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

and principles of the Conservative Administration. And certainly not least in importance was the emphatic declaration made by Sir Robert Peel, first in answer to Lord John Russell, and afterwards confirmed by him in his dexterous and judicious notice of those honourable questionists, Mr. Hume and Mr. Ewart, that he saw no reason in the recent votes of the House of Commons to abandon the helm which has been committed to his trust. He will have the courage to maintain his post, though the weather be somewhat rough, and though the winds do roar not a little about his bark ; for he feels like all brave and honourable men, that such is the time for more strenuous exertion and more con stancy of purpose. But let us, to do him justice, quote his owl words :—" I have not felt it my duty, in consequence of the vote of the other night, to ten der my resignation, and I do intend to persevere in that course which I consider it my duty equally to the King and to the public to pursue ; and, notwithstand ing that vote, to submit to the consideration of the House those measures on which his Majesty's Go vernment have formed their opinion." This declara tion will fill his opponents with dismay, and his friends with confidence ; and now, with the spirit of Reform as his guide, it will be his own fault if he do not suc ceed in winning the sanction of Parliament, and the approbation of the people.—Times. We did not think it possible, even at the present time, when two parties that cordially hate each other have combined for the purpose of preventing the King's Ministers from having a " fair trial," that the virulence of faction should go to such an absurd length as to presume that any Government in this country would dare to maintain a standing army, contrary to the Constitution, after the expiration of the Mutiny Act. Under that Act alone is that code of military law allowed which is absolutely essential to the discip line and subordination of an army, always excepting its barbarous punishments by that degrading and cruel instrument of military torture which we do not believe to be at all necessary for the government of British sole Biers. The answer given by Sir Robert Peel to Lord John Russell last night, when asked by the latter whether the rumour of maintaining a standing army without the sanction of the Mutiny Act was true, was such as might have been expected; Sir Robert Peel stating that he never heard of it, until he heard it from the lips of the Noble Lord himself that evening. Nor do we believe any body else ever heard of it, or that Lord John Russell regarded it as any thing more than - such pure fiction as the Bishop of Exeter had formerly exposed in the too memorable correspondence with himself. Here we cannot but observe that when, Under the Whig Administration, it was proposed, on Moving the annual Mutiny Act, to reform that Act so far as to abolish the disgusting practice of military flogging, the Whig Ministers —ay, the reforming Whigs, and Lord John Russell himself, the Pay-. master of the Forces—opposed that reform, ansl thereby left British subjects liable to more cruel punishment than can be inflicted on negro apprenticed slaves, or than can be inflicted on brute beasts, without subjecting the flagellator of horse or donkey to the penalties of Martin's Act. Perhaps now that the Whigs are out of office, they may find their huma nity as well as their patriotism return upon them, and so become reformers as to military punishment once more !—Morning Herald. Whatever may have been the impression produced last night by the speech of Sir Robert Peel on the House of Commons—whatever his determination to " persevere" in what he deems to be his " duty," but which others would justly deem to he his disgrace— there arc other fiery trials awaiting him, which he will have no small difficulty in getting over. Two very important questions stand for discussion next week— the one is the malt tax, and the other the Irish Church. The Marquis of Chandos brings the first under the consideration of the House, and .Mr. Ward the se cond. On both Ministers are again destined to be defeated, provided none of those professing reform principles play false. Our fears of treachery are chiefly on the question of the Irish Church Some sinister rumours on this subject have reached us. We could mention the names of two or three sus pected " wolves in sheep's clothing ;" but as we hope the suspicions are groundless we forbear at pre sent. If the members to whom we refer do in this case betray their constituents and the country, their greatest enemies could wish them no severer punish ment than to see their speeches on the hustings ap pended to their votes. Never was there a stronger contrast than will be exhibited between their professions and conduct. Even should there be two or three in stances of treachery, Ministers will be beaten ; and as the Standard said, in reference to another contest, " well beaten too." Still Sit Robert Peel will not, according to his present resolves, resign. He is to go on at all hazards until the question of the supplies is settled. What may be his eventual determination we know not, nor, indeed, does he himself ; but we vouch for this fact, and it is of importance that the country should know it, that his present intention is, in the event of being refused the supplies, again to dissolve parliament. And we are further assured, that he is already armed with precedents to urge in justification of the daring expedient.—Morning Advertiser. The rumours of the defection of the Duke of Wel lington, Lord Aberdeen, and some other kindred spirits . from the Peel Ministry, are not confirmed. As there is no quarter from which aid sufficient to enable Sir Robert to carry on the Government can be ob tained, it has not been thought worth while, we sup pose, to part company for the short period Ministers can at farthest remain in office. The answer of Sir Robert Peel to the questions put last night by Lord John Russell, indicated a determination on the part of Ministers to retain office as long as possible. " I have not felt it my duty (said the Right Hon. Baronet), in consequence of the vote of the other night, to ten der my resignation (a burst of cheers from all the Mi nisterial Benches), and I do intend to persevere (cheers) in that which I consider I owe to his Ma jesty and to the public, notwithstanding that vote, by submitting to the consideration of the House those measures on which the members of the present Go vernment have formed their opinions, and which are alluded to in the Speech from the Throne" (cheers). The question is not properly what Ministers intend to do, but what they will be able to do. The House of Com mons, by the Amendment to the Address, pronounced the dissolution of the last Parliament an injurious inter _ ruption to the progress of Reform, and expressed, also, dissatisfaction with the extent of the Reforms an nounced in the Speech from the Throne. "As far (said Lord John Russell) as the opinion of the House conveys a censure, it has fixed that censure upon the dissolution of the last Parliament by Minis ters." The House of Commons can terminate, when it pleases, the career of Ministers. Allusions have often been made to the struggle between Mr. Pitt and the House of Commons in 1784, but the cases of 1784 and 1835 are by no means parallel. There is a river in Macedon and a river in Wales. We had a House of Commons in 1784, and we have now a House of Commons ; but in 1784 a majority of the Commons was returned by boroughmongers ; but the Reform Bill has transferred power from the borough mongers to the middle classes. When the Times, therefore, tells us that " Mr. Pitt had to encounter a far more decided majority, varying from 30 to 20 votes, in a much less numerous House, and with a much thinner attendance, during a period moreover of 'above three months, and after, perhaps, a dozen divi sions ; yet that prudent as well as resolute Minister. never thought of resigning, nor did he dissolve Parlia ment, until after he had put the Opposition so flag rantly in the wrong, that the country anticipated the wishes of the Minister, and returned a majority in his favour, which crushed for years all the hopes of adverse faction"—our contemporary forgets that the opposition to Mr. Pitt was not in the country, but in the indi vidual Members of a particular House of Commons. The course which Mr. Fox and Mr. Burke had pur sued with regard to India, was exceedingly unpopular in the country, as well as obnoxious to the King ; and Mr. Pitt knew that an election would instantly give him a large majority in the House of Commons. Any one who chooses to consult Bishop Wat son s Memoirs, - and other publications which throw light, on the spirit of that time, will find that -the nation was strongly excited in favour of Mrs Pitt. But - what is the case now ? The Opposition, so far from outrunning the wishes of the nation, is far from keeping pace with it. This is so notorious, that the journals which support Ministers are constantly complaining of the control exercised by the constituencies over their re presentatives. In the case of the Speakersbip, no thing but the certain knowledge that their constituents would never forgive either a vote in favour of Sir Charles Sutton, or the declining to vote, could coun teract the great personal influence of the former Speaker. The present Ministers are stronger in Parliament than they arc anywhere else. The Tories were driven from all places where corruption and intimidation could not be brought into play. Their representatives are not the representatives of the people, but of Tory land lords, and corrupt Corporations. -The only large towns in which they have been successful, are Liverpool, Bristol, and Norwich—places in which the independent voters are swamped by necessitous and corrupt freemen. No comparison can, therefore, be more misplaced ,than that between 1784 and 1835. The dissolution of 1784 was hailed by the nation ; a dissolution now would irritate the nation, and add greatly to the numbers of the Reformers in the House of Commons. Ministers and their sup porters ought not to blow hot and cold in the same breath. They complain of the subjection under which Members are kept by their constitu ents, and yet they talk of reaction. If there be a reaction, it is not assuredly in favour of Ministers, but against them. But their reaction is of a piece with all the rest of their conduct, false and fraudulent. Mr. Hume last night observed, with reference to the case of Mr. Pitt,-that he " indeed had a considerable majority against him and persevered, but then the people were with him. That, give me leave to say, is not the case now. No doubt the Honourable Mem bers on the other side are under a delusion upon this point, but as regards my constituents, I will venture without hesitation to say, that three out of four arc op posed to the present Ministers." Lord John Russell did not ask the direct question he had proposed to put to Sir Robert Peel with regard to dissolution, as he inferred from the King's Answer to the Address that it was not the intention of Ministers to interrupt the course of the House ; but he observed, " I do think that we should not go far with the concession of sup plies, or coin:nit ourselves incautiously by placing the public money in the hands of Ministers, before we have an explanation from them, after the adoption of the late Amendment, of the course it is their intention to pursue." Sir Robert professed that he had never diiectly or indirectly countenanced the rumours of a dissolution, and never even discussed the case hypo thetically. If a Ministry can retain office, in spite of a majority of the House of Commons, it is absurd to speak of constitutional right ? Ministers may intend what they please, but, thank God, the decision of the question how long they shall remain in office is not with them, but with the House of, Commons. The. House will, no doubt, assert its dignity by stopping supplies, and refusing to pass a certain measure ne cessary to their existence. George 111., in 1784, threatened abdication and retreat to Hanover. The ques tion, however, was not between the King and the na tion, but between the King, with one section of the Aristocracy, and with the nation, and another sec tion of the Aristocracy. The course was then ob vious and easy—a dissolution. But a dissolution has already been tried by the present Ministry, and the returns to the Parliament give a majority against them. We really cannot understand in what consti tutional way they can protract their existence beyond the period when the House of Commons chooses to terminate it. But rumours of measures that never en tered the head of either George 111. or Mr. Pitt are now afloat. An allusion to them was made by Lord John Russell. After alluding to the ru mours of an intention of Ministers to endeavour to wear out and vex the country by repeated dissolutions, his Lordship added, " There have been rumours even of a more extraordinary nature—that should Ministers think it advisable to recommend his Majesty to dissolve this Parliament before the Mutiny. Act shall have been passed, they would consider them selves authorized to maintain a standing army in tune of peace, contrary to . the known Constitution of the country, and without the consent of Parliament." Sir Robert Peel professed that he had heard of this rumour for the first time from the lips of the Noble Lord. The rumour, for all that, has been very confidently circu lated, with the view, no doubt, of trying the effect of it. We do not believe that Sir Robert Peel would be a party to any such daring violation of the Constitu tion. But Sir Robert Peel has some associates on whom we could not calculate with• the same confidence. The Government was conducted for three weeks without the Right Honourable Baronet ; and when deviations from the Constitution are contemplated, he may have leave given him to complete his survey of Italy. We are certain that the Tories never will consent either to an effective Municipal Reform, or to such an Ecclesiastical Reform as would be acceptable to the nation ; but this is all of which we are certain: Some of the more daring spirits among them may che rish the intention of governing by means utterly at variance with the Constitution, rather than part with power. However, all this will soon be ascertained. Govern Ministers cannot, with a majority of the Com mons against them. Dissolve they cannot, because the majority would still be greater. They can expect no defection from the Opposition, because the con stituencies are not, like the old Oligarchs and their nominees, to be gained by intrigue. The House of 'Commons will, therefore, fulfil the expectations of the nation, and assert its dignity by bringing matters to an issue which will place Ministers under the neces sity of either resigning or retaining office unconstitu tionally. If they venture on unconstitutional courses, there is spirit enough in the nation to bring the proudest of them to their senses. We are not afraid of the result.—Morning Chronicle. The questions put last night to the Prime Minister by Lord John Russell in the House of Commons, and the answers they received, have considerably disap- j pointed the hopes which the factions opposed to his Majesty's Government had confidently cherished, and somewhat prematurely expressed. The morning organs of the factions summoned with infinite emphasis and pomp a full attendance of their Members, as if some great enterprise was to be achieved, some blow to be struck, deeply injurious to the character and authority of the Government, if not entirely fatal to its existence. But never, certainly, did factions in any State ex perience a more mortifying disappointment. The Opposition mountain heaved and groaned, and la boured, and its throes were consummated and re- warded by a production at once the most diminu tive and unsightly that can be imagined. But this was not the great disaster of the night to the Op position party. It is a party which has often, be fore to-day, made a prodigious noise and done nothing; so that mere failure is too habitual to it to be alto gether intolerable. The disaster of the night to the Opposition was the ease, and grace, and promptitude, and firmness with which the Minister of the King dis posed of its factious questions, and, without any effort or contrivance, by the simple and manly dis charge of his pooper duty, presented to the country an exposition of the views and intentions of the Govern ment, a development of its confidence and strength which placed the pigmy proceeding of the Opposition in a light at once the most offensive and the most ridiculous. The main question—by the Opposition it is felt to be a vital one—which his Lordship thought it proper to ask was, whether the King's Government had sanctioned certain rumours said to have been cur rent as to an intended dissolution of Parliament ? The reply to this was given with singular force and propriety in the very words which Earl Grey, then the chief of a Ministry of which Lord John Russell was a subordinate member, employed on a somewhat similar occasion ; and it was a distinct and positive refusal to supply any explanation as to the intentions of the King's Government with respeet to a contin gent exercise of the Royal prerogative ; however, at the same time, all responsibility for the alleged rumour. Lord John Russell's questions, and the more persevering but not more stringent questions of Mr. Hume to the same end, were answered in a manner which we have no doubt will prove eminently satisfactory to the nation at large, although it was evi dently displeasing to the querists and the party with whom and for whom they act. The answers will be TUE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, MARCH 3, 1835. satisfactory to the nation at large, because they were strictly in unison with the spirit of the Constitution, and 'dictated, indeed, by the plainest rules of pru dence. It 'was displeasing' to. the factions opposed to the King's Government, because these factions are equally regardless of the dictates of prudence and the principles of the Constitution when either present an obstruction to their efforts to force themselves once more into power. Why should Lord John Russell and Mr. Hums have expected that Sir Robert Peel would compromise the King's prerogative, by any de claration as to what he would or would not advise on an emergency which may never arise? We go fur ther even than this, and ask why the present Admi nistration, if they are assailed or interrupted in their Ministerial duty by a factious Opposition, in the House of Commons, should not meet that Opposi tion in the manner in which a factious Opposition in the House of Commons has generally been met ? The Premier, we rejoice to _ say, resolutely and perseveringly refused to give any pledge whatever as to the advice he would give to the Sovereign, or would withhold, in the event of the Opposition conti nuing to obstruct the important business of the nation in the HOuse of Commons, and to oppose a factious resistance to the King's Government. The tongue of Sir Robert Peel was tied ; it is competent, however, to us to express an opinion on the subject upon which he prudently refused to express any. We say boldly, and without hesitation, that it will be the duty of the King's Government to dissolve the present Parliament at the very first moment in which it shall show a de termination to obstruct and embarrass the King's Mi nisters upon any subject whatever. It is in vain that Lord John Russell and Mr. Hume, adopting the very absurd and inapplicable argument of the Morning Chronicle, deprecate such an exer cise of the Royal prerogative, insisting that his Majesty's Ministers ought to be concluded by the last general election, and are bound to acquiesce, without appeal, in the decisions, be they what they may, of the present House of Commons. His Majesty's Minis ters 'cannot, as rational men, or as faithful and zealous servants of the Crown and of the country, surrender political power to the hands of their opponents without having first laid before Parliament some of the measures of improvement which they intend to propose as an earnest of the policy they have determined to adopt, and without, in, the second place, taking the sense of the nation as to the value and efficiency of these measures, and the confidence and support to which their authors are entitled. Every circumstance in the situation of the country concurs to impress upon Ministers the duty of clinging to the helm, which their Sovereign has en trusted to them, to the last possible moment, in manly and resolute defiance of all the efforts of faction to dispossess them. When they accepted office, they pledged themselves to their Sovereign and their coun try, by the clearest implication, to fulfil his duty to time utmost of their power. And it is evident that this duty would be left incomplete by Ministers if they-were to retire from office without. a final appeal to the na tion, after the nation is made fully acquainted with the principles by which they have determined to regulate their official conduct. The last appeal to the people was necessary, because there was no reasonable expec tation that the House of Commons then in existence would afford to the Ministers of the Crown any trial whatever. The next dissolution will be equally ne cessary, should the present House of Commons evince a determination to give to the Ministers of the Crown no other than a mock trial.—Morning Post. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 9. The Earl of SUAFTESBURY sat as Deputy Speaker. The Duke of RICHMOND said he was directed by the Library Committee to report that the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod had communicated to thetn that there was a great want of room for the officers of the house, and they had come to the determination of recommending that the House in which Mr. O'Hanlon resided should be taken for that purpose. On the motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, it was ordered that no petition should be received for a private bill after the 6th of April—nor any report from the Judges on a private bill after the 12th of May. " Lord ELLENBORO UGH brought in a bill of indemnity for the Governor-General and other officers of the East India which was read a first time. The Earl of ROSSLYN presented a petition from the Presbytery of Stirling, complaining of the want of accommo dation in the churches of the Establishment in Scotland. The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from Jos. Sparrow, praying for the appointment of a Committee to in quire into the government of public and private mad-houses. Lord TEYN HAM presented a petition from a parish in Kent, complaining of agricultural distress, and praying for a Committee to enquire into the same. The Earl of SH A FTE SB UR Y presented a petition from a parish in Stirlingshire, in favour of the Church Establish ment. A number of papers were presented from the Tax-office. The Duke of RICHMOND had a petition to present, to which he wished particularly to call the attention of the Go vernment, and rnore particularly that of the noble Lord ( Witarn eliffe). It was from the Clerk of the Peace of the county of Sussex, complaining that that House had called for a return which cost him 701. to make out ; that he had charged it in his bill against the county, but the Magistrates had unanimously agreed that it should be expunged, which was accordingly done; and he said he was afraid to refuse compliance with such an order, in case of being called before the House and sent to Netvgate. They then referred hi m t o th e S ecr etary for the Home Department, who told him that there was no fund from which they could pay him, so that the whole expense fell upon the unfortunate officer. He did not think that that was proper, and hoped that his Noble Friend ( Whaincliffe) • would take some step to alter the law upon the subject. Lord BROUGHAM said he perfectly agreed in all that had fallen from his Noble Friend. The expense of returns called for and made for the public good, ought to be paid from the public funds ; but he was obliged to say that such an appli cation should not be made to the House of Lords. He bad never heard of such an application made to that House. To be sure we lived in very strange times, when the Govern ment were prepared to carry on the government, not with the confidence of the House of Commons but against it, and en tirely by the House of Lords—still it was rather too much to say, even yet, that the House of Lords was to be petitioned for payment of expenses to any individual, and the Commons to be passed over. _ . Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that there was no authority for placing the charge upon the county rate. He could assure the House that there was no wish on the part of his Ma jesty's present Ministers to usurp any of the privileges of the House of Commons, and that they were perfectly ready to leave the whole subject to its consideration. He trusted the Noble Lord would not object to the subject being referred to a select committee. Lord BROUGHAM said, that the House had no funds at its disposal, unless a subscription was entered into. After a few observations from Lord ROSSLYN the petition was withdrawn. PROXIES-THE JEWS. , The Marquis of WESTMINSTER, after stating that it was his intention at present not to bring forward his motions with respect to voting by proxy and the emancipation of the Jews, wished that the Noble Duke ( Richmond) would consent to the names of the six Bishops being removed whom he had proposed should constitute part of the Committee to inquire into the expediency of taking unnecessary oaths. The Duke of RICHMOND could not consent to the re moval of the names of the six Bishops, especially when he re collected that there were no less than 24 Lay Peers, who formed part of that Committee. The House then adjourned. HOUSE OF CO7II4IONS, MANCH 2. The SPEAKER took the Chair at ten minutes to four o'clock. Several petitions were presented, but from the low tone of voice in which the Members who presented them spoke, we could not ascertain their purport. A messenger from the India House presented returns of certain compensations granted to persons lately belonging to the Company's Maritime Service. Messengers from the Audit Office, the Tax Office, and the Bank of England, presented papers, which were laid on the table. Mr. EMERSON TENNENT presented petitions from the town of Belfast, praying for leave to bring in a Bill to make a road from Belfast to Dublin. Referred to the Com mittee. Mr. BAINES presented a petition from Leeds, praying for leave to bring in a Bill to light that town with Gas. Mr. PL UM P'rRE moved for a copy of the minutes of the court-martial upon Captain Aitchison.—Ordered. Colonel LEITH HAY gave notice, that on the 19th of March he should move for the re-appointment of the Com mittee upon Private Bills. Mr. BUCKINGHAM gave notice, that on the 9th April he should move for leave to bring in a bill for the better regulation of the sale of beer, &c. ; and on the same day he should move for leave to bring in a Bill to authorize parish-officers throughout England and \Vales to take measures to provide publi c walks and public institutions for the use of the me c h an i cs , an d t o afford them the means of social enjoyment after labour, without having recourse to taverns or beer-houses. Mr. J. JERVIS moved for copies of the correspondence that had taken place between the sheriffs of the city and the sheriffs of the county of Chester, with the Secretary of State for the Home Department, relative to the execution of the two men for the murder of Mr. Ashton, together with the opinions of his Majesty's Attorney cad Solicitor-G e n era l t h ereon . The ATTORNEY-GENERAL believed that it was per fectly well known what the opinions of his Majesty's law officers were, but he believed that it never was usual to lay upon the table of that House the actual opinion of the law officers of the Crown. He had no objection to the other part of the motion. ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS. The SPEAKER, having read the answer of his Majesty to the Address presented on Saturday by this House, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose to move that the thanks of the House be presented to his Ma jesty for his most gracious Answer to the Address. Mr. HUME said he scarcely thought the Address called for thanks. In respect of Corporation Reform, the answer was silent, and he was Lot pleased to take any notice of the amendment. He therefore did not see that they were called upon to offer thanks for an answer which in fact was no answer at all. He believed such a course was customary, and that was the only ground he saw for adcpting it on the present occasion. He did hot wish to' offer any disrespect ; but he must say, that he wished that communications between the Throne and that House, and from that House to the Throne, should be intelligible, and to some purpose. If it was mere rou tine, he had nothing more to say, but he would not commit himself by saying what was not correct. He did not think there was any ground for thanks, and therefore he could not concur in it unless upon the understanding that it was a mere matter of form. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that as a compliance in the vote of thanks was a uniform custom, be could not help thinking that it was the unanimous feeling of the House that there was nothing in the answer to induce the House to dissent from that custom.---( Hear, hear.) Mr. HUNIE said it was not for what was in the answer, but • for what was omitted, that he objected to it. As, however, it was a mere matter of form he would not seek to change that practice, or to disturb the unanimity of the House. The motion was then a,greed to. NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT. Tho CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose to move that the part of his Majesty's speech which referred to the burning of the two Houses of Parliament, be read. On that part of the speech being read by the clerk, the Right Hon. Baronet said that there seemed to be a wish on the part of the Hquse, almost unanimo lily, if not entirely so, to recognise the propriety of the cot,se pursued-by his Ma jesty on the destruction of the two 111itises of Parliament, in giving directions for the- temporary accommodation of the two Houses. He referred to the Jlouse to adopt the course most likely to suit their convenience and that of the public. He rose to move that a Committee 'should be appointed to take the matter into consideration, and that that Committee should be composed of men of businesS most likely to give the subject the best consideration. He hoped the House would be satisfied with the constitution of that Committee, and they should not have motions continually proposing to make additions to it. A committee would be appointed by the House of Lords, for the purpose of taking this part of the subject, w hick related to the accommodation of that House, into consideration. He had no doubt some means might be found by which the two committees might be brought together : the regulations might be adopted on their joint recommendation. He ought perhaps to state, that his Majesty had thought it advisable, to call the attention of an eminent architect to the re-building of the houses of Parliament. These provisions, however, were made during the late administration, still he might add, that his Majesty's present Government entirely coincided in the course which had been pursued. It was thought advisable that seine person should be appointed, but if - the present con stituted Committee should think differently, he could assure the House that nothing had passed which could at all interfere with the operations of the C.-.,mmittec. Mr. HUME wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet whe ther it would be competent for the House itself to con sider the site upon which the new buildings were to be erected ; he thought considerable importance wa attached to this part of the subject, as to whether the site, was to be regulated by the provisional Committee, or by the House ; for his own part, he thought it ought to be decided by the I-louse itself, and he therefore wished to ask the Right Honourable Baronet whether that resolution would be passed without r,tference to the site. He knew, as having been a member of the late Committee formed for the purpose of considering the propriety of erecting new Houses of Parliament, that many Members were anxious to change their present situation. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—This difference proceeds on this assumption that the ancient site of the Howes should be maintained. His own opinion was that the present offered the most commodious position, but whatever might be the opinion of the provisional committee, or the House at large, he did not think that this particular question would interfere with the appointment of the present Committee. Mr. ROBINSON was anxious to know whether the en largement of the present site was in contemplation ? The motion was then agreed to. MINISTERIAL EXPLANATIONS. Lord JOHN RUSSELL, rose to ask some questions of the Right Hon. Baronet in respect to a dissolution of Parlia ment, which it was rumoured it was the intention of his Majesty's Ministers to recommend, if the present House of Commons showed a disposition to adopt different measures from those brought forward. It has (said the Noble Lord) called for measures of a more decided character than the Ministers had advised his Majesty to recommend in his speech from the throne, and the rumour is, that the only measure which was to be adopted is now considered to be unnecessary, though the Ministers felt that the . late vote of the House was a censure upon them.—( Hear, hear.) I never knew any Ministry to stand, with respect to the house of Commons, in such an extraordinary situation before, and I thought - it ne cessary to call the attention of the House, before we went into any Committee of Supply whatever, to the rumours which pre vailed. I want to ask whether the Right Hon. Baronet has given any authority to those rumours ? Whether his Majesty's Mi nisters, having advised his Majesty to appeal to the sense of his people, will .not be content, if. the House is adverse to any views and measures brought forward by the Right Honourable Baronet,—whether they will appeal again to the sense of the people, and endeavour to wear out and vex the country by repeated elections?—( llear, hear, hear.) There have been rumours of a more extraordinary na ture—that if we came to a case in which it should be thought advisable to dissolve the Parliament before the passing of the Mutiny - Act, that the Right Hon. Baronet would feel authorised in maintaining a standing army I , a . a time of peace.—( Hear, hear, and laughter from the :Ministerial side.) I admit that the rumour is in itself absurd, and though it may have entered into the heads of some sanguine persons to advise his Majesty to such a course, a great deal of the force of such a suspicion is dispelled by the answer of his Majesty to the Ad dress. After quoting that Address, the Noble Lord observed —now, Sir, I cannot believe that they (the Ministers) have given any such notice, or that they have a dissolution of Par liament at all in contemplation. I have therefore changed my mind on the subject, and shall not ask the question which on a former night, I intimated to be my intention to propose to the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, when he should make his motion for the Supplies ; but judging from the answer that his Majesty has been graciously pleased to give to the amended Address, I infer that it is not the intention of Ministers to interrupt the House in the forwarding of those measures which they think necessary for the welfare of the State, and which, as the chief council of the nation, they may deem it conducive to its interests to offer. With regard to the general supplies I do not intend, as I have before observed, to put any formal questions to the Right Honourable Baronet, but at the same time, while I retrain from doing so, I do think that we ought not to go into the details of that subject incau tiously, or until, at least, full explanations are given by Mini sters, after the success of the amended address, of the course 1 ---- they inte n d to - pursue. I do not agree with the Hon. Member for Middlesex (Mr. Hume), th'at his Majesty's answer, in reply to the Amcnded Address, ought to have stated any thing definite as to the intentionof ministers regardingcorporation and other reforms, but I am of opinion that they must state their intentions as to the measures of reform they pro mise to introduce,—especially, they are bound now to give those explanations, as the conversations which are rumoured to have recently taken place in the old Palace of West minster tend to increase the doubts heretofore enter tained of the sincerity of Ministers as to Corpo ration Reform—or that they wish to give to the people that cz.ntroul over these Bodies that they formerly exercised, and that ought to be, most indu bitably, at once restored to them.—(hear, hear.) My Honourable and Learned Friend the Member for Edin burgh ( Sir John Campbell) has given a notice, that in case the Government do not bring forward a measure of muni cipal Reform, he shall propose a bill on the sulject. I trust my Honourable and Learned Friend will persevere in his motion, and that, whatever his Majesty's Ministers may do, he will carry into efLset the wishes of the peonle. With regard to the queition of the Irish Church, the Right Honourable Gentleman oppoLite ( Sir R. Peel) stated, in answer to a question proposed to him on the first night's de bate, that his Majesty's Ministers were determined to lay the report of the Commissions on the table of the House, but that they might not expect any thing from them in the way of a motion. Having made no motion on the subject, it is my intention, as soon as the report shall be laid on the table, to bring the question formally before the House. I shall then allude to the reforms which it was the intention of his Majesty's late Government to introduce. Having stated what our course will be upon these two questions, in order that the Right Hon. Gentleman may answer the call which will, I doubt not, be made upon him, I shall now leave it to him to state the course the Government intend to pursue in the new and extraordinary circumstances in which it is placed. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said—Sir, it is always my wish to give to th e H ouse as unreserved an explanation of the course which I mean to pursue as a public man, as it is consistent with my duty as a Minister; and I do not require any stated time to give an answer to the questions of the Noble Lord—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") I have not felt it my duty, in consequence of the vote of the other night, to tender my resignation to his Majesty__( Loud cheering from the Ministerialists)—and I do intend to perse vere—( Renewed cheering)—in that which I consider my duty, and which is (notwithstanding that vote) to submit to the consideration of the House those measures upon which his Majesty's Government have formed their opinions. Sir, I am aware that the House of Commons did, by a small majority _(Loud cries of " Hear, hear,")—in an especially full House--a majority of 309 to 302 —pass a censure on the King's Government, but did that majority of seven imply a difference of opinion as to the necessity of a dissolu tion of Parliament, and an apprehension which I think was unfounded, that measures which would be conducive to the general interest will be interrupted by the appeal which his Majesty has made to the sense of his people?—( Hear, hear.) I did not believe that that majority which came to the vote on the subject of the amendment did mean to imply an opinion that that vote was tantamount to a vote for the removal of his Majesty's Ministers.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") I know that there are many who concurred in that vote, who will admit that I should have been acting inconsistently with my duty, if I considered that that vote implied an opinion that it was my duty to retire from the post t,) which his Majesty had called me. Some Hon. Members voting for that amendment declared ' that such was their opinion. With respect. 6 the Irish Church, (for I shall take the several questions of the Noble Lord in the order which their importance merits, not in the order in which they were put to me), I do intend to present to this House the Report which may be made by the Commis sioners of Public Instruction, appointed by the late Govern ment. When I came into office, I ascertained that that Commission had applied itself sedulously to the duties that had been pointed out to it. I ascertained that they had com pleted their inquiries in one half the parishes of Ireland ; that they were proceeding to make them in the others, and his Ma jesty's servants did not consider it consistent with their duty, the Commission having been appointed by his Majesty, to interfere with the progress of it.—( Hear, hear.) On the contrary, not committing myself to the adoption of any of its sentiments, or the principle of any of the measures which it might pro pose, I do intend to lay the Report upon the table of the House. The Noble Lord has intimated an opinion that we would not found any measure upon the suggestions of this Commission. The Noble Lord misapprehended me.—( Hear.) What I said was this—that I still remained of opinion that ecclesiastical pro perty ought not to be diverted from actual ecclesiastical purposes. —( Cheers.) That was the principle which I always have maintained, and on which I am still disposed to act, but I did not preclude myself by that declaration from adopting any measures recommended by that Commission, if I approved of them.—( Hear.) Besides the subject of the corporation commission, I know not to what conversations the Noble Lord alluded. I speak only for myself, and I mean when the report of the Corporation Commission shall be presented and con cluded (which I hope it will be in a short time, as we were led to expect it at the conclusion of the last month,) when that. report and evidence shall be laid upon the table, I mean to give its suggestions and evidence my best consideration. I assure the Noble Lord that I have no lurk ing prejudices in favour of the abuses of corporations.—( Hear.) I cannot conceive how I can have any interest in maintaining- the abuses of corporations ; on the contrary, I can feel that both I and the public have a deep interest in putting an end to those abuses; but it would be inconsistent with ray duty, as a Minister of the Crown, looking at the report of the Committee of 183.3, of which you, Sir, (addressing the Speaker) was Chairman. and which stated that the remedies suggested would suit small Corporations, but would not suit great ones, and that the most popular Corporations were net the most pure, I should not be enabled to form a sound conclusion as to the most natural course I ought to pursue, until I had an oppor tunity of seeing the report of the Com m ission e rs, of weighing the evidence, and b of ascertaining what abuses really exist. I have the honour of presiding over a corporation, and I am sure they will give their unanimous assent, if the result of the Com mission prove that abuses exist, to any improvement that should be suggested, and I trust that I am not committing any dere liction of the trust confided in me when I say, • that on the part of my own Corporation there is a general disposition to concur in the same course. I am sure that the Noble Lord will scarcely charge me with any intention of blinking Corpora tion Reform. I repeat, I have no interest in doing so— my only wish is that I should know the nature and extent of the remedy, before I commit myself to it.—( Hear, hear.) With respect to the last point, but in fact the most important with which I was threatened on a former day, but from which the Noble Lord has now receded, —( Loud cheers from the Ministerial benches)— it is possible in the interval the Noble Lord may have referred to a question put in April, 1831, to Lord Grey. There were then rumours very prevalent of an intention to dissolve Parliament, and with good reason, for the question was put on the 21st of April, and on the 22d Parliament was dissolved.--(Loud laughter. ) Lord Wharncliffe then said, that as allusion had been made to the subject he wished to ask the Noble Lord (Grey), whether there was any truth in those rumours, and whether the Noble Lord had advised his Majesty to dissolve Parlia ment? Earl Grey, in answer, said, " that he believed the question was one of very unusual nature--(great cheering from the Ministerial benches)—and he could hardly bring himself to believe, when the question was put by the Noble Lord, that he expectcd.an answer." I will be more explicit. The Noble Lord has asked me whether or not I have coun tenanced rumours that are prevalent respecting an intended dissolution of Parliament, and I answer him that by no act or expression of mine, either directly or indirectly given, have I given any sanction to such rumours, and I also add, that I have never even put a case hypothetically in, which such a dissolution would be justifiable.—( Cheers.) It is only respectful to the House that I - should state this; nothing would be more unbecoming in lase than to hold out any menace to this House, in consequence of any course which this House may think fit to pursue. Another rumour referred to by the Noble Lord was, that we are to govern by means of standing armies, in case the House of Commons should vote the supplies, or to pass the Mutiny Act.—(Tremendous laughter.) I trust this rumour is of recent origin, as I declare that the first time I ever heard a whiseer of it was from the lips of the Noble Lord. There was another question with which I was threatened the other day, but which the Noble Lord has not put to-day, viz. whether or not I should pledge to the House that his Majesty's prerogative respecting the dissolution ofParliaraent should not be exercised ? I never sanctioned such a rumour by any act or expression of mine. It would be most unbecoming of me to fetter the discretion of the House by any menace, or by a re fesence to any menace, and it would be equally unbe coming of me, as one of the Ministers of the Crown, to place any of the prerogatives of the Crown in abeyance.— ( Loud cheers.) As a privy councillor, and adviser of the Crown, I have never advised the exercise of this prerogative. To the extent to which I have gone I venture to anticipate that my answer to the Noble Lord will be satisfactory.—( Hear. ) LordJ. RUSSE LL—I did not m e a n that the Right Hots. , Baronet was to govern by a standing army ; what I meant was that there were rumours abroad that the Right Hon. Bart. would consider himself justified in keeping up the army, though there was no Mutiny Bill in ex istence. --( Hear. ) Mr. SPRING RICE enquired whether it was the intention of the present Government to make any alteration in the sys tem of education established in Ireland by the late Ministers ? Sir HENRY HARDINGE replied that it was not the intention of the present Government to make any alteration in that system ; but he would take that opportunity of stating, that the estimate for that purpose would be larger this year than it was during the last. Mr. HUME asked whether, notwithstanding the majorities against Ministers notwithstanding the feel ing of that House against them and, consequently, notwithstanding public opinion, which the majority of that House represented, the Right Hon. Baronet and his colleagues intended to persevere in maintaining their places, in the face of repeated majorities against them, and in spite of the voice of the nation.—( Cries of " oh, oh") Would they still persevere in retaining their places, notwithstanding all these demonstrations of public opinion against them? We have a right (continued the Hon. Gentleman) to expect a steady, straightforward answer, and my question is, whether I understood the Right Honourable Baronet correctly, that not withstanding the majority of this House being decidedly against him and his colleagues, it is his intention to persevere ? —or whether he doubts the opinion already expressed to be the opinion of the majority of this House? I should be very happy to know, because the Right Ho nourable Baronet most see that the people of England have no means of stating their opinions but through their representa tives in this House ; and if the opinions of their representatives are to be set at nought and at defiance, I do not know what unpleasant consequences may arise.--( Hear, hear, hear.) It may bring about a collision with the other House, which it it is extremely desirable to avoid.—( Hear, hear.) It is con trary to almost all precedent, although it is perfectly well known that William Pitt continued in office under similar circumstances for a considerable time, but certainly during that time the people out of doors were eventually with Mr. Pitt. ( Cheers from the Ministerial side.) That' is not the case now—( Laughter and loud cheers from the Opposition)— although I have no doubt there are Hon. Members on the other side of the House who are under that delusion.—( Continued laughter and cheering.) I am sure I speak as far as regards my own constituents.—( Cries of " Oh oh.") Aye, I will say three out of four. I have not the smallest hesitation in in saying that three out of four in the county of Middlesex arc against the present Government, and I therefore do hope the Right Hon. Baronet -will, with his usual frankness, answer my question—first, whether he considers the decisions that have taken place do not show a majority of the people against him, or whether lie intends to wait for a future period in order to try the strength of the House? Sir ROBERT PEEL—When I answered the question put to me by the Noble Lord, I stated a simple fact, namely, that in consequence of the vote the other night, I had not considered it my duty to tender my resignation, and I do assure the Right Honourable Gentleman, that in my situation, I find it quite sufficient to dispose of the practical questions that are put to me—(cheers from the Ministerial benches)—without meeting hypothetical points to which the Hon. Gentleman asks for an answer. I have not resigned, and I mean to proceed in the execution of my duty, and submit to the consideration of Parliament those measures which the Go vernment have decided upon.—( Cheers from the opposition.) But with respect to the course I intend to pursue, until the measures are actually brought before the consideration of the house, I cannot pronounce an opinion. Mr. H UME.—I regret I cannot make myself understood to the Right Hon. Bart. The Right Hon. Bart. speaks hy pothetically, but I speak an actual fact. The Right Honourable Baronet was in a minority on the Address to the Crown—an actual majority of this House being against him, and a large majority out of the House being against him.—( No, no.) Such might not be the case with the con stituencies of some hon. gentlemen, but for his own he would say, nine out of ten did not place confidence in the Government of the Right Hon. Gentleman. Now these were actual facts, and admitted of no hypothesis at all. If the Right Hon. Gentleman is balancing between two courses, I have no doubt that the Right Hon. Gentleman finds great diffi culty how he is to proceed. I think, however, that we ought to know what we are to do, for since the question now before the House is a matter of supply—it becomes us to be fully acquainted with the proceedings of those who deniend them. Others might be merely matters of form, this is a case preparatory to granting the supplies, and if we are told that the present Ministry, not enjoying the confidence of the people, are to maintain their places, for they cannot carry on the Government, it is for us to consider whether or not it would be right were we to place at the disposal of hie Majesty and his Majesty's Ministers any supply whatever.— ( Hear, hear.) Any thing that curbs the prerogative of the Crown is extremely dangerous, and ought not to be resorted to any occasion, except on the greatest emergency ; but if, "after public opinion has been expressed in this manner, we commit our supplies to the present Ministry, I should like to know whose fault it is ? I do not think that the majority of the House of Commons are to be treated in direct defiance, and I should therefore like to ask the Right Hon.. Bart the ac tual fact, and not hypothetically. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER--.I really appeal to the House whether I have shown any reluctance to answer any quet'on. The House of Commons cam, to a division the other night on the Address by a majority of 30.9 to 302 : against Ministers. I have s a id, l oo ki ng at t h at majority, that 1 did not feel it my duty to abandon my place on this occa sion. If the Hon. Member thinks that he ought to put himself in direct opposition, before he understand s what Ministers intend doing, I shall then know how to pro ceed. It would be quite out of my power to answer the ques tion of the Hon. Gentleman before I know the actual feeling of the House with respect to the measures intended to be pro posed by the Government. Mr. HITME.—I ask the Right Hon. Baronet whether be thinks that the late vote against the Ministry to be a vote of confidence or want of confidence in them ? It was stated by the• friends of the Right Hon. Baronet as being a direct ilia play of want of confidence. Sir ROBERT PEEL said on looking to that vote he did not think it hid decided that it was his,duty to retire. Mr. E WART would ask the Right Hon. Baronet if be thought the vote was not a cen sure u p on Mi n i sters ?—( Hear") Sir ROBERT PEEL—I can construe the address, and I can construe the answer to the address ; but I leave it to those who voted for the amend men t t o construe t h e i r O WII course of conduct—( Cheers and l aug ht er f rom t h e Mi n isterial s ide. —( Cheers. ) Mr. I3ARCL A Y said it had been stated, that the majOrkre - of the people out of doors agreed with those that carried the amendment. Now, as representing a very large body of t he people, he would deny that statement—at least the balance would be found to be quite as nice out of doors as within that House. During his canvass, he never heard anY lamentations for the loss of the late Ministry.—( Cheers from the Ministerial side.) He found the people out of doors • to consist either of Conservatives or Destructives--( Laughter). If the lion. Member for Middlesex could try the question by a motion either condemnatory or commendatory of the late Ministers, he would find that there would be no majority either one way or the other.—( Hear, and laughter.) Major BE AUCLERK thought the House was travelling away from the real question before it, though he could s a Y with justice and truth he h a d no confidence in Ministers, as they did not go far enough to satisfy him.—( Hear.) At the same time he was willing to vote for so mtich of the supplie s as would enable them to go on : he would not throw an/ impediment in the way of their bringing forward their Mee' sures. It was of little consequence whether Government Wa s Whig, Tory, or Radical, provided the measures introduced by the Government were good.—( Hear, hear.) If the Minis' tern could not make up th e i r m i n d s to b r i ng f o rward any satisfactory measures, he could not support the but if they did, he w o uld lie bound to do so. He thought the attacks which had been made on both sides of the House were not likely to be productive of any good.--(Hear .) He should only vote for a certain supply, that Ministers migh t have an opportunity of bringing before the House their inea' ' Aires, but if those measur es were not sat i s f actory, h e s hould feel it his duty to stop the supplies.—( Hear, hear.) .• Mr. O'CONNELL—The Right Hon. Bart, has said something with regard to the Temporalities of the Iris" Church, which I understood him to say are to be applied t o ex' clesinstical purposes. I wish to k now if l am to un d e rstan d them to be iieaited to the purpos e s of th e es t a bli s h e d Church . Sir ROBERT PEEL-1 am bound to state that it is con. fined to purposes connected with the doctrines of the Esta blished Church.—( Hoar.) In a short time the Report of the Commissioners will be laid b e f ore th e H ouse, an d I s ubmit whether it is not Premature to discuss these details at present' Mr. O'CONNELL—I did not mean to excite any discus' sion, nor do I think my question is calculated to do so. CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEE. Sir R. PEEL rose and said—l beg leave to make a m otion which some gentlemen may not be prepared for, and which other gentlemen may attribute to motives that have really n o fott'' dation. • It is with the greatest satisfaction that I have the honour to propose that Mr. Bernal should take the Caaa . ' as Chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means.—(l ll ; moose cheering from all sides of the House.) I protest agant s f misconstruction of my motives : w h a t m i g ht h avo b een t h e fate o, another proposition, I will not now inquire.—( Cheers al laughter from the Opposition.) It is enough for me that am of the present.--( La ug ht er .) H on . M em b ers ma y laugh a and cheer, but I can say with t r uth, th a t I never contem plated I l e' nourable other appointment.—( Ch eers .) F or I h ave witnes,sv" with pleasure the g rea t i m p ar ti a li ty w i t h w hi c h t h e l e ' nourable Gentleman has presided in the Chair. And ther e are many present who can bear me out in my assertil l ; that I never had any oth er p ro p os i t i on to ma k e . If t House is unanimous i n ca lli ng th at H on. G ent l eman to t 1• . 1 . Chair, it will, in my o pi n i on , b e on l y pay i ng hi m t h e coml 3ll.* ' • ment to which he is justly entitled.—( Great cheering.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, he rose merely for the Pa' pose of bearing his testimony to the fact that Mr. Bernal Wa s now only reaping the advantages which his strict impart and gentlemanly behaviour in the chair had justly entitled hint to at the hands of the House—( Cheers.) 11 . 1 r. BERNAL then w en t an d t oo k t h e c h a i r, amidst the most enthusiastic cheering. The HON. MEMBER then read (pro forma) the paragraph ° his Majesty's speech which was addressed to the House of C °ni d . mons. He then put the question,—" That a supply be gran° to his Majesty," which pass e d w i t h out comment, an d was re ported to the House. THE RATHCORMAC AFFAIR. Mr. H. GRATTAN said that he did not wish to ew t : any debate on the moti o n o f w hi c h h e h a d g i ven not ice el; former evening, resp ec ti ng th e me l anc h o l y a ff a i r of gat! cormac.—( Hear, hear, he ar .) If th e Right Honours , Gentleman opposite ( Sir H. H ar di nge ) would cons e , llt to the production of the l e tter o f th e N o bl e L or d f ro m t 6 • Horse Guards, he (Mr. G.) should abstain from making observations on the subject. Sir. H. HA RDINGE was o bli ge d t o t h e H on . Membe r for the course he pursued, b u t as t o th e l etter o f t h e No , sl e " f Lord, much misapprehe n si on was a b roa d as to t h e pu rport ° I, it. All it said r es p ec ti ng th e me l anc h o l y a ff a i r i n questi°.; was the approval of the con d uc t o f t h e m ili tary f or ac ting I r a obedience to the orders of the Magistracy, but not one w° did it contain of approbation as to how they acted ° that occasion. He ( Sir Henry Hardinge) did not ° er- ' tainly know how it came into the public newspapers, s' ie. if his explanation was n o t sa ti s f ac t ory t o t h e H on . Gen man opposite, he would refer him to Bristol and to othe r places, in which instances it was a l ways a prac tice the Government to cong r at u l a t e th e m ilit ary f or t h e servi i ° e which they rendered.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. O'CONNELL, without participating in the m otion; hoped the letter would be l a id on th e t a bl e, and from i t" as explanation which the Right lion. Baronet had given, ail% ) the question was still sub judi ce , h e h o p e d t h at no discuss'' would take place. The expla na ti on w hi c h h as b een gis; e h , t until replied to, if it ever should, would have all the Weig it deserved. • Sir JO [IN BYNG, without desiri ng t o p rovo k e a Meus f sion, would wish to know what would justify the expression °, " forbearance" contain e d i n th e N o bl e L or d' s l etter o f cog ° tulation to the Ministry. Mr. LITTLETON defended the late Government frog the responsibility imposed u p on th em respect i ng t hi s aft'', neither it nor the present Government was charg ) able for any blame on thi s subject.--( Hear, hear, he sr l After a few observa t i ons f rom th e Ri g h t H on . G en tleow „, the motion was agreed to, and the House adjourned. LOVE STRONGER TIIAN DOCTORS.—A cer tail : female, resident in a n e i g hb our i ng v ill age , w h o h as lived in state of single blessedness to the age of thirty, had sunk, s° ' ll years ago, into a most piti a bl e s t a t e o f ill h ea l t h. A s We p ro ot fess not to und ers ta n d th e p a th o l ogy o f di sease, we can be precisely say what her complaint m i g ht b e ; su ffi ce to s ay, was constantly a patient of one or other of the medical P_ l k fessors. Latterly, she has been almost utterly unable to wr ie at all, and was evidently wear i ng away . I n t hi s d e plotsv h condition, it was thought advisable t o t r y a j ourne y by o il A c y; to a short distance. While in the act of returning home , " o f or six weeks ago, she happened to get closetted inside eil e t ,,o the stage-coaches, along with a gentleman nearly of age. They talked on various subjects, until, at last, the 13 , 4 was asked if she knew of any female of about her own k e ' r . &c., who would take a situation as housekeeper ? She aar l . o li ed in the negative. The querist, not so soon satisfied, pi al t told her that he did not mean a housekeeper merely, partner for life. The lady hung down her head disci s t and when she ventured to raise it again, it was to look e ti ne o the window, or any where rather than in the face of her " ve r, admirer. As the gentleman resolutely persevered, bend), he not only overcame all her objections on account of ill he al A but, before parting, got from her her name, address, &c.,* tt et very few days after her arrival at home, she received a ' e j o g couched in such gallant terms, and abounding in such 10101/ professions, that its effect in bettering her health was tr ac ed electric. In a few days more young Lothario again aPP e i, * in propria persona, Now was the cure complete ! week or fortnight following, she waited on one o f our . 111 .4 respectable Sheffield physicians, who had attended her , ,eist• notice that his further attentions would be needless. T" c „i r ed ter gentleman was of course surprised, and eagerly en c l.; what was the matter? But judge of his further surprise'- to her 0 his fair patient modestly informed him that she was go," t be be married ! A hearty laugh and a mos t cor di a l shake 0 1 0 . 0 4 hand, however, showed how willingly th e phy s ician re 3l ci e tle his fair charge into abler hands. The lady is since oar i ni jo. and was never in better he a lth an d spirit s .—Shejfiela pendent. BIRTHS. Cha r° On the 28th ult., at Houghton, the lady of the Hon. - Langdale, of a daughter. _„,„ of 6 On the Ist inst., in Bro o k- s t r e e t, th e H on . M r s. Staw`i' daughter. of On the 28th ult., the lady of the Hon. Edward Curzon, daughter. r d Air On the 28th ult., i n B er k e l ey - square , t h e l a d y o f Craw. e ° , trobus, Esq., of a son . 1, lsdl o) On the '24th ult., at Empingham Vicarage, Rutland, th e the Rev. Lorick C oo p er , o f a son . Esq . ' o. On the 17th ult., at Clifton, the lady of Elliot Roberts , a daughter. 0 sib On the Ist inst., Mrs. J. B. d e Mole, of Merchant Tailors of a daughter. __....- 111ARRIED. illr• 00 On the td inst., at St George's, Hanover-square , J Gibbs, of Bicester, O xon , to M ary, on l y d aug h te r of .0 Bennett, of New Bond -street, London. %li p Of DIED. On the 27th ult., at Watergate, Sussex, Francis Pag e r flio General Crosbie, and only child of the late G. W. 'F b°lll— iii s 0 0 On the 2d inst., at Southampton-row, Russell-square, T o iri year, the Rev. James Capper, M.A., for more than 55 Y c ~ o Wilmington, Sussex. I.~lffamow lihAr - 4°' iiiiN G. °1 London: Printed and Published by MORD° Y- - die C O ° . 112, Strand, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in • of Middlesex. To th e ALD LON ~~ tati n ~ 11-ent Allo N , trade, at twe n &lack s , lie 8411 be as. Rho 16 , u 1 ~,.. e°NTI MI l'Ort th en , *O4 as. I N to t, R , Joh n e C°l aptain ~~,