The Sun. — London, England, 1835-06-18 00:00:00

VICE-CHANCERY COURT. .4111.0 VALE V. WRIGHT. Mr. COOPER addressed his Honour at the sitting of the Court, and said there was a prisoner in Court whose case was very different from that of the Welsh prisoners who bad lrAely been produced. The Learned Counsel moved that 'this prisoner should be turned over to the Fleet, for the purpose of obtaining a sequestration against him. He was plaintiff in the cause, and he had sled the bill for the purpose of setting aside the sale of a house. At the hear ing his bill was dismissed with costs. When the attach ment for nonpayment of these costs was issued against him he was already imprisoned for debt. He had, in fact, an other freehold house, out of the rent of which he might readily discharge this claim ; but it seemed he preferred remaining in prison, although he would ultimately have to pay the Additional expense occasioned by the process of sequestration. ' nes VICE-CHANCELLOR—I apprehend this motion is quits of course. The order must be made. BAYLEY V. DIXON. Mr. KNIGHT moved upon notice for an injunction, to 'which, he understood, no objection at present would be - made. A lady of property had thought proper to settle upon the infant children of a respectable professional gentleman a sum of 5,5001. stock. Out of delicacy, a second professional gentleman was employed for the pur pose of managing the business. After the gift was complete the lady changed her mind, and the father was most pro perly desirous, as far as he could, to forego the children's claim ; but on the very day on which a re-transfer was to 'have been made, the settlor died. Other persons now stepped forward for the protection of the infants, and he moved for an injunction to restrain the transfer of the 5,5001. His HONOUR granted the injunction. ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. BROWNE. This cause came on upon exceptions to the Master's Report, under the decree by which the defendant, the Rev. Thomas Browne, was ordered to account for certain charity estates of which he had been long in possession. Mr. BEAMES supported the exceptions. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL supported the report. His HONOUR observed that the proper course would be to apply to the Attorney-General for the exercise of his discretion. LEWIS V. JOHN. Mr. SPURRIER stated that there were two young women defendants in this cause, of the name of Catherine and Martha John, about the age of seventeen and eighteen, in Court. An attachment having issued against them for not putting in their answer, the Messenger of the Court had brought them up from Glamorganshire. They were now produced in Court according to the practice, and he had to move that the senior six clerk should be assigned as their guardian, in the usual way. Sir W. HORNE and Mr. KNIGHT, with other members of the bar as amici curie, expressed their astonishment at this proceeding, which they characterised as an abuse of the process of the Court. The right course was for the plain tiff to have moved for a Commission to assign a guardian, and to take their answer. Mr. SPURRIER appealed to the Registrar whether the course pursued was not perfectly regular ? The REGISTRAR intimated his opinion that the plaintiff had taken the proper course. Mr. BF AmEs (amicus curie) supported the same view ; and Mr. COOPER (amicus cu rite) said he had seen an infant in arms brought up in custody for a like contempt in not putting in an answer. His - HoNouß was not aware of any other course of pro ceeding, and made the order. A discussion arose as to the disposal of the infants, who, it appeared, could not speak a word of English. Mr. Butt offered to take them to his own house ; but it was arranged that the plaintiff's solicitor should send them down by that night's coach. COURT OF KING'S BENCH. CLAY V. STEPHENSON. In this case a rule had been obtained that the Commis sion to be issued for the examination of witnesses abroad should be directed to the gentlemen who composed one of the Civil Courts at Hamburg. The reason for the appli cation was stated, in an affidavit on which the rule was obtained, to be that some of the witnesses desired to be examined were unwilling to give their testimony, and would refire to he examined by any private arbitrator. Mr. WIGHTMAN showed cause against this rule. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL supported the rule. The COURT (excepting Mr. Justice Littledale, who had great doubts on the subject) thought that the application ought to be granted, and therefore made the irule absolute. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. 110 USE OF LORDS, JUNE 17. ROYAL COMMISSION. The Royal Assent was given to-day by Commission to the Consolidated Fund Bill, the Newcastle and Carlisle Railway Bill, the Cart Navigation Bill, the Dublin Oil Gas Bill, the Birmingham Canal Navigation Bill, the Exeter Canal Bill, the Ashburton Roads Bill, and several other private Bills. The Commissioners were the Earl of Shaftesbury, Lord Duncan• non, and Lord Wharncliffe. A message from the House of Commons brought up seve ral private Bills, which were read a first time. The Bills on the Table were forwarded a stage, and the House adjourned till to-morrow, at half-past three o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, JUNE 17. The SPEAXER took the Chair at a quarter to four o'clock, but the Gallery was not opened until a quarter past four. The Ballots for the Worcester (County) and Tralee (Bo rough) Election Committees were fixed for this day, and there was a very large number of Members in attendance at the sitting of the House, but the parties not appearing in either case, the orders for taking the petitions into consideration were discharged. A message from the Lords announced that their Lord ships had agreed to several private Bills. Mr. MILE S brought up the Report of the Committee on the Tunbridge Wells Improvement Bill. GREENWICH RAILWAY. Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented a petition against the London and Greenwich Railway. He complained that the way in which the Bill now stood, it was impossible for any of the parties opposed to it to know when it was likely to be brought forward. Mr. HUME suggested that it would be the proper course to make the next stage of the Bill an order of the day ; the House would then be prepared for the consideration. Sir E. KNATCHBULL said, all he wanted was that the House should not be taken by surprise. Mr. WILK S said the opposers of a Bill frequently made it an order of the day for the purpose of opposing it. The petition was referred to•the Committee on the Bill. Mr. C. BRUCE presented a petition against the Leith Water Bill. HUBERT V. bTEINAR. This action was brought to recover the sum of 2371., being the amount of a bill of exchange drawn and protested in France many years since. Some time after the bill was drawn defendant left France, and came to reside in Eng land, where the present action was brought against him, in which a verdict was recorded in his favour ; he having pleaded the French statute of limitation as laid down in the " Code de Commerce." A rule in arrest of judgment was subsequently obtained, and The COURT gave judgment this day, and considered that the limitation laid down in the French law did no bar plaintiff's right in an action brought in an English Court of Record. They therefore ordered that a verdict on the general issue should be entered for the plaintiff COURT OF EXCHEQUER. JENKINS V. lIARVY. Mr. BARON PARKE gave the judgment of the Court in this case, which was an action by the lessee of the corpora tion of Truro to try the right of the corporation to a toll of 4d. per chaldron for metage on all coals that came into the port. It was tried before Mr. Baron Gurney at Launces ton at the last Spring Assizes, when the Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff on the first count only, thereby find-, ing that the corporation was such by prescription, and that from time immemorial they had a right to appoint an officer, who was entitled to receive a metage of 4d. a chaldron on all coals imported into the harbour of that town. But to questions by the Learned Judge the Jury said that the officer was entitled to metage only for the performance of services, that is, when he measured the coals ; and they also said that the metage claimed was not a port duty. The COURT were of opinion that the verdict for the plaintiff should not be disturbed, and that the rule for a new trial should be discharged.—Rule discharged. COURT OF BANKRUPTCY. MARSH, GRAHAM, STRACEY, AND FAUNTLEROY'S DANK- RUPTCY. On Tuesday a very numerous meeting of the creditors of the banking firm of Marsh, Graham, Stracey, and Faunt leroy, was held at the Court of Commissioners of Bank rupts, Basinghall-street, for the purpose of considering a proposition for compromising with the Directors of the Bank of England with respect to the proceeds of stock sold out by forged powers of atttorney by the late Henry Faunt leroy, in the event of the estate of the bankrupts being re leased from further claims on the part of the Bank of Eng land. The meeting was most numerously attended. Mr. Knight in the Chair. A resolution was moved, to the effect that the meeting assented to pay to the Bank of England the sum of 95,000!. out of the proceeds of the estate in hand, upon condition that the Bank of England return the estate, and all divi dends declared, or to be declared, on the proofs made of 234,213/. 16s. I d., as well as in respect to proceeds of stock, &c., amounting to 10,777!. 13s. 10d., and 18,221/. 12s. 6d., and to proofs against the separate estate of Henry Fauntleroy ; and that the meeting fully authorise the assig nees to carry the arrangement into full and complete effect. The resolution ti as put from the Chair, and carried with acclamation, there being only one dissentient voice. The meeting then adjourned. We hear of several melancholy accidents in dif ferent parts of the country from the heavy rains during the late thunder -storm, by which the streams were suddenly swollen to such a height, that there was hardly time to escape from the flood.—Glasgow Herald. PROJECTED PIER HARBOUR AT BLAKENaY AND CLET.—A few weeks since we stated that a meeting of merchants, ship-owners, &c., had taken place in this town, on the subject of a Pier Harbour, and that the plan submitted was well received, and considered highly desirable ; since then we are given to understand the ship-owners in the north have sanctioned the plan. Experienced nautical men speak of it in the highest terms, which is one of the best guarantees ; and had their advice been more attended to in an adjoining county, at a similar undertaking, the shareholders would not now have to give their shares away. Four gentlemen from London have been busily engaged for several days, and are going to continue a fortnight longer, making plans and esti mates. Any doubts which may have existed as to the forma tion of a bar, will be immediately removed, on the knowledge that it is intended to make a cut into the extensive broads of Saltbouse, for the tide to flow into, with a lock to hold the the water until the tide has receded, when the gates being opened, a body of water, occupying upwards of 1,000 acres, will rush with such force as to keep the channel always open; a like body of water will be reserved each tide, on the Stiff key side. The flow of water on this coast is so great, that it is thought Government will make it, in case of need, a station for their small vessels of war; indeed, the benefit which will arise to the shipping interest, th e fisheries, Six. will be incalculable. It is supposed a trifling tax of about id. per ton on ships passing, will pay the interest of the capi tal required.—Norfolk Chronicle. THE CHURCH. Mr. R. TREVOR presented a number of petitions from Gateshead, Chester-le-street, and other places in the county of Durham, against the appropriation clause to be inserted in the Irish Tithe Bill. The petitioners were very respectable, and lie quite agreed with them in opinion. It had been stated that these petitions were got up by the Clergy—he had made some inquiries into the matter, and he was perfectly convinced that these petitions were the spontaneous acts of the people who signed them. Mr. LAMBTON was sorry that the Hon. Gentleman had not read those petitions to the House, that the sentiments they contained might be fully known. On the part of him self and his Honourable Colleague, he would give a most positive and distinct denial to their assertions, and he would unhesitatingly say, on the part of the great majority of the inhabitants of that county, as well as the majo rity of the electors, that such sentiments were not entertained by them.—( Hear.) There were one or two points he wished to remark upon, though he was aware that this was not the time to enter at large into the subject.—( Hear, hear.) It did appear strange to him, that because they sought this ap propriation clause to relieve millions of Catholics from paying towards a Church Establishment, for which they derived no advantage, and to alter that law which gave a large salary to clergymen who had no congregation—it did appear rather strange that such a clause should be considered as endangering the safety of the Church of England : such an assertion was an insult to the Protestant religion.-- ( Hear, hear.) As to the other remark, about the viola tion of their oaths by Catholics, he must say that he did not believe any of the Catholic Members in that House were capable of violating the oath they had taken, nor was the sup port of that clause any violation of that oath.--( Hear.) Mr. HARLAND (as was understood in the gallery) said said he did not wish to call in question the respectability of the petitioners, but he would say that their assertions were not in accordance with the opinions of the majority of the people of that county, and he was very happy to find that seven or eight out of the ten Members for the county of Durham had already sanctioned the appropriation clause.—( Hear.) He would say nothing of the manner in which the petitions were got up by raising a superstitious dread of popery being about to pull down the Protestant Church, but he would content himself by saying that if this question were put fairly and honestly, and in a proper light before the country, the great majority of the people would be in favor of it. ( Hear.) Indeed, it was his opinion that this clause would have the effect of placing the Church itself in a much more se cure and permanent footing than it now stands.—( Hear. ) Mr. CUTHBERT RIPPON said that this petition was carried about by a reverend gentleman, and the petition con tained the names of 78 electors, and other inhabitants of the the parish of Gateshead, which contained 608 electors, twenty of whose names were appended to the petition.— ( Hear, hear.) The parish contained 15,177 families, 59 of the heads of which had signed the petition.—( Hear, hear.) But the Rev. Gentleman, not content with hawk ing the petition about this parish, took it into adjacent parishes. He believed that this was not the petition of the people, but that that pious and political brotherhood the Dean and Chapter of Durham and the Conservative Asso ciation, who were unionists for a bad purpose, had selected the Hon. Gentleman as their parliamentary conduit-pipe, through which to pour the overflowings of their bigotry and malevo lence.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. A. TREVOR most unhesitatingly admitted that he was extremely proud of being chosen as the conduit-pipe to convey the sentiments either of the Dean and Chapter of Durham, or of the Conservative Association.—( A laugh.) It was not unnatural that those who entertained simi lar opinions to his own should confide a petition containing their sentiments to him. Mr. PEASE, as the petition came from a portion of his constituents, and as allusion had been made to what he had said on a former occasion respecting the manner in which these petitions were signed, would take the liberty. if the House would grant him the indulgence, to read a few lines from a letter which he had received upon this subject from one of his constituents.—( Hear.) It would be recollected that when he, ( Mr. P.) stated on a former occasion that those who signed these petitions were ignorant of the purport of them, be was contradicted by the Hon. Member (Mr. A. Trevor) who presented the petition. The letter, after referring to this, proceeded to state that the writer had signed this petition, and he was quite sure that he was not only ignorant of the nature of the petition, but be was most grossly deceived by the person who obtained the sig natures.—( Hear.) As the sheet which he had signed was a blank one, he had asked if the petition :was intended to contain any tiring contrary to, or disapproving of, the mo tion of Lord John Russell for appropriating the surplus revenues of the Irish Church to the purposes of general education, he was told, " No, not in any shape."—( Hear, hear.) There were many others who had made the same complaint. The petition was carried about by the clergy man—at least the sheets containing the signatures were hawked about, and were afterwards attached to the peti tion. He would ask whether this was not a gross perversion of the sentiments of the petitioners? The writer further stated that if public notice had been given of this petition, a petition containing contrary sentiments would be signed by nineteen out of twenty of the inhabitants. He knew that many who had signed this petition were highly respectable, and conveyed what were really their sentiments, but they were not the sentiments of the great majority of the people of Durham—that county, out of the the ten representatives which it sends to Parliament, sent seven or eight who supported the motion of Lord J. Russell, and he did not believe that they were displeased with the con duct of their Representatives, or regretted their choice. The petition was then laid on the table. TIMBER DUTIES. Mr. A. TREVOR then presented a petition from the Chamber of Commerce at Gateshead, against any alteration in the Timber Duties. POOR LAWS. The same HoN. MEMBER gave notice that on Friday night, in going into a Committee of Supply, he would call the at tention of the House to the state of the poor is the parish of Grantley (as we understood). WEST INDIA GRANT. Mr. F. BUXTON gave notice that on the same evening he would move to suspend the appropriation of the grant of 20,000,0001. to the West India Proprietors. CHANNEL ISLANDS. Mr. LABOUCHERE moved that the R e port of the Select Committee upon the Channel Islands be printed.—Agreed to. IPSWICH ELECTION. Mr. P. M. STEWART moved for leave to bring up the Report of the Select Committee, appointed to select such parts of the evidence given before the Ipswich Election Commit tee, as related to the Special Report made by that Committee. The Report was then brought up, and read by the Clerk. The Committee reported that they could not make a selection of such parts of their evidence as might bear upon their second Report until 'it had been all printed ; and, from the forward state in which it was, they hoped to have it all ready by Wednesday morning next.—( Hear, hear.) GRAIN FROM THE ISLE OF MAN. In answer to a question from an Hon. Member, Mr. L ABOUCHE RE said that he believed a Bill to regu late the importation of grain from the Isle of Man was ready to be introduced by the President of the Board of Trade. ORANGE PROCESSIONS. Col. CONOLL Y begged to know from the Noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, whether certain persons who were about to take their trial at the next Assizes for the County Tyrone, for attending a procession in the North of Ireland, would ob tain the benefit of the same interpretation which had been put upon the procession which accompanied the Noble Lord at the head of his Majesty's Government in Ireland. He begged to read a letter which would more fully explain the question he wished to ask.—( Order.) The SPEAKER, who was nearly inaudible, observed, '(as we understood) that a question might be asked, but it was ir regular to read any documents, or make any observations, which might lead to a discussion. Colonel CONOLLY having repeated his question, Lord MORPETH said the Hon. and Gallant Member wished to know whether his Majesty's Government intended to interfere in the case of prisoners who were in custody for a breach of the law. He begged to inform him that his Majesty's Government had no such intention. The SPEAKER said a few Words which were quite inaudible. After a few words from Mr. PRARD, which were totally inaudible in the gallery, the subject was dropped. CHARITIES. On the motion of Mr. DANIEL WHITTLE HARVEY, THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, JUNE 18, 1835. the following Comm England and Wales Harvey, D. W. Aglionby, H. A. Baines, E Blackburn, John I. Brotherton, J. Campbell, Sir John Colborne, N. W. R. Divett, E. Egerton, Lord Fran. Follett, Sir W. W. REGISTRATION OF VOTERS. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, he trusted that the House would be prepared to adopt the resolution which he in tended to submit to them. It would rescind the reso lution of the House of the 11th of June, 1833. He had been asked by an Hon. Member who had been on the Ipswich Committee whether persons reported as guilty of bribery were to be struck off the register ?—( Hear, hear.) He was of opinion that that House was not the proper place in which bribery ought to be punished. He thought that such a crime ought to be punished by the due course of law. That House was the ultimate Court of Appeal, and ought not to take up such a matter in the first instance. He thought it would be wrong and dangerous for the House to to assume such a power by a resolution which ought to be defined only by an Act of Parliament.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord, who throughout was most imperfectly heard in the gallery, moved a resolution directing the Speaker to direct all Returning Officers to strike off all such names from the Register as were reported to that House by a Committee as having been struck off by them--and to add all others which they found should have been inserted. Mr. CALLAGHAN trusted that the Noble Lord would so frame the Resolutions, that non-resident freemen who had registered without swearing as to residence, should be re moved from the registry. Lord JOHN RUSSELL had so worded the resolution, as to bring that class of voters within the clause. Mr. GOULBURN thought that a Committee had full powers to strike off such voters without having a specific clause to that effect. Mr. CALLAGHAN observed that a great number of voters had been struck off by the Committee, but a great number equally objectionable remained. Mr. SHIEL thought the Irish mode of registration was ex tremely objectionable. At several elections voters had ten dered their votes, which had been received by the Sheriff, although he thought they were not entitled to vote, but as they were on the registry he received them.—(Hear, hear.) By the present system, a very great expense was incurred. Mr. SHAW was for an entire revision of the registration, and contended that a definitive and uniform law upon the sub ject should be established. Two Committees of the House had already declared that they would not revise the decisions of the revising barristers.—( Hear, hear.) That might be well in England where there was an annual regis tration, but in Ireland the case was widely different. Mr. HUME had obtained leave to bring in a bill to remedy this abuse, and he was only waiting the arrival of the Attorney- General for Ireland to proceed. Sir R. PEEL observed that the objection of the Hon. Member for Tipperary would apply in principle to a registra tion for one year as well as to a registration of eight years. It would be much better to pass the present resolution, and bring in some remedy for the evil complained of.—( Hear.) Mr. O'CONNELL was quite sure that it would be neces sary for them to legislate upon this subject, for they would be able to do nothing decisive without legislation. And here he would ask the House what reason was there why there should be an annual registration in England, and not in Ireland ? ( Hear, hear.) The octennial registration of Ireland was productive of serious evils, because the voters went to the poll with their certificates, and the validity of their votes could only be found outby the expensive process of a petition. In Eng land the revising barristers were on the spot, but there was a town in the county of Cork, the electors of which had to travel seventy miles to register themselves, that ought not to be-4 Hear, hear.) The Attorney-General did him the honour to say that he was preparing a Bill on this subject, and to ask him for suggestions, which, however, he would not ven ture to give, lest the work should be said to be his. In the city of Dublin, a return was called for of those votes acquired by birth, servitude, and marriage, and those obtained by spe cial qualification. The returns proved that none by personal right were admitted, though now they were admitting them ; and Chief Baron Joy, on an appeal, held that it was a good right of voting. Now ought there not to be an annual revision in Ireland ?—( Hear.) There should be a Judge and an assistant barrister to conduct the registration every twelve months ; then it would be known before every election, who was entitled to vote, and there would be no occasion to incur -the expense of a scrutiny before this House, which expense was frightful, enormous, and disgraceful.-- ( Hear.) If any error occurred, the evil would only last twelve months, and would be much easier detected than at present. He hoped the Attorney- General would bring forward his Bill to amend Irish registration, and that he would lay it on the table before the end of another week. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in the absence of the Attorney-General for Ireland, begged to say that he thought it of the greatest importance that a Bill should be introduced for the purpose of amending the Irish registry. He saw no reason why there should not be an annual registry.--( Hear.) Be saw no reason why the Irish elections should last for five days, while those of England and Scotland were over in two days, and he hoped shortly to see them over in one.—( Hear. ) He concurred in the observations of the Hon. Member for Dublin, that there ought to be an appeal from the decision of the re vising Barrister—(hear, from the Irish Members)--and then that the registry should be conclusive.--( Hear, hear.) Lord STANLEY begged to remind the House, that at the time the Reform Bill was passed there Was no system of regis tering in England, while in Ireland they had a system of registration ; and upon introducing the English • system it was thought better to see how the new system worked in England before they introduced a similar system into Ireland. That had been the general understanding, and not from any reluctance to put the two countries upon the same footing. That had been the ground for the difference, and there was still some doubt he believed among the Irish Members as to the propriety of having separate polling places, and of limiting the time for taking the poll at elections. The framers of the Reform Bill were anxious to see how the new system worked in England before they introduced the same system into Ireland. Mr. Sergeant JACKSON thought it would be advantageous to have an appeal as well in the case where the vote was re jected (as at present) as when the vote was registered.— (Hear.) The Hon. and Learned Member proceedd to com ment upon the statement of the lion. and Learned Member for Dublin relative to the Corporation of Dublin admitting the right of freemen. The Corporation had always claimed the right of considering the right of every individual claiming to be admitted to the freedom of the city ; and in the case of a mandamus obtained against them in the Court of King's Bench, the Corporation of Dublin had established their right to use such discretion. With respect to the decision of Chief Baron Joy, that he believed had been in favour of the Learned Member for Dublin. He had seen different Reports of that decision, and it appeared that his Lordship had reversed the decision of the Barrister, the party claiming having produced the certificate of the Town Clerk, and his entry on the books. Mr. O'CONNELL begged to set the Learned Member right. He had not been in Dublin at the time of the decision of Baron Joy, but by the Learned Judge's decision a man had determined his right to vote as a freeman, although the cor poration of the city of Dublin in their Report to that House in the year 1831, had stated that no man could claim to be admitted, or had been admitted as of right. Although, from the year 1792 Catholics could be freemen of the City, many were the sons of freemen, and many had married the daughters of freemen. The Corporation excluded all they chose, and ad mitted the right of all they pleased. That was exactly the state of the question. The Corporation having reported to that House that they would admit no man as a matter of right, that Report was laid on the table—he had sent for it to the Library —an individual went into the Court of King's Bench to resist this, and had been defeated there. They admitted an inchoate right—that was a right which no man could enforce.—( Loud cries of " Spoke.") I have spoken. Mr. Serjeant JACKSON—The Hon. and Learned Mem ber for Dublin stated that he was not in Dublin when this question was tried. He recollected that the Hon. Member was at the Session when the objection was made.—( Cries of " No, no.") Why, the Hon. and Learned Member took the objection himself.--( A laugh. ) Mr. O'CONNELL had taken the objection at a former Session, but not so to have the question tried.--( Cheers. ) Mr. C. FE RGUS SON thought the point was of the greatest importance that this question should be made a matter of legis lation. When a vote was once properly adjudicated upon it, it ought to be final. It appeared to him, that to suffer the right of a man to a vote to be canvassed every year, though it had been established by a Court of Justice, was the most preposterous thing they could possibly do.—( Hear, hear.) He would, in the first place, have the right satisfactorily adjudicated, and then he would not have it in the power of any man to impeach his vote. This example was set by the ancient system of Scotland. Mr. D. RONA YNE could inform the Hon. and Learned Sergeant that not only in Dublin, but in the different Corpo rations of Ireland, they had recognised rights since the Reform Bill was passed, which had never been recognised before. The Resolution was then put from the Chair, and agreed to without any opposition. WOLVERHAMPTON RIOTS. Mr. TH 0 RNL E Y wished to ask the Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Home Department, as it was known that the Government had caused an investigation to be made at Wolverhampton respecting certain disturbances that had taken place, he wished to ask when the Report would be laid before the House ? Lord J. RUSSELL could only say that he had been in formed by Sir F. Roe that the Report could not be prepared in less than 10 days. He had no objection to lay the entire Report before the House.—( Cheers.) UNIVERSITY OF LONDON. Mr. TOOKE begged to know from the Noble Secretary of State for the Home Department in what state the proceed ings were with respect to the granting of a charter to the University of London? Sir JOHN CAMPBELL said he believed he could answer the question as well as the Noble Lord.--( Hear, hear.) The matter had been referred to him as Attorney-General —it was of the utmost importance, and he would be quite ready to receive the suggestions of the Hon. Member, or any other one. THE CHANCELLORSHIP. Mr. C. BULLER wished to know from the Noble Lord (John Russell) whether or not any Bill was in prepa ration for the purpose of regulating the office of Lord High Chanceller, and especially for the purpose of disjoining the judicial from the political functions of the office. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, it was well known that the present arrangement was a temporary one; but as the question • iittee was nominated on the Charities of Goulburn, H. Hodges, T. T. Hume, Joseph Inglis, Sir R. H. Law, Hon. G. Lushsngton, Charles Peel, Sir R. Philips, M. Rolfe, J. M. Russell, Lord J. Russell, Lord Sandon, Lord Somerset, Lord G. Stewart, P. M. Talfourd, T. Noon Warburton, H. Wilks, J. Wrottesley, Sir J. was one of so• much importance, he trusted he would be excused from giving any answer on the present occasion. Sir R. PEEL wished to know what arrangement was made respecting the salary of the Chancellor. The words of the Act of Parliament were express upon the subject. Sup posing the present arrangement was to become fixed, were those who were Judges, and were receiving the salary of Jud ges, were they to be entitled to the salary of the Chancellor ? Lord J. RUSSELL said there were Returns preparing in the Home-office which would be :t answer the question of the Hon. Baronet. It would soon be on the table of the House. CORPORATION REFORM. Sir R. PE ELwidedtc know what course the Noble Lord opposite intended to pursue relative to the Committee on the Corporation Reform Bill ? He had understood that it was his intention to have gone on with it day after day ; but as that course had not been pursued, he wished to know whether he meant to go into Committee on the Bill pro forma, and discuss the Bill on the bringing up of the Report. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that it was not his intention to go into Committee pro forma, as the alterations he intended to propose would be but few. It was his intention to begin on Monday next with the Committee and to proceed with it day after day. If gentlemen who had motions for those days persisted in bringing them forward, he would not be enabled to do so, but he should press upon them the necessity of allowing so important a subject to take precedence. LIMITATION OF POLLS BILL. On the motion that the House go into Committee on the above Bill, Lord J. RUSSELL was understood to say that he was in general favourable to the Bill, as affording many facilities to the collection of votes, and the prevention of the abuses so common at elections ; but he thought it should be postponed till the opinion of the Registration Committee was given to the House. Sir R. PEEL said that if the polls could be taken in one day a great benefit would be produced, as this would tend very much much to lessen the expenses of elections, and prevent a continuation of those outrages, intimidation, violence, and undue influence, that now so frequently obstructed the free exercise of the franchise. He would also wish to see the num ber of polling places increased, as this would give the voters the facility of polling quickly and near home, and prevent the marching of large bodies of persons to distant polling places. He would suggest that the reference of questions to the Re gistration Committee be extended, and he thought this latter point should be one of them. So friendly was he to the prin ciple of the Bill that he was of opinion it should not be hastily introduced • but that its details should he further considered. Mr. H CME said he had a Bill drawn up on this subject, but he was induced to withhold presenting it from the fact of the Registration Committee being on the eve of giving to the House the result of their inquiries. He expected that Com mittee would have reported to the House that night ; if they had, he would have introduced the Bill. However, he would not oppose any good measure that had in view so desirable an object as the reformation of the present system of taking the poll. Though the present Bill did not come up to his notion of perfection on the question, yet he would be glad to see any one provision, any one part, of the general measure carried. Mr. BULLER would beg to suggest to his Hon. Friend to wait for the Report of the Registration Committee, of which he (Mr. Buller) was one. That Committee certainly did much but had yet much more to do. There were a great many ques tions before them, which he feared they could not get through before the close of the session. It was suggested to delay the Bill till the Hon. Member for Middlesex brought in his Bill; but that Hon. Member said he would not bring in his Bill till tho report of the Registration Committee was laid before the House ; and as that Report was not likely to be laid so soon as anticipated before the House, it behoved the House to see that so important a subject was not to be stifled, though the present Bill was not so perfect as was desirable. Mr. EW ART was understood to suggest that the Bill be referred to a Committee up stairs. Mr. AGL lONB Y said the lion. Member (Mr. Hume) in the Bill he intended to introduce had embodied all the pro visions of the present Bill, and others of a valuable kind, so as to make the measure perfect. The great object should be to promote the purity and independence of election, and save expense, and give a facility for tendering all the votes in one day. He thought the proposition of' sending the Bill to a Committee up stairs should not be adopted. The Bill in its present shape was too simple, its machinery was too imperfect, for the purpose of practical utility, for in many cases it would be found wholly inoperative. It should, then, be wholly re modelled. As the Member for Hastings proposed to have the clauses discussed one by one, he could see no reason for post poning the discussion. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was un derstood to recommend that the Bill be read pro forma, and the several clause s an d amen d men t s di scusse d a t a 'future time. Colonel WOOD thought the number of polling places should be increased everywhere. Colonel SIBTHORP would suggest that no two polling places be under the same roof, or even near each other, as this would prevent a concourse of bodies of men, many of them not voters, which frequently led to confusion, intimida tion, and riot. His suggestion was meant to apply to cities and counties. Mr. WARBURTON took the same view of the subject as the Chancellor of the Exchequer. An HON. MEMBER thought the third reading of the Bill should be postponed, till they saw what the Registration Com mittee would propose. The part of the Reform Bill that re ferred to the polling should, it was suggested, be repealed, and a measure de 1101:0 be introduced. The expense of the erection of additional booths were made an objection. Now, this expense would not be equal to the expense consequent on No days' polling. This Bill should be well considered, be fore they proceeded further. It was better to have one com prehensive Act, than many only touching on particular points. Lord MORPETH said if the Bill passed, he would move for additional polling places for the West Riding of Yorkshire. Mr. ORD said the expense of bringing voters to the poll from distant places, if the polling places were few and distant, would be more than that of the erection of additional polling places, which would afford a facility to the electors of giving their votes without trouble, expense, or annoyance. His Friend Mr. Elphinstone had designedly made the measure dis tinct and different from the contemplated Report of the Regis tration Committee. It had a single object in view—at pre sent, however, it was insufficient for the general purpose. Mr. HARDY said though in the boroughs polling places need not be increased an additional number was requisite in the towns. The House then went into Committee on the Bill. Several Gentlemen rose to move their amendments to the Bill. Mr. WARBURTON said, he thought the object of allow ing the Bill to go into Committee was to allow Mr. Elphin stone at a future stage an 'opportunity of moving his own clauses ; but now it appeared that several Members were in troducing their own clauses. It was better to let the Bill first go on in its regular course, and then introduce the discussion on the clauses after. The whole discussion was carried in so conversational an( lo w a tone that it was impossible to collect more the genera import of each speaker's few remarks. The Bill was read a second time. COLONIAL PASSENGERS' BILL. The House resolved itself into a Committee on the Colo nial Passengers' Bill. On the clause being read relative to the casks which shall be used to contain water for the voyage," A MEMBER suggested that the owners should be restricted from using any that had been previously employed for any other puposes. Mr. FIUME codld see no objection to the use of wine or brandy casks. He thought it would be quite sufficient to de clare " that the officer shall satisfy himself that the casks had not been filled with anything to render the water unhealthy or impure." Mr. O'BRIEN reminded Hon. Members that if the officer was not allowed to use his discretion, oil casks might be used, which would render the water very unpleasant, if not un healthy. He was aware that many vessels left Limerick last season with emigrants, their stock of water being contained in oil casks. Mr. G OUL BURN admitted that it would be advisable to specifically prohibit oil casks. The clause was then agreed to. Mr. HUME called attention to the sth clause, empowering the inspecting officer to examine the provisions, &c., imme diately previous to sailing. He thought this interference would be likely to cause injurious delays to vessels on the point of sailing, and suggested that the officer should be required to complete his search a certain number of days previous—say three ; or, better still, that the provisions should be examined and approved of before shipment. Sir James Graham, Mr. G. Grey, Mr. P. Thomson, and Mr. O'Brien, also offered suggestions on this clause, but in so low a tone that they were inaudible. Mr. WA RBUR - TON thought that the powers proposed to be conferred on Custom-house officers of absolutely rejecting a shipped stock of provisions, might be rendered the source of great abuse in petty outports, where it would be difficult to obtain a fresh supply, except from a favourite of the officer, and at a ruinous price. Mr. HUME argued against the minute and vexatious le gislation pursued in Bills of this nature. He thought it would be quite as consistent to order an inspection of the steam boiler of a packet preparatory to every trip, for it might blow up and destroy the passengers if not kept in a sound working condition, as had indeed frequently happened. Mr. GOULBURN and Mr. LABOUCHERE vindicated the prin ciple of the Bill, which only interfered to protect those whom it was not the interest of the shipowners to take care of. The latter would look to the sufficiency of their boilers for the sake of their vessel, while it was found by experience that in many cases they allowed the poor passengers to starve. Mr. O'BRIEN bore testimony to the facts that out of 2,500 poor emigrants who left Limerick last year 500 died on the passage. Those vessels had set sail for America in a state not fit to cross the Channel to England, the proof of which was that from the third day after their departure the pumps were obliged to be kept going all the voyage. Mr. ROEBUCK urged the necessity of the strictest sur veillance. Last year there were 30,000 poor emigrants (for the most part quite destitute) sent out to Canada without any arrangement to keep them from starving during the five or six months that the country was bound up in frost and snow. Mr. CL AY submitted that the example of the East India Company (with respect to the systematic inspection to which their ships were subjected previous to a voyage) was the best that could be followed in the present case. The happy effects of this course was that the Company's insurance did not amount to one-sixth of the ordinary rates, for no ship of theirs was allowed to sail unless first app rove d sea- worthy. Their ship stores never spoiled or afforded subject of complaint ; in fact, no bad provisions were offered to their vessels, for it was well known that they would previously be inspected. If emi grant vessels were compelled to adopt similar salutary arrange ments, they would no longer hear the just complaints of poor passengers respecting the deficient quantity or deteriorated quality of their provisions. Mr. BARNARD suggested'the propriety of prohibiting the employment of vessels in the emigrant service that were twenty-two years old. Mr. WARBURTON strongly objected to the restriction. It would act as a premium on the building of a bad class of vessels, designed not to last even twenty years. It would be much safer to trust to the character of each vessel on Lloyd's List. Mr. HUME recommended the adoption of the practice of Government, which caused a strict inspection of vessels that offered to take troops abroad, and suggested that no vessel should be allowed to take passengers on board unless similarly inspected and approved. The age of vessels could never be a satisfactory guide. He had sailed very safely in a ship seventy two years old. Mr. THORNHILL complained of the clause restricting the export of spirits in emigrant vessels. He thought a cargo in pipes or hogsheads as safe as one in bales. An Hon. MEMBER stated that he had known cases where the captains had taken out a large stock of spirits, apparently for exportation, but really to sell to the passengers for their own profit. In cases where the passengers mutinied, and took the controul of the vessel into their own hands the presence of such a stock was particularly dangerous. Sir G. GREY thought that the only practicable to prevent these evils was to prohibit the export of any spirits, in vessels fitted out to take passengers. Mr. HUME had no objection to impose a penalty on mas ters or mates who should sell any spirits to emigrants on a voyage, but he did not think it just to limit the owners' right to ship what cargo he pleased. After a few other observations the Bill then went through Committee, and the Report was ordered to be taken into con sideration on Wednesday next. The House resumed, and On ,the motion of Mr. H AWE S, the House went into Com mittee on the LOAN SOCIETIES BILL. The Bill went through the Committee. SAVINGS' BANKS. The Savings' Bank Bill was read a' send time, and or. dered to be committed. ROMAN CATHOLIC MARRIAGES BILL. The Roman Catholic Marriages (Ireland) Bill went through a Committee, and was afterwards reported .. to the House. INNS AND ALEHOUSES BILL. The Inns and Alehouses Bill went through a Committee. MERCHANT SEAMEN'S BILL. On the motion for going into Committee on the Hull Mer chant Seamen's Fund Bill, Mr. BETHEL moved as an amendment, that the Bill be committed that day six months. He proposed this amendment on the ground that there was a clause in the Bill, which gave to the Hull Trinity House the disposal of the Fund. Sir G. CLERK objected to the taking away of the manage.. ment of the Fund from the Hull Trinity House. Mr. L ABOUCHE RE saw no reason to depart in this case from the general principle, that those who contribute to any fund should have some control over it. Mr. BAINE S supporred the motion. Sir M. W. RIDLEY opposed it. After a few words from Mr. HUME, Lord SANDON, and one or two Hon. Members, the Gallery was cleared for a division, but the amendment was not pressed, Some clauses of the Bill were agreed to. The Chairman reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again. The report of the Capital Punishments Bill was received. PRISONERS' COUNSEL BILL. Mr. EWART moved the Order of the Day for the House going into Committee on the Prisoners' Counsel Bill. The question being put, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL expressed his approbation of the Bill. It was his opinion that in cases of felony, mis demeanor, and high treason, prisoners should be allowed coun sel. All were now agreed that the time had come when this experiment must be tried. The scandal of refusing Counsel to prisoners could no longer be suffered to remain. __ _ An Hon. MEMBER - opposed the Bill, and contended that the objects proposed would not be attained by it. From his experience of many years on circuit, he could say that in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, no speech was made by the Counsel for the prosecution in cases of minor felony. It was seldom or never done, except in cases of arson, rape, or murder. He considered that it was the duty of the Judge to look after the interests of the prisoner, and to see that justice was done him. The present Bill would be the cause of hav ing great injustice done towards prisoners. The remarks he had just made were intended for the benefit of prisoners. If Courts were multiplied, the present Bill might be introduced, but until they were, and until Judges had more time, the Bill would be totally inoperative. The present Bill would tend to double the expenses attendant on the administration of jus tice, and the whole of the time of the Courts would be oc cupied with the speeches of Counsel. The title of the Bill ought to be altered, and it ought to be called a " Bill to give Prisoners to Counsel."—( A laugh.) Mr. C. FE RG US SON had never heard any thing in the shape of argument to prove that prisoners ought not to have Counsel except in cases of life and death. He had seen pri soners suffer because their cases were not properly explained to the Jury, and it was time that the present system should be put an end, to, and that prisoners should be allowed Counsel in cases of felony. Mr. BL A CKB UR NE said that in the northern circuit he had always seen Counsel open the case for the prisoner, and if the practice was different in the midland circuit, it should be altered and made the same. It ought not to be left to the prosecutor to say whether the prisoner was to be defended or not. He contended that the little time of the Courts would bo taken up if the Bill were permitted to pass. More time was lost now through the necessity of the Counsel putting questions to give the Jury a better Idea of the circumstances of cases, and the present Bill, in nine cases out of ten, would be the cause of a saving of time. In the course of his practice he always found that misdemeanours occupied less time than felo nies. In burglaries, for instance, many minute circumstances might arise that it would be necessary for Counsel to explain to the Jury, and in which the prisoner required to have Counsel more than in cases of assault, in which punishment might not amount to more than a fine of five shillings. He would give his most cordial assent to the Bill. Mr. POULTER wished that the prosecutor and the pri soner should be placed on an equal footing. The chief ques tion was, which was the best method of doing so. What he would propose was that the prisoner's Counsel should address the Jury in all cases in which the prosecutor's Counsel had exercised such a right. In civil cases much injustice was now down, and a great part of the time at Westminster Hall was taken up on questions being raised as to whether judgments were right or wrong. He had not known any case of hard ship, or of any one being innocently convicted from want of Counsel. Mr. 0' C 0 NNE L L—l recollect one though, and I mean to state it to the House. Mr. POUL TE R--There might have been, but that arose rather from the infirmity in judgment to which all human beings are liable, than from want of Counsel. Speeches would not save prisoners, and he begged to exclude cases in Ireland from being adduced to prove that they would; neither would he take, in the present instance, the Hon. and Learned Mem ber for Dublin as a witness. There were errors in the Bill, and he hoped the House would agree to the amendment of the Hon. Member for Somersetshire. Mr. SHAW said that the question was not whether pri soners were to have Counsel, but whether Counsel were to make speeches for them. No one advantage was now denied to prisoners that would be given to them by the proposed Bill. His practical objection to the principle of the Bill arose from his feeling that it would call into existence an inferior class of legal practitioners, who would do prisoners more mis chief than good. The practice in Ireland was similar to what it was in this country, and the law there showed the same anxiety to do justice to prisoners that it did in England. He objected to the Bill, because in practice it would not be so be neficial to prisoners as the present law. Speeches of Counsel in ten cases out of eleven would not do any good to the cases of prisoners. He wished the prosecutor and the prisoner to be placed on the same footing. If the proposed measure tended to create respectable and intelligent Counsel his objections to it would be diminished. Mr. C. BULLER thought that his Hon. Friend (Mr. Poulter) had not brought all his recollection to bear on the case when he said that he knew of no modern Jury that had convicted prisoners innocently. He would not go back to an cient times, but he would mention a case that came within tke recollection of every one at all connected with the metropolis. Mr. Sheriff Wylde, during his shrievalty, had saved no less than five persons under conviction, and who had been inno cently convicted for want of Counsel.—(Hear, hear.) He was of opinion that prisoners would not lose if they were allowed to have professional men to defend them.—( Hear.) Speaking from his experience on the Western Circuit, he could state that Counsel fer the prosecution made speeches only in the most complicated cases. But it was in those very cases that the speeches told most against the prisoner, for while every littl e f ac t was p u t t oge th er an d g i ven t o th e Jury in a certain light by the prosecutor's Counsel, he had no right to rebut those inferences and conclusions by a similar state ment on the part of his advocate. He was convinced that the real objection entertained by Judges and Chairmen of Quarter Sessions against the removal of this legal anomaly was their anticipation of a great waste of time by the speeches of the Counsel. It was, however, his opinion that by permitting those speeches much less time would be consumed, and such was the opinion of the Honourable and Learned Mamber for Huntingdon (Mr. Pollock.)_ ( Hear, hear.) Counsel now endeavoured to address the Jury by the medium of cross-examination. He recollected one case in which a Counsel was for a quarter of an hour engaged in cross-examining a witness as to the point whether or not he had seen a dog run out of a house before the prisoner was said to have stolen a watch from the parlour. A friend said to him (Mr. Buller) in surprise, " Surely he is not going to charge the dog with the robbery." His (Mr. Buller's) impression was that the attempted defence was that the man had gone into the house to drive out the dog, and that by some accident the watch fell into his pocket.—( A laugh.) If the prisoner's Counsel had had to make a speech he would not possibly have set up so absurd a defence, and consequently have wasted so much time by cross-examination. Mr. O'C ONN EL L said that he had frequently been obliged to explain, by the medium of a long cross-examination, a point which could have been stated to the Jury in three sentences. The Learned Recorder opposite had declared it was not for the interest of prisoners that their Counsel should be allowed to address the Jury, for they might by chance employ unskilful barristers ; but might not the prosecutor employ incompetent men, and was it likely that the prisoner and his friends would fail in their exertions to seek out the most talented and expe rienced advocates ? At one time the admission of evidence for prisoners was objected-against on the ground that a Jury never convicted but on demonstration of guilt, and that the balancing of evidence by the Judge would frequently be der l4 mental to the prisoner's case. That objection was put on one side, and was now as justly ridiculed as he hoped would speel be the objections to giving prisoners' Counsel the proPes liberty. An HON. MEMBER said he had no objection to prisoners' Counsel addressing the Jury in capital cases, but in petty hit'' ceny trials he thought it would be most inexpedient. Mr. GOULBURN considered the grand objection to tbe, proposition to be this. It would not be denied that in crimin l ?, cases the attainment of truth was the chief object ; but Counsel were allowed to argue every point, and to make th e ir own statements of the case, the display of legal ingen uity rather than the development of truth would be the cons& quence. This was known to be the fact in cases of tnigl e ; meanor, in which prisoners' Counsel frequently kept bac k their evidence, and trusted the acquittal of their client to the power of their eloquence. As to the right at present sessed by the prosecuting Counsel, be had seldom bear controverted that it was the practice of the profession never to exceed a simple unvarnished statement of the facts they in' tended to prove. Dr. L USHINGTON said that the hardship i n dicted t e n prisoners by den 3 ing their Counsel a right of a ddressing W.: Jury had attracted considerable attention so long back e l 1805. He remembered that on one occasion thirty-one P . ; soners were convicted upon certain evidence, and sentence", e execution. A few days after other prisoners were, upon very same evidence, found not guilty—the consequence; which was, of course, a pardon to the thirty-one. At be Admiralty Sessions he laboured for three hours to make t.,h Jury acquainted, through his mode of cross-examination, ri g _ certain indispensable points, which they were wholly unable we comprehend. His efforts were vain, and the prisoners W et acquitted only on a point of law. Mr. SINCL AIR thought that prisoners and prosec ute 1 should at least be put on an equal footing. Mr. S. TA LFOURD observed that the candour and sr parent artlessness of a statement made by a prosecurl Counsel was more insidious and more powerfully affected r minds of a Jury than a set speech, in which the skill and ill e ; genuity of the Barrister might be readily discerned. In O A proved by circumstantial evidence, the prosecuting Cou ll , made his own statement of the facts, and drew upon the nul l of the Jury a well grouped picture, the effect of which 11 unconnected facts elicited by the prisoner's Counsel in cre ss i : examination could destroy or weaken. How was it pos s ' b f , - to make known to a Jury the prisoner's case, and the in rences which he drew, except by the address of Counsel? be • An Hon. MEMBER would undertake to say that if proposition were agreed to, the business at the West Rid" Sessions would never be got through. Mr. JACKSON was satisfied that, in circumstantial cas e :! the prisoners' Counsel ought to be allowed to address the The SPEAKER then left the Chair, and the House went in Committee. Mr. A. SANDFORD moved that the end of the first c lB _, L use the following provision be added, " Provided, neverth el 7, that in cases of felony, unless the Counsel against the prisneroe shall have made a speech in the prosecution, the Counsel !,;, the prisoner shall not address the Jury in defence of such P'' Boner." After a few words from the Attorney-General, 1g, 5 1, O'Connell, C. Fergusson, and Trevor, the House des' The numbers were— For the amendment Against it Majority for the clause On the next clause being read, to the effect that " d el 6/sel before Magistrates prisoners should not be allowed Co A 0 unless by the Magistrates' permission," an amendme?Lte moved in these words :—" Except in cases where ?defi e o have summary jurisdiction," the Committee divided, w there appeared— For the amendment Against it The Chairman gave a casting vote against the mow' and the original clause was agreed to. air The House resumed, the other orders of the day posed of, and the House adjourned at a Quarter-past o' Clock. SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE• ADVICE S, ARRIVALS, AND DEPARTURES THE SCOTCH WHARFS.—JUNE 15. Ce A • HOARE'S DUNDEE AND PERTH STEAM-WHARF.—•"A" I-. the Dundee, Perth, and London Shipping Company's stesnl i; ship Dundee, John Wishart commander, arrived at Dn°l`; last Friday morning, at half-past three o'clock, after being tamed seveal hurs by thick weather. HOARE'S r WH o ARF.—Advices : the Kirkaldy and Load e r ° Shipping Company's smack Enterprise James Mann mas t h , sailed from Kirkaldy the 10th inst. ; and the Dundee t L e r wfoor and London Shipping Company's smack Sovereign , Sumners master, sailed from Dundee the 13th inst. ; both this Wharf. Arrivals : the Pilot, John Orenston master, fr°,,, e/ Leith ; the Craig Elachie, Andrew James master, fro; Fraserburg ; and the Banff and London Shipping ComPlig i i smack Union, George Bruce master, from Banff, with gen er ; cargoes. Departures : the Margaret, Robert Bertie mascot for Newcastle ; and the Friends, John Gow master, for , Andrew's; both with general cargoes. DowNE's WHARF.—Advice : the Bridport Shipping Com pany's vessel Busy, R. Angel master, sailed from Bridport the 13th inst. for this Wharf. Arrival : the Peterhead an d Lon don Shipping Company's vessel London, J. Robb master , from Peterhead, with a general cargo. Departure : tbo Bloom, John Haverson master, for Portsoy. CARRON WHARF.—No advices. Arrival: the Totnesg , Henry Hallett master, from Axmouth, with a general cargo . No departures. MILLER'S WHARF.—Advices : the Aberdeen and Londa Shipping Company's smack Duke of Gordon, Robert Dun: can master, arrived at Aberdeen 11th instant; and the Leif o and Edinburgh Shipping Company's smack Superb, Mei° Anderson master, arrived at Leith 11th instant; and the Es" vorite, James Dickson master, sailed from Leith 12th instant , for this wharf. Arrivals : the Aberdeen and London Shipping Company's steam ship City of Aberdeen, Alexander Mori: son Commander, at noon, with a general cargo and a gre a ,! Dumber of passengers. She left Aberdeen at three o'clo ck on Saturday afternoon, and was detained upwards of fifteen hours on the passage in consequence of very thick weather; the same Company's smack Regent, Leslie I,awson Ba er , from Aberdeen ; and the smack Robert Bruce, Wm- Ander son master, from Leith. No departures. LEITH AND GLASGOW WHARF.—No advices. Arrivals the steam-ship Royal Victoria, James Mills Cowm an Leith, with goods and passengers ; and yesterday ( Sunday) th Hawk, John Menzies master, from Leith, with a general care, No departures. .1 and LEITH AND BERWICK WHARF.—Advice : the London Leith Old Shipping Company's smack Lord weiiington James Nicholson master, arrived at Leith the 11 th instantl der, {rota .e Arrivals : the London and Leith Old Shipping ComPs°sYrid smacks the Sir William Wallace, J. Tulloch master, the the Ocean, Henry Johnston master—both from Leith ; and i Berwick Shipping Company's smack Ceres, Wall a° plo dreth master, from Berwick—all with general cargoes' departures. FIRE.—The neighbourhood of Coram-street, B O I; wick-square, was on Monday night, between five end sout thrown into the greatest alarm, owing to a fire breakilA for in the house of Mr. Hill, baker and corn-chandler, whi.., c d es some time burnt with the utmost fury. A very few 111':" s. elapsed before the parish and London Establishment en V; ( 1, from French-horn-yard and Farringdon-street, arrived, a .. . nt , by the assistance rendered the firemen by those on tbc. 9 r o f the fire was most miraculously confined to the destructliber two upper rooms and the roof of the house. This is an? de nt instance of fire from foul chimneys; and had the ac e t he happened in the night, from the nature of the pr ernisqs , inmates would have had the greatest difficulty in escaping v , 1 1 , 1 their lives. Mr. Hill is insured in the Kent and Sun 1" Office. BIR TR S. flircil' On the 14th inst., at Canonbury, Mrs. Wm. Montague of a daughter. of ° On the 17th inst., at Dulwich-hill, Mrs. Henry You n P daugOhter th . Cb el- n e 15th inst., the lady of Frederick Crowder, Esq. , 44 sham Lode Surrey, of a son. • t On the g lith inst., Mrs. James Hayday, of Little Quee n-btree' Lincoln's Inn-fields, of a daughter. Vicar On the 12th inst., the lady of the Rev. H. S. Porklington, of Stebbing, of a son. _____.-----"-- . hae, On Thursday morning, the MARRIED 18th, at All Souls, Mary-le - vto - by the Rev. Mr. Bennett, William Arthur, engineer, Glasfr i ' Ellen Sophia Breten, London. FA" On the 16th inst., at Richmond, Surrey, Henry Brownt, of of the Bombay Civil Service, to Eliza Ann, youngest daug u " the late Sir Harry Verelst Darrell, Bart. On the 15th inst., Mr. J. P. Davis, of Norfolk Chin n , "",, of Strand, to Eliza, eldest daughter of D. I. Davis, Esq., Kingston, Jamaica. 1 ' On the 15th inst., at St. Pancras New Church, J. E. El ivo Esq., solicitor, of Devonport, to Miss Tolcher, of Portland-aq ua ' Plymouth. On the 16th inst., at Trinity Church, Regent's-park, Mr. • Eaton, of Oxford, to Miss Amelia Barnes, of Milford, Staffordsivre DIED. Jobe' On the 17th inst., at the Mansion-House, in his 16th year , youngest son of the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor of London. , e , On the 16th inst., Mrs. Mary Crabtree, of St. Andrew's - 1' u — Regent's-park. On the 14th inst., at Risby, near Bury St. Edmund's, suff°ll‘' Samuel Robinson, Esq., of Finsbury-circus, in his 81st year. On the 16th inst. ; William Conant, Esq., of Twickenham,"il dlesex, aged 51. On the 14th inst., at Leamington, Emily, relict of the late g r. William Yenning, formerly of Milk-street, Cheapside, aged 65 ' dr On the 16th inst., Mr. John Deacon, of St. John-street-rea in his 71st year. relit On the 10th inst., at Clapham, in her 86th year, Margaret , ,. of the late Andrew Van Yzendoorn, Esq., of Mount-row, a t beth, and formerly of Rotterdam. Also, on the 12th inst"' ke r Burton-crescent, aged 23, Frederick H erman Arnold B IC , to Caarten, Esq., grandson of the above, a n d e ld es t son of the a Adrian Herman Bicker Caartens. o f fo r On the 4th inst., aged 68, Mr. Jaques Delprat, a native n Hague, formerly of Oport o , and for upwards of 25 years bookkeer to Messrs: Newman, Hunt, and Co., of London. On the 6th inst., at Knockbartknock, Lochwinnoch, Fulton Esq., in his 95th y ear . On the 12th inst., at Alford, Mr. James Hasnip, aged 8 0 - On the 12th inst., at Bilsby, Mr. John Smith, aged 135. Last week, at Brigg, Mrs. Ann Camm, aged 84. beth On the 9th Mat., at Wing, in her 90th year, Mrs. --- Russell, widow. London: Pr intednd Published by MURDO YOUNG, of Na 112, Strand, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the cool of Middlesex. ROY Aimiii To TitAv] W4.E Chemist, &c Powders for Ginger Beer Water ditto, IS. per doze dozen ; thre( N.B. Be Powders," r others are ge We hav Wray's adve Seidlitz and quality. Hip met with, al TO PH C " Stout Win Fine old d Goed crux Superior o Very curl( Good stow Ditto She' Superior d Genuine I Very Goa Excellent Fine old d Very supe , Marsala, fi Fine old F Old Lisboi Bucellas, West Indi; Old East I Sparkling Clarets .. A b Englishe Rlouls's ce The Best Very GOOl The best I Irish and the Still Patent Br Fine Old Highly Re Bottles, h: thawed whey No Order: No. 8, DEE I day deserve it. The princ should get a aerating these combi COOPER wards of hat' his eng.s.gem To realize vie w of his S WORK, U and fearless FASHION 93, Bishops 4 7, Conduit • Among tt of every den feet and up' Which posse exportation, Annexed 'gashes, &c. t luches. Or any si thAs a plate SUperfiCial under 3 feel Several s upwards in I ._lderable re WIRE by t in all its br for CHIAI PAINTIN in every de elegant tarnufactur of a. solidit3 berzil stock INC. VES and PASS IN the greaten character f ROOM, I quiet to till tabaretts, I of the fabr brussels, I orirairistl 1 Floor.clati seasor downy Fes Hs it and 131aokers, Bedd):l l g , , ] is deterW A regist curing of FURNISI fixtures ap furnished every cons FamiliG ?ASTE, DESIGN with the their orde tio n x`.o ih( With it and t►he v( them, He eontinsati house, 93. BRANCI _ . 'The hi deiip,htful NV, , /sIE, 1 an Lie% 01 tatio,n, ti Tentirel‘Y 'RANCH ctous a 1 4 ALEX. MANUF SAUCE Dishes, Each Fc.reign tnintinen Wilson z sale Oi kgoho Ba Armon, ]Ciol ,zl-str 237, Pa queen's Chew, Howes, . street ; slid Co. 'Garnett, Alaryleb Manche: tent-sti Tama, 88 W o oa, he stree,%; Hor; Messrs.* DaYell, Lion-str Strand; t Ilassho., - ing, as wl dvtcarr $':~;:~ _ 13_ 1 ' 15... IL 19_ 20... 22... 2)... 45... 118... 40...