. But now that the Secre tary for the Home Department had signified his willingness to support the instruction moved by the Hon. Member for Mal ton, the question assumed a perfectly different appearance, and . struction most unadvisa , he did consider that the bi ß y ig a h n t d H he on w . o B u a l r d on vo e t t e su ag p a p i o n r s t t ed an t y he l sue n h instruction. He would move that they should repeal all pro. - vision for the law of settlement, and that the poor of each dis trict be re'ieved in the particular district where the distress arose, and that the State should make a provision for the relief of the poor in such proportion as it might in its wisdom think proper. They might say that the time for such an arrangement had not arrived, but he contended that it had, for when they reflected on the great commercial changes which bad been made, could they any longer maintain the old principle of settlement? It was impossible. From all the towns except Stockport, these returns had been readily furnished. He was therefore compelled to move in the House that these returns should be furnished forthwith. From these returns, defective as they were, it appeared, 15,260 per sons were sent from these large manufacturing towns to the rural district. In Manchester, there was the case of one o'd man, who was sent back to his parish after a residence of thirty-five years. In the years 1841 and 1842, t h ere were sent over from Stockport to Ireland a great number of per sons, with families averaging from eight to twelve each ; but the clerk of the union of Stockport, with a strange forgetful ness, could not for the life of him tell how long these people had resided there. He did not know what would be the effect of his amendment, but whatever it was, he should have the satisfaction of placing it upon the records of the House.__ (Cries of " Hear.") During the recess he had travelled through all the manufacturing districts, and was pleased to see the marked improvement among the labouring classes. He believed that if the law of settlement could be altered with safety at any time, it was the present. He believed that an alteration, or a tiral abolition, of the existing laws would be met with pleasure by all elasses of the community. General JOHNSON seconded the amendment. He was satisfied, after thirty years experience, that the only way to give general satisfaction to the public would be to totally abo lish the present law of settlement.—(Cheers. ) Mr. BRIGHT had been at a loss to consider, from the speech of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, whether he in-' there was • The tended to oppose the Bill or to have a blow at the manufac t g ha t t he the t ' turers. The Hon. Member for Finsbury had been down in those parts of the country, and had possibly been endeavouring Hon. Member proceeded atten tioncapitalists to the welfare of labourers b an by the small capitalists. employed t Th© liou. NemPer should recollect ) when he spoke of the to find the grievancesf t e o lt ar a g m u o e n paid by the large Mr. BANKES was anxious to hear the opinion of her Majesty's Government on the general subject. He should, however, oppose the present motion, because he believed that it would have the tendency of producing a useless mass of unemployed labourers. Ttey must look to a different system than they now possessed for the protection of the common lands. Mr. RICE thought the motion would operate most cruelly and unjustly on many of the poor in all parts of the country. There certainly would be a great difficulty in remodelling the Bill; and he considered that the Government were anxious to know wh.ther the House considered such a remodelling neces sary,—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Ca HISTOPHER said if he considered the Bill would ben , tit the poor he would vote for it, but he was not of any such ooinion. A parish would not support its own p or, but great respect for the old pane England, parochial system of as he ' ,port on the whole union. He had a between the middle and considered also that some of the the poorer elas , es. He considered e t r h e throw poor, would inflict clauses of the Bill, instead of relieving the it engendered their su good feelings new burdens upon them. Mr. STEW f T was as anxious as any other person to see the evils in the present system removed , but he considered .the amendment which had been moved would lead t o some other abuses to those which already existed, equally objectionable. With respect to the question of general settlement he consi deredsent it an ev il ; any l aw upon th e su bj ec t w as a positive evil —( Hear, hea r I—b ut i t was necessary . O n g eneral grounds he was disp c . se d to support a un i on sett l emen t ; but he wouldßiplirewfeerre to tohpeaasrsthe iutoquea l sti a o , n v, fu i r t further debated. most Ifthepre objection able, u n l ess it was L T ON InDer 19r Aatlrteodn, accompanied by some such measure as that proposed. t w h o a , t ok t h e a t y tt e nZm eff e e n c t t nolfOlttybry., THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY MORNING, JUNE 6, 1846. • apathy of the capitalists in times of distress, that there had been several large firms which paid a great sum for wages i during the three years of distress, and had not received a single • shilling of profit on that labour. There was one firm in Hali fax which paid 36 40i0S. in three years fur wages, but had not paid a single farthing to the income-tax. The manufacturers did not consider the poor-laws a burden, and they would not come to the Ronse to be relieved from such rates. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE—You relieve yourselves by sending the paupers away. Mr. BRIGHT—It was not to be supposed that when the landlords of Ireland were expatriating their population, that the town of Stockport was to be tilled with these people without some effort being made to relieve themselves from this burden. The Hon. ssa i G. of n Be r Es t h , Ne to T population, sihNocwK t h seado Member did n o t represent the interests of the labourer in the manufacturing di s t r i cts, the party he represented, with whom oL o:io d he associated, an d w h ose bad passions he instigated, were but a handful comparative r vo e en G y h r a r o d es np b tel e re e imt n yaof n among the sternest oppone n t s o f the association which h a d e ff ecte d th e emancipation of indu s t ry in the rep ea l o f t h e corn-laws. just sat down had appea l e d to the report of the Government Cm w t h h e o m h a a el_ nufacturing operatives of Stockport, but he thought that the Hon. Gentleman should not have forgotten the report that had been made by Mr. Trimmer, one of the Factory Commis sioners, who, speaking of the injuries done by ma eltinery, stated that in Stockpert alone, in the years 1837, 1838, and 1839, no less than 340 cases had occurred in which persons had suffered injuries. whilst working in the cotton factories.--( Hear, hear.) And compensation by the master manufacturers hat been made in only two of those cases. He defied the Hon. Member to show that the landed gentry had so treated those who had been in jured in their service.—( Hear, hear ) The lien. Member had also said that the Hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Dun. combs) had no right to speak in that House as the representa tive of the working classes. Why, then, if that Hon. i'dernber was not, he would ask who was ?—( Hear, bear.) He felt him self bound to oppose the proposition of his Hon. Relative. The Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department had not the slightest pretence for saying, as he had done that evening, that the Government did not contemplate any material change in the poor-law. He contended that after the poor of this country had been worked out by the manufacturers, it would be unjust to send there back as paupers to the agricultu ral parishes in whi c h th e y were b orn .—( H ear , h ear .) H e hoped that the dis cuss i on o f thi s measure m i g ht b e pos t pone d to afford a better opp or t un it y o f ascerta i n i ng t h e op i n i ons o f the people at large.--(Hear, hear.) Sir T. ACLAND thought that the motion of his Hon. Friend the member for Mallon was entitled to a great deal of very serious consideratioa ; but in giving his vote for the fur ther consideration of the measure, he did not consider himself bound to adhere to the provisions proposed by his Hon. Friend. His great object was, that the main intent and object of this non-removal law should be attained, because it approximated in a great degree to effect non-removal altogether. Nothing in his opinion could be more equitable than that three years should constitute a settlement, and it would be a great act of justi'ce to that class of the poor men who were the means of creating the wealth of the rich. On those grounds he would support the Bill, and because it made residence a ground for non-removal. Mr. BANKES agreed with the Hon. Member that this Bill had many meritorious recommendations ; but still the amendments of the Hon. Member for Malton would have the effect of embarrassing the measure, and, therefore, he could not see how the Government could ap prove of it. He would also contend for it that this measure would be injurious to the agricultural interest ; but it would certainly be upset by the amendment which had been intro duced. He had no objection to the settlement of the question as to whether three or five years should constitute a settlement; but whichever way it was to be, let it be settled at once. If a pauper was to be removed, he could not resist it ; but if he was to be removed from one parish to another, at the expense of the parish, then one parish could defend it, for they had the means of doing so, and wonld resist the infliction of an addi- tional burden upon them, if they thought it was unjust. Those were the observations which he had deemed it necessary to make on the motion of the Hon. Member for Melton, which he should certainly oppose. Mr. SPOONER could assure the Hon. Member for Fins bury that he gave his cordial assent to the proposition that a residence of five years should give a right of settlement; and ne was further certain, that there was no disposition on the part of the great manufacturers of the country, to deprive the la bouring classes of that protection to which they are entitled. With regard to the question before the House, he should feel compelled to vote against the motion of the Hon. Member for Melton, as it would extend the power of the Poor Law Corn mi,sioners. to which he had a most decided objection. He did not think the way in which the Commissioners hid recently used their power furnished any reason for giving them addi tional infiuence.—( Hear. ) Sir J. GRAHAM wished to offer a few observations in explana tion on account cf what had fallen from several members. He ad mittted there was difficulty in defining what residence was ; still he thought that could be overcome in Committee, and he could assure lion. Members that both in the House and out of the House he would do his best to make the definition as clear as possible. With regard to the proposition of the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire, he agreed with the Hon. Member for Durham, as he was persuaded the change the former Member recommended would lead to most important conse quences, which they would do well to consider. It had been said that the Government had not acted with good faith in regard to the present measure, in supporting the instruction of the Hon. Member for Mahon. To that he could say, that since the Bill had been introduced he had had many communications with Members on both sides of the /louse, and the result was that he now thought that the mea sure would not be complete without such a provision as that which he proposed last year, and which was now incorporated in the motion of the Hon. Member for Melton. As he had previously observed, there were many parishes which had but few proprietors, and in which the poor were placed under great difficulty in obtaining a settlement ; to these a union settle.. ment would be a great boon, as it would remove the restrictions under which they at present laboured. He therefore supported the instruction, and if it were adopted by the House, the Bill, as amended, could be ready in six or seven days for pro; ceeding with. He was anxious tnat the measure should pass, and he would do every , hing in his power to facilitate it. Mr. BROTHERTON called the attention of the House to Lancashire, in which the parishes were in malty instances di vided into townships, each township supporting its own poor. Lord J. RUSSELL, like his Hon. Friend the Member for Melton, wished not to fetter himself in giving a vote upon that occasion with regard to any future vote upon this most difficult question. The difficulty of the question had certainly not been diminished by the course which the Right Honourable Baronet appeared inclined to adopt. He agreed with some Honourable Gentlemen, that where a man had been engaged in work for a long time in a particular parish he was entitled to claim relief from the rates of that parish when he was reduced to a state of poverty. Acting upon this principle the Right Hon. Baronet proposed by this Bill that a person residing in a parish for seven years should be eligible to relief, but his Hon. Friend the Member for Melton had stated that there were certain localities where there were no rates at all, and the labourer was thus driven to seek relief in a neighbour ing parish ; he was, therefore, to some extent, inclined to sup port his Hon. Friend's proposal; but then, by doing so, he would be inflicting great hardships upon particular districts, and it become necessary for them to consider how they could get over that difficulty. The question then being so surrounded with difficulties, he was most anxious to obtain every informa tion upon it, arid he was therefore prepared to go into Com- ' mittee upon this Bill, in order that they might elicit the opinions of those who were experienced in the matter. There were diffi culties, as he had already stated, in the way of adopting the plan of his Hon. Friend, but it seemed to him that those difficulties were increased when the Right Hon. Baronet opposite de clared that he wished the House to agree to the instructions. The Right Hon. Baronet said he should vote for them, because he thought they were conformable with justice, so that in fact the tone the Right Hon. Baronet had taken, made him the mover of this proposal, and if the House went into Committee armed with these instructions, the Right Hon. Baronet would alter the terms and ferns of his Bill ; and no doubt the Committee would be purely of a pro forma eharae.ter, and they would have the Right Hon. Baronet intro ducing an entirely new Bill. Now let the House reflect well upon this, and consider the circumstances under which this measure had been brought forward. It was introduced in conjunction with a larger measure of reform, and the House had had ample time for looking into its provisions. What time would they have, though, to examine either the principles of the clauses placed in their hands in the month of June ? He thought the best chance then, for them was, sur rounded as they were with so many difficulties, to go into Com mittee and consider the Bill of the Government as it at pre sent stood, and see whether the House generally was prepared Ito agree to its provisions. They must recollect, too, that the Right Honourable Baronet had several times changed his mind with respect to this question. At one time he was only for birth settlement, and now he proposed to alter that principle ;altogether. At another time, the Right Hon. Baronet had protested that it was highly necessary that Government should not hastily adopt any amendment upon the subject of the corn-laws, until they had seriously considered the proposal, and were prepared to carry it out through the medium of a Bill. He (Lord John Russell) must confess that he thought, after what bad fallen from the Right Honourable Gentleman, his opinions must have undergone an extensive ' and a very sudden change.—( Loud cheers from the protec tionist benches.) Up the whole, he was decidedly of opinion that the best thing they could do was to go into Committee on the Bill, and thus enable many gentlemen who were conversant wilih the subjeet to supply them with some valuable information bearing on the subject, and to tell them what they thought was the opinion of the working classes in their respective districts with regard to this measure. This he did think, that any further alteration on this subject ought not to be made without grave previous consideration.— ( Hear, hear.) Therefore, in giving his vote for the instruc tions moved for by his Hon. Friend, he wished to say, that if upon further consideration he found that no further alteration ought to be introduced, he should not feel himself pledged to any particular course by the vote which he should give on this occasion. —( Hear, hear.) Lord J. MANNERS admitted that the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department, had been rather severely dealt with during this diseussion.—(Hear.) That Right Hon. Gentleman had said, during the last year, that the Bill which he had brought in last year was a sound Bill, but, as it was objected to by the country, he was obliged to bring in another Bill more calculated to meet the wishes of the people. He wished to call the attention of the House to the position in which Members would place themselves who were disposed to adopt the course recommended by her Ma jesty's Government. They found the Bill introduced by her Majesty's Ministers as a sort of compensation to the agri cultural interest. But what would their astonishment be to find, at ten or eleven o'clock, a professed opponent of the mea sure giving it his support?—(Hear, hear.) He confessed he was much disposed to agree as to the course suggested by the Hon. Gentleman th e - Member for Finsbury, and, should be press the amendment to a divison, he should have his (Lord J. Manners) support.—(Hear, and cries of "Divide, divide.") Mr. P. BORTHWICK (amidst great laughter, cries of " Oh ! oh !" and " Divide, divide") said he rose for the pur pose of moving the adjournment of the debate, inasmuch as many Hon. Members were absent, as they were under a rens - apprehension as to the course which the Government intended to take that night w ith regar d to this question.—(" Divide, divide.") He thought that the people at large were e n ti t l e d to ask for an adjou rnmen t o f th i s disc ussion, ii in vid order that the measure might be fully considered.—(" e, divide.") Mr. B A NKES having seconded the adjournment, The SPE NKER p u t t h e motion, h Mr. DUNCOMBE rose for the purpose of replying to the remarks which h a d b een t h at evening made by the Hon. Mem ber for Durh am (M r. B right). That Hon. Gentleman bad said, amongst other things, that if the measures which were now before the other House of Parliament had been left to him (Mr. Duncombe) and his associates, they never would have passed. He had also said he had been in the ' manufacturing districts, for the purpose of fomenting discord between em ployers and employed. He was also pleased to say that with - regard to the feelings of the working classes he was totally in error. He (Mr. Duncombe) did not know what right he had to make his assertions, be cause he had the honour of sitting in that House for nearly twenty years, and he had alwaysi voted for a repeal of the corn 'laws.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Durham had not condescended to say who those persons were with whom he associated, nor did he now know to whom he alluded. He certainly . had h a d w h a t were ca lled League meetings , and he had always openly stated what were his. views as to ticket raestings.—(Loud cheers froth the Protectionists.) [t He had always said he would attend public meetings in favour of a repeal of the corn-laws, provided they were open meetings.—(Repeated cheering from the protectionists benches.) He had, of course, great objection to take part in the genteel comedy at vent-garden Theatre—(Laughter)— and he had also refused to tumble with certain gentemen at Sadler's Wells.—( Continued laughter.) An attempt was got up by the League in Finsbury to call into account why he did not go to Sadler's Wells, and tumble with them, and he openly avowed that he could not take any part with the League, be cause they did not submit the principle of free-trade to public opinion.—( Vehement cheering from the protectionist benches.) The working classes believed that the League, in bringing forward their free-trade measure, were not actuated solely by the desire of furthering the interests of the wosking classes, but rather to forward their own interests, and he (Mr. Duncombe) was of the same opinion Protectionist cheers.) He supported the motion for the adjournment in consequence of the divided state of feeling in the House, he would certainly take the sense of the House on his amendment. Mr. P. BORT HWICK, then withdrew to expressdr ewhismotthioeir sensenforan adjournment, in order to allow the House on the amendment of the Hon. Membet for Finsbury. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the amendment Against A The House la a j g o a r i i n ty d a i g vi a d i e n d st o t n he m a r m . eEndpmeennitson,s motion,-40 when there appeared For the amendment 92 Against Majority for tbe amendment —22 Mr. T. DUNCOMI3E moved that the House should go into Committee on Monday next—(Hear, hear)—and he consi dered that an amendment in the law of settlement would be more acceptable to the people of England than any debate upon the Irish Coercion Bill ; he would, therefore, move that the question should have a preference to that Bill on next Monday night. Mr. HENLEY said, the Member for Malton was not pre pared with any of his clauses. It would be monstrous to go into Committee on the Bill before the country would have an opportunity of considering the question. Sir J. GRAHAM said he did intend to give his o upp rt to the amendment s o f th e H on. Member for /Miter]. support to J. Graham) had certainly been opposed to both sides of the House to-night on the subject.— (Laughter. ) But he would ask the Hon. Member to consent to the proposed arrangement, by which time would be afforded to the House to consider those amendments; and if it was postponed till Monday, he would have an opportunity of conferring with the Hon. Member. He would then ask the House to go into Committee pro forma' upon the Bill. Colonel SIBTHORP said it appeared to him that the Right Honourable Baronet was glad to catch at any port in a storm.—(Great laughter.) It was then agreed to postpone the Bill till Monday. GREENWICH OBSERVATORY. Sir R. INGLIS wished to ask his Right Hon. Friend at the head of her Majesty's Government whether he had re ceived any report as to the dangerous state of the Observatory in Greenwich; and if so when that report would be laid upon the table. In the event of that report not being received he should move that the Hon. Member who had charge of the Bill would move the order of th. day upon Monday next. Sir R. PEEL said that his Hon. Friend (the Secretary of the Admiralty) had just informed him that the report had been received at the Admiralty, and would be laid on the table on Monday. Only he hoped that the Hon. Member who had charge of the Bill would make a motion upon it. ROPE MAKERS' BILL. This Bill passed through Committee, and was ordered to be read a third time on Monday week. COUNTY WORKS PRESENTMENT (IRELAND) BILL. This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be com mitted on Wednesday next. STEAM NAVIGATION AND SALVAGE. Sir G. CLERK obtained leave to bring in a Bill for the re gulation of steam navigation, and for requiring sea-going ves sels to carry certain boats ; also a Bill for consolidating and amending the laws relating to wreck and salvage. BRIDPORT ELECTION. The following Members were appointed to serve on the Committee on this election :—Mr. Christie. Mr. Cripps, Mr. Parker, Mr. Pakington, Mr. Th orne l y , M r. Serner. Lord James Stuart, Mr. Henley, Mr. T. Duncombe, Mr. Dickin son, Sir Wm. Molesworth, Mr. Banker, Sir E. Colebrooke, Mr. H. Drummond. and Lord A. Hervey. Mr. MACKINNON obtained leave to bring in a Bill to prevent the nuisance of smoke from the furnaces of steam engines. Mr. BORTHWICK gave notice that on Monday, on the question being put that the House do resolve itclf into a Committee of the whole House on the Poor Removal Bill, he should move that such Bill be referred to a Select Committee. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Half-past Twelve o'clock. THE FORD ABBEY ESTATE (PARTICULARS AND DRAWINGS JUST ISSUED). It is difficult to describe the immense sensation pro duced by the publication of these voluminous papers. Tee description of the estate, with its beauteous park and ornamental waters, which from time immemorial has been accounted the great and proud feature of the county—the demesne of 2,000/. a year—the sporting, with the seductive auxiliaries of fishing and hunting— all this (and the great leviathan of the west claims much more than it has credit for in this brief outline) would indeed be enough to awaken the latent spark of curiosity, but the historical account arouses extra ordinary sensation, and furnishes an interesting and perfect reminiscence of the MAGNIFICENTLY FINE ABBEY. The lady's name who has contributed, by means of her brain farm, to improve and render more perfect the his torical representation of the far-famed Abbey, is kept profoundly secret—her diffidence has placed a barrier that even Robins cannot overcome. It has been found expedient, in order to keep curiosity within bounds, to make a small charge for the drawings end plans. The subject of the Abbey is one of n:-ver-tiring praise; but we find we are verging from our original destination, which was only to point out a few of the great features connected with the history that is to follow—to the latter wo now commend the work ; it will bear to be read over and over again, and we shall be glad to find that amongst the host who are now busily engaged in this interesting task to number the one who is to be Fortune's favourite at the auction—(we learn it is to be a peremptory sale). Mr. Robins has judiciously selected a little spice from Lord Byron—he could not pass the talented Lord's glowing description of Norman Abbey without giving gentle praise to the author:— " An old, old monastery once, and now Still older mansion, of a rich and rare Mix'd gothic, such as artists all allow Few specimens yet left us can compare." The river Axe, so renowned by the disciples of Isaac Walten for its piscatory pleasures and delicious trout, winds in serpentine beauty through the fair demesne— Lost for a space through thickets veering, But broader when again appearing." It was here that— " The branching stag swept down with all his herd, To quaff a brook which murmured like a bird." It may be asked— " What more can mortals now desire?" The reply is concise. Read the condensed history that is just published. The magnificent tapestry that adorns . the state rooms alone would amply compensate for a journey of double the distance ; its value must be immense. Jeremy Bentham resided at the Abbey three years of his life. Some of his cleverest works issued thence. THE FOREIGN MAILS.—POCT.OFFICE.—The follow ing notice relating to ,the departure and arrival of the foreign mails was on Thursday hosted at the chief office, St. Martin's-le-Grand :—Vigo, Oporto, Lisbon, Spain, Gibral tar, Mediterranean, Egypt, India, and China. The next mails for Gibraltar, Malta, Greece, the lonian Islands, Egypt, India, China, via Southampton, will be dispatched from hence on the morning of the 20th instant. The Tagus sailed with the above mails of 3d instant.—Peninsular, &c. :—The Madrid for the Peninsular mails of the morning Bth inst.—lndia, &c., via Marseilles. The next mails for the Mediterranean, Egypt, India, and China, via Marseilles, will be dispatched from hence on the evening of the Bth instant. Dates of Mails from India, &c., via Marseilles, which ar rived on the 3d instant, are as follows :—Calcutta, April 22 ; Madras, April 23 ; Bombay, May 1; Alexandria, May 22 ; Corfu, May 24; Malta, May 27.—Malta Station.— Arrival and departure of packets: The contract steamer Duke of Cornwall, with mails from England, of May 3, ar rived from Gibraltar, May 14, and sailed for Alexandria on the 17th of May. Her Majesty's steamer Flamer, with mails from England of the 7th of May, arrived from Marseilles on the 17th. The contract steamer Iberia arrived from Alex andria on the 27th, and the Royal Tar appointed to sail for England on the 29th. The steam vessel Spitfire sailed from Malta for the lonian Islands and Greece on the 17th of May, and returned on the 27th.—West Indies, &c.: The next , mails will be dispatched from here on the morning of the 17th instant. The Severn sailed June 2. The Teviot due on the 7th instant.—Sydney, New South Wales: The Tra falgar sailed on the 3d instant, with the mails of the 2d instant. A Cunzous CoNrsirveresna.—Thursday morning the lives of several of the letter-carriers employed in the General Post-office in St. Martin's-le-Grand were placed in great jeopardy by the sudden disarrangement of pare of the new machinery recently erected in the establishment, used for the purpose of hoisting up the newspapers and men, and lowering them from the newly-finished rooms over the inland and letter-carriers' offices. The machine --which is worked by means of a powerful engine placed in the centre of the base ment—is fitted at each end of the letter-carriers' office, north and south. It consists of a series of flaps, about six feet apart, chiefly of wood, on a framework of iron, which are so constructed as to pass with facility underneath and over the top of the framework, thus rendering any reverse motion unnecessary. As the flaps reach the level of the ground floor, baskets full of newspapers and men with trays filled with letters are placed upon the flaps, which, wrhoiulendthaet machine strapping is in gear, is consta ntlymoving a moderate pace. Great care is required by the men in when h a ec platforms n g a n o yn even the acc b dw a e s hn k et e no t es the c a u n r s d mb i a n ye h s w t i e hn pie which h i n s g t rhe o eg n us a n lma ra d l lyl off e st tpha worked,re s t ie. eebut f l the minute wheels in connexion with the motive power be come disarranged, the shelves are whirled round with fearful velocity, and the men placed in imminent peril from the fact that if they do not jump off, or are dragged out, or the en gine momentarily stopped, nothing can save them from being crushed to death. Just before the dispatch of the letter carriers. yesterday (Thursday) morning, at al a' e'clock, when several of the men were t he travellinghrtfroafid prepare elupperg rooms (where fourteen divisions of them their letters for delivery) to the fl sudden disarrangement of the apparatusr tbooya theo place, machine, an dh a e shelves were lowered with frightful were dragged out as they force. Some of the men succeeded in jumping off; officers; one letter-carrier reached the floor by their brother_ violence upon his head, and one of fell with considerable _Pretty, had the greatest difficulty in them, named William others ( escaping from being crushed , by t i he flap abovehi him, Their terror none o f the men are injured exc ept t slightly. n u e t , y. how ln ev c e o r n , s c i a d u er s a ed tio t n he f m or t t o he dr s e a a f d ety tha o t f p te a rr rt o o r fatthtehoeffimcai official th e officers thus employed, a notice was on Thursday after noon p os ted in the office, prohibiting any one of them from going up or down the machine, except when the baskets or bags of a heavy kind are conveyed by it during the greatest pressure of the duty. ORANGES.—We believe we are correct in stating that, notwithstanding the large quanties of this favourite and de licious fruit which are annually imported from the south of Europe; the arrivals during the season, now about to close, have been unprecedented, both with regard to their extent and the excellent quality of the fruit. Several cargoes of this esteemed fruit have arrived within the past week, and up to the period of writing this notice, thus causing it, of su • perior quality, and in good condition, to maintain its position among the fruits of the now advanced sewn, to a much later period than i.e uvually the case. FRIDAY NIGHT'S GAZETTE, WHITEHALL, JUNE 3, 1846. The Queen has been pleased to present tho Rev. James' Dewar to the church and parish of Kilchoman, in the pres bytery of Isla and J ura , an d county of Argyll. vacant by the death of Mr. Alexander M'Nab, late minister thereof. The Queen has also been pleased to present the Rev. James Ramsay to the church and parish of Alvth, in the presbytery' of Meigle, and county of Perth, vacant by the death of Mr. Wm. Ramsay, late minister thereof. The Queen has also been pleased to present the Reverend Henry Beatson to the church and parish of Barra, in the presbvtery of List, and county of Inverness, vacant by the death of Mr. Alexander Nicholson, late Minister thereof. WHITEHALL, JuNE 4. The Queen has been . pleased to grant to the Venerable Francis Lear, 8.D., the deanery of her Majesty'q cathedral church of Sarum, the same being void by the resignation of the Very Reverend Doctor Hugh Nicolas Pearson, late Dean thereof. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Trinity Term, 9th Victoria, 1846. Th 111;day, the 4th thy (f June, 1846. This Court will, on Thu , aday, the 18th day of June instant, hold sitting'g, and will proceed in disposing of the bUsiness then pPru , ing in the Now Tria! Paper and Special Paper, on the said 18th"dav of Jane, an d on t h e two following days and on Monday the - 22 , 1 day of June inst an t, an d the five follow ing days. and on Monday the 29th day of June instant, and the five following days. BY TIM COURT. Read in open Caul t, E. Bennett. Cemmksiens by the Queen Royal Westmorland Militia—Captain E. IL Smith to be Adjutant. vice Bennett, retired upon full pay. First West York Regiment of Militia—Captain C. A. Baines to he. Adjutant, May 2. Herts Militia—Capt. E. S. James to be Adjutant, May 9. Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant of Devonshire. C. B. Celmady, ESQ.. to be Deputy Lieutenant ; Colonel H. R. F. Davie to be Deputy Lieutenant; IL Porter, Esq., to be Deputy Lieutenant, May 4. South De ; j Devon Stevenson,i Regiment S tevenson, Captain Es q l S . fi , oe, J. Ed war d s , Gent., to be Lieutenant ; C. 11. Webber , Gent. , ltitoiab—elCLaßpt.aßinr April 11 be to be Lieutenant; J. W. Walrond. Gent., to be Lieutenant ; J. Beer, Gent., to be E ns i gn • J. Ralph, ent., to be Ensign ; H. L. T o ll, G ent., to be Ensign ; J. Leader, Gent., to be' Ensign, April 16. Captain ; R. North D evon Regiment of Militia—C. H. Webber, E sq., to be C aptain, vim Fortescue ; W. C. /layer, Esq., to be A e 8 . e P t : t 0 Ridgway.bj Major; e ; n t s ., i r t o J. beEnsign,n. Williams, B l ar e. t . , - 11 . Clarke. Esq., to be Captain, April 24. t East Devon Regiment of Militia—The Hon. J. W. Colonel;For tenanctommission byy the Lord Lieutenant of LinliththgboewL. Lieu tenant 24. H. T. Hartnell, Gent., to be Ensign, First or Berwick, Haddington, Linlithgow, and Peebles Regiment of North Briti s h Mil itia—G. Hood, M.D., to be Ensign and Assistant-Surgeon, vice Clunie, resigned, May 26. WHITEHALL, Max 26. The Lord Chancellor has appointed John Phillips, of Hastings, in the county of Sussex, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. WHITEHALL, MAY 28. The Lord Chancellor has appointed John Richard Wood, of Woodbridge, in the county of Suffolk, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. BANKRUPTCIES SUPERSEDED. Edward Few, cabinet maker, Manchester. Stephen Knowles, brewer, Exeter. BANKRUPTS. Edward Clark, builder, Mortimer-road, Kingsland, to sur render June 12, at eleven, and July 14, at half-past eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Alsager, official assignee, Bit.- chin-lane, Cornhill ; Wickings, Finsburv-terrace. City-road. Charles Gordon Matthew John Hopkins. tailor, Portman street, Portman. square, June 16, at half-past one, and July 14, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee, Basinghall-street ; Meed, Bedford. row. William Mitchell, furniture dealer, Finsbury-place South, June 10, at half past ten, and July 3, at ten, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell, official assignee; Kinsey, Blooms bury-square. fWilloughby Marshall Smithson, printer and publisher, Canterbury, June 16, at half-past twelve, and July 16, at jseiulgejl,:vio-eehen3n:oßß,ar,tatitintdhgienehl egilv e t f nn u s:t rt rcpain o t f :dh ß Leee a a n wre k lieos r t u ,i p rsitt t ,f e aao y rfriN . ,c,Bihe J iaei o sn. h tekeo n rri s u: o rpjt n t. , ucGln oc a3l e .G; i s a , r l lcen a ennn s c i Sheet, grocer, Wileted-street, Somere=town, June official assignee, 18, Aldermanbury ; Russell ' and Co., H ig h Robert- s tre et. 15, at half-past two, and July 20, at half-past eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Graham, official assignee, Coleman street; Hill and Matthews, St. Mary Axe. John Davis Paine, publisher, Mitcham, Surrey, June 15, at three, and July 20, at twelve, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Tarquand, official assignee, Old Jewry Chambers; Richardson, Coleman-street. Paul Shawson and Thomas Beeston Young, druggists, Louth, Lincolnshire, June 17, and July 8, at eleven, at. the Leeds District Court. Kynaston, official assignee, Kingston upon-Hull; Huinphreys and Co., Chancery-lane ; Wilson, Binhrook. Hodgson Stelling, wool comber, Well, Yorkshire, June 16, and July 13, at eleven, at the Leeds District Conrt. Young, official assignee, Leeds; Williamson and Co., Gray's Inn; Carie , , Leeds. William Nortcliffe, dyer, Milk-street, Manchester, Jnne 15, and July 13, at eleven, at the District• Conrt. Leeds. Young, official assignee, Leeds ; Jacques end Co., Ely-place, London : and Battves and Co., Huddersfie'd. John Izleetham, gun maker, Richmond, Yorkshire, June 16, and July 7, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Hope, official assignee, Leeds; Kirk, Symond's Inn, London; Harle, Leeds. Robert Bleakley, bricklayer, Liverpool, June 16, and July 9, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court. Turner, official assignee, Liverpool ; Gregory and Co., Bedford-row ; Green, Liverpool. James Conlen, woollen-draper, Cheltenham, June 1 9, and July 21, at one, at the Bristol District Court. Miller, official assignee, Bristol ; Dowling, Gloucester. John Solomon, outfitter, Exeter, June 17, at eleven, and July 16, at one, at the E xe t er Di s trict Court. Hirtzel, official assignee, Exeter; Jones, Size-lane, London; Stogdon, Exeter. DIVIDENDS DECLARED. J. Brooke, miller, Gooderstone,Norfolk— first div. of Is. 7d. in the pound, on any Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Whit more, 13asinghall-street. J. Jenkin, , , currier, Old Kent-road—a div of 2s. 20. in the pound, on account of first div. of 4s. 6d. in the pound, on any Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Whitmore,Basinghall-street. J. Roberts and H. Hughes, linendrapers, Manchester— first div. of 15s. in the pound, on Tuesday, June 16, and every following Tuesday, at the office of Mr. Hobson, Manchester. A. Whitworth, cloth finisher, Greetland, Yorkshire—first and final div. of ls. sd. in the pound, on any Tuesday, at the office of Mr. Hope, Leeds. . • DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-street. T. Oakley, farmer, dealer in oil-cake, St. Albans, Hertford shire, June 30, at twelve—L. Williams, woollendraper, Oxford, June 26, at twelve. In the Country. J. Veysey, hatter, Exeter, July 1, at eleven, at the Exeter District Court—J. and J. Brooks, curriers, Glastonbury, Somersetshire, June 30, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court—F. Ward, rag merchant, Batley, Yorkshire, June 29, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court—D. Broadhead and A. J. Halero, stockbrokers, Leeds, June 29, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court—B. Clark, corn factor, Leeds, June 29, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court—J. and R. S. Holroyd, cotton spinners, Soy land, Yorkshire, June 29, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court—S. and J. Burton, chemists, king ston-upon-Ilull, July 1, at eleven, at the Kingston-upon- Hull District Court—W. Robins, June 26, at ten, at the Bir mingham District Court. CERTIFICATES to be granted, unless cause to shown to the contrary, on the day herein mentioise 1. R. Stephens - in, apothecary, SOW hwiek-street, Hyde-park, June 26—T. Williams, merchant, Fenchurch-street. June 26 —M. Griffiths and P. Pearson, tailors, New Band-stre.et, J one 26—R. and R. Weathellog, farmers, Stone, Kent, June 26 —T. Metcalfe, carpente r , Princes-street, Red Lion-square, June 26—W. Mills, glove maniacturer, Foster-lane, June 27—E. S. Ds kes, basket-maker, Romford, June 26—E. Morgan, coach-builder, Lisson-grove, J.tne Kltft, cheesemonger, South-street, Manchester-square, June 26 R. W. Sheppard, innkeeper, Ensham, Oxfordshire, June 26 —E. Darling, Berlin wool dealer, Ipswich. June 29—J. Bar coach-maker, Southampton-place, Eust(!n l quar b e 'rnill, Glatt+ wise, watch-maker, St. Martin's-lane, June 80—V. Elkins, E. H. Durdcn, manufacturing chemist, Pi tc com - e cester, shire, June 3 . C c la b a e r a fi p e s l i d d , e, Gloucester- shire, road, June 26—J. Emmins, 31. Jones, grocer, London, Juno 26—H. Docker, oilman, Pall mall,clothier, June 26. builder, Princes-road, Notting-hill, June 26—G. B. Earp, P ARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. M. Wells and J. Winn , Custom - house agents , Love. lane, Eastcheap—T. Sm i th and J. Hndnett, poneis, Brett e ll_l ane, Staffordshire —J. Thorney and T. Eark:,.inn., stockbrokers-- T. A. Kay and M. A. Sharwood, millin-rs, Davies-street, Berkeley-square -- J. T. Hill and N. Hill, jun., merchants, Speakman and Hull—A. Navlor anti Beckitt, rag mercha nts , L ee d s—H. RP.hßenoewdaennd, mercers,T.B.Salt T er o , th surgeons, .R ea y k d m e— an ß. uLdun Wright,v waggon-grease makers, Windle, Lancashire--S. and J. P. Boond, file manufacturers, Salford—R. Cunliffe, J. Hoyle, George Buckley, J. Hanson, and R. Read, stone masons, Scout and Rock, Lancashire (so far as regards R. Read)—W. Butterell and J. Leadbeater, grocers, Sheffield—S. Mason, jun., and A. Kraehenbuhl, commission agents, Manchester— T. Irwin and J. Jenkinson, hat manufacturers, Red Cross street, Southwark—J. Coulthard, E. S. Manico, and E. Coulthard, commission agents, E rook's-wharf, Upperghames street (so far as regards E. S. Manico)—T. Gray, A. D. Dangerfield, and G. H. Lovegrove, newspaper proprietors, Salisbury-square, Fleet. street—J. Fisher, J. Fisher, sun., T. Fisher, i. Fisher, H. Robinson, and J. Walker, lace mer chants, Watling -street (so far as regards J. Walker)—T. Shepherd and 'l'. Gledhill, tinners, Cleckheaton, Yorks gh illahe t Y d ire—. and A. G. Perkins, merchants, Austin-friars —F. Tk r an C. Gott and J. Jefferson, builders, Scarborough-IP. on and W. Williams, • C._3l`C_rea and H. J.Boord 8 ' Feldgate-street, Whitechvel (so manufacturing chemists, G t .r street — v Stevenson , s oGnar, fishdiGardiner, s r a I ; v sin D v ar i c k k h e o n u s s e an e , Loner . rearson, T. Marshall, w fa o r n a t s e r d eg m a an rds uf E ac . G. Eley, an .dT C. Baker, lace manufacturers, Nottingham ards H. Frearson). (so far as reg SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS. Robert Walker, warehouseman, Glasgow, June 10, and tGurardemnerliaTifil-ax—ff F July 1, at twelve, at the of f ice of Mr. Young, Glasgow. Andrew Flockhart, tanner, Kinross, June 10, and July 1, at twelve, at Kirkland's Inn, Kinross. Neill Macdonald, plumber, Glasgow, June 12, and July 3, at one, at the office of Messrs. Knox and Findlay, Glasgow. George Nicol, corn merchant, Newburgh, June 12, and July 14, at two, at M‘Nab's Hotel, Cupar-Fife. PRICE OF SUGAR. The average price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar, the pro. duce of the British possessions in America, computed from the returns made in the week ending June 2, 1846, ix 355. Bd. per cwt. THE WATERLOO-BRIDGE COMPANY.—Thursday, a one o'clock, a general assembly of the Company of Pro prietors of the Waterloo-bridge Company was held at the Crown and Anchor Tavern, Strand, to receive the last half yearly report, ending the 23d of February, 1846; Mr. T. 13ignell, a director, in the chair. Mr. Q. Powell read the report, which showed that the receipts from the tolls amounted to 7,1521. 155., and the total income, including 6501. Bs. id. stock appropriated, to 8,3361. 19s. 10d. The expendi ture consisted of 1,416/. 35. 10d. ordinary disbursements, in terests on bonds 1,295/. 165., and dividend of 3s. in the pound on annuities, upon 37,000/., due this bait-year 5,6251. The report, after having observed that all the railway companies which weie in treaty for the bridge had failed to prosecute their schemes, stated that the baiance of the last half-year amounted to 1,397/. 7s. Bd., and recommended a dividend of 35. in the pound, which would leave a balance of 650/. Bs. ld. toun thaniemousiy receivedin favour n o the df adopted, Co m p when Com pany. thanksl'he re p w chair man, and the meeting operated. o r were tw voted as ..., - .1.