The Sun. — London, England, 1837-05-22 00:00:00

important, and acquires so much more importance from the - political consequences depending upon it, and the precedent it may establish for an unsound and perni cious course of legislation, that we owe no apology to Orir readers for these details. It will presently be our duty to return to the subject, and we shall watch with great attention and jealousy the proceedings of the Ge aieral Assembly now convened in Edinburgh. The Go vernment appear to have their eyes open to the dangers of the case. We repeat, once commence a system of grants to the national Churches, and let any man predict—for we certainly cannot—where it is to end. The Bishop of London must watch the commence ment of the system with great hope and anxiety. We dare say he could make out as good a case for Spital fields and the eastern parts of the metropolis as Dr. Chalmers can for Edinburgh or Glasgow. We can not avoid indulging in one remark on the consistency of certain Noble Lords, who are in such haste to force oa measures relating to the Scotch Church, when only in possession of the partial information of the Com missioners relating to Edinburgh and Leith ; while they refuse to consider any Irish measure until they lave before them not only full knowledge of the in tentions of Governnient, but the actual decision the House of Commons on other measures only connected with the first, because they are all applicable to Ire land. Lord Aberdeen, Lord Haddingto - n, and Lord Wharncliffe seem to know how to adapt their legisla torial wisdom to specific cases.—Morning Chronicle. The Parliamentary support of disaffected Irish Pa pists was brought to market two years ago by O'Con nell and the priesthood, and the price at which it was advertised was the ruin of the Church in Ireland. The Parliamentary support also of the disaffected English Dissenters was brought to the same market at the same period], and its price was to be the utmost prac- . ticable injury that could. be inflicted on the Church of England here. A cabinet of corrupt political adven turers was satisfied to bid for both the dishonest price demanded. For the votes of the Papists it offered -Ist. Such an administration of the Irish Executive Government as should gradually vest all public func tions, political, judicial, and those relating to police, in the hands of Papists or of sworn tools to Papists. 2d. Such a tithe Bill as should not merely despoil the established Church of a large share of her ancient revenue, but should ingraft upon that system of im mediate robbery the recognition of a principle, by virtue of which every shilling of Church property should be hereafter conficated to . the Papists. 3d. Such a Bill for the packing of corporations, as should place the representation of Irish cities and boroughs at the mercy of the Popish priests. Happily, except in what relates to the abuse of the king's prerogative, and to the factious and corrula appointment of public officers, no part of the scheme has vet succeeded. The Ministers bidding for votes, have much resembled Irish peasants in their bidding for laud. They have tendered prices, thei:z ability to pay which they had taken no pains to ^,alculate. At the end of the second twelvemonth the whole rent from the very outset is in arrear, The tenants are in a state of palpable insolvency, and nothing remains for them but a surrender of the land, or holding on a tortuous possession. One Irish Church Bill has been strangled by its authors, because, under cover of com muting tithe, they could not smuggle through Parlia ment a law for its total extinction ; of a second, after an unnaturally long gestation, it looks as if they were about to miscarry—if not, to die in travail. Their Bill for wielding over each Municipality in Ireland for election purposes the rod of a Popish inquis;ition, is sure of meeting from the proper legislative autho thority its meet and, just reward. So far as con cans Ireland, therefore, or any permanent change in the law and constitution of Church or State in that country, the Ministers we say are bankrupt of promise, annd their whole plot has been defeated. Now for England. The purchase-money of the po litical Dissenters, likewise, was to be an attack upon our National Church. But a confiscatory Tithe Bil would not answer here. The mind of Englishmen would not end ure it. Th e mo d e of operation against the Church of England, therefore, was to be of neces sity by sap. A marriage Bill, with one for registration lit ' births, deaths, &e., was part and parcel of this course of indirect hostility, and after long blundering. such a Bill was carried, with how much benefit to the contrivers, or how much more of injury to the estab lishment than a mere demonstration of sectarian spite ;against her Clergy, we shall not now iiarire. It is ufficient to remark, that the Church of England has been in nowise lowered, impoverished, or weakened by this measure, cotc.paratively with the hopes originally cotertamed from it by those at whose suggestion it wa's introduced to Parliament. Another instalment of the purchase-morrey payable to political Dissenters, as the price of their partisan support of the Radicals in °ince, was to be a Bill for recognisi ng the " voluntary prin ciple," by dri v i ng i n t h e sma ll end of the wedge under the ,:ante of a measure for the better settlement of Church rites. Of this notable expedient, recommended both 1 y Lord Melbourne 'and Lord Morpeth, as one which riust prove prodigirmsly satisfactory to all parties inte rested, the prin.:in:le is briefly this, viz. a.foreible seizure of the lands of Bishops and Chapters, and wresting them out of the possession of their immemorial ow ners, on dye plea of improving their market value, for the betiO:rt of other parties not connected with the Clitire'a of England, and proFessedly bent on her de strtaction ! Twist this plausible invention as you will, it Is a systematic alienation of Church property, and 1 ranster of it to strangers. It is a version of The vo l:intary principle to the full as intelligible as the ex t inction of Tithe itself, or its transfer to Jumpers, Bumpers, or Muggletonians, would be. It is an nouncing to the Protestant Bishops and Chapter,— " You shall have no help from Parliament towards the better management of your own estates, but on the condition of surrendering them to a faction de claredly hostile towards the Church of England." In fact, it is a robbery cloaked over by a fraud, and one which the nation, whatever the House of Commons may do, will never cease to repro bate. The Conservative leaders have abundantly tc stifled their willingness to consult the interests, the scruples, the prejudices—nay, the caprices of those Dissenters who feel a bond fide repugnance to the payment of Church -rates, from other than fac tious and malignant motives, by offering, either as Mi nisters or Opposition, their concurrence in any plan which shall not involve a fresh encroachment on the rights of the Church and of the Clergy. The Church rate is now, and was from time which may be called immemorial, a burden upon the landed property of the realm. All estates are subject to it. They have been invariably transmitted, transferred, purchased, and en joyed, liable to that essential charge. The Conser vatives are ready to-morrow to release the land, &c., from the burden in its present form, and to substi• tute another mode of preserving sacred edifices from dilapidation, which shall be free from certain special ' objections raised against the existing practice. The inevitable condition, however, being, that the secu rity shall be equally solid, and the obligation such, in point of universality, as shall neither impair the amount of the fund, nor invalidate in any sense that principle of a Church Establishment which gives it a lien upon the nation as a whole. Whether this is to be effected by the imposition of a land tax, or by an assignment from the Consolidated Fund of a portion of revenue adequate to the emergencies of the service, we deem a matter of but secondary calculation. The two chief points are, that a just amount be secured, and that a fundamental principle be maintained inviolate. There is little more to add, but a remembrancer to all friends of the Church in Parliament, that the question of English Church-rates comes once more before the House of Commons this night, and that it behoves t hem to manifest to their countrymen an unrelaxed de votion to the most ancient, valuable, and sacred of all our national institutions. That stanch old English man, the Member for Westminster, will no doubt be in his place, and forward, both by speech and suffrage, to defend the true Catholic Church of England—pure daughter of the Reformation.—Times. Electors of Westminster ! we hasten to put you on your guard against a most villainous conspiracy which is now in active operation against your independence. This conspiracy is formed for a purpose no less atro cious than to make the recent disaster which has be fallen your representation the prelude to your perpetual degradation. The Tories, in availing themselves of the services of an imbecile apostate, had an object in view far more injurious to public liberty than the dubious success of sustaining in your representative trust the drivelling clotard who so shamelessly betrayed it. They well know that the faded fatuous &lel gentleman whom they have deluded and seduced to, their camp is impo tent alike to good or ill ; they reell know that the act of dire desertien which flung i.tretrivable infamy on the brilliant reputation of BurdEtt, and made Westminster an associate of his disgrace!, as it had previously been of his glory, is the last for which the fallen Baronet can be made availrble. Their object, therefore, is to supersede him the first opportunity by an implement more efficient for Tory purposes—one, whose name being unstained b'; apostacy, and whose influence un impaired by previous associations, may be used with out an outrwe:e on the feelings of those few con scientious Temes who prize political principle, character, and cons!miency too much to act in concert with a rene gade. - With this intent the anonymous Committee who acttsd in the late election for Sir Francis Burdett, with that activity in evil which characterises the Tories, has already hired agents for the purpose of canvassing those electors who voted for Toryism and apostacy, to transfer their suffrages on the next occasion to pure Toryism, of which Sir George Murray is named as the personification. This is the plot, men of West minster, against which we most earnestly and anxiously warn you. The wrong already inflicted upon you, and the odium which you have incurred by yourselves be coming parties to it, may be palliated by the fact of the inability of him who betrayed both himself and you, and the reflection that gratitude for past services, even more than the vile machinations practised against the ' free exercise of your franchise, produced the majority at the recent election ; but if you incur a perpetuity of disgrace, and of worse than political disfranchisement, by allowing the representation of your city—a repre sentation hallowed by so many reminiscences dear to the affections of freemen—to be permanently usurped by Toryism, you will become the scoff and scorn of every free and independent mind ; and Westminster, once a magic name, the mere utterance of which made tyranny tremble, and the heart of liberty heave with tumultuous 'exultation, will become a bye-word for everything that is base and degraded. Hence it is that we conjure you by all that is dear to you as men and citizens, by the duty ycu owe to yourselves and to your country, to repel the insidious advances which Toryism is attempting agaisist your independence, and prepare, by an immediate and active organisation, to retrieve your recent (Visaster. No time should be lost in effect ing that combination of force which in the day of trial is so essential to victory, and to the absence of which the late defeat of the Westminster Reformers is solely attributable ; for, notwithstanding the number of the former supporters of Sir Francis Burdett who remained neuter, and of others who, through a generous, but most culpable gratitude, sacrificed political principle to personal regard towards the apostate, and voted for Toryism, yet a sufficient number of the good and true men of Westminster—had they been one-half so well organised as their enemies—still remained to protect the city from the calamity which has befallen it. But trea son triumphed as the Tories have frequently done, not by superiority of numbers, but by superiority of dis cipline. It is to this, almost as much as to their cor rupt practices of bribery, intimidation, and other undue influences, that they are inCebted for most of their suc cesses. The Reformers, not in Westminster only, but in many other constituencies, arc miserably in want of the drill-serjeant. This is a defect which, in Westmin ster, it is especially imperative to supply without a mo ment's delay ; for if the result of the secret Tory can , vacs which is now in progress prove favourable, Sir Francis Burdett, the spurious Tory representative. might at once resign in favour of the thorough-bred, thorough-going, " whole-hog" Tory, Sir George Mur ray, and the faction might thus snatch a victory by surprise, as they have lately done by stratagem, of a more 'infamous description ; beSides, in the probable course of events, a general election is not far distant, and even if it should not occur so soon as anticipated, yet should the Tories, by any vile manoeuvring, usurp the Administration for howevet short a time, the trans fer of Sir Francis Burdett to the House of Lords—if he be not previously disposed of in some other asylum for the imbecile and refractory—will give Westminster the opportunity of retrieving its defeat, or allowing the seal to be 'fixed on the irrevocable fiat of its degrada tion. Electors of Westminster, you have made an enor mous stride in the way of evil and of political debase ment, by yielding to the machinations of Toryism and the suggestions of a misplaced and unseasonable grati tude in your recent choice of a Reprcsenta:ive—facilis descensus avelui—it is now more than ever in cumbent on you to be vigilant and active in recovering the ground which you have lost, not only to your selves, but to the Reform interests of the empire. For two years of one of the most important epochs of Bri tish history, you have been either unrepresented, or misrepresented in the House of Commons. At pre sent you have there only a mere " driveller and a show"—an apostate and a Tory. Shall your repre sentation be suffered to remain in this degraded posi tion, when the great contest for British freedom is being fought ? When history shall record the pro gress of the struggle of popular against oligarchic Go vernment, shall the electors of Westminster be handed down to eternal infamy, as either standing neuter in the fight, or striking against the principles of liberty, of which at one time they had been foremost in the assertion ? The time is at hand when you must give a negative to these queries. Now, therefore, men of Westminster, " Awake, arise, or be for ever fallen !" Morning Advertiser. Our labours for the reform of the criminal law seem at length to he drawing towards an end. The divi sion in the House of Commons, on Friday night, upon Mr. Ewart's motion to limit the punishment of death to cases of actual murder, though nominally a defeat of the great principle for which we have con tended, was such a defeat as affords us the consolatory assurance of future victory, and that at no distant time. It was one of the last vehement struggles of the bar barous system of legislation, against which the sen tcnce of enlightened opinion has gone forth ; but strug gles of this sort indicate less of the vigour of health than the agony of approaching expiration. A majority of one in support of the system, not merely of useless but brutalising executions, which Ministers wish to uphold, may be said with some confidence. o an nounce the coming doom of the life-destroying en geance which had too long in this country usurped the name of justice. If Sir George Sinclair, the Member for Caithness, and Mr. Lynch, the Member for Galway, who were both favourable to Mr. Ewart's proposition, had not been shut out on the division, the majority of one would have been the other way. But, as it was, the expression of the real opinion of the House was in favour of the abolition proposed ; for we find, on examining the list, that there were no fewer than „fifteen Whig, placeinen in the majority. Omitting those placemen, the instruction of Mr. Ewart to the Com mittee, giving them the power to limit the penalty of death to murder alone, was carried by a majority of 14. Thus the Ministers were virtually defeated, not withstanding they threw all the weight of their in fluence into the scale of exterminating law. It is a strange and curious circumstance that Ministers, who ' have shown themselves but too ready to sacrifice the great and noble institutions of this ancient monarchy to propitiate the advocates of organic or revolutionary changes, should cling with desperate tenacity to the established system of judicial strangulation on the scaffold, and become conservators of the gallows Is this the only portion of our ancient system of govern ment worth preserving ? Are the spectacles which afford a disgusting pastime to the rabble of London and other towns, and which, in the way of example, are of no other use than to familiarise the populace with cruelty, and . thereby make them more ready than they otherwise would be to embrue their hands in blood— are these spectacles, we ask, too precious in the eyes of our Whig Reformers to be allowed to be swept away by the advancing civilisation of the nineteenth century ? The spirit of the ancient common law of England was mild and merciful. The copious infusion of barbarism into our penal code is comparatively of modern date. Several of those capital enactments which Ministers now endeavour to perpetuate under the head of offences against the person are scarcely more than thirty years old, and the earliest of them not .older than the reign of Queen Anne. What a change has taken place since we first began to demand regularly and systematically the extirpation of punishments of blood ! Ten years have now nearly elapsed since we entered the field prepared to avail ourselves of every fair opportunity to expose the barbarism and prove the inutility, or rather the pernicious effects, of a state of the law, under which judicial homicide was carried to a most frightful extent. Romilly's honest and able efforts to civilise our penal code had proved abortive in all but a very few compara tively unimportant instances. Mackintosh, who took up the subject after his death, made one or two power ful speeches, and then fell asleep at his post. As far as the Whigs were connected with this question it may, indeed, be said " a change came o'er the spirit of their dream," for the Marquis of Lansdowne, when Home Secretary under Mr. Canning, added some three or four new capital punishments to the statute-book in his " improved edition" of the Ellenborough Act, without encountering any opposition in the House of Commons. Now we are to record the gratifying fact of a majority of the independent Members of the House of Commons having voted for the abolition of capital punishments in all cases except that of wilful murder. How would Romilly be astonished could he return on earth to see that enlightened amelioration of our criminal law defeated only by the influence of the Whigs themselves, and the votes of their subservient placemen I Combined with the Ministerial phalanx on this occasion we also observe the names of Sir Robert Peel, MI. Goulburn, and Sir R. H. Inglis. We had hoped that by this time the leaders of Conservative policy had been convinced that the best way to preserve our national institutions is to . root out the abuses which impair their use fulness, and get rid of those legislative errors which are opposed to the spirit of Christian civi lization. That the abolition of capital punishments, at least to the extent of Mr. Ewart's proposition, must take place sooner or later, we have no doubt whatever. It is not in the power of either Whig, or Tory noblemen, or both combined, to prevent it. Why then will a Statesman like Sir Robert Peel repeat the error which he committed in regard to the offence of forgery in 1830, and impotently object to improvements when he can no longer successfully resist ? With a sincere admiration of his talents, which ought to be de voted to nobler purposes than vainly endeavouring to retain some fragments of the broken tablets of sangui nary law—with a grateful recollection of thestruly con stitutional principles which he maintained and elo quently expounded when last in power—we trust we may be excused for wishing to disconnect his fame from the contamination of a system which enlightened opinion has irrevocably condemned, and which Whig influence can only respite for a time from its merited doom. We cannot avoid noticing a suggestion thrown out during - the debate on Friday night by Mr. Grote, to substitute secret for public executions. That such a suggestiOn should emanate from one of the school of " philosophers" to which that gentleman belongs does not astonish us. We recollect when he said the Poor law Amendment Act was not unconstitutional enough for him, and certainly anything more at variance with the genius of our free Constitution than secret execu tions could not be proposed by any body. Hitherto it was thought that executions were only had recourse to in the way of public example. Our legislators and our judges have been in the habit of disclaiming the doctrine that would make punishment partake of re venge or retaliation. Example, and example alone, is the professed end and object of executions. As examples, in all but the demoralising sense, they have failed—utterly and notoriously failed. The Duke of Richmond admitted and lamented their failure a short time ago in the House of Lords. Sir Robert Peel has no less freely confessed and regretted their failure in the House of Commons. In this state of things— while the public have fresh upon their memory the dis gusting scenes of popular licentiousness with which the recent executions of Pegstvorth and Greenacre at New gate were realised, up starts the ultra-Liberal Mr. Grote, and proposes that executions shall be conducted for the future in private. Does he propose private execu tions by way of public example 9 Does he recall the scenes of the dungeons of the Parisian Bastile and the Spanish Inquisition, with the hope of improving, by their revival in this country, the administration of Bri tish justice ? Mr. O'Connell reasoned better than Mr. Grote, when, as a remedy for the disgusting and bru talising examples of death upon the scaffold, he sug gested the abolition of such scents altogether. There was an able article on this subject on Friday in the Morning Advertiser, in which that complete abolition was advocated. We quote the following passage, as deserving the most serious attention. The writer, having commented upon the indecent conduct of the populace at Grcenacre's execution, went on to say, " The Frederick-st:eet murder, which followed directly upon the execution, and which is characterised by a still more contemptuous disregard of human life than the minder by Greenacre, proves the utter futi lity of the example. Executions of murderers pro duce fresh murders. If we do not wish to offer a premium for murder we must abstain from supplying a stimulant to the crime by the sanguinary familiarity and brutal vindictiveness of public executions." It is also worth observing, that immediately after the exe cution of Pegszvorth, who had stabbed his victim with a knife, the attempt to assassinate the Deputy-Chair. man of the East India Board was made with a simi lar weapon by the wretched Kearney. Stich is the moral efficacy of the death-scene on the scaffold ! Mr. Flume, in seconding Mr. Ewart's instruction to the Committee, truly observed that " sanguinary laws only tended to tender a people barbarous ; and this was a truth which the recent executions in the metropolis, at Gloucester and elsewhere, strikingly exemplified." And Col. Thompson asked " Was there an intention in any quarter to do away with the punishment of death for political offences ? The current of opi nion was strongly running against such practices throughout Europe ; and there was a natural anxiety to know whether this country was to be behind the rest ? " For our own part, we often recommended to Louis Philip to try some other experiment than that of the guillotine in endeavouring to put down the crime of regicide. He has at length tried the experiment of clemency ; and we find that he was not able to stir abroad without exposing his person to the assassin's weapon, while he relied upon the terror supposed to be inspired by examples of retaliation and vengeance, but has repeatedly appeared among the crowds of Paris unguarded since he gave an example of mercy in the case of Meunier, and has experienced a degree of personal security to which he had been previously a stranger. All experience proves that the most effective laws for the protection of both property and life are those which are most free from the stain of blood. On Friday morning.we commented, by antici pation, upon the statistical returns which were pro duced in the course of the debate.—Morning Herald. SECOND EDITION. SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT, (THIS EVENING.) HOUSE OF LORDS. The Loan CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at five o'clock. Mr. F. MAULE and others from the Commons brought up the Highway Acts Continuation Bill, and some Private Bills, which were sevsrally read a first time. Lord SEAG R AVE presented a petition from Cheltenham, praying for the abolition of the Window Tax. Earl RIPON said, as he understood it would be more con venient to the Noble Secretary for the Colonies that he should postpone his question and motion relative to the pro ceedings in Colonel Arthur's case, with the leave of the House he would postpone them till Tuesday week. Mr. BERNAL, and others, brought up the Glasgow and Ayr Railway Bill, the Shire Halls Bill, and other Bills.—Read a first time. CHURCH-RATES. Petitions praying for the abolition_ of Church-rates were presented by Lord Seagrave, from Cheltenham ; Lord Straf ford, from places in Essex ; the Earl of Burlington, and the Earl of Fitzwilliam. Petitions against the abolition of the Church-rates were presented by the Bishop of Salisbury, Lord Orford, the Bishop of Exeter, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Archbishop of York, the Bishop of Worcester, Earl Ripon, and the Marquis of Bute. The Marquis of SALISBURY presented a petition from John F. Murray, late an inspector of the National Board of Education in Ireland, complaining of being dismissed without cause, and praying for enquiry into the case before the Com mittee now sitting on the question. The Archbishop of DUBLIN had no objection to the in quiry, but he begged to state that there was an objection oil the threshold of such an inquiry. The inspectors were not the direct servants of the public...they were the THE SUN, LONDON', MONIDAY, MAY 22, 183'. servants of the Board, who were responsible for their conduct. They alone appointed them, and it must be left at their discretion either to retain or dismiss them, other wise they would never obtain a board of respectable gentle men to perform the duties. He was exceedingly sorry that he could not agree in the character Mr. Murray gave of himself; he would rather not then enter into a itaterfient of the facts of the case, as it might be their pleasure to order a full inquiry, at which he would rejoice. If the petitioner's private character had suffered from his dismissal by the Board, it was his own fault, for the Commissioners invariably kept from the public view any of the reasons, until they were challenged or forced into it,by the parties themselves. The Marquis of SALISBURY said he held in his hand a letter from the Secretary to the Board to the petitioner, in which it was stated that the only reason for his discharge was that of violating a rule laid down by the Commissioners, in writing and publishing a political pamphlet. He did not ques tion the discretion which must necessarily be placed in the hands of the Commissioners, but it was a pity that they should discharge him for one reason when they had others behind. After a few words from Lord RADNOR and the Mar quis of LANS DO WNE the petition was referred to the Committee on Irish Education. The Bishop of EXETER presented petitions from Nor thumberland, St. Luke's, Chelsea, Derby, Bradford, and Manchester, praying for an alteration in the Poor Law Amend ment Act. One of the petitions complained, that in the work houge of the Worcester Union the members of the Church were confined on a Sunday, while the members of any dissenting Chapel were allowed to go out. He gave notice that on Thursday next he would move for a copy of any order made by the Poor Law Commissioners relative to the subject. Lord ELLENBOROUG El said paupers who were very importunate to go out to Church came in in a much worse condition than vivn they went oar. Earl FITZ WILLIAM and the Duke of RICHMOND urged upon the Rev. Prelate the propriety of inquiring whe ther any such order was in existence. The Bishop of EXETER said he had heard several reasons against his motion, but he would still have the honour of sub mitting it to the House. The Duke of RICHMOND then moved that the Clerk of the Board of Guardians at Worcester be requested to send up a copy of any regulation made by the Board of Guardians, relative to the attendance of the paupers at worship on a Sunday.—Agreed to. It having been stated that Thursday might be otherwise en gaged, the Rev. Prelate gave his notice for Tuesday week. Lord D UNC ANN ON postponed the Committee on the Dub lin Police Bill, from Thursday till Tuesday. He said inquiries had been directed into the disgusting conduct said to have taken place at an execution lately in Gloucester. The She riff had made inquiries into the subject—he had examined forty witnesses, and not of them had seen anything at all dis graceful or indecorous. The paragraph in which it had ap peared was wholly without foundation. The Duke of RICHMOND was happy to hear the state ment, and hoped that the enquiry would tend to keep the lowest functioners of the law in something like decent order. Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought the country was obliged to the Noble Duke for bringing forward the question, and he had no doubt that it would do good. He had seen the evidence taken on the question, and he fully concurred in the opinion of the Noble Viscount, that the paragraph in question was without any foundation. Lord SE AG RAVE had also seen the evidence in question, but he had come to a different conclusion. He thought the paragraph overcharged, but not without foundation. It was clear to him that there had been much levity at the execution. The House then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour. Mr. CAMPBELL appeared at the bar and presented co pies of the regulations passed in India. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD presented a petition from the merchants and traders of Dundalk against the Mer sey Conservancy Bill. Sir R. BATESON presented a petition from certain shareholders of the Commercial and Agricultural Bank of Ireland, praying for leave to bring in a Bill to invest the pro perty in trustees, and to distribute the surplus among the share holders Mr. MARSL AND brought up the Report of the Corn. tnittee on the Stockport Improvement Bill. The Hon. Mem ber also presented a petition from Stockport against the Mer sey Conservancy Bill. SHROPSHIRE AND NORTH WALES ASSUR ANCE COMPANY. Lord CLIVE moved the third reading of this Bill. Mr. P. THOMSON opposed the third reading, and did so on grounds wholly unconnected with the merits of the Bill itself. The House had upon a former evening, when aßill was before it, relative to the Birmingham Plate Glass Company, unanimously decided that they would not consent to any Bill introduced merely for the purpose of enabling parties to sue and be sued ; bat that the parties must do that for which an Act of Parliament had been passed a few years ago—namely, to have the circumstances of the case inquired into, and then a Charter or Letters Patent would be granted to any Company who might make out a proper case. If the House supported him in the view he now took, well and good; if not he should not consider it his duty to look after Bills of this kind. All he wanted was that Parliament should declare some definite rule on this subject. He had under stood that the House had done so in the case of the Birmingham Plate Glass Company, on which occasion the Right Hon. Bart. the Member for Tamworth entirely approved of the course he (Mr. P. Thomson) suggested, and that Bill was thrown out. Under these circumstances, he felt it to be his duty to call upon the House to reject the Bill theca before it. Lord CLIVE complained of the unfairness of opposing the Bill at the present advanced stage. He denied that there seas anything out of the ordinary course in the measure before the House, as in the year 1835 Parliament had passed the Uni versal Life Insurance and the Argus Insurance Company Lals, embodying simillr principles ; and in the following year it passed the Westminster Fire and Life Insurance Company and the National Endowment Society Bills. In the present Session the Licensed Victuallers' Fire and Life Insurance Company Bill—a Bill the objects of which were similar in every respect to the present measure—had been introduced, and had proceeded pari passu with the Bill now before the House. All he asked was a measure of equal justice for the Society which he represented, and he trusted that the House would not deny that to him. Mr. 0. GORE said the present Bill had been introduced to Parliament at the same time as the Licensed Victuallers' Bills ; and, as he had been informed, previous to the third reading, a deputation had waited on the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to know if he still meant to oppose the Bill, and his reply was that he did not wish to oppose it farther, after all the ex pense the parties had been put to. That answer had been very justly given, and he hoped that the same considera tion would induce the Right Honourable Gentleman oppo site to allow the present Bill to be read a third time. The Plate Glass Company's Bill was not at all analogous to the one under consideration. It was a Bill for the purpose of opposing individual speculations in trade, for any one might embark their capital in the making of plate glass, but it was impossible that any private individual could embark capital enough for granting insurances on lives and against fire. Then, again, it was of no use to make application for Letters Patent, for, in a very short period of years, upwards of one hundred applications had been made unsuccessfully. Ile thought it would be ungenerous in the Right Hon. Gentleman to press his opposition to the Bill, now that it had arrived at its last stage. Mr. P. THOMSON, in adhering to his opposition to the Bill, did not think it necessary to re-state the grounds upon which he had taken that course.—( Hear.) The reason why do few applications were made to the Crown for Letters Patent was, that parties found it easier to come before the House than to go before the King in Council, where the matters were fully sifted, and the reason why so few applica tions had been acceded to, was that the parties would not abide by the first grounds upon which they applied for the Letters Patent. For instance, in one case the parties applied for Letters on the ground that it was absolutely necessary they should raise more money. The Letters were then offered them on condition that a certain sum of subscribed capital must be paid up, but upon those conditions they refused to take out the Letters. They were never refused to any body of men who presented to the Council a fair and proper case. —( Hear.) With respect to the late period at which he had , offered his opposition, he begged to inform Hon. Gentlemen that he received no official information of these Bills, and therefore he could not be blamed because some Bills had passed with the objectionable clause, and that he had hot been made aware of this one before. Mr. HARVEY said that perhaps many Hon. Members were not aware that the Right Hon. Gentleman was appealing to them to reject a Bill which it had been moved should be read a third time, and that appeal was made upon special grounds. Now, what was the nature of the Bill ? Why, its object was to enable the Shropshire Assurance Company to sue and be sued, a Bill of a common nature, of which others, with similar provi sions, bad received the sanction of the House. In his (Mr. Harvey's) opinion, it was hard and unjust to seek to establish a principle by making a particular measure a victim, especially as there was no ground whatever for impeaching the conduct of the parties connected with this measure, the entire capital of which, he understood, had been paid up. He thought the course proposed by the Right lion. Gentleman ought not to be tolerated by that House, inasmuch as if it was, parties would have to go to the Privy Council to get Letters Patent. It was somewhat unfortunate that this important principle had not been put forward earlier. The course of proceeding pointed out by the Right Hon. Gentleman opened considera tions of a very grave kind. What was the ground of objectio of the Right Hon. Gentleman ? Why one with which he entirely concurred, namely, that the course of the House when inquiring into private business was so lax, that it was, in fact, no inquiry at all. There was something extremely objectionable on con stitutional grounds in the course proposed to be pursued by the Right Hon. Gentleman, as it was, in fact, giving to the Treasury a most formidable and irresponsible power. Independent of that, in his (Mr. H.'s) opinion, it was fraught with great mischief. This Bill had gone through all but one stage, and it was most unfair, in his opinion, to say that the party should now go to the Board of Trade. On the broad principle of justice, which the House never disregarded, he thought they would not on that occasion listen to the suggestion of the Right Hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade. Mr. VI LL IE RS was the person who moved the third read ing of the Birmingham Plate Glass Company, and he felt called upon to say that not a single argument had been urged on the present occasion that was not urged when that Bill was before the House. Finding the Right Hon. the Member for Tamworth agreeing with the Right Honourable the President of the Board of Trade, he thought it was useless to divide ; ;:nd he, therofoxe, witl.drin-: the ^^eti,:P. Sir R. PEEL said that he had argued against the third reading of that Bill upon general principle. He conceived the general principle as muck applicable to the present Bill as it was to the other ; and he should, therefore, extend his opposi tion to it.--( Hear, hear.) Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when the numbers were— For the third reading Against it .. Majority 2l The Bill was then read a third time and passed. Sir E. WILMOT brought up the Report of the Commit tee on the Birmigham Equitable Gas Company. Mr. FITZ SIMON presented four petitions in favour of the London and Blackwall Commercial Railway. SUNDAY TRAVELLING. Lord J. STUART presented a petition from Ayr, against the clause in the Glasgow and Ayr Railway Bill for prohibit ing travelling on Sundays. Sir ANDREW AGNEW gave notice that to-morrow he should present a petition from the General Assembly of Scot land, prayi,ig for the introduction of a clause to prohibit tra velling on Sundays in all Scotch Railway Bills. Mr. TOWNLEY brought up the Report of the Committee on the Over Inclosure Bill. LONDON AND GREENWICH RAILWAY. On the motion of Mr. BARNARD the London and Greenwich Railway Bill (No. 2) was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. The Hon. Member then presented a petition against the Collier Dock Bill. AGRICULTURAL BANK (IRELAND.) _ Mr. WEST presented petitions from 810 shareholders of the Agricultural Bank of Ireland, holding a large amount of the Company's stock, praying for legislative protection, and to be heard by Counsel against the Bill for dissolving the Company, and investing. the funds in Trustees. Mr. W. S. O'BRIEN presented a petition from the house of Buchanan, Kinnear, and Co., of Limerick, and another petition from Mr. Walker, lace factor, parties employing several thousand hands weekly at their factories, against the same Bill. Mr. FA ZAKERLEY brought up the Report of the Poor Law Committee. Mea.engers from the Lords brought up several ails. CHURCH-RATES. Sir ROBERT PEEL presented fifty petitions from dif ferent parts of Staffordshire, against the abolition of Church rates. Lard NIORPETH presented a great number of petitions from the West Riding of York, in favour of the abolition of Church-rates. Petitions were presented in favour of the abolition of Chureh rates, by Mr. Tancred, from Banbury ; by Dr. Lushington, from the Tower Hamlets ; by Mr. E. J. Stanley, from Chester ; by Mr. Guest, from Merthyr Tidville ; by Mr. Ellice, from Coventry ; by Mr. Wilks, from Worcester, Wareham, Bos ton, and Curton ; by Mr. Pryme, from Elly, and several other places; by Mr. P. Stewart, from Lancaster; by Lord Ebring. ton, from North Devon ; by Mr. F. Buxton, from Weymouth and ten other places ; by Mr. Hindley, from Ashton-under-Lyne ; by Sir R. Ferguson from Nottingham ; by Mr. Lennard from Suffolk ; and by Mr. E. L. Bulwer from Lincoln. Petitions were also presented against the abolition of Church rates, by Sir William Follett, from Exeter; by Major Cumming Bruce, from Inverness ; by Mr. Pusey, from Berk shire ; and by Sir John Tyrrel from Essex, signed by 14,000 persons. Mr. L A MBTON presented petitions from certain lessees in the county of Durham, praying for just and equitable terms. The petition was a long one, and therefore he would not trouble the House by reading it at length, but recommended it to the particular attention of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer.—( Laughter.) Petitions in favor of the Ministerial plan were presented by Mr. C. Lushington; by Mr. Gisborn, from Derbyshire; by Mr. Angerstein ; by Mr. Wilbraham ; by Mr. Divett, from Exeter; by Mr. Ewart ; by Mr. Gillon ; by Lord John Rus sell; by Sir H. Williamson, from the County of Durham, signed by 19,722; by Mr. Baines; and by Mr. Potter, from Oswestry. Petitions against the Ministerial plan were presented by Mr. S. Wortley, from Halifax • by Mr. Mackinnon, from Pad dington ; by Mr. Villiers, irom Wolverhampton ; by Captain Alsager, from Surrey ; Sir John Y. Buller, from Devonport, and 40 other places in Devon; by Sir R. Bateson, from Sligo; by Mr. Richards and Mr. R. Trevor. ( Here Sir Francis Burdett entered the House, supported by Sir George Sinclair, and took his seat on the front Opposition Bench.) Mr. HUME presented a petition from St. Mary Islington, praying for the abolition of Church-rates. The Hon. Mem ber stated that a Clergyman of the Church of England, in order to turn the petition into ridicule, had signed his name " Jim Crow."—(Great laughter.) That signature had been erased from the petition, the parishioners having considered such an act an insult to the parish, and he ( Mr. Hume) thought it was a disgrace to the Clergyman. Colonel WOOD presented a petition against the abolition of Church-rates, from 3,000 inhabitants of Brecon. Captain WEMYSS presented a petition from Fifeshire, in favour of the abolition of Church-rates. Mr. HARVEY presented a petition from the Welsh Inde pendent Congregation of Southwark, to the same effect. Lord WO RSLE Y presented two petitions to the same effect. Mr. Sergeant TA LFO URD presented petitions from Read ing and other places to the same effect. THE BRITISH MARINES. Mr. MACLEAN begged to ask the Secretary of the Ad miralty, whether he had received any dispatches communicat ing the intelligence of an address presented by the National Guards of Barcelona to the Queen of Spain, charging tine British Marines with conduct,:which, if true, was disgraceful to the British arms. Mr. C. WOOD—What was the charge ? Mr. MACLEAN—That they had steeped their bayonets in the blood of their allies. Mr. C. AN 0 OD—I can state most distinctly that the charge is untrue.—( Loud cheers.) I have had accounts from the Officer commanding the British Marines in that part of Spain, and although a certain portion of the troops were landed they took no part whatever in the hostilities which were going forward. Mr. MACLEAN was quite certain they were most grossly libelled, and he begged to know whether the Right Hon. Gentleman had any objection to lay the dispatches which he had received upon the table, in order that the character of the British Marines might be fully vindicated. Mr. WOOD did not think it right to assent to the Hon. Member's demand, he having given him no previous intimation of the question, so that he might have looked over the dis patches. (Hear, hear.) Mr. HUMPHRIES presented a petition from 6,200 inha bitants of Southwark in favour of the abolition of Church rates. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Lord JOHN* RUS SE L L, before moving the Order of the Day, begged to state to the House the course he intended to pursue. He proposed to-morrow, or soon as possible, to continue the Committee on the Irish Poor-law Bill. Very probably that Committee would not be concluded before Friday next, and in that case the Budget would not be brought on on that day. After the Committee was concluded he proposed to have the Bill reprinted, and then to fix the third reading for some . future day. With respect to the Irish Tithe - Bill, the second reading of which was fixed for the 9th of June, he intended on the next Order Day afterwards to go into Com mittee on that Bill. • In answer to a question from an Hon. Member the Noble Lord stated that it would perhaps be necessary for the House to sit on Wednesday next. Mr. SHAW asked what was the intention of the Noble Lord with respect to the Bills for the amendment of the Criminal Law ? . Lord JOHN RUSSELL intended that they should go into Committtee, pro forma, and have the Bills printed be fore their further consideration. CHURCH-RATES. Mr. BERNAL then brought up the report of the Com mittee on the Church-rates Bill. The Report having been read by the Clerk at the table, Mr. A. JOIINSTONE rose to address the House. Ile could not agree to the resolution proposed by Government, inas much as by it a fund was to be raised for the purpose of supplying the deficiency that would be occasioned by the abolition of the Church-rate, in a manner that would be highly detrimental to the Church itself, especially as he ( Mr. J.) was of opinicn that the arr. °ant required might be raised in a manner that would not be detrimental to any party. The House had been called upon to support the Government measure, because the Dissenters had declared themselves unwilling any longer to pay Church-rates. No man was more willing than he Vt a; to give due weight to the religious scruples of his Dissenting fellow subjects, but he could not sec how a Church Establish ment was to be supported if so great a concession were made. It had been said this measure was a healing measure, and that it would give peace to the country. Concession did not always give peace—( Hear, hear)—on the contrary, he believed such concession would lead to greater agitation.—( Cheers. ) He would ask the Hon. Members for Leeds and Boston whether they thought this a healing measure, a ad if this would make peace between the Dissenters and the Church with re gard to the great questions that were agitated. The Dissenters had told them they would not be satisfied till they obtained their favourite proposition, the separation of the Church from :the State.—(No, no, from Mr. Baines, and vehement cheering from the opposition.) 111 r. B A INE S rose and continued on his legs for severe' seconds, amidst loud cries of order, order, from the Opposition Benches. The SPEAKER said that if the Hon. Member for Leeds thought the Hon. Member for St. Andrews had something that was inconsistent with the orders of the House, he might then interrupt him. Mr. A. JOHNSTONE resumed. In Scotland two-thirds of the Landholders were Episcopalian Dissenters and they paid the Church-rate without a murmur, because they consider they were under great obligations to the Ch urc h. It appeared to him that the people of Scotland might be di vided into three classes—those able and willing to pay for re ligious instruction, those unable to do so, and those who were well able, but were unwilling to do so.—( Hear, hear, hear.) One of the great objects of a Church Establishment should be to provide for the spiritual wants of the people, and he would contend that until the wants of the destitute poer were provided for, however they might increase their army and police, and however they might legislate respect to prison discipline, they could not expect permanent tranquillity or prosper ty. They must elevate the moral character of the people, or all their efforts would be vain. The • I-fun. Member here referred to the staters e its of M. Guizot, Minister of Public Instruction in France. relation to the demoralization existing among the lower classes of that country, and argued from it the necessity that existed for attending more clo:iely to the moral and religious instrue flea of thepeopie. _ He grieved that no remedy had been pointed out for the great evils to which he had adverted, and Ministers had held out no hope that that evil would be remedied if the measures proposed by them were passed.—( Hear, bear.) He trusted the house would agree to his amennment, as by of it no injury could be done to any party , and the property the Church would be fixed upon a sound basis.—(Che ers.) The Hon. Member concluded by moving his amendment. Mr. BA iNE S wished to know upon what authority the Hon. for Inverness had found his assertion, that the Dissenters were determined that the Church and State should be separated. He believed the Hod. Member had made t hat assertios un willingly.—( )He had no doubt that there were many Dissenters ,•'ho were desirous of having than' Union. separated, but that there was no such intention to the part of the geh,nral body of the Dissenters. - he would take upon himself to t 2eelare.—( Cheers.) The Hon. Member had asked whether the measure proposed to be in troduced, was the healing; me asure. He ( Mr. B. in answer. could say that it would be a healing measure. It tv,Ne not o. be said it was ineffectual, because it did answer the t. on every one.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He would take himself to say that the measure proposed by his Ma i 'e s ", te Ministers was a much better one than that proposed b) got flea. Member, and that if it was carried as proposed, l only would Church-rates be abolished, but the Clergy bette. paid The Hon. Member had said that there were 11 milli° ll of persons connected with the Church of England , and there was not Church room for a quarter of them ; he would ask whether the whole of that eleven millions were anxious o r de. sirous to go to the Church —(Cheers.) (LEFT SPEAKING.) TATTERSALL'S(THIS EVENING)* THE DERBY. 2 to 1 agst Mr. S. Stanley's Rat-trap 9 to 2 agst Mr. Greville's Mango 8 to 1 agst Lord Suffleld's Caravan '8 to 1 4gst Lord Exeter's Hybiscus 11 to 1 agst Lord Berners's Phosphorus 13 to 1 egst Mr. Wreford's Wisdom 17 to 1 agst Mr. Bowes's Mickle Fell—taken 25t-) 1 agst Lord J rvy's Achmet 25 to 1 agst Mr. Osbaldeston's Alabcmetm 25 to 1 agst Captain Gardnor's Benedict 50 to 1 agst Lord Chesterfield's Critic 70 to i agst Mr. Wreford's Wintonian 100 to 1 agst Lord Chesterfield's Sambo THE OAKS. 2 to l agst Mr. J. Day's Chapeau d'Espagne 9 to 4 agst Mr. Thornhill's Egeria—taken NAVAL INTELLIGENCE. (From the Haniphire Telegraph.) PORTSMOUTH, MAY 20.—The Blonde, 46, ComtrW dore Mason, was to leave Callao for Pisco, on the 23d Jr nuary, lnd would go on to Valparaiso. The Talbot, 2 9 ' Capt. Pennell, arrived at Callao, from Huanchacho, °noes' year's day ; the Cleopatra, 26, Capt. the Hon. G. Greir left Rio Janeiro, for the Pacific, on the 28th Feb., leav,ng the Dablin, 52, in that port ; the Pelorus, 18, ComrnaPcter Harding., arrived at Madeira, in nine days from Spith( ad, 011 the 21st ult., and proceeded on the following day for 1.130 Cape : Conway, 28, Captain Drinkwater, left the Cape for Ceylon, on the 3d March. APPOINTMENTS.—Captain Thomas Maitland, Corn mander Kingcome, and Lieut. W. W. Chambers to ti g Wellesley, the intended flag-ship for Rear-Admiral Sir "' L. Maitland, who is to command in the East Indies ; Lieut , nant George Morritt to be additional Lieutenant of the Hastings ; Lieutenants John Bowden and Henry Johnston, to Sheerness Ordinary ; Mr. W. R. Smith, Mate of th e Excellent, to the Seringapatam ; Mr. Robert Wilson' Purser, Mr. W. Living, and Mr. R. White, Acting Mall ter, Mr. W. Roberts, Acting Second Master, Mr. A. W' tham, Engineer, Mr. W. Forbes, Second Master, and Mr. W. Pearman, Engineer, all additional to the Victory, f or the service of the Wildfire and Fearless, two new Wer mouth packets, and to be placed under Lieut. J. A. St' yens, of the same service ; Mr. Michael M'Ennally, geon, Mr. J. P. Weston, Second Master and Pilot, and Mr. James Kealing, Clerk-in-charge, to the Romney ; M r ' Wm. Bailey to be additional Assistant-Surgeon to Thalia' Mr. Joseph Steveuen, Surgeon, and Mr. Samuel Donellfi Assistant-Surgeon, to the Hazard ; Dr. Mansell, Assistan t ' Surgeon, to Greenwich Hospital. THE EUPHRATES EXPEDITION. The Pembroke, 74, which arrived at Plymouth on Sunds7 last, has brought home the surviving officers and men of tbs Euphrates expedition, with the exception of Colonel Cher a nay, who, early in February, intended to go from Barb to Bushire, and from thence to Bombay, to endeavour the arrange with the Indian Government in carrying out ; plan of a mail communication between India and-Englse by steam, up the Euphrates. There appears no do ubt " notwithstanding the disasters which have attended this PO ° paratory expedition, that with steamers adapted for titrit purpoE.e, and when the navigation of the river is a 1 4 s better known by experience in passing up and down, tb s .., the passage from Bussorah to Beles may be made in WO' '1 days, even allowing for anchoring in the darkest parts of lb: nights, which on the first onset would be necessary ; bb when the river became known, the distance might gone over in fifteen days. Bcles is only about lu" miles from the Bay of Antioch, in the Mediterranea. o : a comparatively civilised part of Syria, over which cle / tance the mail bags might be rapidly conveyed to a ger mer, which could be periodically ready ; the distance fro° , Busaora4i to Bombay would occupy a good steaul er j ten days ; from Antioch to England would, unless be, weather prevailed, never occupy more than three w eek" so that when the system shall be brought into full p ig, the communication between Bombay and England migb be fairly calculated as not exceeding fifty days. L b : expedition, on its way down, was a little annoyed .uL. Arabs, a new tribe of whom was found at about eve," eighty miles, and who, generally speaking, are in d e pl' rable poverty ; they eagerly accepted the presents w ill % were given, but were always refused tribute, which th e t invariably demanded. It is a question, therefore, w l3 : ther these Arabs would always peaceably allow a st e d a ri traffic to be carried on on this noble river, as it we,"j be a considerable time before they would be sa tisn, that the advantages of fair trading would equal the f ,t r ,„ bate and plunder which they now casually pick up. 1.1 ",.• lonel Chesney, while at the ' mouth of the Euphrst e h ; surveyed that river from the sea to its junction with t i r„ Tigris, and from thence up to Bagdad, and some e,.„!' tance beyond. A most successful trade will at no great T e tance of time be created in this direction, mad also uP )7 0 Karoon River, fora distance of 140 miles from Buasoralit:o the direction of Ispahan, to a town called Ahwav, which are some heavy rapids not navigable, but bel; which portage the adventurers were told boats could,A, `used.-withiafety, and to a considerable distance eastvAP-0 On the 25th January 22 officers and men left Bagdad lit, their return overland to the Mediterranean ; they were °of tended by a few Arabs of various tribes, for the purpostelaer explaining who they were as they went along, being 11 t bs the nominal protection of Ibrahim Pacha, the heir t°, 0 Egyptian throne, and these men they found verh uscf u h io , they averted several threatened attacks, and in 0 °, 6 ;b0 stance from a party of 1,500 horsemen. They crosse d Euphrates River at the spot where the steamer was s l ed and where she now lies, bottom upwards, on the 30t",,c1 that month ; reached Palmyra on the Bth February , t - b Damascus on the 13th, Dalbec on the 21st, and Sn ub view of the Mediterranean on the 24th, at Be ir or whence they in a few days after embarked in the 1 3 ; 0 0 steamer, Lieutenant Waugh. The steamer at Bagdau„ left in charge of Mr. Hector, the Consul, and he inte rs eo' employ it in making regular trips for goods and Pa ss s oo gers to Bussorah and Bushire, a distance of n early miles.—Hampshire Telegraph. ......... The NEW FLAT GOLD WATCOi; The price in gold cases, with vertical movement .........£ 7 Ditto, with well-finished horizontal movement, in double- • . bottomed engine-turned cases, jewelled in four holes, g 4 ' with silver dial ... T. COX SAVORY, Working Silversmith and Joivell .f ' Cornhill, London. N.B. fhe Horizontal Construction is particularly rec0n103.44 for its superior accuracy. . I RTIIS. Cl rie° At Sholebrook Lodge, on W ednesday, 17th inst., LOY Fitz Roy, of a son. On the 19th inst., the lady of Fr e deri c k Farrar, Esq.''' . - street, Regent's-park, and Doctor's-commons, of a son. fsci d On the 19th inst., in Bedford-row, the lady of C. Morgau, surOn the 18th inst., at Tunbridge Wells, the lady S‘ra h of a son. MARRIED. -trot' of be On the 19th inst., at Kew, John Hubbard, jun., Escl", r of I ford, to the Hon. Maria Margaret Napier, eldest daug e late Lord Nap h ier. On the 18t inst., at St. Marvlebone Church, G e orge i d ly, to Catherine Eddy, youngest daughter of the Rev. J ohu o f Toddington, Gloucestershire. of On the 17th inst., at Rainham, Kent, W. H. pol ver u s o hte r " Abingdon-street, Westminster, to Charlotte, four th d W. Smart, Esq., of Bloor's-place, Rainham. to i fo i l; On the 18th inst., at Northampton, the Rev. Georg e daog Harvey, son of the late Sir L. Harvey, to Elinor, young est eto r er of the late B. Young, Esq., of Walton-on -Thames' a Re o f On the 18th inst., at Bath, the Rev. George B• sr " of Freckenham, Suffolk, and eldest son of .1. G . ri ,`,ll:igh te Bowling House, Yorkshire, to Catherine Anne, se cond the late W. Robertson, M.D., Bath. DIED. On the 21st inst., Susannah, relict of the late 1 1 ° 1 d o, Atkinson, Esq., of the Royal Mint, in her 79th year*: . age o , of On the 10th inst., Mr. Jas. Searle, late of Camb°"infant On the 9th inst., aged 13 months, Henry Daugir o ' n d o n S v c , C. the Rev. J. A. Giles, Head Master of the city of On the 12th inst., in Prospect-row, .Mile-ead-r°'" IlArr ict Thornhill, aged 33. Mrs. On the 12th in Union-row, Camberwell, Surrey,pier Hester Back, aged 85. Sam uel Ga Y° " On the 18th inst., at Old Brompton, aged 24, - Sir Esq., of Trinity College, Cambridge, youngest so' Gambier. I ) einted and Published by 311.111 - :7,trauti, at The thiiee, il2. t .°ll of Aliddleserx.—)fonday, May 22, 1407.