The Sun. — London, England, 1848-07-04 00:00:00

nal ad ea . or im flits mid LX11... Is a ;hey fern left rown im )e to es of mpe- I the the e, to Dubs e the thaw pro dent, eme pro- ab- GO!. ..J - ion, himself a resident planter, and cultivating his own 'estate in Jamaica. That Hon. Gentleman said, speak. ing of the agricultural state of the parish of St. Andrew, that in 1812 it contained twenty-two sugar estates, which yielded 3,000 hogsheads of sugar at 60.000/, and with the rum, Sce., produced altogether 175,000/. per annum; whereas in 1847 there were only twelve estates, yielding only five hogsh e ad s of su ga r, the entire income amount ing to 15,9001., showing a deficiency in the annual pro duction of that single parish of 159,0001. The same gentleman went on to say, that he himself 'as a ruined man—that the estate which some years ago gave him an income of 10,000/., did not now produce as many pence. This was strong evidence to show that the residents were suffering just as much as the owners of estates residing in this country. He re gretted to be obliged to say that the Noble Lord at the head of the colonial department seemed much disposed to act the part of a dictator, and assume the power of governing these colonies according to his own will, pay ing no attention to the statement of the planters or go vernor. He would not impute to Lord Grey, or the - Under Secretary, that which was imputable to the office itself, which he regarded as the worst administered of the Government departments, owing in a great degree to the diversity of interests concerned, the number of our colonial possessions, and the utter impossi bility of any ono man, however great his talents, 'usefully and efficiently to superintend them all. He saw no reason why there should not he a board con stituted for the colonies similar to the Board of Admi ralty. But to return to the condition of the colonies, he found that within the last seven years there had been a dimunition in West India exports alone of 1,069,000/. He would not now enter into the question of free trade, falsely so called—free imports, he would rather call it, or unlimited encouragement to foreign manufactures. It was said that the continuance of protection would be a retrograde movement as regarded free trade; but he contended that there could be no free trade without strict reciprocity, thereby producing cheap prices and -cheap labour. The free-trade party—the Manchester party, he would call them— invariably argued as though cheap prices would be an advantage; but it was of much more importance to the labourer to have constant em ployment and remunerative wages, than to be enabled to buy his sugar at a penny or twopence per pound cheaper. Admitting the disturbing influences of the destruction of the potato crop in 1846, a bad harvest and the consequent mercantile depression, he was still convinced that the longer free trade measures were persisted in, the greater would be the difficulties in which the country would be involved. Calico, which a few years ago cost 12d. or 13d. a yard, was now produced at Manchester for 2, 1 2 -d. Supposing a further reduction to 11A., how was the manufacturer to be remu nerated for his capital, and at the same time give good Wages to his labourer? At the bidding of the econo mists, protection had been taken away from some in terests; the consequence was mutual jealousy amongst all interests, and a desire to deprive those of !protection which still enjoyed it. He did not advocate protection for the sake of the landed interest, the West Indians, or the shipowners; but for the sake of supporting the sys tem under which this country existed, and enabling it to yield the vast amount of taxation which it had to bear. Already the effects of free trade had been manifest in the revenue; and while rejoicing to hear the statement which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had made in his second budget on Friday night, he was still op posed to any further relaxation of protection. As to the West Indies, sound policy and the interests of the em pire at large demanded that they should have a pro tection of 10s. for fully six years, to enable them success fully to struggle with the intense competition of slave labour. The proposition of the Government assumed that our colonists would eventually be able to compete rwith Cuba and Brazil, by a very slight increase of the 'existing differential duties. This was nothing more than " letting them down easily," and their ultimate ruin would be inevitable. He regarded these colonies as a main source of wealth and power to this country; he therefore objected to do anything injurious to their in terests, which might perhaps convert them into open hostility, and lead to their becoming appendages of another nation. There was a general impression in the colonies that injustice had been done them by Parlia ment. How would the Government proceed if - they re solved on stopping the supplies? In British Guiana they had already refused to vote the supplies for more than three months; and if this example were acted on, the Government might find themselves in an extremely difficult position. The Honourable Member for Northampton had said that there was no bargain with the colonies at the time the Emancipation Act was passed; but if no bargain, there had certainly been a contract, both in 1834 and since, to the effect that the West Indians should be protected against the slave islands, by having a preference for their produce in the home market. This principle had been recog nised over and over again by the various ministers who had held office down to 1845, and ratified by large ma jorities of the House. Now it was said we could not exclude slave-grown sugar, on account of certain treaties with the United States and Venezuela, which admitted their produce on the terms of the most favoured nations. Mut why on this account throw the sugar trade into the hands of the Cubans and the Brazilians, to whom we owed no obligation? He admitted that those who sat on his side of the House differed as to the amount of pro tection necessary; but that difference was no greater than existed amongst the supporters of' Ministers. He rejoiced that the question had at length been placed on such a footing that the House must either affirm the proposition of Government or the recommendations of the West Indian committee; and he should have no hesi tation in giving his support to the later. That committee had been fairly constituted; it consisted of men fully competent to deal with the question; its inquiries had been most extensive and laborious; and yet the Noble Lord at the head of the Government treated its recom mendations with absolute neglect. What would the West Indians think of such conduct as this?—(Hear.) He for one would not vote for an additional farthing towards the cost of sending labourers to the colonies, convinced that such a measure would only aggravate the distress of the colonists. Mr. A. OSWALD said the Government had de parted from the Bill of 1846, and had thereby admitted the necessity of increased protection. He (Mr. Oswald) had voted for the Bill of 1846; but that was, owing to his being without the information which had been sup plied him by the West Indian Committee.—(Hear.) Amongst the press, metropolitan and provincial, there was a universal chorus of dissent from the Government plan. Was the House to sing another song? If so, it was high time to take into consideration the proposal of the Hon. Member for Montrose. Seeing nothing before him but the plan of the Government and the recom mendation of the Committee, he was prepared fully to support the latter, heedless of any taunt of inconsistency that might be directed against him.—(Hear, hear.) He feared there was too much inconsistency in that House.— (Laughter.) He found from the Economist newspaper that the production of the West Indies had decreased one-half between 1834 and 1841, owing to. the inadequate supply of labour, and the pre- ' vious unwholesome stimulus of protection. He be lieved the former to be the true and the sole reason. For this injustice the House was responsible, and must pay the price. He represented a large constituency (Ayrshire), but did not believe that any old woman there would like to have sugar for her tea or her' whiskytoddy" a penny a pound cheaper, if thereby an injustice was inflicted on others.—(Hear, hear.) He would answer for the same feeling existing in the mind of every man, woman, and child, engaged in manufac tures in the county he represented. What might be the case at Manchester he could not say. An eminent Scot tish mercantile firm, whose founders had left an ample fortune, had recently succumbed to the pressure ; and, in the circular to their creditors they attributed their failure to the measures of 1846.—(Hear, hear.) As to the increase in the slave trade, no doubt could be enter tained by any one who looked at the return which had been published. The Honourable Member for Man chester (Mr. Bright) had vainly attempted to show that the slave trade could not have increased in 1846, in con sequence of the measures of 1846; but had he overlooked the possibility of intelligence being sent out to the Ha vannah that the measure was likely to pass? The Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) had anticipated the time when slavery would be extinct ; but that happy period had been anticipated long ago, even by Curran, and he feared it was still very far distant.—(Hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the proposition of the Hon. Baronet the member for Droitwitch was to reduce the duty on colonial sugar from 14s. to 10s., instead of 135., as proposed by the Government, thus making a differential duty of 10s. be tween colonial and foreign sugar. The Hon. Baronet proposed this duty for an indefinite time, and in the course of his speech be anticipated the objections that would probably be urged against his proposition on the ground of its being detrimental to the consumer and re venue. On both these grounds he objected to the Hon. Baronet's proposal. He admitted that the Government ought to attend to the interests of the West India body; but the interest of the great body of consumers in this country was not to be neglected or left out of considera tion.—(Hear, hear.) He certainly was not prepared to support a system of protection which would permanently increase the cost of a necessary article to the consumers of this country for the exclusive benefit of the West India body.—(Hear, hear.) The lion. Gentleman who spoke last said that there was no sacrifice made by the people of this country. That might be the opinion of the old ladies of Ayrshire, who could pay for the sugar that sweetened their tea and whisky toddy ; but ho did not think it was the opinion of the bulk of the popu lation there. If the H on . G ent l eman referred to a paper which had been laid on t h e ta bl e o f the House, he would find that the people of this country paid in the year 1841 no less than 3,800,0001. more for their sugar than they would havo done if there had been no protec tion. In 1842 they paid 3,600,000/. more; and in 1843 they paid 3,400,000/. This, with the 20 ,000,000/. which had been paid in consequence of the Act of Emancipa tion, was a pretty substantial proof of the sympathy of the people of this country with the West Indian body. He was not prepared to say that they ought not to be put for a time in a position to enable them to compete with slave-growing countries; but the country and the House had decided that protection as a permanent sys tem should cease. As he was not prepared to ask for that protection which he once enjoyed as a landlord, so he was not prepared to allow a system of permanent protection for the West Indians. The Honourable Gen tleman opposite had commented on Members of the Government for remarking on the extravagant sys tem of management adopted by the West In dian planters. They had said nothing but what had been given in evidence by those planters themselves. He should rather think that was a source of hope, be cause it held out the prospect, under a more economical system, of being able to compete with slave-growing countries ; and he was glad to find that the Hon. Mem ber for Guilford was of opinion that before long free labour sugar would he the cheapest in the world. His main objection to the Honourable Baronet's proposal was on the score of the revenue. Speaking on this subject, hepegged to assure the Right Honourable Gen tleman who presided over the Miscellaneous Estimates Committ,e, who seemed to think that he had cast a slur upon the Committee, that he never felt it would be fair on the part of the Government to throw upon them the responsibility of making reductions, and that they ought to relieve the Government front the responsi bility of doing what they could in that respect. The Honourable Baronet seemed to think that he reis represented the probable loss to the revenue in the first instance. What he said was, that the probable loss at first, if the proposal of the Committee were adopted, would be 960,0001. ; and that the first loss by the proposal of the Government would be only 240,0001., and that it Would be touch easier to make up the one than the other. The loss could only be made up from increased consumption, and the proportion in which fo reign and colonial sugar entered into that consumption. The Hon. Baronet, who followed the estimates of the Committee, estimated the consumption of the country next year at 325,000 tans. He considered that estimate an excess-4e had no hopes that the consumption would reach that tiiantity. It would give an increase of con sumption of 35,000 tons in one year. If the Hon. Baro net referred to the increase of former years he would find nothing to justify that calculation, with the excep tiqn of the year 1845. when there was an increase of 38,000 tons. But the Ron. Gentleman must recollect that that was a year in which the sugar duties were largely reduced, in which free-labour sugar was admitted, and tLat it was a year of considerable prosperity. There was every possible circumstance that could tend to promote consumption in that year ; but they had no reason to expect the same circumstances would exist next year. loother years the increase was 17,000 tons, 12,000, 11,000, 23,000, 17,000, 29,000. The average increase was about 20,000 tons, and was the . high,.st amount of consumption which they could expect. He thought the Hon. Gentleman was mistaken with regard to the pro portion in which foreign and colonial sugars would enter into consumption. The Hon. Gentleman estimated the probable import from the West India colonies next year at 20,000 tons ; and the report of the Committee stated thst the stock of colonial sugar in hand was from 60 000 tons to 65,000 tons, giving a total amount of 265,000 tons of colonial sugar. Now, it must be remembered that the holders of sugar would have every possible inducement to enter the utmost possible amount of sugar in the next year—that is, before July 5, 1819 ; and as he saw no reason why they would not enter from 240,000 to 250,000 tons of colonial sugar in the course of the next year, leaving a stock of about 25,000 tons in hand, it was impossible to expect that anything like the calculation of the Hon. Gentleman would be re ceived. He had calculated that from 300,000 to 310,000 tons would probably be entered for home consumption, and he estimated the probable loss to the revenue at 45,000/. There might be, a gain of 40,0001., but he would be well satisfied if the revenue from sugar was no lower next year than it was last year. He might, in fairness to the West Indies, reduce sugar one shilling per cwt., but to do more would in the present state of the finances of the country be obviously unjust. Upon the whole, he thought he had taken a fair and reason able course, and he therefore must resist the Hon. Gen- tlemau's proposal. Mr. T. M. GIBSON, as a Member of the Committee appointed to inquire into the alleged distress in the colonies, was anxious to make a few observations. He would first of all express his regret that her Majesty's Government had thought fit to depart from the law of ' 1846. He had thought that law a final question, and he hoped that hereafter they would never have to discuss the question, except as one of public revenue.— ( Hear, hear.) But for every word that had been said about the revenue of the state ten had been spoken about the revenue of private individuals. West India distress was not a question that ought to be discussed in a debate upon the sugar duties. The West Indian was not the only distressed interest in this country. Had they had no other bankruptcies—no other failures ? —(Loud ironical cheers.) He understood that cheer, but he was merely stating a fact.—(Renewed cheers.) But did the commercial men of England come to that House as the West Indian did, in forma pauperis ? The cotton-spinners of Lancashire alone bad suffered last year losses as great as the value of all the produce of the West Indies. But they had, out of their capital, maintained their labourers, and they hail not come down there seeking relief, and crying out every night for addi tional protection.—(Hear.) There was a great deal, too, about the testimony as to West Indian distress, that he frankly owned he entirely distrusted. The parties exa mined by the Committee were only interested parties, and they based all their calculations of their losses upon very ample estimates as to the cost of their production. "Remunerative prices !" Why, what had the land lords told them about the prices at which alone they could grow corn ?—(Hear, hear.) All that sort of evi dence had been sufficiently disproved ; and, surely they must allow an ample per tentage upon the evidence of those who came before a Committee that never saw a sugar cane at all, and told them at what price alone they were able to produce a hundred weight of sugar.—(Loud cheers.) Why, in the blue book he held in his hand, he found witnesses who gave evi dence as to the cost of the production of sugar, which fixed a cwt. at every conceivable price. There were men who said they could grow sugar at 4s. a cwt. ; others who declared they could not produce it at certain periods under 16/. a cwt. Now, he owned to a preference for official evidence, and he - was rather pleased to have it in his power to quote Lord Harris. Lord Harris said that in " therdoest managed estates "—(ironical cheers)—well, they were not there to protect bad management—(Much cheering)—" on the best managed estates (said Lord Harris) planters could produce sugar at 10s. a cwt."— (Hear, hear.) Well, that was just the amount of pro tection they proposed to give to the West Indians. The suggestion from the other side; therefore, was nothing less than to give the planters their sugar for nothing. What they proposed was to let him have his sugar as if he had stolen it, or as if it was given him. Why, surely under such circumstances it was monstrous to ask for I l i theit Hon.industrious Gentleman opposite protection for th e W est I n di ans out of the h ar d earn i ngs ° o i s n i t e E t n h g o l u a g n i d i --' t th (C at ile tl e t ' e Nest Indies Indies had a just claim, but ho doubted how we were to pay it. Now he (Mr. Gibson) took just the converse position. He denied the claim, but, if he admitted it, he should be pre pared to say that it ought at all hazards and sacrifices to be paid.—(Hear, hear.) But he denied the claim. The West India proprietors had had 20,000,000/. from us for their slaves. That sum represented the capital of 800,000/. per annum. For the last nine years the West Indies had exported about 2f million tons. of sugar yearly. The interest, therefore, amounted to a bounty of about ss. 4d, a cwt. on every cwt. of sugar exported since the passing of the Emancipation Act.—(Cheers.) If he deducted this bounty from the expense, it would be, according to Lord Harris, no less than half the cost of production. Take the case of Jamaica. Jamaica, on en average of the last nine years, had exported 751,539 I cats. of sugar a year. The proprietors of that island had received 6,102,000/. in the shape s of compensation. Why, the interest on that sum amounted to a bounty of no less than 7s. on every cwt. of sugar exported from the colony. The House had nothing to do with moot- gages or marriage settlements. In 1830, during the period of slavery, it was stated that the cost of pro duction of a cwt. of sugar in our West India colonies was 15s. 4d., less by ss. 4d. than was stated by many competent witnesses to be the cost of production now. As to the money compensation now proposed, how was it to be applied to the case of persons who had recently per. chased estates in the West Indies at nominal prices? Were these parties to set up a claim of compensation in respect of these estates, as though they had been pro prietors of them at a time when great dividends were realised from this source?—(Hear, hear.) It was said that free labour could not compete with slave labour; the production of indigo afforded a proof to the con• trary, for it was well known that free-labour indigo had entirely driven slave-labour indigo out of the market. —(Hear, hear.) He denied that the slave trade had in creased. The speech of his Hon. Colleague had thoroughly disproved the allegation that such was the case. He protested against the proposition that our foreign trade was to be proscribed, or even crippled, to suit the purposes of our colonial agriculture. It was out of the question to suppose that by any legislation they could do that for the colonists which the colonists would not do for themselves. As to the slave trade, public opinion would in the end put it down throughout the world, as public opinion had put it down in the British dominions. Meanwhile our great principle should be to do our best in attending to our own real business. Mr. T. BARING said that everything that occurred showed hire the danger of sudden and sweeping changes. He contended that the case of the British West Indian colonies presented an entire exception to the rules even of the most rigid free-trader, for - our West India colo nies were suffer — lnc", not so much from the ordinary na ture of things, as from the difficulties which had been thrown in their way by Imperial legislation. The Right Hon. Gentleman over the way repudiated the proceed ings of the Committee, of which he himself had been a member in constant attendance, and said that no reli ance was to be placed upon their reported evidence or their stated views. Yet the Right Hon. Gentleman's Friend (the ion. Member for Westbury) had moved a distinct resolution that the West Indian colonies were in a state of great distress, requiring a decided remedy.. He protested against the mode in which lion. Gentle men opposite seemed to treat the West Indian colonies and their interests, as subject altogether to the varying circumstances of party contest. The proposition of the Government was to give a protection of 7s. to British sugar, but between the value of British sugars and foreign there was a difference of 2s. 4d. a cwt., which would reduce the nett protection to4s.:t3d. But, indepen dently of all these calculations, the question was, would the proposition of the Government afford a real and substantial relief to the planters ? Would the measure restore confidence in the colonies ? So far from it, there was hardly a man there who thought they could struggle on under it. Even the 10s. duty would hardly effect any considerable relief, although it certainly would enable the planters to carry on cultivation to a greater extent than under the Government propositions. But the protection offered of 4s. Bd. was only to endure for one year. Nothing was more distressing than a con tinued state of depression, and one which annually would become worse ; he felt that this would be the case under the proposed rate of duties, and in voting for the amend ment of the Hon. Member for Droitwich he was only actuated by the sincere belief that the Government proposition was not adequate to the emergency. The colonists would not look at it as a manifestation of a real desire to help them. They would say that the Government had called to th e i r re li e f a g entleman skilful in dealin g w i t h fi gures, and b y h i s ass i stance, they attempted to throw dust in their eyes. (teer, hear.) The Government looked at the colo nies not as they really were, but as the Colonial-office wished them to be.—(Hear, hear.) Was it satisfactory that the measure should be regarded by the colonists as a party proceedi ng ? W ould it be looked at by them as having proceeded from the fair convictions of the House, when it was only passed by a majority of fifteen votes? And was it tholght that the sugar consumer would be benefited by th-3 change? Would he not rather be in jured? Was n')t, the sugar cultivation falling off in the West Indies, an how much easier was it not to destroy j than to restore? What was wanted was not temporary but permanent cheapness of sugar. As the Right Hon. Member for Coventry had said, the question was not one of a penny a pound cheaper sugar for the consumer, but whether the sugar colonies were to be destroyed; and it would become a qnestion hereafter, whether the colonists would not come to Parliament and claim, not protection, for that was no longer an English word, but the means of maintaining order and their social institutions. For all the reasons he hid stated, he should give his humble support to the amendment. Lord J. RUSSELL said that having already spoken on the former evening's debates, he should trouble the Committee only for a few minutes ; but he could not let the Hon. Gentleman's observations pass without some remarks. He must say he was glad to have a proposie tion set before the Committee in opposition to that of the Government. The Hon. Member (Mr. T. Baring) had suggested views and attributed motives to the Go vernment which were discreditable to them, and he had moreover stated that they bad not the interests of the colonies in view. The Hon. Mete bees influence and his abilities were such as to induce the colonists to believe his statements. But if the Hon. Gentleman's statements were true, the way to benefit the colonists would have been to have made a proposal which all would have agreed in, and not to endeavour to collect into one body all the discordant opinions, and muster them against the Government propositions. It appeared to him that the coarse taken by the opposite party ought to have been quite different to that pursued. They ought first to have discussed the question whether the House would go into Committee at all, and then the amendment of the lion. Member for Manchester would have been discussed and dis posed of. Then they would have taken into consideration the Government propositions, and the Hon. Baronet opposite would have made his present amendment. But they began by first discussing the Hon. Baronet's amendments, and afterwards that of the Hon. Member for Manchester; and now they came to the considera tion of the second amendment of the Hon. Baronet the Member for Droitwich, for substituting a 10s. duty in stead of the one proposed by the Government. Now let him state what he considered to be the disadvantages of that proposal. It could not be sound, in the first place, that it would risk no less an amount of revenue than 060,0001, for the Hon. Baronet's calculations on this head were all conjectural; and let him ask whether it was wise, so soon after a serious deficiency had been made up, to risk nearly a million of revenue in this way? The Hon. Baronet's proposal was to impose a 10s. duty for the period of six years.—(No.) What, then, was the Hon. Baronet's proposal? Sir J. PAKINGTON said his proposal was to impose a 10s. duty for three years, but that he was not disposed to enter into any speculations as to the period to which that duty ought to be ultimately extended. Lord J. RUSSELL—But that would leave the whole question of the sugar duties in a most unsatisfactory state, for nothing is to be more deprecated than uncer tainty in the operation of duties.—(Hear, hear.) The proprietors might then say we will work during the three years of protection and then give up cultivation and abandon our estates. What would be the state of the colonies? It might he very beneficial for those who have invested their property in the West Indies, but not at all encouraging to those who wish success to the introduction of free labour. There would be two serious risks attending the adoption of the Honourable Baronet's amendment. One is the risk of losing 960,000/. of annual revenue, and the other founded on the state of uncertainty in which the colonies would be left at the end of three years, or the loss which six years of protection weulti inflict on the consumer. These appear to me to be sufficient reasons for rejecting the proposal of the Honourable Baronet. The Honourable Member for Huntingdon asks why has not the Govern ment proposed a middle course—why refuse to do so merely for the sake of consistency? Why, if we wished to preserve a reputation for consistency our course would have been to stand by the law of 1846.—(11ear, hear.) That would have been our course, and we should not have been reproached as we have been for abandoning that measure and the principle it involves. What we have endeavoured to do was to adopt the very course which the Honourable Member for Huntingdon recommends. We have endeavoured to adopt a middle course, sensible of its inconvenience, not at the same time sensible that we should satisfy the West India in terest, and knowing also that in departing from the measure of 1846 we should incur great complaints from those who were satisfied with that measure. Exposed to these disadvantages, open to these objections, we have proposed a measure which we thought advantageous to all parties; and whatever faults or omissions it may exhibit, it is one which I submit is better comparatively than that which has been proposed by the Hon. Baronet.—(Cheers, and cries of " Divide.") Mr. DISRAELI said he hoped that as he had not before taken any part in the present debate he should be allowed to occupy the attention of the House for a few moments, especially as he intended to confine himself strictly to the question immediately before the House.— (Hear, hear:) He must say, with reference to the two positions of the Noble Lord—first as regarded revenue, and secondly as to the unsatisfactory nature of the Hon. Member for Droitwich's proposition—that with re spect to the first he did not think the experience they had had of the Noble Lord's calculations of revenue should make his opinion on that point a matter of very vital importance—(A laugh)—and as to the proposition of his Hon. Friend, he admitted that it was exposed to the objection of being only of a temporary character. But what, on the other hand, was the proposition of Ministers? Was it not open to the same objection as was applied to the scheme of his Hon. Friend?—(liear, hear.) His Hon. Friend's scheme was a step in the right direction, and held out a greater hope of stability and certainty than that of the Noble Lord. He cer tainly thought that the Noble Lord's proposition, after all the inquiry and discussion which had taken place, was anything but satisfactory. And when they had the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth, who had had, from peculiar circumstances, his attention directed to the affairs of our sugar colonies for many years, telling them that the Committee which had investigated the subject in 1848 had thrown a flood of light upon it, he thought that it did not become the House, or any of its Members, to depreciate that inquiry or discussion. There was one point on which they were all agreed, ex cept the Hon. Under-Secretary for the Colonies—namely, that our colonies in the West Indies were in an unpre precedented state of depression. Mr. HAWES—I admitted they were CO. Mr. DISRAELI—Perhaps the Hon. Under-Secretary had become convinced in the course of the discussion. — (A laugh.) It was also agreed that the Hon. Baronet the Member for Droitwich had advanced a proposition to the House which was in unison with the report of the Committee, to the effect that the depression of our colo nies had arisen from their inability to compete with slave labour ; and, what the House was then called upon to do was, to give them such an amount of assistance as majority thatthat decision c protection isio n w a s founded o would enable th em to compete with slave la b our. —(Hear, hear.) Th e Committee had decided by of i 'poenr cwt.a lo rt gs,hopualtdienbte, and instate investigation, given; iv en and Member for Manchester had The Right Honourable said that they all knew how these Committee inquiries were conducted, that certain leading questions were asked, with a view of get ting such answers as would bear on the views of the questioner. Now he (Mr. Disraeli) did not think that sit all a fair description of the proceedings of the Committee, the more ,especially as his Right Hon. Friend had himself attended and cross-examined all the witnesses, being moreover at the time a member of the Government. Why, there was one witness who was so much in unison with the views of the Colonial office,that he was called Lord Grey's witness.—(Laughter) That gentleman was examined for three hours and twenty-five minutes, in chief by a member of the Go vernment, and his business before the Committee was to substantiate the principles, the acknowledged principles of the Colonial-office, namely, that free labour could compete successfully with slave labour, that the great source of West India misfortune was absenteeism; and that the only remedy for those misfortunes would be the repeal of the navigation-laws.—(Cheers.) Ile men tioned these facts to show that the inquiry of the Com mittee had not been merely a hole and corner investi gation, but that the subject matter was investigated bona fide, and that every shade of opinion was properly represented. It; therefore, a body of evidence ob tained under such circumstances had induced the Committee to arrive at a conclusion very different from that ;of :the Government, it was the legiti mate consequence of such evidence ; and he begged it to be understood that the representatives of Government on the Committee, had done their best to substantiate the views of the Colonial-office, as he had before indi cated. The gentleman whose examination in chief was given to prove that free labour could compete with slave labour, admitted on his cross-examination that he had on his own estate produced free-labour sugar at an ex pense of 521. per ton. e —(Hear, hear.) The same gentle man was called on to prove that absenteeism was a curse, and he ultimately proved that every resident pro prietor was insolvent, and that all the sugar was pro duced by absentees.—(Cheers and laughter.) He re ferred to the evidence of Mr. Peckwood (as we understood), who was also to prove the third point of the Colonial-office creed, namely, that the relief for co lonial grievances was to be found in a repeal of the navigation-laws; but his evidence did not at all lead to that conclusion. After all these witnesses, it had been said that the Sugar Planting Committee had acted like the Navigation Committee—(A laugh)—had heard only the evidence on one side, and then separated without agreeing to any report.—(Hear, hear.) He denied the truth of that assertion. The Committee had patiently heard all the evidence worth listening to, and so far from shirking reports, he believed that there never was a Committee which had produced a greater number.—(Hear, hear.) Well, it was proved to the sa tisfaction of that Committee that our colonies could not compete with the slave colonies; and it was also shown most satisfactorily that the difference between them amounted to little less than 16a. the cwt. Certainly the Hon. Member for Westbury did, on a subsequent occa sion, challenge the accuracy of the calculations; but to his (Mr. Disraeli's) apprehension, the Hon. Member did not appear to be so happy upon sugar as he generally was on other subjects.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) He could never forget the tremendous statistics with which on an early night in the session the Hon. Member had come down, as regarded beet-root sugar.—(Hear.) They had not heard much of beet-root sugar during the pre sent debate.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) It was not alleged now that this country might be supplied with the beet-root sugar of the continent. But it was said that it was unjust to prove that 16s. was the re quired amount of protection, and then to demand only 10s. It should be remembered, however, that all the calculations in the Committee were made before any of the promised changes had been announced, and before THE S N, LONDON, T EJESDA_Y EVENING, JULY 4, 1848. the reduction now expected in the prico of labour was known. If they had asked for 16s. they would have been subsequently told," You forget that labour will be 25 per cent. cheaper. You forget the alteration of the rum duty, and the proposed immigration of labourers." The Committee hart anticipated all these objections, and in proposing 10s. had given credit for these items. Well, then, the colonies being in the position which had been universally acknowledged, and the sum proposed being conceded to be a just and moderate protection, he thought that the Government were bound to concede it on their own admission. With regard to the gene ral scope of the Government measures, he admitted that they were of a remedial character, but only to such an extent as to qualify the blunders of 1846. (Hear, hear.) If it were of advantage that free negroes should be conveyed to the colonies instead of to Sierra Leone, why had that not been done in 1646 ? He said then that immigration was only a remedy for previous blunders.—(Hear, hear.) It was sa id then that great benefits were to be derived from a new mode of classifi cation as to claved and muscovado sugar. Why had not that been done in 1846? These were blunders again.—(Hear, hear.) Again, half a million was to be given; but it was only two months since it had been calculated that 170,0001. would be sufficient. _ _ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER —Only for two colonies.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. DISRAELI—Oh, it was said that the others did not require it But now it seemed it was necessary to grant 670,0001. Could that grant be looked upon as otherv, ise than a remedy for the blunders of 1846 ? (Hear, hear.) Something had been said as to the en gagements which had been entered into with our colo nies at the time of emancipation. H e h a d never alleged that a contract in the vulgar sense had been entered into. He was willing to admit that no suc h contra ct existed..— (Hear, hear.)' But would anyOn;rissert that if the West Indians had not expected a continuance of their market they would so quietly have accepted the terms they were offered ? It was the principle of protection to the colonies that destroyed the Government in 1841 — the principle which then went to the country, and which it was thought was then decided. And were they now to turn round and tell the colonists that this was all a delusion—that the phrases and solemn pledges then made, and the words sugar and free trade, were merely cries as evanescent as the mottoes on their election banners ?—(liear.) The Right lion. Gen tleman (Mr. Gibson) opposed the proposition because it went to support the interests of the colonies and was ad verse to the foreign trade. No one knew the import ance of the trade of the Brazils—no one had urged on the House the necessity for a treaty of commerce with the Brazils—more than the Right Hon. Gentleman. But he would not ask the Right Hon. Gentleman for a treaty of commerce with the Brazils. That was a new subject, and he intended ere long to bring it before the House—(Hear)—but he would ask, where was the Bra zilian trade which we were told over and over again was worth more than that of all our colonies together ? It had been said, if you assist the colonies, why not assist the manufacturers of Manchester and Bolton ? The reason was that they had had the monopoly of legisla tion, and though he believed they were in as disastrous a state as the colonies, it was because they had departed from the sound principles of commercial legislation themselves that they were in their present position ; but in the case of the colonies they had, without any fault of their own, been made the victims of our legislation. But after the course which had been taken, after the adop- Lion of free-trade principle, he was surprised to hear the Right Hon. Gentleman, as one of the advocates of this principle, now come forward and say that our own ma nufactures had as much right to be protected as the colonies.—(" Oh, oh," and "Divide, divide.") With regard to the Mauritius, as showing the effect of our legislation in that colony, he had a statement from the books of Messrs. Reid and Irving, which, in justice to those gentlemen, he would read. It appeared that in August, 1843, the balance of account against their prin cipal agent for their estates in the Mauritius was 78,0001. after an immense, a lavish, but a justifiable expenditure in the improvement of their property. In the same month in 1845, a year after the Act of 1844, for ad mitting foreign free-labour sugar, the balance rose against them to 183,0001., and in the same month in 1847, twelve months after the Act of 1846, which admitted slave labour sugar into the home market, it was 410,0001. This was the position of a house that never bought a single ton of sugar, all the money having been advanced in cultivating their own estates on the faith of Acts of Parliament, the violation of which entailed upon them a loss of from 400,0001. to 500,0001. Then, with regard to the argument of the too great increase of our colonial empire, the Mauritius was the key to India. If we had possessed the Mauritius fifty years before we did, we should have conquered India with less difficulty, and re tained it with far less cost.—(Hear, hear.) And suppose that colony were now in the hands of the French, what would be our position in regard to oar Indian posses sions? It was the same as to many of our other colo nies; and he contended that imperial as well as com mercial considerations were consequently involved in the consideration of this question. Let America possess Canada, the West India islands, and the Gulf of Mexico, and what security should we have for retain ing the commercial advantages which we now en joyed? The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Ripon (Sir J. Graham), who admitted that he supported the Government proposition against his conviction, said that he did so because he (Mr. Disraeli), in opposing the measure of 1846, had said the time would soon come when a spirit of reaction would arise, which would com • pel the rescinding of that measure, and the Hon. Baronet would not vote with the Hon. Member for Droitwich, because he would not assist in fulfilling that prediction. But the Government had themselves fulfilled the predic tion. His prediction was not in favour of any particular duty. What he said was that the House would have be fore long to change its course of legislation—(liear, hear)—that it would have to go b ac k, and they had gone back.—(Protectionist cheers.) And whether the protective duty proposed was 75. or 10s., the reaction was the same. Reaction was not a thing which could be regu lated by Act of Parliament—the course of reaction, which was the ebb and flow of public opinion, was inevitable —it was the courage of hope deferred—of false repre sentation, and of the awakening of the nation out of the delusion into which it had been lulled. And when they found the capital of the country wasting away—the mills standing 'still—the labourers idle--it was not sur prising that there should be distrust in the theories the adoption of which had produced those results. — (Hear , hear.) It might be well for th e Ri g ht Hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham) to say there w as n o reaction : he re membered gentlemen who use d to a d o pt the cry of " no surrender,' and then laid do wn t h e i r arais---(Hee.r, hear) —but such bravado would n o t arres t the progress of public opinion on the inevitable course of human affairs. Let them continue the course they were now quitting with so much hesitation and so much timidity, and let the principles of the Right Hon. Member for Manchester be pursued, and within an interval of two years the Right Hon. Baronet would have to raise the cry of " no reaction " amid a dissolving empire and a despairing people.—(Cheers, and cries of " Divide.") Mr. C. .2. VILLIERS denied that the majority of the Sugar and Coffee Planting Committee were Free-traders, or that they were in favour of reaction. There were ten Protectionists and only five Free-traders on that Committee.—(Cries of " No, no," and " Name.") He repeated there were ten Protectionists either in principle or for the occasion on the article sugar on that Commit tee.—(Name.) Then, as to the question whether the proposition of the Hon. Member for Droitwich was car ried by a majority. The nroposition to which the Com mittee could not be brought to agree was that of a 10s. protection duty ; and the Hon. Member for Liverpool was only able to carry it by two Members leaving the Committee, who, had they remained, would have voted against it. There was no evidence taken before the Committee which showed that protection was necessary for the prosperity of the West India colonies ; the effect of the evidence was rather to show that what was re quired was a forced introduction a labour, and the ex clusive possession of the British market.—(Hear, hear.) Sir J. PAKINGTON—What he had said was, that the Committee did recommend a duty of ten shillings. But he was disposed to hope that it would not be neces sary to keep up that amount of duty longer than three years, and after that there should be a descending scale. Lod G. BENTINCK rose raerely to answer the question he had WeenTchailenged to answer respecting the constitution of the Committee. Of the 15, whose names were settled between the Secretary of the Trea- sury and himself, only three had voted against the bill of 1846—(hear, hear)—Sir J. Pakiogton, Mr. P. Miles, and himself. Five had voted in favour of that Act, Mr. Labouchere, Mr. Goulburn, Mr. M. Gibson, Mr. C. Villiers, and Mr. Ewart.—(Cheers.)—There were of avowed Free-traders, whose opinions on the subject were not known, Mr. Cardwell, who did net vot e for or against the Act of 184 5 ; Sir T. Birch, Mr. H. Hope, Mr. J. Wilson, Mr. J. Matheson, and Sir E. Buxton. The resolution of the Committee, which was eventually carried was proposed by Sir T. Birch, the Member for Liverpool, and it was by the special desire of the Secretary to the Treasury acting for th e Govern ment that Sir T. Birch had been put upon the Cora rnittee.—(Hear.) Lord G. Manners was the only other Member, and he was supposed to favour the opinion of Member nfavofou of the reso lution Droitwich was no t entitled to respect as the opinion of a C omm i tte e r t h e chairman. He had fairly stated the compet i tion of the Committee , and he appealed to that House—(H ear , lhoetairo)n—mwohveedthebry theits Hen. n fairly and impartially framed and constituted? If there was any bias it was certainly against the planters' interest, and in favour of of the opinions of the Noble Lord.—(Hear.),He had. muchl to say in justifica tion of his Hon. Friend's resolution, but at that late hour he would not enter upon the subject, but reserve himself for another occasion.—(lronical cheers.) Mr. CARDWELL having said a few words explain ing the course taken by him and Mr. Goulburn on the Committee. The Committee divided, when there appeared— For the amendment Against it Majority ............. . Mr. BARKLY, who said he had also an amend ment to propose, moved that the Chairman should re port progress. Lord J. RUSSELL requested that the Committee might be allowed to proceed with the resolutions. The CHAIRMAN having put the question that " thirteen shillings" should stand part of the preamble, Mr. GLADSTONE said he thought the resolutions were of so much importance and intricacy that it would he impossible to get them through before Wednesday. He would not say whether blame might not attach to the Government for not bringing the question on earlier. He thought it objectionable that duties should be thus levied on a simple resolution of the House; at all events, no advantage would be gained by commenc ing a consideration of the resolutions now. He would recommend the Noble Lord, now that the House was in Committee on the sugar duties, to take a temporary re solution continuing . the duties of 1846. Mr. COBDEN saw no great object to be gained passing these resolutions now. It would be running a race against those merchants who were importing large cargoes of sugar on the assurance that the scale would not be interfered with. If the resolutions were passed, it would be a serious loss to those merchants who had probably given a higher price for the sugar in expectation of having Is. 6d. less duty to pay. Lord J. RUSSELL said that, seeing the objections that had been made, he would not now press the Com mittee to pass the resolutions. He would not propose a temporary resolution continuing the duties, because such a course would be quite unlooked for. As it appeared the question could not be settled before the sth July, he would propose that the Chairman should report pro gress; and he would name Friday next for going on with the resolutions. • Mr. GLADSTONE wished to know what would be done in reference to the duties which would come into operation on Thursday? It was not a question affecting merely those who had sugar in bond, but those who had it on the way towards this country. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in an swer to Mr, Gladstone's former remarks, said it had been the invariable practice to give directions for the alters.. tion of duties on a simple resolution of the House. He referred to several cases in point, and said that that prteodent would now be followed. By the course now proposed, all the sugar that came in between the sth and the time the resolution was reported, would come in at the reduced duty. Mr. GLADSTONE repeated that this arrangement would be attended with geeat inconvenience. He urged the Noble Lord to give notice of a resolution for this day, to be reported on Wednesday, and thus the question would be kept open. The motion for reporting progress was then agreed to, and the House resumed. TRIAL OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS IN IRELAND. Sir R. FERGUSON obtained leave to bring in a Bill for the more speedy trial and punishment of juvenile offenders in Ireland.—The Bill was afterwards brought in and read a first time. SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE TENANTS (IRELAND) BILL. Sir. W. SOMERVILLE brought up the report of this Committee, which was ordered to be printed. The House adjourned at two o'clock. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS. ;From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.) MONDAY, JULY 3. SUGAR DUTIES.-(IN THE COMMITTEE.) Motion made, and Question proposed, " That the Duty on Muscovado, or any other Sugar not being equal in quality to White Clayed, be, from and after the sth day of July, 1848, to the .sth day of July, 1849, for every cwt. 13s.:"— Afterwards Motion made, and Question put, " That the Duty on Muscovado, or any other Sugar, not being equal in quality to White Clayed, be, for every cwt. 102." The Com mittee divided : MINORITY—AYES, 169. Acland, Sir T. D. Emlyn, Viscount Mailings, J. R. Adderley, C. B. Euston, Earl Mure, Colonel Anstey, Thomas C. Farnham, E. Napier, Joseph Archdall, Captain Farrer, James Neeld, John Bagge, William Fellowes, E. Neeld, Joseph Bagot, William Filmer, Sir E. Newdegate, N. Baldock, E. 11. Fitzgerald, It. A. Newport, Visct. Bankes, G. Forbes, William O'llrien,Sir Lucius Barkly, Henry Forester, G. C. Ossulton, Lord Baring, Thomas Fox, S. L. Oswald, A. Barrington, Viscount Fuller, A. E. Packe, C. W. Benbow, John Galway, Viscount Palmer, Robert Bennet, Philip Gaskell , J. M. Pattison, James Bentinck, Lord G. Goddard, A. L. Pennant, Colonel Bentinck, Lord H. Godsonoß. Plowden, W. H. Beresford, William Gordon, Admiral " Powlett, Lord W. Blackstone, W. S. Gore, W. 0 . Reid. Colonel Boldero, Henry Granby, Marquis of Robinson, George Bowles, Admiral Greene, Thomas Raiford, Francis Bramston, T. W. Grogan, E. Sandars, George Bremridge, Richard Haggitt, F. R. Seymer, Henry Ker Brisco, M. Rale, R. B. Sibthorp, Colonel Broadley, Henry Raiford, Sir H. Smith, M. Tucker Brooke, Lord Hall, Colonel Smyth, John G. Bruce, C. L. : Halsey, T. P. Somerset, Captain Buck, L. W. Hamilton, G. A. Sotheron, T. H. S. Buller, Sir J. Y. Hamilton, J. H. Spooner, Richard Burghley, Lord Hamilton, Lord C. Stafford, Augustus Burrell, Sir C. Harris, Captain Stuart, Henry Buxton, Sir E. Henley, J. W. Stuart, J. Cabbell, B. B. Herries, J. C. Sutton, H. M. Carew, W. P. Hildyard, R. C. Taylor, T. E. Cayley, Edward S. Hildyard, T. B. Thornhill, G. Chichester, Lord J. Hodgson, W. N. Tollemache, John Christopher, R. Hood, Sir A. Trevor, G. R. Christy, Samuel Hope, H. T. Turner, G. J. Clive, Henry B. Hotham, Lord Tyrrell, Sir J. Cobbold, John C. Hudson, George 'Urquhart, David Cochrane, A. Hume, Joseph Vesey, T. Codrington, Sir W. Ingestre, Viscount Villiers, Viscount CemptonrH. C. JoWire, Sir W. H. Villiers, F. W. Conolly, Col. Jones, Captain Vivian, J. E. Cotton, W. H. Keating, Robert Vyse, H. Courtenay, Lord Knox, Colonel Waddington, David Darner, Colonel Law, C. E. Waddington, H. S. Deedes, W. Lennox, Lord HG. Walpole, S. 11. Disraeli, B. Lindsay, Colonel Walsh, Sir J. B. Dod, J. W. Lockhart, A. E. Wawn, J ,T. Dodd, George Lockhart, W. Welby, G. E. Drax, J. S. W. Mackenzie, W. F. Williamson, Sir H. Drummond, Home Mandeville ' Viscount Willoughby, Sir H. Duckworth, Sir J. Mangles, It. D. Wodehouse,E. Duncombe, 0. Manners, Lord C. Wynn, Sir W. DR Pre, C. G. Masterman, John East, Sir:J. B. Meux, Sir Henry TELLERS. Edwards, Henry Miles, P. W. S. Pakington, Sir J. S. Egerton, Sir P. Miles, William Baillie, H. J. Egerton, W. T. Morgan, 0. MAJORITY—NOES, 231. Abdy, T.'N. Fox, W. J. Norms, Sir D. Ads% R. Shafto Freestun, Colonel O'Brien, John Anderson, Arthur Gibson, T. M. Ogle, S. C. Anson, Colonel Gladstone, W. E. Ord, W. Anson, Viscount Glyn, George Carr Owen, Sir J. Armstrong, Sir A. Graham, Sir James Paget, Lord A. Armstrong, R. B. Granger, T. C. Paget, Lord Clarence Arundel, Earl in Greene, John Palmer, Roundell Bagshavv,lJohn Grey, Sir George Palmerston, Vis. Bailey, Joseph Grey, P. W. Parker, John Baines, M. T. Grosvenor, Lord R. Patten, J. W. Baring, Sir F. T. Guest, Sir J. Pearson, Charles Barnard, E. G. Hall, Sir B. Fechell, Captain Bellew, R. M. Hallyburton, Lord - Peel, Sir Robert Berkeley, Captain Hardcastle, J. A. Perfect, Robert Berkeley, Craven Haste, Alexander Peto, Samuel M. Slake, M. J. Ilastie, Archibald Pigott, Francis BouvorieZE. P. Hawes, Benjamin Pilkington, James Bowring, Dr. Hay, Lord J. Pinney, W. Boyle, Colonel Irayter, W. G. Price, Sir R. Ileathcoat, John Pusey, P. Brand, Thomas Reneago,Raphael, Alexander Brotherton, J. Ileueage, Edward Reynolds, John Brown, W. Browne, R. 1). Henry, Alexander Ricardo, J. L. Buller, Charles Herbert, H. A. Ricardo, Osman Sunbury, E. H. Hervey, Lord A. Rice, E. R. Callaghan, D. Heywood, James Rich, Henry Campbell, W. F. liobhouse, Sir John Robartes, T. J. Cardwell, Edward Hobhouse, T. B. Romilly„Sir John Carter, John B. Hodges, T. L. Russell, Lord John Caulfield, Colonel Hodges, T. Twisden Russell, F. C. H. Cavendish, C. C. llollond, Robert Rutherfurd, A. Cavendish, G. H. Howard, C. W. Scholefield, William Cavendish, W. G. Howard, J. K. Scrope, G. P. Chaplin,,lV. J. Howard, P. ,H. Scully Francis Childers, J. W. Hughes, IV. B. Seymour, Sir,H. Clay, James Hutt, William Shafto, R. D. Clements, Charles Jervis, Sir John Shell, R. L. Clerk Sir G. Keogh, William Shelburne, Earl of Clifford, H. M. Kershaw, James Simeon, John Cobden, Richard ' Kildare, Marquis Slaney, Robert A. Cockburn, Alex. King, Peter John Smith, R. V. Colebrooke, Sir T. Labouchere, Henry Smith, John A. Corbally, M. E. Lacy, Henry C. Smith, J. Benjamin Cowper, W. F. Langston, J. H. Somerville, Sir W. Craig, W. G. • Lascelles, W. S. Spearman, H. J. Dalrymple, Captain Lemon, Sir Charles Stanfield, W. R. C. Dashwood, G. H. Lewis, Sir T. Stuart, Lord D. Davie, Sir Henry Lewis, G. C. Stuart, Lord J. Dawson, T. V. Lincoln, Earl of Sullivan, Michael Denison, W. J. Littleton, E. R. Talbot, C. R. Devereux, J. T. Locke, Joseph Talbot, J. H. D'Eyncourt, T. Lushington, C. Talfourd, Sergeant ')ivett, E. Macnamara, Major Tancred, H. W. Douglas, Sir C. M'Cullagh, W. T. Thicknesse, R. A. Duff, G. S. M'Gregor, John Thompson, Colonel Duke, Sir James M'Taggart, Sir J. Thompson, George Duncan, George Maher, N. Thornely, Thomas Duncuft, John Marshall, J. pa. Towneley, John Dundas, Admiral Martin, John Townshend, Captain Dundas, Sir D. Martin4C. W. Turner, E. Ebringtou, Viscount Martin, Samuel Vane, Lord H. Elliot, J. E. Matheson, A. Villiers, Charles Estcourt, J. B. B. Matheson, James Vivian, J. H. Evans, Sir De Lacy Matheson, Colonel Wakley, T. Evans, John Manic, Fox Ward, H. G. Evans, William Melgund, Viscount Watkins, Colonel Ewart, William Milner, W. M. Westhead, J. P. Fagan, William Mitchell, A. T. Willcox, Brodie Fergus, John Moffatt, George Williams, John Ferguson, Col. Monsell, William Wilson, James.: Ferguson, Sir R. Morpeth, Viscount Wilson, Matthew Fitzpatrick, J W. Morison, Sir W. Wood, Sir Charles Fitzwilliam, G. W. Morris, David Wrightson, W. B. Foley, J. H. Mostyn, E. Wyld, James Forster, M. Mowatt, Francis TELLERS. Fortescue, Chichester Mrlgrave, Earl Tufnell, Henry Fortescue, J. W. gorreys, Lord Hill, Lord Marcus RAILWAY RETURNS RAILWAY TRAFFIC.—The following are the Total Receipts of Rail ways for the past week—that is to say, up to the date to which the respective returns are made, together with the receipts of the same week In the previous year:— Week Last i„1 t 4. ending NAME OF RAILWAY. week. -- - A Julio - Aberdeen .. •• . • .... ••••.• • • • • ••• • • - 25 Amiens and Boulogne .•••• • • • • •• • • 1,086 514 - Arbroath and Forfar ••• • • ••••• • •• 25 Chester and Birkenhead .•••••• • • • • • • 897 674 24 Ca1ed0nian............. • • 4,197 - 24 Chester and Holyhead. ••..••.. • • • • • . 936 - 23 Cockermonth and Workington.... •• • • 127 - - Dublin and Drogheda. ••• • • ••••• • • •• - 898 27 Dublin and Kingstown ••••••• • • • • • • • 1,048 1,123 24 Dundee, Perth, and Aberdeen •••• • • • • 1,000 - 25 East Anglian.- ... ..... • • 565 - 24 Edinburgh and Glasgow .• • • •••. • . • • 3,316 3,227 24 Edinbnrgh and Northern •••••• • • • • • • 1,505 - 25 Eastern Counties and North Eastern • • 15,810 13,618 24 East Lancashire • • 1,124 962 18 Eastern Union .......... 1,548 1,036 - Glasgow, Garnkirk, and Coatbridge... - 24 Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ayr ••• • • • 2,113 2,617 24 Glasgow and Greenock. •••• • • • • •• • • 1,237 1,806 24 Great Southern and Western .. •• • • 2,340 1,724 25 Great Western, &c •••••••.• • • • • . • • • • 21,922 21,551 24 Kendal and Windermere .... ••• • • • 193 - 24 Lancashire and Yorkshire •• • • 11,178 10,205 23 Lancaster and Carlisle •••• • • • • - Leeds and Think - 24 Londonderry and Enniskillen • • 138 117 25 London and North Western, &c. ..... 45,505 45,363 25 London and Blackwall ••••••• • • • • • • • 1,267 1,364 24 London and Brighton .••••••• • • • • • • • 9,978 9,157 25 London and South Western .•••• • • • • 9,879 9,231 24 Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire 2,735 1,942 25 Maryport and Carlisle • • •.• • • 501 667 24 Midland, Bristol, and Birmingham • • 21,178 20,432 25 Midland Great Western (Irish) ••• • .. 964 - - Newmarket... 24 Newcastle and Carlisle ••••••• • • • • • • • 2,238 2,320 - N0rf01k........................- 24 North British 2,121 1,705 - Paris and Rouen .••••••••• • • • • • • • • • - - Rouen and Havre •- - Scottish Central - 28 Shrewsbury and Chester •.•••• • • • • • • 650 440 24 South Eastern and Branches •• • • 9,034 8,9 58 23 South Devon . ••.... • ..... 1,617 779 24 Taff Vale ........ - Ulster . ..... - 25 Whitehaven Junction .•.••••• • • • • • • • 19 9 209 - Wishaw and Cohness ..• •••••• • • • • • • - 2 2 4 4 York York and and Newcastle Midland d a . n . d . 1 8 3 : 8 33 5 3 6 171:0737.95 Sunday afternoon an accident happened to a boy of the name of Cotterell, while engaged in turning a " merry go• round," near the New Model Prison, Holloway. It appeared that the boy by some means got knocked down by the machine while it was in motion. He was taken to the Royal Free Hospital, where, on examination, it was found that his arm was broken. HAYMARKET THEATRE. Mr. and Mrs. Charles Keen took their benefit at this Theatre yesterday evening, on which occasion the per formances consisted of Sir E. Bulwer Lytton's play of Money and of Mrs. Centlivte's comedy of The IVonder, Mr. and Mrs. Charles Kean sustaining respectively the characters of Arthur Evelyn and Clara Douglas in the first piece and of Don Felix and Donna Violante in the second. It is a work of supererogation to descant at this time of day on the merits of the Arthur Evelyn of Mr. Charles Kean; it has long been the delight of every playgoer, and is acknowledged by every critic to be the best on the stage. The Clara Douglas of Mrs. Charles Kean is beautiful exceedingly. As intensely pathetic as that of any of her predecessors, the Clara Douglas of Mrs. Charles Kean is more ladylike—more like what we should expect Clara Douglas to be, seeing she has always been used to mix in good society. This tone, which can only be caught by mixing in good society, has been given to the character by Mrs. Charles Kean, and there fore is she par excellence the Clara Douglas of the author. The great feature of the evening was, however, the first appearance of Mr. Charles Kean in comedy. We say his first appearance in comedy, for albeit Money is called a comedy, the character of Evelyn is essentially tragic. Not so that of Don Felix, in which MaCharles Kean appeared for the first time last evening. Knowing and admiring as we do the genius of Mr. Charles Kean in tragedy, believing that his genius as a tragedian has not yet completely developed itself, and that although he has done great things (greater than any man now living has ever done), yet that he will do greater still ; hiving attentively watched his career from that certain night in October, 1827, when the young boy, full of genius and enthusiasm, but as yet unformed in his art, ppeared in the character of Norval at Drury-lane, and made "a most palpable hit;" having followed his career through his long course of provincial practice (by which he was made an artist) until his re-appearance in London in the character of Hamlet, after a patient study in the provinces of many years, at once placed him at the head of his profession, having since watched his career of uninterrupted success, and assisted (to make use of a French expression) at all his triumphs; having also the greatest possible faith i❑ his genius and powers, we will confess we felt anxious for the result of the experiment of last evening. Not that we dreaded anything like a failure—genius never can fail entirely—but we feared lest, not trusting suffi ciently to his own inspirations, Mr. Charles Kean might, in a line entirely new to him, be tempted to adopt some of the traditional conventionalities of the part, and thus give us, albeit a good Don Felix, such a Don Felix as divers who have gone before him have given; or, on the other hand, that he might overleap the bounds of comedy, and make of Don Felix an Othello. We were, however, agreeably surprised at the Don Felix of Mr. Charles Kean; not only was it a bril liant success, it was a perfect triumph. He pitched the character from the beginning somewhat higher than his predecessors have done of late years, but he maintained the pitch throughout, making of it an harmonious whole, which will, if we mistake not, be the model of all future aspirants to histrionic fame in the character of Don Felix. He was, indeed, the chivalrous and im passioned, but somewhat hasty and hot-headed, Portuguese nobleman, and he had the good taste never once to condescend to claptrap, and never, however inviting might be the situation, to descend to buffoonery. His jealousy was real, and excited our sympathy, albeit we were aware of its utter ground lessness, and although amused at the dilemma in which he constantly finds himself placed, it was impossible not to feel !for his misfortunes. He was, in fact, the Don Felix of the comedy—Don Felix the gentleman as con tradistinguished from Don Felix the buffoon, as he is too often represented to be. Full of earnestness, full of power, by turns pathetic, impassioned, and sar castic, the Don Felix of Mr. Charles Kean was the triumph of genius chastened by taste and a consummate knowledge of art. This is his first, we hope it will not be his Last, appearance in comedy. There are divers cognate characters to Don Felix to be found in the works of our old dramatists which Mr. Charles Kean might re vivo with great advantage both to himself and to the public. Mrs. Charles Kean has long been the best Donna Violante on the stage. In the personation of the lady, par excellence, of our haute comedie no one can approach her. It is in these days de lightful to witness her impersonation of cha racters of the class of Donna Violante. In this line she stands alone, unapproached and unapproach able. She was excellently supported by Miss Emma Harding, who in the part of Donna Isabella, had an opportunity of appearing in a " character," an op portunity of which she knew well how to avail her self. her Donna Isabella was admirable. Mrs. Ilumby acted inis, as she alone can act pert chambermaids. Webster's Lissardo was the beau ideal of the smart, in triguing valet. Why does ho not revive the comedy (not the opera) of the Barber of Seville, and act the part of Figaro himself! Mr.and Mrs. Charles Kean were called for at the conclusion of each of the comedies, and bouquets ti Jolson showered upon them. Her Majesty and Prince Albert honoured the theatre with their presence, and arrived soon after the commencement of the performances. At the conclusion of the play there was a loud call for " God save the Queen,," with which the band complied. Her Majesty men eAme forward to acknowledge the compliment, and the cheering with which she was received was en thusiastic. Prince Albert also was loudly cheered. The h once was crowded to suffocation. Before the rising of the curtain standing room was not to be had in the pit. The box lobbies even were crowded, and the galleries were a sea of heads. (From the Chronicle.) Mr. and Mrs. C. Kean last night took their benefit at this theatre, when, honoured by the patronage of her Majesty, they had a bumper house—such a house as has not been brought together to witness an English per formance for many, many a long day. The performances consisted of the comedy of Money, which has lately been revived with an effective cast, including Mr. C. Kean as Evely, and Mrs. C. Kean as Clara Douglas; and Mrs. Centlivre's comedy of The Woader, cut down to three acts, in which Mr. C. Kean essayed the part of Don Felix for the first time, to Mrs. C. Kean's Donna Vio•- haute We are glad to see Mr. C. Kean showing an in clination to enlarge his range of characters, and hope he will be encouraged to pursue still further so useful and improving a course of study. His long habit of decla mation in tragic parts, however, has fixed him in a sententious tone, utterly inappropriate to light comedy, and which he will have to labour hard and resolutely to disembarrass himself of before he au appear with seas faction to himself or his audience in characters asso ciated with reminiscences of such names as Elliston and Charles Kemble. Mrs. C. Kean's Violante was an admirable performance—one which makes us long to see her oftener in parts of legitimate comedy. Her scene in the second act, where she has the laugh upon the jealous Felix, when he rushes sword in hand after his supposed rival into the empty closet, was a brilliant piece of acting, and drew down a hearty round of applause. Her Majesty and Prince Albert end suite arrived about eight o'clock. At the termination of the first piece Mr. and Mrs. C. Kean were loudly called for, and upon their appearance before the curtain, hailed with loud cheering, accompanied by a profuse shower of bouquets. A cry was then raised for " God save the Queen," which was repeated at intervals during the next ten minutes, some delay occurring in compliance with the demand. When the first note of the National An them was struok up by the orchestra, and the Queen appeared in front of her box, there was such a shout of genuine loyalty throughout the house as must have con vinced her Majesty of the delight with which a British public hailed her appearance amonst them, giving the sanction of her countenance to the national drama of the country. The same cheering, accompanied with lusty waving of hats and handkerchiefs, was repeated again and again at the close of the anthem. (From the Post.) The performances last night were for the benefit of Mr. and Mrs. Charles Kean, and were honoured by the presence of her Majesty, Prince Albert, the Duchess of Kent, and many of the highest aristocracy. The com pliment was as gracious as deserved, and we have no doubt that the excellence of the pieces selected and the merits of the actors will induce a frequent repetition of the royal patronage. her Majesty entered the theatre ere the conclusion of the first act of Money, and gave frequent testimonies of her satisfaction during the pro gress of the play. At the conclusion Mr. and Mrs. Charles Kean were summoned before the curtain amidst the applause of the audience. The National Anthem wr called for, and her Majesty bowed freqently from her box in acknowledgment of the enthusiastic loyalty of the house. Mrs. Centlivre's comedy of The Wonder, com pressed into three acts, followed, in which the characters of Don Felix and Donna Violante were sustained by Mr. and Mrs. Charles Kean with infinite spirit. The theatre was densely crowded in every part. (From the Herald.) The benefit of Mr. and Mrs. Charles Kean took place last night, her Majesty and the Prince, and her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent, honouring the perform ance with their presence. The entertainment consisted of Sir Bulwer Lytton's play of Money, and a compressed version of Mrs. Centlivre's Wonder, both of which were acted with great spirit, the two principal artists meeting with great applause, and achieving an abundance of bouquets. The house was crammed to overflowing, every available seat having been secured a fortnight ago. (From the Advertiser.) Yesterday evening Mr. and Mrs. Charles Kean took their benefit at this theatre. The entertainmentthsewfearcet h rendered doubly attractive and interesting from er of her Majesty the Queen honouring the houpseaidwibtyh, her august presence, doubtless a mark of to the genius and talent of the gifted7em e t n e eficiares. The pieces selected for the occasion wer e Mre Wonder, than which, perhap s, two be tter and ieces, Th e o n i e,i more adapted to the resources of the theatre, could not have been chosen from the ample_ r catalogue s of our dra matic compositions. Mr. and Mrs. Kean in the first pi ec e sustained the respective_ .c haracters of Evelyn an d Cl ara Douglas, the two leading personages of the co medy, and which were impersonated with every success. Evelyn was natural, and app eare d fully Mr. Kean's to carry Out the conception of the author. i n the portions of the play where the stronger emotion, of the man were called into operation, he was admirably impressive, more especially was this observable in the scene with Clara, at the commencement, when the gentleman and the scholar is refused OR ac count of poverty. The intimation of his sudden wealthiness was received in a becoming manner, not breaking forth in boisterous rautings, but mild, calm, and feeling. The assumed adversity, too, at the latter end of the play was excellently evinced; it was really the rich man trying by an expedient the truth and sin cerity of those who professed so much regard, that they were ready and eager to perform any office for him. The taunts and gibes addressed to those tongue-flatterers were delivered with a bitterness of accent, which added to their weight and severity, while the manly sentiments which pervade the part were uttered with heart and soul. Mrs. Kean as the gentle, loving, suffering, and kind Clara was, as she invariably is with every character she _---~: undertakes, eminently successful, her portrayal of deep emotion, griel; and love are unparalleled for softness, tenderness, and natural grace ; all these and more she displayed last night in her embodiment of Clara Douglas. The other characters in the comedy were cleverly sustained. Mr. Webster appeared in his ori ginal part, that of Graves-his representation of the honest-hearted and pathetic widower was extremely unctions. Keeley's Benjamin Stout was as funny as be can make a part when he likes. Mrs. Glover as Lady Franklyn was excellent. Wigan's Dudley Smooth W',ls also good. Her Majesty arrived at the commencement of the second act, and on appearing in the box which had been prepared for her, she was greeted by mo st warm and enthusiastic plaudits from the audience, who, regardless of the play, cheered en masse. Her Majesty appeared in excellent health and spirits, and was evi dently much pleased with the performances. She was accompanied by her Royal Consort and a brilliant suite, At the conclusion of the play, Mr. and Mrs. Kean had to reappear, and received the loud congratulations of their delighted patrons, who expressed their satisfaction by showering on to the stage numerous bouquets of beau tiful flowers. The [Vender was admirably given. Mrs. Kean was the Violante—a character that she assumed with infinite grace; and Mr. Kean, the Don Felix, in which he displayed finished acting. Webster's Lizardo, and Mrs. llumby's Flora, deserves a passing tribute of praise. The house was crowded in all parts, and every particle of room from which a view of her Majesty could be obtained was occupied long before the commence ment of tha first piece. The performances were attended with the utmost success. LYCEUM MEATRE. Au idea has generally prevailed among her ALajesty s liege subjects that without a farce or comic drama is of French construction, it cannot he a good one, that opinion has gained ground so strongly that it is quite a novelty now-a-days to have to record the success of an original comic drama, sustained by English actors at au English theatre. This fact, however, took place last evening at this elegant theatre: a new comic drama, in two acts, from the practised pen of Selby, was produced, for the first time, with deserved success. It is entitled the Tutor's Assistant. We shall not enter into a de tailed account of the plot, nor of the mishaps that befal a tutor in his attempts to control the love of his pupil for a certain Princess, the disguises that take place to accomplish the wishes of the Prince, or the pranks that are played upon the lady's governess, further than to say all ends as should be ; the lovers are united, the tutor and governess are appeased, and the curtain falls amid the applause of a delighted audiepcc. Mr. Selby as the Duke was good, Mr. C. Mathews as the Prince was as full of spirit and vivacity as could be wished; Mrs. C. Jones, as the Governess, wies admirable, her acting was relished greatly. Miss J. Coleman sustained the part of Agatha with good effect, her by-play was excellent ; and Miss lloward made a pretty and fascinating Prin cess. At the conclusion of the performance Mrs. C. Jones was called fur, and was led before the curtain by Mr. C. Mathews to receive the applause that she so richly merited. The house was well and fashionably attended. COURT CIRCULAR. The Queen, attended by her Lady in waiting, took an airing in a carriage and four yesterday. Major- General Worn yss, Equerry in waiting, attended on horseback. His Royal Highness Prince Albert rode out on horseback at the same time, attended by Lieut.- Colonel Seymour, Equerry in waiting. Prince Alfred, the Princess Helena, and the Princess Louisa, accompanied by the Dowager Lady Lyttelton, took a drive in an open carriage and four yesterday. Her Majesty and Prince Albert honoured the per formance at the Haymarket Theatre yesterday evening with their presence. The Royal suite consisted of the Viscountess Jocelyn, Hon. Miss Kerr, Earl of Listowel, Major-General Wemyss, and Lieut.• Colonel Seymour. Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent also honoured the Haymarket Theatre with her presence last evening. Her Royal Highness was attended by Lady Augusta Bruce, Lady Anna Maria Dawson, Baroness de Speth, Sir George Couper, and Lord James Murray. Her . Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent visited the Duchess of Gloucester yesterday at Gloucester House. Mr. Cardwell, M.P., Mr. Moore, and a deputation from Liverpo9,l, had an interview with Lord John Russell yesterday, at his official residence in Downing street. Mr. Marsh and Mr. Blunt had an interview with Earl Grey yesterday, at the Colonial-office. The Earl of Falmouth had an interview with Earl Granville yesterday at the Office of the Board of Trade. Sir Thomas Freernantle, Chairman of the Customs, Mr. John Wood, Chairman of the Excise, and Mr. Pressly, Secretary to the Board of Stamps and Taxes, had interviews with the Chancellor of the Exchequer yesterday. HER MAJESTY'S THEATRE.—The Queen and his Royal Highness Prince Albert honoured the perform ance at her Majesty's Theatre, on Saturday evening with their presence ; her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent accompanied her Majesty and his Royal High ness ; the Queen was attended by the Viscountess Jece- Iyu, the Hon. Miss Cavendish, the Earl of Listowel, and General Wemyss ; her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent was attended by Lady Augusta Bruce ; and in attendance upon his Royal Highness Prince Albert was Lieutenant-Colonel Seymour. Her Majesty the Queen Adelaide's box was occupied by the Marquis' and Mar chioness of Clanricarde. and Lady Emily de Burgh. His Royal Highness Prince George also visited the theatre. Amongst the audience were his Royal Highness Prince Leopold of Naples, his Grace the Duke of Wellington, his Excellency the Russian Minister and the Baroness Brunow and Md lle. Olga do Lechner, his Excellency the Hanoverian Minister, his Excellency the Sardinian Minister, his Excellency the Swedish Minister, the Duchess of Leeds and Miss Lane Fox, the Marchioness of Douro, the Marquis of Huntley, the Marquis and Marchiones of Sligo and the Ladies Browne, the Mar quis and Marchioness of Ailesbury, the Marquis of Donegal, his Excellency the Baron Hugel, the Count Arthur de Courcy, the Earl of Liverpool, the Earl of Falmouth, the Earl of Munster, the Earl of Besborough, the Earl and Countess of Wilton, the Earl Granville, the Earl of Lonadale, the Earl of Cardigan, the Chevalier de Colonna, the Viscount Canning, the Viscount Enfield, the Viscount Anson, the Viscount and Viscountess Maidstone, Lord Forester, Lord Mounteharles, Lord Sandys, Lord Saltoun, Lord Gard ner, Lord W. Beresford, Lord Southampton and Lady Charles Somerset, Lady A. Paulet, Lady Foulis, Lady Willoughby de Eresby, Lord Walpole, Lady BeW , nck, Lady Bellingham Graham, Sir H. Menx, Sir A. afford Sir George Otway, General the Hon. IL Cavendish, General the Hon. A. Upton, Major-General Watson, the lion. C. Cavendish, Sir John Cam Hobhouse, Bart., M.P., Sir H. Willoughby Bart., and Lady Fremantle, Sir C. Shackell, Mr. B. D'lsraeli, M.P., Sir John Yardo Buller, M.P., and Isidy Buller, Colonel and tbo Hon. Nirs. Anson, Mr., Mrs., and Miss B. Trelawney; Hon. R. Cutzon, Colonel and Lady H. Lane, Captain the lion. James Macdonald, the Bon. Spencer Cowper, Mr. C. J. Palmer, Captain and the Hon. Mrs. Ryder Burs ton, Mr. 0. Morgan, M.P., Captain Packman, R.N., Mr. Rose, Mr. G. Cornwall, Mr. Broadley, M.P., fir. and Mrs. Tudor, Mr. Hubert de Burgh, Captain Sej mour Sadler, Captain Williams, Mr. and Mrs. Whelor, Lieut.-General Sir A. Woodford, Bart., &c. ROYAL ITALIAN OPERA, COVENT GARDEN.-1 - 31er Majesty's box was occupied on Saturday evening by the Earl and Countess Fortescue, Viscount and Viscountess Ebrington, Miss Gale and Miss Williams ; there wens also present his Royal Highness Prince Wolowski, bts Excellency the American Minister and Mrs. Bancroft, the Duke and Duchess of Richmond and the Ladies Lennox, the Duchess of Coigny and Lady Benlik nc, the Duke and Duchess of Montrose, the Dowager Ductess of Bedford and Lady Rachel Russell, the Marqiti .Earl Titchfield, Marquis of Sligo, Marquis of Tavist oc of Munster, Earl and Countess of Eglinten , Eark, l G , , , r o o w s : venor, Earl and Countess of Arran, the Countess ager of Essex, Miss Johnstone, Sir e J rn o p h i n eto a o n i e l l: v s: i d s y Walsh, Earl of Cardigan, Viscount T .. count Exmouth, Lady Augusta Gordon, Lady Adelaide Fitzclarence and Miss Kennedy Ersk ine, Viscountess Dillon, Sir William and Lady and the Misses Stuart, Lord and Lady Dinorben, Lord Ernest Bruce and Miss De Bathe, Miss De Bathe Elphinstone, Lord and Lady and the Honourable Miss Foley,_ Bruce, Lord and Lady Carrington, Lor L d a S dy uffie m ld o , :Lord and La il dy ono S a ) r . a k b e l s e , an, Templera LpaoctrilyviiiSe,cotti,dLyady Websteorr,e, Lady Isabella no° Miss Dillon, Lord and Lady Ho llan d ,b t n Viscount re " Han.an and d Major ll M l r rs . Speer r , F ox . Lord Hall)? ur o , . Mr. Lady Mary lle, Need.. Lady Leesum, Hon. Dudley Fortescue, °a- Hon Mrs. Wyndham, ham,. Hon. J . . Hf oi • t(M)eusrgc.uhlebV, Hon.teosnl Hon. Latimer Neville, Sir W. Somerville, Sir Lady Atkinson, Sir C. Lemon, Sir rerog rind Jasper ao o c sn k i neo , rdn Hon. ab3f, Sir John and Lady horod,\SVir A henry 'yti ebb, Baron do Steinberg, Sir G. Armitage, Sir Charlm.Mar shall, Sir F. Booth, Sir Edwin Seudamore, Hon. f 3... Pon sonby, Sir Olney Wakeman, Mrs. Henry Bai! abridge, Mrs. Mills and the Misses Mills, Mrs. M.ountjoy Martin, Miss Burdett Coutts and par ty, the M i sses Byrnes, the Misses Richards, Major -General Campbell, R.A. , Colonel Blanc, Colonel B. Kn. )x., M.P., Colonel Wingfield, Major and Mrs. Pugh, Major Simp son, Major Jones, Major and the Hon. Mrs. d,-age, Cap tain J. L. Clayton, R.N., Captain Cuddy, C.aptain D. Carleton, Captain de Bathe, Captain Sullivan, Mr. C. Balfour, Mr. F. Huddlestone, Mr. I. Foley, M.P., Mr. 11. Baring, M.P., Mr. Charles Standish. HAYMARKET THEATRE.—MT. Stevens, the ma nager of the free-list office at this house, takes his benefit this evening, when Banda, with an attractive cast, will be performed. We hope the amateurs and others who have repeatedly experienced Mr. Steven's polite atten tion, will come forward and give him the bumper he de serves. ANOTHER NEW ASTEROID.—A tenth planet, be longing to the group which revolve between Mars and Jupiter, has just been discovered by Professor Kaiser, of Leyden. It is calculated that this planet performs its revolutions round the sun in three years and eight months. The ninth asteriod, which was discovered by (we believe) Mr. Hind, about three months ago, has not yet been named ; it may, perhaps, be the same as the one now noticed by Protessor Kaiser. ELOPEMENT.—A pair of youthful fugitives are reported at the west end of town to have, during the past week, suddenly disappeared from an hotel cele brated as the resting•place of many distinguished fo•• reigners. The lady is stated to be Mrs. H---, about 22 years of age, who, although generally residing with her husband at his seat in %Vales, usually resorts during the fashionable season to town, and stays ,it the hotel alluded to. The gentleman is believed to be Captain W--, on leave of absence from his regiment in India, who was staying at the same hotel. Their present place of whereabout is not yet known.—Observer.