The Sun. — London, England, 1835-07-03 00:00:00

TilE SUN, LONDON, FRLt)AY, JULY 3, 1833 House? Mr. O'CONNELL—I said no such thing, and I congra tulate the Noble Lord on his extreme valour. I rejoice at it. 1 If he had taken my words and repeated them, he would have found that there was net- the least occasion for this most un necessary display. Lord STANLEY.—Then I beg the Hon. and Learned Gentleman to repeat his words. Mr. O'CONNELL.—My words were what I said twice, that I should be glad to hear of any job too contemptible for this House to think of. Lord STANLEY—No ! those were not the words. Mr. O'CONNELL—Yes, they were. I was in posses sion of the chair. I have said part of the words, I mean to repeat the remainder. lam interrupted. Lord STANLE Y—l rise to order. I ask whether it is consistent with the orders of this House that any Gentleman should use the words, that he should like to know how any Member sitting in the place in which he sits can speak of any job as being too contemptible ? Mr. O'CONNELL—In the first place I wish the Hon. Member had allowed me to finish. I said two things. I said I should have been glad to see any job too contemptible for this House to think of, and I added to that, that sitting at the side of the House in which the Noble Lord sits, no job was certainly too contemptible for the House to think of. I made that assertion, and I repeat it. Lord SANDON—The Hon. and Learned Member turns the charge of jobbing from one individual to all the Members on this side of the flouse.—( A laugh.) He has no right to accuse all the Members of any job ; I think we, on this side of the House, have as good a right to stand on our character as the Hen. and Learned Gentleman. Mr. O'CO NNE LL—I did not mean to attack every indi vidual Member. I meant to attack that side of the House, and I meant to attack them politically ; and, speaking of po litical jobs, I meant to say, not that they would adopt tho jobs, but that they would condescend to think of them ; and I make them a present of that purity which leads them to ima gine they would not think of them at all. lam ready to ad mit they would not think of jobs. I will suppose there is not a single individual on that side of the House who would think of a job, and we then come back to the question, whether or no the town-clerk is to be a perpetual jobber, as every Mem ber of this House must be, if he were to sit permanently here. I know of nothing that would so soon tend to make us jobbers, as sitting permanently here. The more Members are independent of control, the more are they under the temptation of being jobbers. The Noble Lord's argument is founded on this—that these persons were .to be a political Council ; and over and over again he talked of their being a political Council. The intention of this Bill is to prevent their being a political Council, or to give them a higher sphere of duty than that of being a municipal Council. The inten tion was to make them a municipal Council for local pur poses. Politics may interfere, but the great object is to pre vent a permanent politician. With that view I oppose the amendment. I think it would make a permanent jobber in every Corporation—not attending to the municipal business of tlfb Corporation, but keeping his eye on politics, and being enabled to sell his politics to advantage, whenever it suited any particular party to purchase. Lord STANLEY—If I entreat the pardon of the Corn mittee for deviating in any degree from the question, I shall do so without interfering with that order which I feel ought to be observed. I shaenot, therefore, allude to the persona' attack on myself, or to the attack directed against a body of men by whom, agreeing with them on some points, and differ ing with them on others, I happen, according to the arrange ments of the House, now to be surrounded : but I shall wish to advert, for one moment, if the Committee will allow me, to an expression which, having been used in the Committee, from whatever quarter it may come, I should be glad to take an opportunity of referring to. The Hon. and Learned Gen tleman, the Member for Dublin, has spoken of me as sitting on this side of the House. He has coupled that with an ac cusation which I hope it is not necessary for me in this House to throw off from royself—(hear)—and which certainly I shall take no notice of; but AS attacks have been personally made against me on this subject, although it may appear of little importance to any Gentleman in this House, and although where this or that man may happen to sit does not obtain that importance out of doors which I know is attached to it in this House , I wish to say one word as to the of' this place I now happen to occupy. At the commencement Session, under a different Administration, being unable altogether to support his Majesty's last Government, and at the same time wishing to offer them no factious or violent opposition, I took that place in the House, which, us far as place is considered, indicates neutrality between the two contending parties- and no disposition to give a violent oppo sition. On the change of Government I maintained the same place in the House on the same principle of independence of office end independence of opposition. Being unconnected with party, and wishing to follow my own views, I wished to indicate, %Is far as I could, by the position I occupied, that I intended co hostility to the Government of my Noble Friend. Obsers ations have of late been made, which have rendered it necessary for me to depart from that position—not to depart from the principles on which I anted. Those principles will not be changed—those principles have not been changed ; and whether attacked publicly, where I can defend myself, or pri vately elsewhere, where I cannot, I shall pursue that course which I feel myself bound to follow. When 1 found on more than one suecessive night that sitting on the same side with his Majesty's Ministers, and discussing the details of a Bill which was in Come-duce, and which it was my earnest desire to forward, my accidental voting on the other side, and my re turn to the seat which I occupied, were to be received with cheers, which, coming from individuals, were cheers of per sonal insult, and which, coming from a body, intimated a clear opinion on the part of that body, that I was not a person who was fit for their society—an opinion in which I very humbly ac j uiesce—when I saw that opinion so plainly intimated that it was impossible to mistake it, I felt it to be my duty, more especially after the comments in the public Papers of the fol lowing day, which rendered it impossible to suppose that the conduct was unintentional or was not to be continued. De sirous, on the one side, of not provoking insult—and deter mined, on the other side, not to give offence, I felt I had no course to pursue but to withdraw from society which evidently did not wish I should remain amongst them. There are per -ens who may think it necessary or worth their while to con s -'iat may be the motives of my co nduct. I chan g ed my seder re_ :.-sleuse, because I wished to avoid giving o r takin g place in this !hat where I was I must hear , with r e g ard offence, because I fe:: in private could not be passed t 6 myself, observations wh;c :: who will not justify their over, occasionally coming fro m theeZ Hear.) I wished expressions either in public or in privaZa:s-4 ;2cl for that pur to withdraw from such unplea sant collision, . pose, and that purpose only , I sit where I do. 1 us s e cs pard r of the Committee. I will not deny that the attacks tease; upon me have given me pain. I wish to set myself right with those whom I most respect and esteem. I wish to set myself right with them and with the public. I wish to state the cause of a mere personal movement which may be interpreted into a political change of opinion, and stating that I will not refer further to observations coming from the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin—pronounced by wholesale on Gentlemen who happen to sit at this side of the House, and individually on myself, whom he has 'thought fit to select for an attack which he considers worthy the dignity and decorum of the House. I trust Hon. Members will feel as Gentlemen and men of honour that, as a Gentleman and man of honour, I have been justified in trespassing on the Committee.—( Cheers.) • Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I only wish to allude for one moment to what has just been said by the Noble Lord. It was a source of great pain to me, as my Noble Friend well knew, that that difference of opinion took place which did take place on a very important question. I have been very much pained to see that in the course of this year there have been other differences of opinion respecting that course of policy which my Hon. Friend and I have thought fit to adopt. As to the seat which my Noble Friend may think fit to occupy in this House, that certainly is a matter which must be left to his own particular choice ; and unless he had chosen to mention it, I should not have felt myself at liberty to say one word upon the subject ; but having mentioned it, I must say that if he meant it as a political step, I think the cheers which took place whenever there was a division in the Committee, pro ceeded rather from a disposition to cause a laugh than from any other cause, and I think that my Noble Friend has attached too much importance to those cheers to found any political step upon them. With regard likewise to the comments of the public press, I think that my Noble Friend would do better to pursue that course of duty which he thinks proper in this House influenced rather by the matters which came before the House, and the conduct of the Members of the House, than the comments which are made from day to day, often with considerable virulence on the conduct of public men. lam happy to hear my Noble Friend say that he did not mean to imply that his political opinion had been at all changed by the position he now occupies. I can assure my Noble Friend with regard to his whole course of public conduct, whether at the time at which I had the good fortune to agree with him, and we acted together, or when in later terms we had the misfor tune to be of a different opinion, that I always thought that if there was any man on whom no imputation could be cast of acting from any unworthy or improper motives in his political conduct, that person was my Noble Friend. I trust, that even if we differ still more widely, I shall always be ready to do justice to the conduct and charac ter.of my Noble Friend. I will not now enter into the question before the House, as that has been sufficiently debated by others. Mr. C. PELHAM, as an independent Member of the House, thought that in justice to himself and the House, the observations of the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin ought not to pass unnoticed. Were Hon. Members sent to be servile slaves to a party or to do their duty to their country? He had retained his seat on his side of the House, for the purpose for which he originally took it on the other,—aedfor that purpose only lie retained it. With regard to the ques tion before the Committee, the Hon. Gentleman said, that the officd of Town Clerk ought certainly not be a political one. It appeared to him, that the Town Clerk could not perform his duties efficiently unless his appointment was permanent. After a few words from Mr Sttew and Mr. H. HUGIIES, the Committee divided, and the numbers were — For the amendment ••• 65 Against it .. Majority against the amendment —GO Mr. BORT H WIC K said that the Bill in its present shape would bear hard upon Town Clerks who at present held office. He knew an instance of a gentleman possessing an income of 1,0001. a year, in return for which he had given up the entire' of his time, and the entire of his talents, for 30 years, besides having relinquished his profession. If the Committee refused to the Town Clerks who were to be appointed hereafter a tenure for life, it was not to be expected that they would grant that permanent appointment to those who were at present in office. He felt that it would not be dealing fairly by the Committee to press his motion to that effect to a division, when it was quite certain, ;from the division which had just taken place, that the result would be against him. He should there fore leave it over until the bringing up of the Report. After a few words from Sir J. R. REID, which were not heard in the gallery, it was resolved that clause 42, as amen ded, should stand part of the Bill. On clause 43, which provides that no money shall be paid except upon order signed by three or more Councillors, and countersigned by the Town Clerk, Mr. W ILK S suggested that the order ought to be signed at the meeting of the Council, because otherwise it might happen that orders would be hawked about the different places for signature. Mr. ESTCOURT thought that the order ought also to be signed by the Mayor. It certainly ought to be signed at the Council Board,-and nowhere else. Lord J. RUSSELL observed that it might, perhaps, be desirable to provide that it should be signed by the Mayor, or three or more Councillors. Mr. W ILK S rose to propose an amendment to the effect that he had already suggested. He moved that after the words " signed by three or more Councillors," in the last line of the clause, these words should be introduced—" at the meeting of the Council at which the order is made." The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected to the amend ment. It often happened that an order was made in sub stance but s not drawn up in form, and the introduction of the proposed words might cause great obstruction to business. The SOLICITOR -GENERAL said that as all the offi cers of the Corporation were required to give security, and as no money was to be paid but by an order in Council, there could be no danger of abuse from the clause as it stood. A conversation ensued in which Sir E. Knatchbull, Mr. Cayley, Mr. Grote, Mr. Robinson, Mr. H. Hughes, Lord Sandon, and others took part, and the subject dropped. The Committee divided, when the numbers were : For the amendment 65 Against it Majority --- 41 The clause was then agreed to, as were also clauses 44, 45, 46, 47, and 48. Clause 49 was then put. Mr. AGLIONBY suggested that any of the present Town Clerks who were not re-appointed under the Bill should re ceive remuneration. The clause was then agreed to. On clause 50 being proposed, Mr. HUGHES HUGHES said that the clause required the presence of one• third of the Council to decide all ques tions that came before them. He should propose as an amend ment that the words "two thirds" be substituted for " one third." Lord JOHN RUSSELL was opposed to the amendment, which he thought both unnecessary and inconvenient. After a few words from Mr. E STCO URT, who was under stood to be opposed to the amendment, it was withdrawn. This clause, as well as clause 51, was then agreed to. Upon clause 52, which gave to the Council the power of granting alehouse licences being proposed, Sir J. GRAHAM rose to propose an amendment. He begged to state his decided objection to the principle con tained in this portion of the Bill. It was proposed by the clause that the Town Council or a committee of that Council should have the power of granting alsehouse licenses only in cases of boroughs to which a separate commission of the peace shall have been granted. This he thought a very great anomaly, and the converse of the case ought to have been taken. Where a borough had a separate commission of the peace, alehouse licenses were to be granted by the local au thorities ; but where it had not a separate commission of the peace, county magistrates were to have the power of granting licenses. This seemed to him a great anomaly, and a principle quite the reverse ought to have been adopted.—( Hear, hear.) For instance, take the town of Guildford. That town was to have a Council, the number of which would amount only to eighteen, and yet it was intended to grant it a separate juris diction, and the Town Council were to have the power of granting licenses. Whereas, the town of Huntingdon, the number of whose Town Council would be twenty-one, was not to have a separate jurisdiction or commission of the peace, so that licenses would be granted in Guildford by the Town Council, but in Huntingdon they would be granted by the county magistrates. Such an anomaly remained to be explained.—( Hear, hear, hear.) It had been stated by the Noble Lord, the Secretary at War, that magisterial functions in boroughs ought not to be connected with any thing political. He fully admitted the principle laid down by the Noble Lord. But this clause was in direct viola- tion of the policy of the law respecting licenses.--( Hear.) The power of granting licenses had-been hitherto considered magisterial and judicial, and consequently had been entrusted to the county magistrates.--( Hear.) The second anomaly in this clause was, that it separated the judicial and m agisterial functions. In large cities the Town Councils would be deci dedly political bodies, and yet to them magisterial functions were about to be entrusted by this clause. Besides, in coun ties a qualification was necessary to become:a magistrate. In many counties the qualification was considerable, such as pro perty in real estate to the amount of 100/. a year. It had been already decided that by this Bill no qualification was ne cessary for a Town Councillor. In large towns, where the duties of town councillors would be most important, and where according to this clause, they would have m agisterial functions to perform, no qualification was required o them.--( Hear, bear.) There was another inconsistency in this part of the Bill, though the Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir J. C. Hoblmuse) had contended that the people should have a right to some share in the selection of their magistrates, this was an anomaly. The Crown was the fountain of justice and the conservator of the peace, and when that peace was broken it was considered the King's peace, and persons were called upon to defend it in the King's name. He did not deny that in an cient towns the magistracy was sometimes elective. The present clause was, notwithstanding, a direct violation of the present law, which placed licenses under the controul of the county magistrates, because they were connected with the po lice of the country and were preservers of the peace— and as that peace was connected with the Crown, all that related to its preservation was entrusted to the magistracy by the authority of the Crown. The power of granting licenses, connected as it was with matters of police, and the preservation of the peace, ought not to be transferred to any persons, save those holding a commission under the Crown. He believed that the magistracy exercised their funct ions to the entire satisfaction of the country.—( Hear, and " No.") He would appeal to the Hon. Members fcr Sheffield and Leeds, where- there was no local jurisdiction, whether the magistrates of the West Riding of the County of York bad not properly and fairly discharged their duties, particularly as far as regarded the granting of licenses ? He would also ask the Hon. Members for Manchester whether the magistrates had acted with impartiality there ? There was a remarkable case in which the magistracy were elective—he meant the town of Caernarvon. The inhabitants entertained the great est jealousy of the mayor and other corporate officers who were elected by the people, whilst they placed the greatest confi dence in the Recorder, who was appointed by the Crown. — (Hear.) His amendment was not exactly like that which stood on the notice paper. It was like a clause which had been introduced into the Act brought in by the Hon. Member for Oxford in 1828, which gave the county magistrates a c3n current jurisdiction with the local authorities in the matter of granting of licenses. He should move that the words after " And be it enacted" in the clause be omitted, and that also the 53d and 54th clause be struck out, for the purpose of in serting " that every borough to which a separate commission of the. peace shall be granted, the justices of the peace for the county or counties in which such borough shall be situ ated, shall, after the Ist of May, 1836, have a concurrent jurisdiction with the local authorities in granting licenses; and that in every borough to which no separate commission of the peace shall be granted, the justices of the peace for the county or counties in which such borough shall be situated, shall exercise all the powers and jurisdiction to which they are now entitled by law in their respective counties; provided al ways that nothing herein contained shall give such magistrates the power of levying, or appropriating, or interfering with the funds, of the said boroughs." Lord HOWICK was of opinion 'that the licensing of ale houses was not at all connected with judicial functions.. He was told that the Crown was the fountain of all authority in matters of this sort, and that no magisterial functions ought to emanate from the people, but be in the appointment of the Crown. Now, one of the greatest abuses of the boroughs was the present state of the magistracy.—( Hear.) They existed under no controul either of the Crown or the people, but they were purely a self-elected body.—( Hear.) They would be now elected by the people, but they would hold their com missions from the Crown.—( Hear.) Having introduced that principle into the Bill before the House, they could not have followed that principle if they left the distribution of ale. house licenses to the county magistracy. The distribution of those licences would place a great deal of political power in the hands of those who possessed such authority, and he, thought it best that it should be taken from the magistrates, and transferred to the town council. The power of granting licenses was not conferred upon magistrates by ancient Acts of Parliament. He believed that it was- , not until after the Revolution that the power was granted•to them: He owned that it was difficult to place such a power safely in the- hands of any body of men, but less mischief would arise from the power being vested in the town council rather than in the ma gistrates.—( Hear.) It was on those simple grounds that he supported the clauses of the Bill which the Right Hon.. Ba ronet proposed should be omitted. Mr. BAINES said that with respect to the town of Leeds, the county magistrates had no concurrent jurisdiction with the borough magistrates. The power of granting licenses was entirely in the hands of the borough magistrates. Ho begged, for the satisfaction of the Right Hon. Baronet ( Sir J. Graham), to mention one fact, which was, the result of the way in which licenses were now granted in Leeds. ' Whilst the people of that place were, by - a large majority,- in favour of the popular Representatives, the publicans were, by a majority of two to one, against them. The magistrates in Leeds were highly respectable, and if the present system so operated under re spectable magistrates, what must it be where they were not so ? He thought this fact a sufficient answer to the arguments of the Right Hoar Baronet, and, at the same time, a very cogent one, against continuance of the present system. Sir J. GRAHAM said.thatzle was not contending in favour of the borough magistrates of Leeds. In Sheffield, where the 'county magistrates had a jurisdiction, the case would be found quite the reverse. Mr. 1-PARKER said that Sheffield was not a borough town. It, and its matters of police, had been always under the jiiriadietion of county magistrates. He thought the licensing system and - matters of police were so cicscly connected that they should not be separated. For his part lie wished to see the power applicable to both placed in the same hands, and he entirely agreed that the town council was as likely to exercise this jurisdiction fairly as any other body that could be chosen for the purpose. With such an impression on his mind he could not do otherwise than support the clause. Mr. B. HOY must admit that the power ought to be in the hands of persons residing on the spot, and he knew that much abuse had arisen because this was not the case. Mr. POTTER said that nothing could be more corrupt or improper than the present system, for it placed the whole body of publicans completely under the control of the magistrates. Mr. M. PIIILL IPS fully agreed that the town council was more likely to exercise this power impartially, and, at the same time, discreetly, than the magistrates, knowing, as they must, all the persons within their locality. Mr. ESTCOURT considered that the object of this clause was to give to the. town council more power than they ought to possess. He feared it would lead to jobbing far more than anything that now existed, and although so much had been said againSt the impartiality of the magistrates, he must assert that they had almost invariably exercised the power placed in their hands with fairness and justice. He, therefore, should give his support to the amendment of his Right Hon. Friend, thinking it would be an improvement of the Bill, as the effect of it would be to call in the aid of the county magistrates. Colonel SIBTIIORP did think that taking the power from the hands of the magistrates to place it in those of the town council would endanger, rather than contribute, to the tranquillity of the town. It was his belief that the Noble Lord in endeavouring to avoid Scylla would inevitably rush on Charybdis.—(Laughter.) Mr. C. BRUCE did not think the proposed change would be productive of the least good. It was quite manifest that the town council would be even more accessible to temptation than the magistrates, and his opinion, therefore, was, that, un less a concurrent jurisdiction were given to county magis trates, the greatest hardships and oppression were likely to arise in individual cases. Lord SA N DON very much feared that this alteration was nothing more nor less than a bribe for party purposes.— ( llear.) If corruption were to be apprehended, it was likely to proceed from the town council rather than from the magis trates, for there could be very little doubt that the influence and patronage of the former would be used to ensure- their re-election.—( Hear.) The town council were, in his judg ment, about the worst body that could have been selected for the exercise of this power.—( Hear.) Mr. H. HUGHES rose amidst cries of " Oh, oh," " Di vide, divide." He was understood to say that during . the whole of his Parliamentary life he had never known a single charge of partiality in the granting of licenses established against the magistracy of the part of the country with which lie was acquainted, and, _as lie considered that the change was any thing but desirable, he for one must offer to it his most strenuous opposition. Sir J: GRAHAM rose to reply, amidst loud and general cries of " Divide, divide," " Order, order," and " Bar, bar and it was not until after Mr. Bernal, the Chairman, had re.- peatedly endeavoured to obtain order, by requesting Hon. Gentlemen to be seated, that the Right' Hon. Baronet was allowed to proceed. The Noble Lord opposite (the Right Hon. Baronet observed) had said that, prior to the revolution, the power of granting licenses did not rest with the Magis trates ; but this was evidently a mistake on the part of the Noble Lord, for, by a statute passed in the year 1462, in the reign of Henry VI., it was expressly declared that all ale houses should be placed under the jurisdiction of the Magis trates, and that they alone should have the power of granting licenses.—( Hear, hear.) This power, he contended, bad never been abused down to the present time, and, therefore, looking at the Town Council and the Magistrates, he must say that in his opinion it would be much safer to entrust the power of granting licenses to the latter rather than to the former.—( Hear, hear.) The House then divided. The numbers were— For the Amendment ... Against it .......... Majority Clauses 54 and 55 then passed The House reported progress, and resumed its sitting on public business. Mr. S. CRAWFORD moved for leave to bring in a B' to amend the law of landlord and tenant in Ireland. Lord MORPETH said something which was not beard. Mr. GO ULBURN said this deviation from the practice o the House was attended with great inconvenience. It was not fair that the simple introduction of a Bill should be ac companied with one-sided statements, which should rather be made the subject of discussion at a more fitting time. Mr. CRAWFORD said his object was to give the propo sition general publicity. The measure was based on the re commendation of various Committees of both Houses of Par liament. The Hon. Member proceeded to dwell on the pro priety of giving tenants protection against the encroachments 166 211 -45 of landlord:_ , , and allowing them compensation for the outlay of their capital on improvements. • Lord MORPETH had no objection to the Bill. Mr. WYNN said there was a difficulty in the House giving sanction to an objectionable Bill. The Bill had for its object to give compensation to ejected tenants. Why interfere be tween man and man? Parliament should not descend to that. Mr. WARBURTON thought the Bill did not interfere with existing contracts ; it gave the outgoing tenant some in demnification for his outlay. After a few words from', Mr. Stmt. and Colonel PERCEVAL, recommending the withdrawal of the Bill for the present, leave, as we understood, was given to bring in the Bill. Mr. P. SC ROPE moved fel- leave to bring in a Bill for the relief of the poor in Ireland. After a short conversational discussion between some Hon. Members, during which Mr. Goulburn intimated that the Hon. Member was poaching on the manor of the Member for Water ford ( Sir R. Musgrave) in introducing such a Bill, as the Hon. Baronet had pre-occupied that ground of legislating fur the Irish poor, leave was given to bring in the Bill. Mr. CALLAGHAN obtained leave to bring in a Bill to regulate the pilotage of steam-boats. MUSIC IN PUBLIC-HOUSES. _ _ Mr. HUME moved for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal so much of the Act of the 25th of George 11. as restrains the amusement of music and dancing. He said this provision re stricting the amusements of the lower classes formed a clause of an Act " to prevent theft," passed in the year 1752, but had remained a dead letter until within the last eight years, when, in consequence of the interference of a number of in formers, it had often been carried vexatiously into operation. Mr. POTTER seconded the motion, and said that they all wanted merriment occasionally.—( A laugh.) Leave granted. To be read a second time on Wednesday next. Mr. HUME then moved for leave to bring in a Bill to limit the expenses of elections, and the time of taking the polls at them; and to abolish the qualifications of Members to serve in Parliament. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought the latter portion of the provisions of the proposed Bill was liable to great objection, and he therefore suggested that the Hon. Member should separate it from the former parts, which he was inclined to approve of. After a few words from Colonel Perceval, Mr. R. Wason, and Mr. Hume in reply, leave was given to bring in the Bill. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at One o'Clock. DOUSE OF LORDS, Jetr 2. The Earl of SIIAPTESBURY took his seat on the Woolsack at 20 minutes past five o'clock, as Deputy-Speaker. A Mes sage from the Commons brought up some private Bills. The Sugar Duties' Bill, Western Australia Bill, and Isle of Man Corn Bill, were read a third time and passed. The Earl of FARNHAM moved for a series of Returns re lative to the composition of tithes in Ireland, arid the names of all applications made to the Lord Lieutenant from parishes in Ireland, with the names of the applicants. Lord DUNCANNON had no objection to the making of such Returns if the Government were in possession of them. He had some doubt whether they were. Lord FARNHAM said a Noble Lord had stated in another place that these applications had been very numerous. As he was extremely opposed to the re-opening of any composition, he was extremely anxious to know how the matter really stood. After a few words from the Marquis of WESTMEATH and the Marquis of LANSDOWNE, Viscount CL IFD E N said these compositions had been made to the number of 1,497 under Mr. Goulburn's Act, which was calculated on the price of wheat for seven years beforel 820, when it was very high. Their Lordships were aware it was not now of near the same value. He lamented that their Lordships had thrown out the Tithe Bill of last year, unwisely he thought for themselves, and very unfortunately both for the country and the clergy, for he was firmly of opinion that if they had got 77i per cent., they would have the full value of their tithe according to the present price of wheat. The motion was then agreed to. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY gave notice that to morrow he would put some questions to the Noble Viscount, relative to a letter written to the Magistrates of Ireland from the Lord Lieutenant. AFFAIRS OF SPAN. The Nona MAncluts then said, the House would recollect the questions he had put to the Noble Viscount opposite (Melbourn), relative to the troops now going out to Spain. He had first asked whether the Order in Council was issued on the part of the Government, or on the ap plication of the Spanish Ambassador ? The answer to that was perfectly satisfactory. The other question was, whether these levies, mercenaries, or British auxiliary force —whichever the Noble Viscount called them---( Loud laughter)—now assembling in the Isle of Dogs—(Laughter) —were to be entitled to the benefit of the convention of Lord Eliot ? He was quite sure the Noble Viscount would not mis-state any fact; therefore he wished to ask him what construction he put upon the Treaty. It was most important for these troops to know, for there was a decree put forth by Don Carlos in which any stranger joining the other forces were excluded from the benefit of the Treaty, and ordered to be instantly shot. That was directly at variance with the statement of the Noble Viscount; and it was desirable that these misguided men, now ready to embark, should be disabused of the deception put upon them by the Noble Viscount.—(Hear, hear.) He demanded to know why that statement had been made, and why there was so much delusion practised with regard to this aid to Spain, as it was called. He could not hear the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Home Department state that Don Carlos's support was confined to two or three provinces, without thinking that there was a great deal of ignorance or wilful misrepresentation. It was well known that the facts were quite different ; that Don Carlos not many months ago left this country with only one attendant, and that now he bad 36,000 men well armed ; while the Queen's troops, which then amounted to 56,000 men, had been beaten at every point, and that more than 8,000 of them had gone over to Don Carlos. Such a statement, made by a Secretary of State, was sure to mislead this fruitless and monstrously absurd exhibition. He in the meantime trusted the Noble Viscount would answer his questions. Viscount MELBOURNE—AII he had said upon a former occasion, which he still maintained, was, that in his opinion those persons now going out would be entitled to the benefits of the Convention. It was impossible for him to say what con struction the parties in Spain might put upon the Convention. With respect to the decree, he firmly believed that it was a forgery, and did not emanate from Don Carlos, whose name it bore. Then, as to what the Noble Marquis had asserted as regarded a statement, or supposed statement, made in another place by his Noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, imputing ignorance of the real state of facts upon the subject of Spanish affairs, he (Lord Melbourne) really be lieved that his Noble Friend had most accurately described the matter, when he said that the civil war was confined to three of the Northern provinces of Spain.—(Hear.) He ( Lord Melbourne) believed such to be strictly the fact ; and that no opposition to the Queen's Government had been manifested in any other part of that country. That statement of his Noble Friend was certainly incompatible with what the Noble Mar quis had stated ; but he believed the Noble Marquis was in accurate in what he had said with respect to the desertion of the Queen's troops, the losses sustained by them, and the amount of the forces on the other side. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY was sorry if he had stavd any thing which the facts would not bear out ; but he thought he had not, and he could not acquiesce in what the Noble Viscount had urged. Viscount MELBOURNE believed the Decree itself to be a forgery—(Hear, hear)—and whether Don Carlos would or would not succeed, was, at present, merely a matter of opinion. The subject was then dropped. DEFENCE OF A COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION. Viscount DITNC AN N 0 N had received a letter in answer to a charge preferred against one of the Commissioners of Public Instruction in Ireland, Mr. M'Dermott, by a clergy man, Mr. Irwin, whose letter had been read to their Lordships on a former night, by a Right Rev. Prelate. Now, this gen tleman, the Commissioner, had received recommendations for the appointment, and was in every respect well qualified to perform the duties imposed upon him, and he had done so in the present instance. It was a little singular that none of these complaints had been urged against the Commissioners, except in their Lordships' House. The Noble Lord then read a letter from Mr. M'Dermott, in which he denied having been at a meeting on the occasion alleged ; but that he did attend a meeting in 1826, in which he did speak, urging the impolicy of keeping so many subjects (he was a Roman Catholic) from the rights and privileges which they were justly entitled to. He also defended himself against the other accusations. The Bishop of EXETER said that the Noble Viscount was under a misapprehension when he said no complaint of Mr. Irwin had been made except in their Lordships' House. He (the Bishop of Exeter) did not make any objection to Mr. M'Dermott because he was a R oman Catholic, but because he was a Roman Catholic agitator. The Right Rev. Prelate then read a letter which he had that day received from Mr. Irwin, in which that gentleman stated that the meeting was held at the town of Castlereagb on the 4th of November 1827, and that Mr. M'Dermott was then chaired through the town. This was, as he had just said, in Noverriber 1827. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE—That was before the passing of the Roman Catholic Relief Bill. The Bishop of EXETER said he was obliged to the Noble Marquis ; but he apprehended the passing of that Act did not purge away all offences—it had no restropective effect. Ile must inform the Noble Marquis and the House too, that Mr. M'Dermott continued to retain the character of a political agi tator. Mr. Blundell also mentioned another gentleman who, though a Protestant, was avowedly hostile to all establish ments. This appointment also was made by the Noble Vis count, in the second Commission named, the efficiency of which was, of course, augmented by the names of the persons intrusted to conduct a Commission of so delicate a nature : this person, avowedly hostile to all establishments, was also chosen, and this was (as we understood) Mr. Neil O'Dominick Browne. An opinion having been formed of the intention with which this Commission was framed, that opinion was confirmed, or strengthened at least, by the appointments made. It was thought to be the test of an intention to destroy the Protestant Church in Ireland. This was the testimony of a clergyman who was ready to submit the whole case to their Lordships at the bar of that House ; and in truth that clergyman was that moment below the bar, and was ready to answer to any questions which might be put publicly or privately to him by any of their Lordships. The character of the agitator, of the Roman Catholic agitator, Mr. M'Der mott, did not rest solely upon the statements made to that House by the clergyman and repeated by a Bishop ; but the very arguments which had been raised only confirmed the statement of his groat distinction as an agitator. During the vs - politics of corporate bodies, there will also be a change of their officers. The Attorney-General, therefore, by his chivalrous Interference, had furnished him w:th the best defence ; for 'surely it could not be supposed that there were to be no politics in the Town Council. But there was another point ; the Town Clerk , of c ourse, was to have a salary ; and when a Change of the corporate body took place, vnight not their sue-- Meers say, as had been said on a certain occasion, " Our pre decessors appointed Lord lfeytesbury, and shall vc take the nom inee of Lord Ellenborough ?—( Cheers.) hy retn him--he ought to le removed?" For these reasons he thought the argument that the Town Clerk would be c ontinued . in office hypothetical, but hoped that the Town Clerk would never obtain such influence and power in the Corporation as to Lecome independent of the Council. Ile therefore must object to a s; stem which would lead to constant changes ; m and while he was anxious to see the office held only duringood be haviour, he oust at the same time declare that au annual elec tion would not teratribute either to the r espectability of the Deice or to the perrennent benefit of the town. Mr. P. THOMSON said, though there might be political changcl in the Town Council, he anticipated no such results as those alluded to by the Right Hon. Baronet ; for though the Town Council and the Town Clerk might differ as to politics, his claims to permanency would rest on his knowledge of the great busi ness of the borough, which would g a Town ive him gre at advantage over any compesttor. Supposi ou never would ng Clerk were to be removable for misconduct, y get rid of a Town Clerk. lie must be guilty of peculation or a gross act of disobedience to the Council to be proved guilty of misconduct. He knew Nt there had been canvassing going on for the office of Town Cerk, and he did not that there would be the slightest dittk-nitY in obtaining the man for the office, services of a professional , I t.ecause any man kne'w - that if he conducted himself properly, he sys:.7 lik el y t° retain his tenure as long as it may suit his interest and co:' nience. He hoped, upon the whole, that the Committee would be of opinion that it was better to give this power wholly to the Council in the first instance, on the same principle upon which the Bill procceded,--viz., placing the power in the hands of the people and their representatives. Mr. TU LK made some observations which were not heard in the gallery. Lord STANLEY said that the House, by the course they were now pursuing. were encouraging this doctrine—that the office of Town Clerk was to be an office entirely depeedent on political principles. They were canvassing the relative strength of political parties in the borough. It was making out the very case which he (Lord Stanley) wished to make out. They were making that which was a legal and profes sional office, a political and party office ; and it was against that that he most strongly protested. The result of the canvass -ivouldbe shown not by qualifications, but by political opinions. They had said that it should not be a professional office ; they bad said that a man should be rewarded for his political opi nions ; they had made the office a foundation for a standing job ; they had laid it down as a foundation for truckling for a municipal office upon political grounds. They were laying the foundation for corrupting the office on the one hand, whilst on the other he wished the office to be really respectable. The Town Clerk might occasionally do unpopular work—he might be engaged in legal proceedings against a great portion o f the inhabitants of the borough. How was he to discharge his duty? Next year a different set of men might be engaged on the Council, and proceedings might take place which were now taking place. The Hon. Members opposite would have the first choice of these officers. If they wished to preserve their friends in power, let it be made a permanent, and do not let it be made a political office. If he could have seen on the part of his Noble Friend opposite the smallest wish or intention of favourably considering this proposal, he would have given the Committee no further trouble. He felt it to be his duty to record his opinion, and he should be obliged to give the Com mittee the trouble to divide, and move to omit the words, " removable during pleasure," and to insert these words, " during good conduct." Mr. TULK said in the place to which he had alluded the (Ace was given to a Tory, in opposition to the majority. Lord HOWICK suggested that the most convenient mode would be to leave out the words " Town Clerk." The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that in many cases the Town Clerk, if he conducted himself properly, was ap pointed year after year. What were the duties of the Town Clerk? It was to record the proceedings of the Town Coun cil, to enter the minutes. He was not necessarily the soli citor for the Corporation. The solicitor might be a totally different person, and, indeed, ought to be a different person. It would be most proper to say that the Town Clerk should not act as solicitor. If, indeed, he had political functions, he ought to go out as often as there was a change of party in the borough. The Right Hon. Baronet had, indeed, to boast of an Attorney-General having remained in office when there was a change of Government, but there was only one person whom lie could prevail upon to continue in office after his re turn from Italy. At least he (the Attorney-General) could answer for himself, that no offer had been made to him, for he could not boast of having rejected any lure which had been held out to him. After a few words from Mr. HOT, Mr. WILLIAMS adverted to the Town Clerk of the city of London, whom he stated to have held office for the last 35 years. They, as well as other officers, had been elected an nually, and no inconvenience had been felt from that course of proceeding. Mr. O'CONNELL—The question is whether the Town Clerk is to be a permanent jobber or not, by being rendered independent of his employers? He would cease to be a ser vant, and would become a master, if he was made independent. The Noble Lord has mistaken the nature of this Council. He has admitted it himself. He has said that it is a job too con temptible for this House to deal with. I should be glad to know of a job too contemptible for this House to deal with. I should be glad to know how it is possible for the Noble Lord sitting where he does, to talk of a job being too contemptible. Perhaps the Hon. Gentlemen on that side of the House would only think of a job in order to reject it. Lord STANLEY—I beg the Hon. and Learned Member to explain what he means.--(Cheers from the Opposition.) Mr. O'CONNELL—Precisely what I said.—( Cheers from the Ministerial Benches.) Lord STANLEY—I want to know, in plain terms, what is the meaning he attaches to the words he has now used in the face of the House, and which, in the face of the House, I de mand an explanation of? I stand upon my character. My character shall not be publicly attacked by any man who will not vindicate that attack here or elsewhere. I ask the Hon. and Learned Gentleman what he means by addressing to me the expression, that sitting in the place where I now sit, I have no right to speak of any job as too contemptible for this general election of 1826, the Duke de Montebello, who hap pened to be travelling through England and Ireland attended, whilst in the latter part of the kingdom, a very great meet ing (which lie was very right in doing) at llallinasloe. He now quoted, he ought to observe, from a Roman Catholic authority—from the index to Wyse's history of the Roman Catholic Association. From this extract, which the Right Rev. Prelate read, it appeared that a gentleman named Du . . • vergier travelled with the Duke de Montebello, and be de scribed the proceedings of the meeting. One speaker spoke of the perfidy of the Government of England, and of the ex ample shown them by America. This was received with thunders of applause, and the speaker was Mr. Shcil. The narrator added that several orators were heard before him also with applause—that after a time when there was an ap pearance of every thing remaining silent, a young gentleman, named INl‘Dermott, rose, and had sufficient power to de tain the meeting. Ile declared that in no country should there be an establishment, &c. The Right Rev. Prelate said it was unintelligible to him why such gentlemen had been named to this Commission. If it were not intended to _ deal fairly with the Protestant cause in Ireland, then the Go- vernment did well to select persons who had declared them selves hostile to all ecclesiastical establishments. There was one other fact which applied more particularly to this gentle man as an agitator. In December, 1828, it was determined by the Roman Catholic Association to send a mission to Eng land (which mission, however, never took place, because, as Mr. Wyse said, they did not think any good would result from such mission) ; and the five first persons who were selected as those who were to form the mission were Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Shell, Mr. Wyse, O'Gorman Mahon, and Mr. M'Dermott. The Marquis of L ANSDOWNE knew many persons whose political sentiments and political conduct underwent a very great change at the time of the Roman Catholic Eman cipation Bill. He knew that such a change of opinion had come over very many persons who were most eminent indivi duals, and he hoped that that fact did not disqualify them from public situations. So far from being a great offence he main tained it was no offence at all to agitate in order to carry a great constitutional measure, and it was perfectly consistent with the loyalty of Mr. M'Dermott's character. He had heard no valid reason given why this gentleman should not have been selected ; and he would here beg leave to state that, as far as he had known and heard of the character of the Com, missioners, they had kept their bands clean from any mixture of party purposes. He was bound to state .„i s f rom communications which he had received from sev , : ca l o f t h em. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE rose ? ,:istinctly to deny the authority upon which Mr. M‘Derrr:,,tt had been declared to be an agitator. He denied that fl oat gentleman was now a political agitator. He claimeo - for that gentleman the merit of having felt, of having `'..,eeply felt the injuries under which lie and his brethren s':atered whilst civil immunities were with held from them. He denied that Mr. M'Dermott could be called disloyal or disaffected, either to the Sovereign or the constituted authorities of the country. It was now eight years since tho circumstance to which allusion had been particularly made had occurred. He should say that Mr. M'Dermott was precisely the person who ought to be employed in the Corn mission--precisely, because he was a member of the Roman Catholic Association, and had thereby shown how much alive he was to the grievances which the two Houses of the Legis lature afterwards decreed should be remedied. The Duke of WELLINGTON said, here was an inquiry affecting in a great degree the interests of the Established Church in Ireland, and the question which the Right Rev. Prelate stated to the House, and which they were to consider was whether this gentleman, who had been an agitator—noted as a Roman Catholic agitator—was, or was not, a fit and pro per person to be selected by the Government as a Commis sioner? Besides, the Right Rev. Prelate (and, he must say, he thought that he had proved his case clearly) had argued to show that this gentleman had been a Roman Catholic agita tor, and a very forward one, and that moreover he had, in a pointed manner, declared himself to be an enemy to the Esta blished Church. If there was any thing in what was said upon common occasions, this man's character must be established as that of a person who ought not to be upon such a Commission. The Bishop of EXETER rose to explain. The Right Rev. Prelate again adverted to the authority from which he had quoted—namely, " The Appendix to Wyse's History of the Catholic Association ;" Mr. Wyse havin g been a noto rious Roman Catholic agitator, and having, for the informa tion of posterity, recorded the proceedings of the Catholic Association. Viscount MELBOURNE very much regretted these dis cussions. He lamented them on account of their personal na ture, and he conceived that the manner in which they were car ried on would not produce any good effect upon the public mind. He thought it would be much better to avoid these anecdotes—these statements of facts, sayings, and assertions made one day, and all contradicted the next. Now, the Noble Duke had stated very distinctly, the principle upon which he proceeded, and he had distinctly admitted that the fact of persons having been members of the Catholic Association could not exclude those persons from holding office. He perfectly agreed in that opinion, because he had known many members of that Association who, when the measure of Ca tholic emancipation was carried, gave up their political pro. ceedings and declared themselves satisfied with it. They had not since engaged in politics, and he thought that those per sons ought to be distinguished, and amongst these lie would name a friend of his who was the Secretary to the Roman Ca tholics of Ireland, Mr. Purcell O'Gorman, whose conduct had always been most exemplary. Considering that seven years had now elapsed since the period when the question of eman cipation was agitated, he could not see why these Gentlemen should be shut out from accepting office under this Commission. Lord FARNHAM should move that the Report of the Com missioners be referred to a Select Committee, and with re ference to a Bill not t' then before the House, if it contained the provision recommending the suspension of benefices where there should not be 50 Protestants, because that would de prive the parish of their pastor. Viscount DUNCANNON explained. Lord WESTMEATH gave notice that he would this day move for a Return of all the prisoners confined in the gaols of Ireland for offences that were not bailable, from July, 1834, to July, 1835, distinguishing those of the Protestant re ligion, and including the Dissenters from the Protestant re ligion, and also those of the Roman Catholic religion, as dis tinguished from the two other classes. THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY moved for leave to bring in a Bill for protecting the revenues of ecclesiastical beneces without the cure of souls, and for preYenting the lapse thereof, pending the inquiry respecting the state of the Established Church in England and Wales. He should not, at this stage, enter into any explanation respecting the Bill. Lord LAN SDOWNE presented a petition from Essex in favour of the Established Church. CRIMINAL JUSTICE—WRITS OF CERTIORARI. Lord DENMAN had a Bill to present which would effect two reforms in the administration of criminal justice. The Act was to enable the Court of King's Bench to take recog nizances to any amount from defendants who removed indict ments into that Court by writs of certiorari, and for pre venting prosecutors from obtaining such wits without the leave of the Court. The Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Thursday next. The Merchant Seamen's Bill went through a Committee, after which the House adjourned. BUCKS SESSIONS. AYLESBURY, July 2. TRIAL OF SOME TRADESMEN AND AGRICULTURAL LABOURERS FOR RESISTING THE OPERATION OF THE NEW POOR LAW BILL. The trial of the agricultural labourers and other persons who were charged with having created a riot in this county, in consequence of the dissatisfaction that was expressed at the operation of the New Poor Law Bill, having been appointed to take place this morning, the Court, at a very early hour, was crowded to excess. Sir Thomas Fremantle attended as Chairman, and on the Bench were several other Magistrates. Goorlman, John Stephens, John Hearne, the younger, and 'William Wilson, were first placed at the bar, and charged with having created a riot at Chalfont. Mr. Sydney Taylor and Mr. Birch attended to conduct the prosecution ; Mr. Bligh and Mr. Maltby defended the prisoners. It appeared from the evidence, that a troop of yeomanry, consisting of twenty men, had been ordered in consequence of a disturbance at Chalfont to remove some paupers, and that a crowd assembled, using threatening expressions, but all the testimony of the witnesses failed to affect the prisoners. The Jury retired from the Court at eight o'clock, and at five minutes past nine returned, pronouncing a verdict finding all the prisoners Not Guilty. Loud cheering, clapping of hands, and stampinc , of feet followed this announcement, which was answered by e a great number of persons outside, and was repeated several times. Seven men, named Young (fether and son), C. and J. Price Cook, Buckingham, and Stonehill, were charged with creating a riot, and assaulting a person named Grace. Grace had been employed by the autorities of North Marston to superintend the surplus labourers of that parish. The prisoners, with some others not in custody, were proved to have assembled on the 13th of April and driven Grace from some land, on which they had been employed, into a pond. While in the pond they flung stones at him to prevent him from getting out, and when he did get out they severely beat him. Three constables went to apprehend the prisoners, when they were met by a party of about thirty men, armed with spades and other weapons. Other assistance was obtained, and the prisoners were secured. The prisoners when called upon for their defence said that they were willing to work, if Grace had offered them a fair price for their labour. They were found Guilty. Price and Stonehill were sen tenced to two months' imprisonment, and the other prisoners to four months. SUICIDE.-011 Tuesday night, about half-past ten, the body of a female was discovered floating in the New River, near Colebrook-row, Islington. She appeared to have passed in a respectable station of society, being elegantly dressed in a black silk gown, gold ear-rings in her ears, and two gold rings on her fingers. The body was taken to Islington Church, where it remains to be owned previous to the coroner's inquest. CORONER'S INQUEST.—An inquest was held yes terday at the Middlesex Hospital, before Mr. Stirling, on view of the body of John Conway, a shoemaker, who was killed in a pugilistic combat, which took place behind the Eyre Arms Ta vern. The investigation, after lasting for some hours, was postponed to give time for the apprehension of the principal offender, the three men now ill custody having acted only as seconds on the occasion. COURT 0 IN PLEAS. SIIACKELL V. ROSIER. Mr. ALEXANDER. .stated that this was an action brought by Mr. Shackell to recover damages from the defendant for the costs of an action for a libel published at his request in the John Bull newspaper, he having undertaken that the matter contained in the libellous article was correct and true, and signed an undertaking to indemnify the plaintiff from any loss which he might sustain by its insertion. To this the de fendant had pleaded, first, that he bad not represented the paragraph to be correct and true ; and secondly, that he had given no undertaking to indemnify the plaintiff from future loss. In the early part of 1833 the defendant, Mr. Ros ; ."er, called at the office of the John Bull newspaper for fir ; pur pose of having an article inserted in that journal. He called twice, but could not see the editor, but the third time he went he saw Mr. Weaver, who was, then acting as sub-editor of the paper. He then produv.d a written paragraph, and stated that he wished to have it inserted in the John Bull. Mr. Weaver having read the article, observed that it was of a libellous tendency, and expre sse d some doubt as to whether the proprietors of the paper would be justified in publishing it, particularly as Mr. Rosier was a stranger. To this Mr. Rosier replied, " I assure you that the statements. contained in the paragraph are quite -true, and I km prepared to prove them. I guarantee the correctne ss of the article, and here is my card." Upon thir, repre sentation the paragraph was published in the John Bull on the following Sunday, the 27th of January. It contained an attack upon Mr. Chalmers, and deserikd him as a mob leader and a person connected with Poli':ical Unions ; and it also alluded to his having been convicted of forgery. Soon after the publication of this paragraph, by the editor of the John Bull Contradicting the statements it contained. A communication, was then sent to Mr. Rosier, and at his own desire an interview took place between him and Mr. Hopkinson, the Kofessional adviser of the John Bull, in the presence of Mr. Weaver, the sub-editor. Mr. Rosier on that occasion repeated that which he had previously said— namely? that, the paragraph was quite true, that he would gua rantee it' ling t'> correctness, wag prepared to prove it, and was wil give an undertaking that the proprietors of the paper si'.ould be indemnified from the consequences of any legal pro ceedings. To this Mr. Hopkinson replied, "Be so good as to write an undertaking to that effect now." Mr. Rosier ac cordingly sat down to write, and was in the act of writing, when a clerk came into the room, and said that Chalmers had commenced proceedings against the Standard news paper. Mr. Rosier then handed the paper on which he had been writing to Mr. Hopkinson, who, supposing , it to he perfectly correct, folded up the paper and put it in his desk ; he then said his only fear was, that his name should be given up, but repeated that he was quite willing to give a guarantee. From that period, Mr. Rosier inte rested himself very much in getting up the defence for the action brought by Mr. Chalmers against Mr. Shackell in July last year. That action was tried by a special jury in this Court before his Lordship, and the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—damages 30/. ; but some points of law having, been raised by the defendant's counsel, the Learned Judge admitted their validity, and a rule nisi was obtained; but be fore a new trial could take place, Mr. Chalmers made over tures to the John Bull to settle the action ; and the proposal having been referred to Mr. Rosier, he consented to pay 601. as a compensation to Mr. Chalmers, together with all the costs of the action which had been tried, and which amounted to between 2001. and 3001. Some circumstances then oc curred tending to prove that Mr. Rosier was not quite so willing to fulfil his guarantee as he had previously shown himself to be, and at length it became quite manifest that it was not his intention to pay any portion of the costs which the John Bull had been put to on his account. Up to the period when the present action was commenced he had evinced no desire to fulfil his engagement, nor had he offered the slightest explanation to justify his breach of contract. The consequence was, that Mr. Shackell was compelled, in justice to himself, to commence the present action to recover from the defendant the 601. which he had paid as compensa tion to Mr. Chalmers, and also the sum of 266 L, being the amount of his solicitor's bill of costs for the action brought against the John Bull. He was aware that a point of law would arise in the present case, which his Learned Friend on the other side would, no doubt, press upon his Lordship, as to whether a guarantee of the description given by Mr. Rosier was a perfectly legal instrument, and came under the general class of such securities. That was a point, however, upon which he would not trouble the jury, because it was a strictly legal question. After evidence had been adduced, in corroboration of the statements of the Learned Counsel, Mr. ALEXANDER said—l shall now put in the written gua rantee of Mr. Rosier, which he gave to Mr. Hopkinson, the plaintiff's solicitor. Mr. Serjeant TALFOURD asked if the document was stamped. Mr. ALEXANDER—It is not stamped. Mr. Serjeant TALFOURD—Then I object to its being made evidence in the case, and I submit that the plaintiff must be nonsuited, inasmuch as the first issue upon the record relates to the promise of the defendant to indemnify the plaintiff frog loss, and as that promise was given upon unstamped paper the action cannot be maintained. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE would take a note of the objectioet and reserve the point. Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD then proceeded to address the Jolt after which, The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said, that having, at the instance of the defendant's counsel, reserved a principal point in the case for future argument, the jury were to confine themselve s to the consideration of two points only—namely, whether they believed that the defendant, when he handed in the paragralb►. vouched that it was correct and true, and whether the fact o f his having given his card to Mr. 'Weaver, was evidence of thla fact. Secondly, they were to consider, whether the interes t manifested, by the defendant in the cause which had ahead/ been tried, the part which he took in getting up the defence, his wishing it to be tried by a Special Jury, and other cireute; stances, did not warrant a belief that be considered hirase l4 in some measure, a responsible party. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damagch 326/. Bs. 10d., the bill of costs to be subjected to be taxed by the Master. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT. The Matters of the Petitions and Schedules of the Prisoner, hereinafter named (the same havi ng b een fil e d i n th e Coat/ are appointed to be heard at th e C our t-h ous e, i n P or tur i street, Lincoln's Inn-field s , o n M on d a y, J u ly 6, 1835, a l Nine o'clock in the Forenoon. Giles, J., Keppell-row, Portsmouth, lodging-house-keeper. - Hallett, T., High-street, Shadwell, eheesemonger. Heale, R. F., Mincing-lane, dealer in Colonial produce. Made, J., Engletield-green, near Staines, Surrey, grocer. Hutchinson, G., Repton, near Derby, surgeon. Kingsford, H., Upper North-place, Gray's Inn-road, atternel clerk. King, Frances`, Quadrant, Regent-street, spinster. Norvall, T.; Golden Lion, West Smithfield, victualler. I, Perkins, E. E., Theed's Cottage, Cpper Holloway, wine-merch o Rozinetti, P. Z., Edward-square, Kensington, teacher. le , Smith, J. S., City Subscription Theatre, Milton-street, CriPP gate. Stevens, R., Marylebone-lane, groom. FREAKS OF A LUNATIC.—The Broadway, Wes t ; minster, was on Sunday morning, during the hours of div li e , service, throWn into a complete state of uproar, in cons , quence of an eccentric individual, a man of considerable P r° perty, having taken it into his head to open a butcher's W; Owing to his literally giving away the meat, the shop and t d carriage-way in front were crowded with a dense multitu ec; anxious to obtain a Sunday dinner, and being only a door 0 , two from a great gin palace, " confusion became worse 0 0 , founded ;" but it was at last put a stop to, by the lunatic F r i o prictor ordering a very handsome phaeton, into which crammed the meat of which he had 'not disposed, and drove ° to his country seat, in order to present it to the villagert.„, MARRIED. • 0' On the 2d inst. at St. George's Church, Hanover-square, PP tenant-Colonel inst., to Maria Georginea Cotes, eldest daug of Lady Maria Cotes. IP P On the 30th uh., at Rochdal e , th e R ev. Willi am Tophsol. a itfi son, of Rochdale, to France s M ar i a , daughter of Walter Va"" Esq., of Crossficld. On the 27th ult., at Alver s t o k e , th e R ev . W. K. Clays inpe,4l of Blunham, Bedfordshire, to Mary A nne , secon d d aug ht e r of P Admiral M'Kinley. 'O ll/4 On the 30th uh., at St. Ma r y' s I s li ng t on , M r . Th om as Zoo* of Gibson-square, to E s th er , secon d d aug h ter o f J ame s Esq., of Tyndale-place. It°ll On the 24th ult., Lewis James Le s lie, of Ch ar les-street, t° Holliday, of Winkfield, Berks. . On the Ist inst., at St. Mary's, Newington, George Allati'Vie of Tooley-street, Southwark, to Maria, second daughter Of Day, Esq., of Hampton-street, Walworth. 1 0/ On the Ist inst., George Frackelton, of Hart-street, to or Ann, eldest daught er o f R o b ert P oc kli ngton , o f t h e Old Cht.,c4 On the 24th tilt., at the Hague, Baron A. Collot Aide-de-camp of his Excellency the Minister of Marine, to daughter of the late Admiral May, of the Dutch Navy, fo r 0 1 years Port Admi ra l an d Fi rs t C omm i ss i oner o f th e Dock-) j Rotterdam. DIED. ...__ _. On the 30th u lt., in his 69th year, Mr. James John Kern De" 0 Queen's-buildi ngs , Knightsbridge. On the 28th ult., in Hereford-street, John C r u n den, ....."/.' his 95th year. l i te On the Ist inst., in her 21st year, Mary A nn , third dseg 1 Mr William Wright, of Cloak-lane, s o li ci t or . • 10 91 r On the 2d inst., in Piccadilly, the H on . L a dy Smith, in year. o,or On the Ist inst., in Wellington-terrace, Miss Frances flu aged 24. _ fie On the 28th ult., at his seat in. Scotland, Evan Wile, , i Dochfour, Inverness-shire, in his 95th year. , IV On the 27th ult., at Edinglassie, Aberdeenshire, age."' r a i Boycott, the beloved child of John Forbes, Esq. O,O On the 29th ult., at Wall's Nursery, Hillenden, Middle"pir 47th year, Mrs. Mary Ann English, Wife of Mr. James 01 late of Kingston, Jamaica. SO On the 28th ult., in Charlotte-street, Portland-place , Smith, Esq., in his 77th year. _ i .- - —...-- London : Printed and Published by_MURDO YOUNG' ~,„ 112, Strand, at The , butt Office, No. 112, Strand, In V P' of Middlesex. , GI Is II NEI COACHES the s t h J anu Tenders N N the particula tidn may be Tenders sea: must be deny the Ist AUO. I: Security% Extensive On the bank: Pike -gate, if, 9th UILI AIAi taken down, the whole of To be view In ns_natned ii •Cheapside. ............„,..._ NI On Tit oresD A brook -cou r t Erecisely, b iptinunn of HE r e of En count of th e Shren eb ury, c?usisting of b c.assitneres, rich Silk Velv neat variety May be v i e and Catalogue Samuel Love, June 29, 18 Spencer -street M R. Al TIC Auction Mart TIESIDENCI hood, containn ing, and break walled gal-lien, tenant, held m To be victve two particular' Offices, St. M The lat.': Alr..': The s m a 110: ion Mart (13 PADDOCKS situated at Yar To be view 111 '4 of Me ssrs. street; at the court, p it , ...qetiont ______ court, IL AI: A • TI° N ttOLU F, sTA grazing l an d , si abutting on 13 kets, hei r , ° Messrs. Jorecrel at th e Audi:. Poultry, art ( The 1 --- " ate Mr, siranlllart (13Y d Plot e lOng LI gi ii°l4 , ,h b otp ba ep T Ao ' 'llr ir re r i t n ‘ u ille v i° ll °t l Y i n t . Within of V A, CAT ~toarnYessels 1 to o substantial good tenants JTo b e viewed: oarrtle.son and r Ai ... ..!.....211(1..!t.1 Coa ch- • house' Green. 4 / 711 — M: T-'-SELL welve o', °equ' cl k ESTATE no rth side, in e ih comprising a ea well•proportion 1 coach house, ste front garden, Nvi occupation of, ai t enant, at a low To he viewed 111essrs. Jordeso at the Auction court, Poultry- Tho THIRD al S E li .. . . a l , ovio e ‘ I g l ril . Elegant i t t .,, t gi e d rao e st o t i : a n : L. v h L e liket."l rwLolvrttert.s()lpyberri_a3.rl)oattiiic't. Particular" . Cl . a(„ S s 1, S. ford Cottage, It. MI Twel fe o'eloek, tiet tlebtxl I' REI PORD COTT. tidls and surroit r "P e etability 11 ,() causes, stablinv, siza.. - ,-,, i‘ _ ,. tzes of 'tau t 7 i ' ed, and surrot ' I O Of Butte! „ To be viewed ~,,2%!-, Boroup, ": ,. e:,..____t____ ?..o_ ,___ irt, po; ki nteel Fur' •t Arb o " u ut - square ~ 11 . Mi 1. Truste J rt i , c) , 183 5, al l 1 vtilarnereial-rop,,, p re I INITURE mss b, and t o of , hair and ly draw ers , " L a nds, chairs, "" euairs, inabog t r ubr oke.table a s t , . 0 4 of plate and l e .a and dinner anehen requisite: To be viewed May be had of 11 P otat rY ; on the Court, Poultry - • fle a: g u ll : 0 1 o u fair, M it. MI TION l' t i g hl Y valuable ASEHOLD "Puses, witi 2 se, eligibly (° 7reet> Cloth -fair R ed Li oth er on -cot ()cell rreehold st to, te Piing a lar, facia > being No bold %tile pr eee d 1 - Io e ,,:"'state, co t and With sh, held N ew-stre, 8 - ibl e " ° long t€ Throperty off alo o of t r ,esPeetiy e A tltt: no tena n t ponitr tort Mart ; A.1311 1N In i S ins ured dut y „ e hallo w e - d tat;„ —° t only to w fro tho m .' ~ne etts ur e , th e ra lY bo hay fr at inore e `l'eatl "Pe , froo l Y co rn r c l i. whence at Pr reef' To the r all s e useul a whi c h 7,.. s° lneti rn U sti s ' ne eotrat rter 'ti n onativ qtr vccl w i li e c D t !ed g ' e t _! u well ftlieots, 0:4 1: 11,a3 1 . dair e4(: tr r it t i fer tr o l l atteod re _ th e eot an ce I Ivi "t anee 1- 41tr Y !, 1 ea r , b O r n A( ku . ie o teulty e I°r % efav: can_ prat F~uLl aii znit utr lee a i' ' r esse d Z nYnel p at lusiv e;h°"4ct on Lue t `'n-r e r-ro a. eqt. L.,t BIRTHS. • sat v On the 29th ult., Mrs. George Waugh, Regeht-st re et, of a o p On the Ist inst., in Half-Moon-street, Mrs. Robt. Cuff, of a, 9 0 1 On the 18th of May, at Corfu, the lady o f C a pt a i n Sancta Royal Engineers, of a daughter. er I ' On the 29th ult., at Stockwell, the lady o f John Giles Pilc h Esq , of a son. C hi the Ist inst., in Old C aven di s h- s t re et, the lady of John Purling, Esq., of a daughter. §O Ol On the Ist inst., at the Rectory, Tooting, Mrs. Marsden, of 5 00 On the 26th ult. at Castle Hill, High Wycombe, Mrs . Rumsey, of a dau ghter. I r