The Sun. — London, England, 1835-08-12 00:00:00

SECOND EDITION S L'N OFFICE, Sep.;. o'clock. THE PARLIAMENT. (T(lIS EVENING.) 110 USE OF CO 11 ,11 /2 NS. The Sit took the Chair at four o'clock. STURGES' BOURNES' ACT. Mr. WAIdE Y presented a petition from 500 rate-payers of the parish of St. Anne, Westminster, complaining of Sturges 11.)urne's A.i!t, and gave notice that next SCFSOII he should introduce a Bill f,,r the repeal of the said Act. He also presented a petition from St. Pancras in favour of the Ale house Bill. Also a petition from Bristol, praying for a remission of the sentence on the Dorchester labourers. He complained that persons sl.ould be tolerated in committing similar off.snecs to that for which these poor men were punished, merely because they belonged to Orange lodges. Colonel PE RCEVA L protested against the comparison. and Hon. Members making their prejudices the standard cf crime or innoc.: , nce. Mr. J. LOWTHER supported the prayer of the Petition. Mr. RUTH VEN also spoke to the same effect. COFFEE HOUSES. Mr. WA la E Y . explained, and presented a petition from James Bywater, keeper of the Crown CoMe-house in Hol born, praying the House not to pass any Sunday Bill a ff ecting coffee-houses,' which were places of moral and intellectual improvement, and of great convenience to the public, par ticularly to clerks in public offices. Also a petition from William Calvert, a Governoe of Christ's Hospital, complain ing of certain abuses, and praying that a Commission may be appointed to inquire into them. Mr. WALLACE presented a petition from Kingston-upon- Hull, numerously signed, which, in the firf,t place, roferred to a deceased Member of this House, but not in terms of reproba tion, and he would not depart from the rule—De nu»lnis nil nisi honunr. The petition went on to complain of certain in terferences both with the freedom and purity of election, which recently occurred.—( Hear.) At the last election large sums of money were expended in bribery and intimidation. He concluded by giving notice of a motion for a Committee of inquiry into this matter. Mr. POTTER supported the petition. IRISII CHURCH. Mr. VESEY presented a petition from the parish of Bal ly-roan, County, in support of the Irish Church. Mr. LEFROY presented seven petitions from Ireland to the same effect. _ Sir IL INGLIS presented petitions from parishes in the county of Kent to the same effect. Colonel PERCEVAL presented three petitions from parishes in the counties of Sligo and Leitrim against the Irish Church Bill. Lord CA STL ERE AG H presented four similar petitions. Sir CHARLES LEMON presented a like petition from 130 of the resident clergy of the county of Cork. Mr. FI ELD EN presented petitions in favour of the Dor chester labourers, for the repeal of stamp duties on news papers, for the repeal of the Poor Law Amendment Bill, for the relief of Handloom Weavers, and one in favour of the Factory Bill. From what places these petitions came we could not hear, owing to the low tone in which the Hon. Member spoke, but some of them came from Oldham and Preston. Mr. WAKLEY supported the petitions in favour of the repeal of the taxes on knowledge. Mr. HINDLEY supported the petition for the relief of children in factories. _ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was sorry that he could not give any satisfactory answer. He did not think it right to interfere with the ordinary wages of labour, and the employment of capital ; and he doubted whether it would be expedient to introduce Bills at the close of a ses sion, without being prepared to assent to the principle, as it would leave the subject loose to be discussed. He thought it would be much better to reserve legislation upon this subject, till they were prepared to carry that legislation into effect. HAND-LOOM WEAVERS. Mr. MAXWELL wished to put a question to the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, viz., whether he would have any ob jection to repeal the stamp duty upon the indentures of ap prentices to hand-loom weavers? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was sorry that he could not hold out any hopes of the remission of this tax. If the market was at present overstocked he was afraid that the result of the remission of this tax would be opposed to the Hon. Member's intentions. _ _ _ Mr. HUME—They would do a great deal of good, if they removed all taxes upon industry. Mr. O'CONNELL—They were wandering from the sub ject.—( Hear.) It was a sound principle of political economy that any interference between master and man was objection able ; but there was one exception in the case of infants, who were not able to protect themselves, and whose parents had the cruelty to falsify the date of their birth, in order that they might be of age to work. If these children were rich they would have the interference of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but as there was no Chancellor of the Exchequer for the poor, that House would be to them a Chancellor of the Exchequer. The petitions were then laid on the table. PROSECUTIONS FOR CONSPIRACY. Mr. D. W. HARVEY presented a petition from an in dividual of the name of Robert Grey, praying that he might be allowed the costs of a prosecution for a conspi racy against certain parties.—( Hear.) One of these, a man of the name of Grosbeck, had enjoyed a pension of 2001. a year, which bad been withdrawn in consequence of this con viction, thereby throwing 2001. a year into the Exchequer. The prosecutor bad been put to an expense of 2501. The Honourable Member also presented a petition from Southwark, praying for a revision of the sentence passed upon the Dorchester labourers ; also a petition from the same place, praying for the repeal of the stamp duties upon news papers. CORPORATION REFORM. The Hon. MEMBER said that the last petition he had to pre sent was signed by 700 electors of Colchester, expressing their approbation of the Municipal Reform Bill, and praying that it do pass into a law.—( Cheers.) IPSN'v ICH ELECTION. Mr. C. BARCLAY presented a Petition from Thomas More Kirk, and gave notice that to-morrow he would move that the Petitioner be brought to the bar and discharged. CARLOW ELECTION COMMITTEE. The floN. MENIBER begged to ask the Learned Member for Dublin whether he had made use of a statement, that by the decision of the Carlotv Election Committee no man could have a franchise under 91d. per annum? Mr. O'CONNELL bad no hesitation in admitting that he did make that statement, and he was sorry for it, as he should have said thirty. Mr. BARCLAY (as Chairman of the Committee), would express his surprize that any individual—(" Order, " Chair, chair," and confusion.) Mr. HUME rose to order. This discussion could not be continued unless the documents on which the statements were founded were before the House. The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member having asked a question and received an answer, could not now enter into any argument on it. Mr. BARCLAY again attempted to address the House, amid loud cries of " Order," " Chair," &c. from the Minis terial Benches. • The SPEAKER ?gain interposed, and reminded the Hon. Member that he was out of order. Mr. II A RCL AY again rose, but was met by loud cries of " Order," in the midst of which the Hon. Member resumed Lis scat. Mr. HUMS moved the Order of the Day for resuming the adjourned debate on printed papers, for the purpose of postponing it till to-morrow.—Agreed.to. BUSINESS OF THE EVENING. Lord JOHN RUSSELL would take the present opportu nity of stating that he intended first moving the Order of the Day for resuming the debate on the second reading of the Municipal Corporations ( Ireland) Bill. He would then go into Committee on the Bill relative to Compensation to slave owners ; and thirdly, his Noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland should move the third reading of the Church of Ire land Bill. Mr. HUME asked a question relative to the order fur the detention of letters in the Glasgow Post-office, on the 22d of last month. Mr. I. ABO UCIIERE did not know why the motion for laying the order in question on the table had not been com plied with. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND.) The Order of the Day for resuming the adjourned debate on the 2d reading of this Bill having been read, Mr. F. SHAW rose to repeat his protest against the House entering upon the di , eussion of so important a measure at this late period of the session, more especially before the evidence of the Commissioners relative to Dublin was before it. The Hon. Member proceeded at some length to reiterate his objec tions to the Bill, which he denounced as being most iniqui tous and unfair in its details. Mr. BARCLAY also complained of the Bill, and pro ceeded to comment upon its details. He thought the object was to hand over the Corporations to the hands of the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, in whom the respectable portion of the people of Ireland had no confidence. He com plained of tho Hon. Member having obtained his information relative to the decision of the Carlow Committee from a rela tion of his who was on it. Mr. O'CONNELL did not know whether he was to answer the charge against himself or not. The Hon. Member agreed that there should be no reform in the Irish Corporations, be cause they had no confidence in him. The Hon. Member had eulogized himself, but he (Me. O'Connell) did not coincide in that eulogium, more especially as that eulogium appeared to be against the facts. He denied the assertion that he (Mr. O'Connell) had received any information from a relative of his on the Committee, but he repeated his assertion without imputing improper motives to the Hon. Mem ber opposite, that if the decision of the Carlow Committee was allowed to stand, 101. freeholders would require a qualification of 301....4 Hear.) Ile did not believe that a worse tribunal existed than the Committees of that House, and he was sure that the Carlow Election Committee would not rescue that tribunal from the general opinion of its inefficiency. Mr. LE FRO Y did not mean to enter into any discussion; -would only say that he was not opposed to any reform that / 4 34 Said a tridency to make these Corporations answer the purpose kJ , - for which they were instituted, but to ascertain what those ends and q*ts were they must have the charters before them. ***" ..r ' It was his : in ention to move that these charters be laid on the me 2.". i. v' ' table of the House, but he would content himself for the pre. ".— .1 ...2 .e,') #k sent with protesting against proceeding - With -tl:is Bill-at this late period of the The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed to-morrow. PRISONS' REGITLATION BILL. On the motion of Lc,rd JOHN RUSSELL, the House resolved itself into a Committee of the whole House upon this Bill. W. R. Stewart in the Chair. The several clauses of the Bill, down to the 15th, were then agreed to without amendment. On this clause being put, Mr. RIDLEY COLBORNE rose to move that the Bride Well Hospital be exempted from the operation of the Bill. The Hon. Member concluded by moving a clause to this effect. Lord J. RUSSELL had consulted w:th a Noble Friend ' (the Duke of Richmond) upon the subject of this clause, and the Noble Duke had informed him that he did not think that the regulation of this Bridcwell would be improved by its being in eluded in this Bill. He would not oppose the clause, although in 1 his opinion, it militated against the principle of the Bill, and was one which he certainly ►would not himself have introduced. Mr. II AWE S saw no reason why the Bridewell should not be included in the Bill, and would divide the House against the introduction of the clause. Sir R. INGLIS supported the clause. There was strong evidence to show that this Hospital was well ma naged, and this he thought a sufficient case for excluding this hospital from the operation of the Bill. Lord HOWICK opposed the introduction of the clause, which, he thought, a direct contradiction to the principle of the Bill. (LEFT SITTING.) HOUSE OF LORDS. The VICE- CHANCELLOR took his scat on the Woolsack shortly More five o'clock. CORPORATION BILL. Petiti_ais were presented against the Corporation 13111 by Lord Kenyon ; by the Marquis of Bristol from Bury St. Ed_ munds ; by Lord 1)e Grey, from Colchester; and by the Duke of Ruthind, from Bath and Scarborough. . . The Marquis of WESTMINSTER presented a petition from Holywell in favour of the Municipal Reform Bill. Lord TENIPLEMORE presented a petition from Wex ford, praying for an alteration of the law respecting tithes. The Duke of RICHMOND brought up the Report on the High Ways Bill, which was ordered to be committed to morrow. _ _ _ The Sheriffs Declaration Bill was read a third time and passed. Lord ELLENBOROUGH presented a petition from Oswestry, praying that they might be exempted from the ope ration of the Corporation Bill. The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a petition from New Sal:2Til against the Corporation Bill. Lord A SIIIWRTON presented a similar petition from Great Yarmouth. The Marquis of LANgDOWNE presented a petition from the inhabitants of Portsmouth, signed by 1,900 -per sons, the first name at the head of the petition being that of the Mayor of the Borough of Portsmouth in favour of the Bill. The Marquis of SALISBURY presented a petition from the borough of Bewdley ; and Lord LYNDH UR ST from the Borough of Yarmouth, against the Municipal Corporation Bill. ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND. The Earl of WICKLOW begged to call attention to a circumstance of some importance, with reference to the administration of police. A few nights ago a Noble Friend of his having brought the subject forward, the Noble Viscount opposite was reported to have stated that the exercise of the pre rogative of mercy, on the part of the Lord Lieutenant, was judiciously exercised, as on that occasion the persons convic ted were equally guilty of the same offence, and equal punishment ought to be awarded to all.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl then went at some length into the case, and stated that the Jury had returned a verdict of aggra vated assault against the Catholic, and simple assaults against the Protestant, party. Ireland generally had an experienced Secretary when she had a young Lieutenant ; but at the present moment she had the infliction of two young and in experienced men.—(Cheers.) He deeply lamented the feel ing that prevailed in Ireland. He lamented the feeling that had been shown towards the Lord-Lieutenant. He thought those who treated him so had acted most unwisely. They should remember that he was the representative of the Sove reign of the country. Viscount DUNCANNON said, the course pursued by the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland was not without a precedent, in fact, it was a very common one. The Noble Lord then, at some length, defended the conduct of Lord Mulgrave. Lord L YND HURST said that the Secretary of State in England never varied the sentence of any person with out applying to the Judge who had tried the cause. The course that had been pursued in Ireland he considered to have been very impolitic, for it appeared that the Lord Lieutenant had in repeated instances varied the judgment pronounced by the Judges, without any consultation with that Judge, or any accurate information as to the circumstances under which it was pronounced. Lord FARNHAM begged to say that he never heard of any case that had occurred during his residence in Ireland that had been at all interfered with by the Lord Lieutenant, which the most fastidious person could find fault with. He considored that, in all probability, the better way would be for the Noble Lord opposite to lay upon the table a copy of the memorial of the Jury to the Lord Lieutenant. Lord PLUNKETT felt convinced from what he knew of the Learned Judge, who tried those prisoners, that he had not suffered any political feeling to interfere with his administration of justice, and he was equally ready to bear his testimony with the Noble Baron who had just sat down to the correctness of the views of his Noble Friend the First Lieutenant, and to his anxiety for the welfare of Ireland; but he believed that after the trial had taken place, and the sentence had been pronounced, a distinction was made with reference to the degrees of guilt of the prisoners. The report of the Learned Judge was laid before Lard Haddington, and there was no reason to suppose that that report had not subse quently come before the Lord Lieutenant. Lords LYNDHURST and DUNCANNON explained. Lord VE SE Y contended that there was nothing - in the case to justify the course taken. (LEFT SITTING.) ST. PANCRAS PARISH MEETING. (Continued from our First Edition.) A vote of thanks having been passed to the two Members of the Borough for their attendance, Sir S. WIIALLEY in acknowledging it, said he was not one of those who thought these meetings were called for the purpose merely of expressing their opinions, but also to show to the House of Lords that in all parts an opportunity had been given to the opponents of the Bill out of their House—if there were any such—but that there was not one in the whole of the large and extensive parish of St. Pancras.— ( Cheers.) He saw the resolutions related to both of the im portant Bills yet in progress. He at once admitted that he did not care so much for the Irish Church Bill, and was very indifferent as to its being passed this year.—(Marks of surprise.) He was a Protestant and a Churchman, and of course was warmly in favour of the Church, but the enquiries into the Irish Church had shown him such intolerable abuses in it, that he was not anxious for the passing of the present Bill.—( Slight disapprobation.) He knew the House of Com mons would not retrograde—they would not relax in the slightest degree—and let the present Bill be thrown out, and one worth five times as much would be sent up to their Lordships next' year.—(Loud and repeated cheering.) He was certain the House of Commons would not in any way diminish their demands on behalf of the people. A Tory had told them in the House that he supported the Bill, because he was afraid, if it did not pass, the people of Ireland would forget what tithes were—( Laughter)—or that they had ever existed. He believed that such might have been near the fact; and it was because he considered the Bill as a great boon to the parsons, and not to the country, that he had less feeling upon it than upon the great Bill for reforming Cor porations.—( Cheers.) Still, however, though he did not con sider it worth the million which the people were to pay for it ; yet, if it would give peace, and consequently prosperity to Ire land, he would say he was most anxious for the settlement of the question. The other Bill, however, for reforming the Cor porations was of the very utmost importance, and it was es sential to the welfare of the country that it should pass un mutilated and without delay—( Cheers)—for then the greatest stronghold of corruption would be broken in upon, and the people would have such a lever as would enable them to raise all whose who were now as a nightmare upon the country. No measure since the great Reform Bill had been of so much importance as the one then under discussion, and he had been most anxious to be enabled to get up in his place, and say that his constituents, though they did not wish for a Corporation for their own borough, yet they had a kindly feeling for their folio N countrymen, and were most anxious that the great abuses of thepresent Corporation system should be done away with. In what situation did the country now stand? He knew that there was a large majority—an immense majo rity of the people in favour of the Bill ; yet it was now in the hands of those who hated it—of those who were most anxious to, and would trample it under their feet—if they dared.—(Loud cheers.) They had tried all they could to delay the Bill, for the purpose of trying how far they might go in thwarting the wishes of the people. The passing of the Bill depended not upon the House of Lords, but upon the people of England—(Cheers)—they were the parties in whose hands the power was. Look at the opposition to the Bill in the House—there was first the Duke of Newcastle who could do what he liked with all his own, except his tongue—brains he had none.—(L-tughter.) Then came the Earl of Winchilsea, a man of might and valour—a man who went out to the field with the Duke of Wellington with a perfect certainty of not having his brains blown out.—( Hear, hear, and loud laughter.) These were the leaders of the farce which had been going on lately. They might laugh at that farce were they not aware that the people of England were the parties who suffered from it, and in the end paid for it. He wondered how it was that any one could dare to threaten the Government with impeachment, because that the whole Commons of England had sent up a Bill to the Upper House—it having been sanctioned by a majority of that house of representatives made it the bill of the people of England, and they were the parties insulted by such idle and unmeaning threats.—(Loud cheers.) We see the real nature of the farce played by the Peers; they must remember that the Com missioners whose conduct had been so grossly impugned were two years engaged in making their inquiries—and yet that the House of Lords, by devoting a few hours daily for five days were able to set the whole of their labours aside. The Corporations were accused of peculation in their accounts, and of perverting the course of justice. The Report accused many of their Lord ships of being accessaries—to instance only one place, there was the Duke of Buckingham, who, because two Aldermen voted accordir , to their conscience; seat, as a matter of course, ~rid requested that they wo reign their gowns. So much was thi; a matter of course, that the s!eward, in writing an account of their refusal, could hardly florl words in which to paint his surprie, it was o strong.— ( A laugh.) These Noble Lords then were convicted of being accessories, and yet they were t!-,e Judges in their own case, and said we want evidence ; and who did they call—not the people of England to prove the crime, but the criminals them selves to prove that they were innocent.—( Cheers.) Here was a sample of British justice—men who could not under the circumstances in which they were placed, act as jurymen, were elevated to the bench, and made judges in their own case.— (Cheers.) It had not long ago been a question " What will the Lords do ?" They had heard evidence at the bar, in order to prove that the Corporations were innocent—then they muct throw out the Bill, if they believed it. If they did so, the question that would then be in every one's mouth would be,—" What shall be done with the Lords ?"—( Load cheers.) They might have protested agairst the Bill, and given it what character they liked, but now they were in a dilemma : if they passed the Bill, they must own that they had been beaten by the people, as they would he in the end—(Cheers)—or otherwise they must own that their calling evidence was indeed a mere pretext to see how far they dared trifle with the patience of the country. He per fectly agreed with them in calling upon the House of Com- MCIIIS not to pass the Appropriation Bill, for the House would thcn have some power to prevent the reenactment of the plot of November last.—(Cheering.) He called upon the people to be awake and not allow themselves to he " caught napping" as they were upon that occasion. He did- not disguise from himself, nor did he wish to do from them, that the present Bill was a very disagreeable demand by one branch of the Legis lature upon the other two : but as they would never freely consent to it, the people must protect themselves.—( Cheers. ) Mr. 11. BULWER said he would not detain the meeting long, as he could only re-echo the opinions they had already heard from former speakers. He could not altogether agree in the Opinions of his Hon. Colleague with respect to the Irish Church Bill, for he abominated any system of religion which supported the sublime religion of the God of Peace by the point of the bayonet.—(Great cheering.) The Hon. Gentleman went over the same topics as his colleague, but as there was no difference of opinion between them, arid our columns are vory full to-day, we are compelled to omit them. He was received throughout with cheers. The petitions were read, and at the conclusion cf the rnee!. irig were signed by nearly every one present. A Deputation from 'the City waited on Lord Melbourne this evening, to present the Address vo:ed to his Lordship at the City Meeting this morning. It was reported this morning that the Duke of Wel lington had left town, and so statel at the city meeting this day; but it appears that the Duke met a'lovc 150 Peers and others, who are opposed. to the Cirporation Reform Bill, at Apsley - House this morning, for the purpose of organizing their plans. The result, we have heard, is, that their Lord !hips intend to go into Committee on the Bill, pro forma. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, Auausr 11. ROMAN CATHOLIC MARRIAGE BILL. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE after citing a few cases in proof of the hardship of the existing law, rendering marria ges contracted between a Protestant and Catholic solemnized by a Catholic priest, null and void, moved the second reading of this Bill. He called upon their Lordships to read the Bill a second time, on the ground that it was grounded on every principle of justice, policy, and expediency. On the question being put, Lord CARBERY moved as an amendment, that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. Lord PLUNKETT supported the Bill, upon the ground of its being just to the parties affected that they should be relieved from the liability of the only remaining penal statute with re gard to Roman Catholic marriages. Every penalty had been removed except that which was proposed to be repealed by this Bill—the existing law being capable of invalidating mar riages celebrated by a Roman Catholic priest between Protes tants and Catholics. The Earl of LIMERICK opposed the Bill. It was either to grant additional power to the Roman Catholic priest or it was not. If not, the Bill was unnecessary ; but if it was, then their Lordships were on dangerous ground. The Noble Earl then referred to a letter which had been recently addressed by a Roman Catholic bishop to the foreman of the grand jury of the county of Limerick, in consequence of the removal of the Roman Catholic chaplain of the gaol, and the appointment of another priest to that office. " What right (said the Roman Catholic bishop) have the grand jury to dispose of my sub jects—( Hear, hear)—and this without a single appeal to the proper authority ?" That was the body to whom their Lord ships were about to give additional powers. The letter then proceeded—" No other priest but the Rev. Mr. Prendergast shall dare to bold the office of chaplain to the gaol. The world shall see by the result of this day, not only the usurping pro pensity of this jury, but also its impotency in ecclesiastical af fairs. I mean nothing personal in this—( A laugh)--but really I can with difficulty restrain my feelings on such a subject, and in such times as these." So say I, my Lords, in such times as these ; and I call upon your Lordships not to give further power to persons of this description. The Earl of WICKLOW agreed with his Noble Friend, that a more presumptuous, more arrogant, more insulting let ter never emanated from any person's pen, than that which had been addressed to a public officer by this Roman Catholic Archbishop. It was but the other day that Doctor M‘ Hale had written a letter, in which he dared to call the Church Establishment of this country, " a falling and sinking reli gion ; a bane and a curse of the country." These were the times when parties felt themselves at liberty to speak their minds, knowing, as they did, that the Government of the country was in hands which enabled them to browbeat the members of the Established Church with impunity. With re gard to the Bill before the House he had heard nothing to con vince him of its necessity. He should not, however, oppose the second reading of the Bill, because he hoped, by intro ducing a clause to the effect that the parish priest should not (except under a penalty) marry any individual whom the Pro testant clergyman was now by law prevented from marrying, to make the state of things considerably better than it was at present. Lord FARNHAM should give his vote in favour of the amendment. The Bishop of LONDON thought if this Bill gave the Roman Catholic priest power to celebrate a marriage between a Protestant and a Catholic, it would, of course, give him the power of celebrating a marriage between Protestant and Pro testant. This would afford the Roman Catholic clergyman a very facile opportunity for proselytism. All that he (the Bishop of London) asked of their Lordships was that they should let the Protestant clergyman be placed on equal ground with the Roman Catholic priest, but which, according to this Bill, he would not be. He should, therefore, without hesita tio 1, vote for the amendment. _ . Lord BROUGHAM said, let the Right Reverend Prelate reflect for a moment what it was that constituted the difficulty of dealing with the marriage-law in this country. It was Lord Hardwicke's Marriage Act. Lord Hardwicke's Act hadin troduced all the difficulty of dealing with the subject, this be ing the only country in Europe in which a law existed, decla ring that all marriages which took place between parties under age, without the consent of parents or gnardians, or without the publication of banns, should be null and void. The count less evils which had resulted from such a law, the domestic mi series, the personal injuries, the offences against public mo rals, it was painful, nay, in some instances agonizing to contem plate. It was a law which, wielded in its full force, rendered a youthful pair adulterers and fornicators in themselves, branding their offspring with the name of bastard. Lord Hardwicke's Act constituted an anomaly in the law of marriage which was peculiar to this country. The same difficulty did not exist in Ireland. There, all that the Legislature had to do was to repeal a portion of the penal law, which affected only a small part of the kingdom, and which, in fact, was nothing more than a disgusting remnant of the Popish penal code. He had been astonished to hear from one of such usual clearness of percep tion as the Right Rev. Prelate who had just Addressed the House, that in his opinion the Act was intended, or at all events would have the effect of putting the Roman Catholic priest on a better footing than the Protestant clergyman ; and not less had he been astonished to hear from the same eminent quarter an assertion founded upon a statement contained in the Report of Dr. Magee's evidence, given before the Com mittee of that Muse in 1825, namely, that the allowing a Ca tholic priest to marry two Protestants, or a Protestant and a Catholic, would lead to an increase of Catholics. Unless he had heard it from the Right Rev. Prelate's own lips, he cer tainly would never have believed that one of his penetration could have been so egregiously deluded. Neither, looking at the effects which daily and notoriously flowed from the present state of the law, unless he had himself been an ear-witness, could he have believed that the Right Reverend Prelate would have contended for the conti nuTice of such a l aw f or a s i ng l e h our . It was a l aw which in no instance went to punish the wrong-doer—neither the priest who married, nor the man who deceived—in every instance the punishment fell upon the innocent woman and helpless children. A man, to obtain a selfish or sensual pur pose, might impose upon the woman he proposed to marry, as well as the priest who was to marry them ; and when his mind changed—when the personal charms of his wife began to decay—when he saw another whom he thought lie should prefer—in short, upon any pretext whatever, or without any pretext at all, he had only to a nnounce t h e manner o f hi s mar riage, to renderit at once a perfect nullity—to proclaim the partner of his bed a prostitute, and his children bastards. The wrong-doer escaped scot-free ; nay, he n o t on l y escape d scot free, but escaped with a reward. The first wrong -d oer—t h e priest—(supposing the priest to have a knowledge of the real religious opinions of the parties he was marrying )— w as rewar d- ed in the shape of the fee he obtained for performing the cere mony; the second wrong-doer—the husband —was rewarded in the enjoyment he obtained in the seduction of the woman. Was that a state of the law which any Protestant divine would wish to continue? Then, the Right Reverend Prelate contended that if the present Bill were allowed to pass, for every " couple-beggar" that might now exist among the Pro testant clergy, there would become twenty " couple-beggars" amongst the Roman Catholic clergy. Ile (Lord Brougham) did not believe that that would be the case. He did not be lieve, indeed, that the Roman Catholic clergyman was so likely to degrade his functions in that way as the Protestant Clergyman, and he would shortly state why—the Roman Ca tholic Church regarded matrimony as a sacrament, whilst the Protestant Church regarded it only as a civil contract,— (" No, no," from the Bench of Bishops.) He would only mention that his authority for the assertion was the highest, and, perhaps, the most eminent Consistorial Judge who had ever lived in that country—Lord Stowell, who, in the case of Dalrymple v. Dalrymple, had distinctly considered the act - of maniage as a civil contract. The Bishop of EXETER said the proposition that mar riage in the eye of the Protestant Church was nothing more -than a civil contract, was one which he (the Bishop of Exeter) would never hear asserted without entering his decided protest againq it.—( Hear. ) In the eye of the law it Was undoubtedly a civil contract, but in the estimation of the Church it was much more than a civil contract. It was regarded as a holy estate— a state into which a man certainly could not enter without a contract ; but the contract was merely the gate. When a man was married, he was in a holy estate— a religious estate. It was a religious estate, because it was ordained by God, commanded by God, blessed by God, and rendered ir revocable by God. Rendered irrevocable by the Deity, the law of England regarded it as irrevocable. In illustra- tion of that fact, he need only mention the case of Miss Tur ner—the Bill for the dissolution of whose marriage could not he sustained on the ground of fraud, and was only subsequently passed by their Lordships on the ground that no legal marriage had taken place, in consequence of the violence that tv:s used. Had their Lordships duly considered what the Roman Catho lic marriage law was? It probably went infinitely further than they were at all aware of. It declared that impediments to marriage by the law of God, should not be considered impe diments if the Pope chose to remove them. It declared that, with the Pope's permission, uncles might marry nieces, ne phews marry aunts, &c. While it thus licensed incestuous marriages, it tied up the liberty of man even in cases in which God had permitted its free exercise. The Roman Catholic marriage law, that law which was at preient in force in Ire land, in certain cases made null and void marriages beyond the Levitical degrees. He should, most heartily, vote for the amendment. The Bishop of HEREFORD said he would vote for the second reading of the Bill, in the hope that the clause de scribed by a Noble Earl, to the effect that the Roman Catholic Priest should not be at liberty to solemnize a marriage where the Protestant clergyman was not at liberty to do so, would be introduced into the Bill in the Committee. The Marquis of CL A NRIC A RUE made a brief reply. Their Lordships then divided-- For the amendment Against it Majority against the Bill At half-past Nine the House adjourned. .-2G HOUSE OF COMMONS, AUGUST 11. CERTIORARI BILL. On the motion of the ATTORNEY-GENERAL the Bill was read a first time. BOGNOR IMPROVEMENT BILL. Lord G. LENNOX brought up the Report of the Com mittee appointed to draw up reasons for not agreeing to the Lords' Amendments to this Bill. ST. STEPHEN'S CHAPEL. Mr. HAWES begged to ask the Right Hon. the Chancel lor of the Exchequer, whether it was the intention of his Ma jesty's Government to direct the pulling down of St. Ste phen's Chapel, and the adjoining cloisters. He was the more anxious for information on this point, as many persons were ir.terested in the preservation of those buildings. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was not the intention of his Majesty's Government to direct any part of these buildings to be pulled down until the plan for the new buildings had been sent in and approved of. There were some temporary repairs directed for their preservation, until it was ascertained whether they could be incorporated with the new building or altogether re moved.—( Hear.) REDUCTION OF THE MILITIA STAFF BILL. On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, the House went into Committee on the Bill for the Reduction of the Militia Staff. After a short discussion the House divided on the first clause. The numbers were— For it 96 Against it Majority The other clauses of the Bill were agreed to, and the Bill went through the Committee. ORANGE LODGES IN ENGLAND. On the motion of Mr. HUME the following Committee was appointed to inquire into the institution and extent of Orange Lodges in Great Britain and the Colonies. Hume, Joseph Ferguson, R. C. Price, Samuel Grove Aglionby, H. A. Finch, G. Pringle, A. Baines, E Finn, W. F. Shell, R. L. Bethel!, IL Hindley, C. Smith, R. Vernon Campbell, Sir J. Howick. Lord Somerset, Lord E. &Unclog, Marquis of Leader, John Temple Thorneley, Thomas Clerk, Sir G. Potter, R. Wallace, R. Colborne, N. W. R. Ward, H. G ORANGE LODGES (IRELAND). The Order of the. Day for resuming the adjourned debate on Orange Lodges in Ireland was then read. Mr. HUME before the debate proceeded, wished to state to the House that it was his intention to omit the fifth arid sixth resolutions, which had reference to the civil part of the question, in order that the discussion should be confined to Orange Lodges existing in the army. Mr. FINCH had great satisfaction in seconding the amend ment moved by his Hon. Friend the other night. He did not deny that the House had just as much right to deal with the malversations of the highest as well as of the humblest per sons in the realm, but then that was a privilege which ought only to be exercised with very great caution ; and he must say that the Hon. Members opposite would do well to assume that virtue if they had it not.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The Hon. Member for Middlesex was not a member of the Com mittee, but he had read some statement in a newspaper re flecting upon an illustrious individual, and he at once said to himself, " Oh, this is enough for me, I'll have a shot at the Duke of Cumberland."—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) That was his great object, and therefore the course which he had pursued was unparliamentary as well as unsuitable to the sea son when it was taken. The Honourable Member for Kilkenny brought forward a resolution on the subject of secret associations, and that resolution was directed, of course, against Orange Societies, though the terms of it were so general that it might include even Freemasons. But could it be said Low that Orange Societies were secret associations, when not only their signs, but the whole course of their proceedings, were known to every Member of the Committee ? It was true that they were in some respects exclusive societies, because they did not admit Roman Catho lics as m em b ers , although they were open to all other sects; but until the Hon. Member for Kilkenny could satisfy him that Roman Catholics could unite in defence of the Protestant re ligion, he must maintain that their exclusion was justifiable, and deny that it was any more an act of intolerance than was exercised at Brookes's and every other club-house in town.— ( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Kilkenny might, therefore, light his pipe with his resolution. It was untrue that the institution of orangemen had produced either reli= gious bigotry or religious feuds in Ireland, and in proof of this he had only to mention that the association of United Irish men existed four years before the first Orange lodge in that country was established. The association of United Irishmen was formed in 1791, and the first Orange lodge in the north of Ireland was not established until 1795, and its institution was the result of self-defence, and these facts he proved by a refe rence to " Plowden's History of Ireland" and other authorities. He described the frightful condition of Ireland from thence down to 1800. There was, &ring the whole of this period, a party hostile to England, to the Protestant religion in Ire land, and so recently even as 1807 it was stated by Mr. Wynd ham, and admitted by Mr. Grattan; that a French party exist ed io that country, which fully justified the continuance of Orange societies, as a means of preserving British connection. The Hon. Gentleman proceeded to show the existence of so cieties in Ireland, from that period to the present, which had in view objects not consistent with the constitutional princi ples of Great Britain, but his voice was frequently so low as to render him very inaudible. In 1825, the interference of the Catholic Association with the Courts of Justice in Ire , land was totally repugnant to the fair and unbiassed admini stration of the law. There was no period of Irish history more rife with disturbance and insubordination than 1821 and 1822. Parties appeared in open day upon the hills, and murder was as openly committed. At this period there was no disturbance in the north of Ireland, whilst in the south eighteen counties were placed under the Insurrection Act, and seven others were about to be proclaimed. The Catholic Association at this period interfered with the Courts of Jus tice by their paid agents, and even avowed a determination to erect tribunals of their own. A complete organization ex isted in the south of Ireland, of which in 1825 the Roman Catholic Priests formed 2,500 members. People might call this a highly-coloured statement, but it was one which he could support by authorities. The Hon. Gentleman then quoted the opinion of (we believe) Lord Plunket, to show that the Association set themselves up as the redressors of all griev ances, and the advocates of all measures, from Parliamentary Reform to Repeal, and that they interfered with every Court, from the very highest in the kingdom down to the Court of Conscience. Surely a state of things like this was most un constitutional. For the levies there was an army of 30,000 collectors. The whole, or nearly the whole, of the Catholic Priesthood of Ireland were attached to the Association, and yet what an outcry was raised if a few of the Protestant Clergy joined the Orange body. The Hon. Gentleman then referred to Mr. Wyse's book to show the admitted con nexion between the high Ecclesiastical Dignitaries and the Association, as well as the enrolment in that body of 2,500 Roman Catholic Priests. When the law to put these down was passed, the Orange institution, which was purely defen sive, ceased to exist. But this law was evaded, and organiza tion and agitation proceeded as usual. The law was hiug,hed at, and by a mere change of name the old Association still existed. The Hon. Gentleman then referred to the simulta neous meetings which took place in Ireland with the threaten • a spect which Irish affairs th en p resente d, and sa i d that ing the Orange body were called upon to re-organize itself in self-defence against the system of intimidation, and the tumul tuary meetings which took place in the South of Ireland. He maintained that there did exist a necessity for some system of protective union amongst the Protestants of Ireland. Un der existing circumstances, therefore, he thought the system of Orane•eism should not be abolished, even if there was a means of doing so, but that, on the contrary, it ought to be preserved and improved, for he admitted that it was susceptible o f i m provement. In conclusion—.( Ironical cheers from the Ministerial Benches—)—in conclusion—(Renewed cries of " H ea r, hear," from the same quarter.)- He hoped the House would allow him to conclude—(" Hear, hear," and " Order") .__and he would do so by expressing a fervent hope that the House would pause cautiously before it proceeded to interfere with an institution, which he maintained was the best and most loyal friend of the mother country in Ireland.—(Cheers. ) Lord E BRING TON thought the question before the House was simply as to the existence of Orange Lodges in the army, and the connection of his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland with them. He would not enter into the ques tion whether the prevalence of Orange Lodges in the army was subversive of the principles of military discipline. Suffice it that the Commander-in-Chief had forbidden their existence amongst the troops. With respect to the connection of the Duke of Cumberland with the. , ,e proceedins, it was not enough to say that his Royal Highness was not aware of what took place. His Royal Highness was the head of the Orange institution, and be was thereto: e responsible for whatever was done by its agents and in his name.—(Hear, hear.) His Royal Highness had written a letter denying all knowledge of the existence of Orange lodges in the army. But how was this denial to be reconciled with a document which he held in his hand, purporting to be a report of a meeting of the Grand Lodge at the house of Lord Kenyon, on the 17th of February, 1831, his Royal Highness in the chair, wherein he read amongst other resolutions, the following :—" That the following war rants be approved of, namely, No. 254 (we did not catch the name), of the 6th battalion of the Royal Artillery; No. 258, James Smith, of the 94th; No. 260, private Wilson, of the 17th ?"—( Hear, hear, hear.) The report then concluded with a.vote of thanks to his Royal Highness for his " conde scension and his attention to the business of the day."—( Hear, bear.) The Noble Lord then recited other documents, most of which had been used the other night by Mr. Finn, in the course of his speech in support of the fact of the existence of Orange Lodges in the army, and of the cognizance of the Noble Duke of that fact. Under these circumstances he felt bound, by a sense of public duty, to support the motion of the Hon. Member for Middlesex, that an humbletddress be pre sented to his Majesty, with a view to instituting an inquiry into the circumstances of the case. Colonel VERNE R contended that the reports from which the Noble Lord quoted were drawn up after the proceedings to which they related took place, and that, even if their accu racy were strictly to be depended on, it was very probable that the Noble Duke at the time was not aware of half the busi ness transacted on the occasion. —(011, oh, and hear, hear.) He was no advocate himself for the creation of Orange lodges amongst the troops, but he believed, nevertheless, that upon more than one occasion it had been found that those regi ments which comprised Orange lodges were the only ones which could be depended upon by the Government. The Hon Member here quoted at great length a vast number of passages from the recent letters and speeches of Mr. O'Connell, to prove his adulation of the Orangemen at one time, his slander of them at another—his at one time courting them as the representative of the true Protestant spirit of Ire land to co-operate with him to procure Repeal, because with out their co-operation Repeal could never be carried ; if they leagued with him Repeal would pass in twelve months. At another time he said as the Orangemen were impracticable, as they resisted his five years of solicitation (cajoling would, perhaps, be the more appropriate word), as they were not to ba diverted from their devotion to their principles, but still clung with dogged obduracy to the connection with England, he gave them up as an irreclaimable body, and he would sweep them before him, and carry Repeal without them, and in spite of them. He wished to exhibit to the House and the country the real character of the opposition of the Hon. Member op posite, and his dependents to the Orange Institution. He I wished to show how contradictory were his opinions, and, be cause contradictory, how insincere, and how unworthy of con fidence or respect.—(Loud cheers.) He wished to show to the gentlemen of England how unfounded were the slan ders against the Irish Orangemen. If the House wished that Repeal should be carried—if it wished for an extirpation of Protestantism in Ireland, and a dissolution of the strong bond that held the Legislative Union between the countries—then, and not till then, would it put down the Orangemen of Ire land.—( Loud cheers.) Mr. WILBRAHAM was strongly opposed to the introduc tion of Orange lodges' in the army; they were calculated to introduce insubordination and evil, and make the army, per haps, more dangerous to the friends of the country than to its enemies. There was discord enough without following the track of the Ribbonmen and the Whiteboys. He would sup port the motion. —( Hear.) Sir E. CODRINGTON, Mr. SHEIL, and several Members rose together. Sir E. CODRINGTON proceeded—He would warn the House against the introduction of these secret societies into England. It was the establishment of secret societies that led to mutiny in 1798. Mr. S HEIL said it was remarkable that the Deputy Grand Master (Colonel Verner), who was twice examined before the Committee, did not say he was ignorant of the ex istence of Orange lodges in the army. His silence as a mi litary man was rather curious on this point. The Grand Master, the Grand Treasurer, and the Grand Secretary— they were all Grand—(A laugh)—declared they had no knowledge of the existence of Orange lodges in the army. It was said that the Committee was unfairly selected. Why, of whom did it consist ? - There were the Members of Sligo and Cavan, Mr. W. Batten, Colonel Wood, Lord Castlereagh, Mr. Nicoll, Sir James Graham—(he did not well know in which rank to class him)—( A laugh)—Sir J. Y. Buller, and others equally favourable to the Orange politics. Well, then, what was done before that Committee—were its proceedings unfairly conducted ? Why, the Orange party were allowed to open the'case themselves, and for the first fifteen or twenty days none but Orange witnesses were heard. There was first Colonel Verner, who was twice examined. Then came the Rev. Martin O'Sullivan, certainly a good witness, inasmuch as he had the benefit of memory as regarded the Catholic reli gion, and of hope as regarded the Protestant.—(Cheers.) This witness was examined no less than seven times. Then came Mr. Swan,ihe Secretary of the principal Orange lodge. Then Mr. Blacker, and after him Mr. Warde, thesolicitor of the Orange body—of course produced to show that that body did not interfere with the administration of justice. Then, again, for the eighth time, came " the Rev. Martin O'Sulli van." Ecce iterum Crispinus—( A laugh)—and lastly, Mr. Baker—every one of them were wittnesses favourable to the Orange body, and for 20 days were they under examination. Well, and what did these impartial witnesses prove ? Did they not prove that there existed in Ireland societies in corporated, provided with arms, and headed by a Prince, not next, but near the throne ?—( Cheers.) And what more did the Committee elicit—was not the detail frightful? Did it not present a picture the most appalling that could be con ceived ? Look to the cases of Dundalk, Newry, Kills, and Armagh, as there detailed. The Hon. Member then pro ceeded to allude to the position the Duke of Cumberland oc cupied as Grand Master of the Orange Lodges. Should any calamity happen to her who was alike the object of Eng land's affection and England's hope—to her who, if her mo ther's virtues were hereditary, would be good, gentle, prudent and virtuous—he need not say he alluded to the heiress pre sumptive to the throne--(Loud cheers)—if by some fatality and fatality it would be considered by the people of England, his 'Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland became successor to the 'British Throne, what must be the expectation of the people ? Would he commence by surrounding his Throne with some 100,000 Irish Janissaries? He submitted to the House that the poner which the Orangemen had arrogated to them selves should be wrested from their hands. It remained for him to ask a plain question—What would the House do, or what were the Government prepared to do? if they did not put them down, the Orangemen would soon put the Govern ment down ?—( Cheers.) Would they turn them into a pat tern instead of, by condign chastisement, exhibiting them as an example ? If the Orangemen were not suppressed the other party would have a right to form counter associations. If the millions in Ireland enrolled and armed themselves, what would be the consequences of a collision ? Woe to the vic tors and the vanquished; In the abyss of blood which would be the result, the hopes of Ireland would be extinguished. The Government had already given a pledge of their affec tion to Ireland, and shown their intention to act with firmness and determination. He would not say he expected, because he knew they would do their duty.—( Immense cheers.) Mr. R. PLUNKETT was free to admit that a stronger case had been brought forward by the opposite side than he at first expected.—( Hear.) He would leave.the question as to the existence of Orange Lodges in the army to be treated by Hon. and Gallant Officers, merely observing that he saw no objection to an institution having within it the seeds of de voted loyalty. Mr. H. TWISS contended that no case of danger was made out to call for further inquiry, and the only question was as to the form of passing the resolutions before the House. The Ribbonmen were as illegal as Orangemen, and should be embraced by any decision to which the House might come. Sir E. H AYES said that whenever it suited the purpose of the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin to agitate the ques tion of the Union he would do so, and who then could the Go vernment rely on but the loyal Protestants of that country ? Lord J. RUSSELL only wished to state the course .he wished to take on this occasion. He had no objection to pointing out the danger of those warrants that had been issued, but until further information he was not disposed to accede to the sth or sth resolution; and, as regarded the resolution that applied to his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland, he did hope that some more satisfactory statement would have been made, which he thought might have been made, than the bare offer to withdraw the warrants which had been issued. He did think that after all that had occurred, the friends of his Royal Highness ought to have expressed their indignation against those unfaithful and un worthy persons with whom they had been allied, and to have announced their determination to withdraw from such an association. With these sentiments he should vote for the resolutions with the exceptions he had named. He looked upon it that it was necessary for the safety of the Crown to put down those societies, and he should meet the question re gardless of the menaces that might be thrown out from any quarter. He should act with equal determination to put down all other societies. He wished to see all equal in the eye of the law. He had no notion that the Government of Ireland should be left without authority, because it did not belong to a certain party. He should support the resolution of the Hon. Member for Middlesex. Mr. SHAW was sure the House would not sanction such an insinuation against his Royal Highness as this Resolution conveyed. The Hon. and Learned Member sat down amidst cries of " Divide." Lord J. RUSSELL rose:and said that it was not his wish or intention to agree to any resolution which insinuated that his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland had been aware of the issue of these warrants. He understood that the Hon. Member for Middlesex had no objection to insert the words, 6' which warrants had been afterwards issued." It appeared to him that this would do away with all objections. Mr. SHAW wished to leave out the words " blank war rants."—( General cries of " No, no.") Lord J. RUSSELL contended his Royal Highness's letter denied the fact. He stated that as soon as the proposal was makto him he denounced the lodges as contrary to the regu• lations issued from the War Office. After this every person of the Society that had anything to do with the issue of the war rants ought to have been more cautious.—( Hear, and cries of " Divide.") Mr. NIC HOLL would withdraw the first four Resolutions, and retain only the fifth and sixth.--( Cries of " They are with drawn already.") His object had been to afford an opportunity of the strictest inquiry. —.Mr. SHAW rose, and atternct , xl to soy a few - words, but he was-inaudible from the cries of " Spoke, spoke." Sir C. DA LBIAC concurred in the strong impropriety of establishing Orange Lodges in the Army ; but he contended that no such Lodges had ever been formed - in the sertice. Sir R. FE RG,IS S SON contended that Orange Lodges had been long foNned in the Army, and they had been held to cunningly, that even the non-cominissiened officers were not aware of the fact. Mr. HUM E replied. He had no objection to separate front the motion that part of it which related to the Army. He ac ceded to the proposal of the Noble Lord. Sir C. DALBIAC explained. The Gallery was. cleared for a division, but eventually Mr. Hume's altered motion was agreed to, without the House di viding. Mr. H. TWISS moved that the last four lines and a half of the last resolution, conveying a censure on the Duke of Cum berland, be omitted. On this question the House divided, For the resolution For the amendment Majority The other Orders of the Day were then proceeded with, and at half-past two o'clock, Mr. BROTH ERTON moved that the House do noW adjourn. The House then divided, and the numbers were— Ayes Noes 6B Majority —s6 The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Three o'clock. FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZETTE. [This Gazette contains an official Note, sent by his Excellency the Reis Effendi to Lord Ponsonby, dated July 14, and transmitted by him to Lord Palmerston, stating that certain inconsiderate per' sons having committed acts of disobedience and rebellion in the neighbourhood of Scutari, in Albania, the Sublime Porte has pro ceeded to blockade Boyana, Durazzo, Lesche, Morton, and Cavaia, which may be considered the ports of Scutari.] DOWNING-STREET, Auc. 10. The King has been graciously pleased to nominate and appoint Rear-Admiral Charles Adam to be a Knight Commander of the Most Honourable Military Order of the Bath, in the room of Ad miral Lord Amelius Beauclerk. WHITEHALL, AuGun 11. The King has been pleased to appoint George Biddel Esq., Professor of Astronomy in the University of Cambridge, to be Astronomical Observator in the Observatory in Greenwich, in the room of John Pond, Esq., resigned. The King has also been pleased to present the Reverend William Thomas Marychurch, A. 111., to the rectory of Sudburn cum Ca pella de Orford, in the diocese of Norwich and county of Suffolk' void by the resignation of the Rev. J. S. Jenkinson. WHITEHALL, AUGUST 8. The Lords Commissioners for the custody of the Great Seal have appointed George Eades, of Evesham, in the county of Wm' cester, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. Commission signed by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Esser. Onley Savill Onley, Esq., to be Deputy Lieutenant, July 4. WAR OFFICE, Ana. 11. 17th Regiment of Light Dragoons—Lieut. W. C. Douglas to be Captain by purchase, vice Bowes, w h o re ti res ; C ornet L . C ro ker to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Douglas; J. A. Thomson, Gent., to be Cornet, by purchase, vice Cr o ke r , A ug . 11. 4th Regiment of Foot—Assistant-Surgeon W. H. Allman, M.D.' , from the Staff, to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Rolland, who ex changes, Aug. 11. 23d Foot—Captain H. P. Bourchior, from the 52d Regiment/ to be Captain, vice W. L. M. Tupper, who retires upon half-K , receiving the difference, Aug. 11. 52d Foot—Captain H. S. Davis, from the half-pay Unattached.' to be Captain, paying the difference, vice Bourchier, appointed 0 the 23d Regiment, Aug. 11. HOSPITAL STAFF. Surgeon M. M. Mahony, M.D., from the 7th Regiment, to be Surgeon to the Forces, vice Macdermott, deceased ; Assistant - Surgeon J. H. Rolland, from the 4th Regiment, to be Assistan t'' Surgeon to the Forces, vi ce All man , w h o exc h anges ; J . E. Nicoll' Gent., to be Assistant-Surgeon to the Forces, vice Moore, sr, pointed to the 37th Regiment, Aug. 11. MEMORANDUM. The date of Lieut. J. G. Baird's appointment, as Adjutant to alit 10th Light Dragoons, to be the 24th, instead of the 31st July. DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY. MARY ANN LEWIS, milliner, Norfolk-street, Strand. BANKRUPTCIES SUPERSEDED. JOSEPH HALL, jun., victualler, Kidderminster, Worcester shire. ALFRED PRICE, straw bonnet-maker, Priest-court, Foster lane, Cheapside, London. DANIEL AIOORE, iron -master, Bordesley Iron Works, Aston , near Birmingham. BANKRUPTS. WILLIAM EDWARD LONG, coal-merchant, St. John ' c l W Wharf, Battersea, Surrey, to surre n d er , A ugust 17 , at twe l ve , _ Sept. 22, at half-past one, at th e C ourt o f Bankruptcy. Sle" Parish-street, St. John's, Southwark ; Cannan, official assignees . Sambrook -court, Basinghall-street, London. EDWARD CORBET BESSELL, lodging-house-keeper, V:, ward-street, Portman-square, Middl esex , A ugust 22, at e l eve n, an Sept 22, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Edwards, PO P cras-lane, official assignee; Pollock, Basinghall-street. EDWARD OTTEY, jun., wine -merchant, Savage-gardenh t Trinity-square, Tower-hill, August 22, at twelve and SePt• 22, a one, at the Court of B an k rup t cy . Edwards, official assignee, Pan cras-lane ; Bracey, Change-alley, London. JOHN LINNETT, bookseller, Austrey, 'Warwickshire, Aqui t 27, and Sept. 22, at twelve, at the Red Lion lnn, Atherstone, Avar" wickshire. Power, Atherstone ; Hawkins, Bloxham, and Stocker' New Boswell-court, Lincoln's-Inn, London. ROBERT HUNT, spirit-merchant, Kingston-upon-Hull, Au gust 26, and Sept. 22, at one, at the George Inn, Kingston-urn . Hull. Rosser and Son, Gray's-Inn-place, Gray's-Inn, London: England and Shackles, Hull. GEORGE HOOPER; tanner, Downton, Wiltshire, August 21 ' and Sept. 22, at ele ven , a t th e Bl ac k H orse I nn, New Baron' Cobb, Salisbury ; Brundrett, Randall, Simmons, and Brost'' , Temple, London. JAMES BROOKE, chemist, Lincoln, August 22, and Sept'22, at eleven, at th e S aracen ' s H ea d Inn, Lincoln. Atkinson an d Pilgrim, Church-court, Lothbury, London ; Broughton and Rayne* Bawtry. JOHN SCHOFIELD, woollen manufacturer, Moorbouse! Rochdale, Lancashire, August 27, and September 22, at two, 0 the Commissioners' Rooms, Manchester. Hardman, Rochdale; Hawkins and Co., New Boswell-court, Lincoln's Inn. GEORGE BLENKIN and WILLIAM SHACKLETOPF merchants, Kingston-upon-Hull; Sept. 2 and 22, at eleven, at the George Inn, Kingston-upon-Hull. Shaw, Ely-place, Holborn; Richardson, Hula. WILLIAM WALLACE, chemist, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, SeP t ' 2, at eleven, and 22, at one, at the Bankrupt Commission-roo o l' Newcastle-upon Tyne. Ingledew, N ewcas tl e - u p on -T yne; Wil liamson and Hill, Verulam-buildings, Gray's-Inn, London. DIVIDENDS. J. and T. Burrow, grocers, Hanley, Staffordshire, Sept. 1 0, ' 4 two, at the Swan Inn, Hanley—R. J ac k s on , g rocer , Newcastle upon-Tyne, Sept. 15, at twelve, at the Bankrupt Commission Room, Newcastle-upon-Tyne—J. Gibson, wharfinger, Northwic h ' Cheshire, Sept. 4, at eleven, at the Crown and Anchor Tavern' Northwich—.R. shipowner, Trotter, Tynemouth , Northumberlan d.. Sept. 8, at eleven, at the Bankrupt Commission Room, Newcastle upon-Tyne—W. Shirley, builder, Moreton-in the Marsh, Glouces ter, Sept 4, at eleven, at the White Hart Inn, Evesham, Worcester shire—E. Pownall, money-scrivener, Ipswich, Sept. 7, at eleveo , at the Golden Lion Inn, Ipsvvich—S. Bennett, grocer, Bath, Sep t. 3, at two, at the Commercial Rooms, Bristol—J. Langley, win e merchant, Bristol, Sept. 3, at eleven, at the Commercial 800100, Bristol. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. J. Wright and J. M. G. Underhill, attorneys, London- 14 , - Condliff and R. Nangreave, plumbers, Liv er p oo l—R. T urv ey and FL Dobbins, livery-stable keepers, Bristol—l. Wh ee l er a nd 11 • Bull, tailors, Birmingham—S. J. Tullcch and Co., wine Mc" chants, Prince's-square, St. George's East (so far as regards S. J• Tulloch)—J. Mountjoy and A. Toop, wheelwrights, Knackers knowle, Devonshire—E. Rawson and Co., Wood-street, Cheap . side—R. Russell and Co., shipbuilders, Liverpool—S. and A. JaY' teachers of.dancing, Gloucester-street, Queen-square— S. Taylor and Co., cotton-spinners, Rochdale, Lancashire (so far as regar d; C. Slade)—P. Jacques and Co. ' bleachers, Hoyle Mill, B arn sley- - J. Fenby and 0. C. Sim—W. Sanders and C. Bracey, surgeons: Birmingham—E. T. and L. Tooth, schoolmistress, Stamford- 0 ' —J. A. Walker and J. G. Sadd, coal merchants, Narrow-stree t, Limehouse—J. and H. Johnson, tallow-chandlers, St. Helen z, Lancashire—P. O'Brien and S. Mills, drapers, Rochdale, Lanea shire—C. Woodfine and T. Williams, coechbuilders. Blahloo, Essex—H. Meadows and Co., lime and coal dealers, Poulton-enm' Leadombe, Cheshire—A. M. Sandeman and J. H. Seeretan, se . counta.nts, Old Jewry—E. Atkins and R. Field, mealmen, Ban bury—S. and C. Briggs, hatters, Brighton—J. B. Johnson and Ca 11. Stevens, horse slaughterers, Mit c ham, Surr e y—G. H ow e and F. Trcwhitt, common brewers, Moukwearmouthshore, Durhaifl M. Chatfield and J. A. Huston, teachers, Pulborough, Sussc%- - T. and T. B. Burford, paper stainers, Rateliff Highway—R. But kr and Co., power-loem stuff-manufacturers, Leeds (so far as re lates to R. Butter)- -J. Stuart and Co., Bombay—R. R. Rocliffe and NV. Browrbridge, rag merchants, York—J. and R. Roger clock makers, Dudley, Worcestershire—E. Caldwell and E. Sall ben, surgeons, Millbrook, Southampton—C. Swainson and Co., cotton-spinners, Fishwiek, Lancashire ( so far as regards G. Bateman. ) SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS. DAVID and JOHN COUSINS, cabinet-makers, Newington . road, Sept. 3 and Aug. 20, at two, at the Old Signet Hall, ROYa l Exchange. JAMES CHRISTIE, builder, Glasgow, Aug. 20 and Sept. 4 0 at one, at the Royal Exchange Sale-rooms. LIVERPOOL COTTON-MARKET, AUG. The market opened this morning with considerable brisknest and sales of the day are upwards of 4,000 bags, at ve ry full prices. (ADVERTISEMENT.)-EIGHT-DAY CLOCKS' FOUR GUINEAS each, warranted. FOR THE DRAWING ROOM, they are made under a glas s shade, 11 inches high, the whole of the Mechanism of the Clock showing. FOR COUNTING HOUSES, SHOPS, AND PUBLI C BUILDINGS; they are made in round or octagon Mahogol cases, (to hang,) 14 inches diameter. FOR HALLS, &c. &c. They are made in Rosewood Got hic patter cases, to stand on a bracket. T. COX SAVORY, Working Goldsmith and Silversinitb, 47, Cornhill, London. BIRTHS. On the 9th inst., at Montague-place, Clapham-road, the lady of Captain J. P. Macdougall, of a son. still-born. On the 11th inst., the wife of Mr. Short, of the Strand Ho tel ' .4 a daughter. • DIED. On the 30th ult., Ma r y, re li ct o f J ohn Croueher, E sq ., late of Hayes, Surrey, in her 81st year. - „ London : Print e d an d P u bli s h e d by MURDO YOUNG of „1 / 4 , 112, Strand, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the counti of Middlesex. 7Pt '"'-' THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 12, 1835.