The Sun. — London, England, 1848-03-01 00:00:00

carry out the same principle in the administration of wh'eh they did in .he n'ltninistr:".zion of jus tice, and as they imposed the penalty for crime on the locality in which it was committed, so they should make the locality in wl , ich destitution ex;sted bear the expense.—(Hear.) Mr. R. M. FOX (Longford) said the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir G. Grey) was mistaken as to the object of the Bill of which he had given notice. It was not to provide for the support of the poor of Ire land by a town•land rating, but of the able-bodied poor only. The infirm poor he proposed to provide for by a union rating. He intended to have pro- P°sed the levying of a tax upon all property other than landed, in order to create a fund to be placed in the hands of the Poor-law Commissioners, as a rate in aid of that to be raised, where the other rate exceeded a certain amount ; but as he saw no likeli • hood of his being able to carry out his views upon the subject, he should not bring forward his Bill, h °Ping, however, that the Committee now moved for Would be granted. Colonel CONOLLY supported the motion. An Hos. MEMBER, who said he represented a place in the west of Ireland, declared that he was not i ndividually opposed to a poor law in Ireland, neither was the constituency which he represented ; but both desired to see a better regulated system established — (Rear, hear)—by which they would have more of L ai* management of their own affairs , in their own hands, and he hoped, therefore, that the Government would yield to the appeal of the Hon. Member for Portarlington. ,M-r- FRENCH denied, as was alleged by the Hon. .°J'ember for Surrey, that Ireland was taxed for the Poor at the same rate only as this country. It was, On the contrary, much more heavily taxed ; for while Ireland was rated for the poor to the extent of 2000,0001., on a rental of 13,000,0001., England was only taxed to the extent of 5,000,0001. on a rental of 56,00 0,000/.—(llear, hear.) Such was the growing Poverty of Ireland that the poor-law tax would soon be double its present amount Even at present it Was consuming the capital of the middle classes, While to the poor it proved a complete mockery. He had ascertained that the mortality amongst the 1 49,000 poor in the workhouses of that country equalled that r,f the metropolis of England, namely, 1 ,000 per week. Mr. HIJIIE hoped the Government would not refuse an opportunity to the Irish Members of proving their e ase ; and, as some of them laudably observed, of preventing their country from being any longer a burden to this. The Government would be acting against their own principles if they refused the Com mittee now moved for. Capt. JONES opposed the appointment of a Com • raittee, as likely to interfere injuriously with the °Peration of the law. The Hon. Member for Ros- common, who supported the motion, was opposed to the law altogether, and it was evidently with the view of opposing it that he asked for a Committee. Mr. FAGAN considered inquiry to be absolutely necessary respecting the mode of administering relief, the transmission of paupers from England, the charge upon the occupier, which he considered to be too much, and upon several other mincr matters. He, therefore, cordially supported the motion, the neces- SitY for which was well borne out by the testimony afforded by all the Hon. Members who had spoken from the sister kingdom. Sir J. WALSH joined in entreating the Govern ment to consent to the appointment of a Com mittee on this most important subject. - Mr. S. CRAWFORD contended that the returns Made to Parliament showed that an inquiry was im- Peratively necessary. The evils of the present system demanded that such should be the case, and that some i ntermediate course should at least be adopted. Look- t ll' to the whole operation of the law, and its results, he cordially joined in the motion for the appointment of a Committee of Inquiry. Major BLACKALL also supported the motion, observing that the time bad arrived when inquiry was not only fitting, but absolutely necessary. In Come unions actually one-half of the population Were receiving relief; and a greater number even than the number of those rated. By reducing the area of taxation it would become the interest of !very one to give all the employment he could In order tc keep down the rates in his own district. It was an important question also, whether in Country like Ireland, where the whole burden of taxation fell upon the land, it would not be well to render other species of property liable to the poor-rate.—(Hear, hear.) This was an addi tional reason for granting the Committee asked for. The Hon. Member for Surrey, while opposing its appointment, had adduced the strongest reasons in support of the motion, such as the charges that had been made against the guardians of different unions and other matters. The Right Hon. the Secretary of State had opposed the Committee, because its object was not defined in the motion ; but, surely, this was nothing unusual when a Committee was moved for. Sir GEORGE GREY What I said was that no definite subject of inquiry was proposed for the Committee. Major BLACKALL thought that sufficient round had been laid for the appointment of the committee. As the law at present stood, if one electoral division in a union was unable to pay up its arrears, the guardians might go on levying new rates on the other divisions which could pay ; and surely nothing could he conceived more calculated to generate carelessness in the expenditure. Mr. AGLIONBY implored Ministers to consent to the app o intment of this Committee. Their oppo sition t o it could only rest on information received from officials in Ireland; and on that ground it was important that other evidence should be heard. An HON. MEMBER, whom we did not recognise, said that feeling the inconvenience which must arise Fora withdrawing a number of officers from Ireland, 10 give evidence before the Committee, he must op. POSO its appointment. Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that the law was imperative as to the appointment of relieving o ffi cers by the Commissioners; and yet this had been made a serious ground of complaint by tbellon. and Gal lant Member for Donegal (Col. Conolly). It was also imperative on relieving officers to give relief in sudden and urgent cases ' • and if this or any other of the requirements of the law were not complied with, the Commissioners would naturally be blamed for trot compelling the guardians to do their duty. The lion. and Gallant mover (Colonel Dunne) had laid Much stress on the state of things in the union of Pallyshannon ; but this, it should be known, had bee n one of the most difficult unions in Ireland to manage. In the Donegal union, the salaries proposed by the guardians for schoolmaster, porter, and other °flieers, had been so ridiculously small -81 . a year for the schoolmaster, and 61. for the porter—(Hear, hear) -- that the Commissioners were compelled to in terfere, otherwise it would be impossible to obtain Proper officers. The Commissioners had been blamed for dismissing certain hoards of guardians. Let the Rouse read the papers on this subject, and they would be satisfied that the Commissioners had endeavoured to perform their duty in the best possible manner. He had always thought that the Irish poor-law would require considerable modification before it was made to work unexceptionably ; but as yet it was quite pre mature to propose any alteration—for the law had not been fully enforced. A committee of in tiniry at the present moment would be absolutely nugatory; for when the law was brought into full operation, a further and fuller inquiry might become necessary. The area of taxation was not unalter ably fixed; it might become tie duty of the Com missioners or the Legislature materially to reduce it, but not certainly to the extent of the townland only. It was most important that the House should take care, in stimulating employment, not to decrease the stimulus to labour, nor to relieve the large landed Proprietors from the duty of supporting the poor. — (hear, hear.) Let them beware of holding out in ducements to clearances.—(Hear, hear.) On the estates of many proprietors there was not a single paup er , those estates being tilled and cultivated by labourers from contiguous districts : and surely it was not intended to relieve such landowners from the support of the poor altogether.—(NO, no.) But S uch would be the effect if each townland were made responsible for tbe support of its own poor. The reduction of the area of taxation was a most important and difficult question, and would de mand the most careful consideration, The Corn- Mistioners had now the power to divide and subdi vide unions ; but such changes could not be effected Without shifting the burden of pauperism from one s et of ratepayers to another, and mo tives were in Consequence imputed. This had taken place in the Only case in which a division had hitherto been made, that of Dromore West, which certainly appeared as clear a case as possible for a division. Agreeing in Much that the Hon. and Gallant Member (Colonel Dunne) had urged, he thought the appointment of a Committee of inquiry at present would be most ill timed. It was not known what the amount of rate or of out-door relief was likely to be. On many other points they were equally in ignorance. The basis of a well-considered poor law was most essen tial for the superstructure of the welfare of Ireland; and it behoved the House to be most careful lest they should take a wrong step in the matter by dis turbing the existing law before they were in p osses- S ion of sufficient information as to how it had worked and how it was likely to operate.—(Heat, hear.) Mr. W. S. O'BRIEN said the appointment of. the ecßumittee was unanimously desired by Irish Members, and if it was denied by an English majority, it would convince the Irish people more strongly of the neces sity of having a Parliament to manage their own af fairs. He thought it important so to arrange the "lons that landed proprietors might have an induce ment rather to employ the poor than to pay increased ra tes ; and this would be attained by decreasing the size of the unions. This was a fit subject for inquiry Al was also the rating of personal property, which had , 1 1, a E SUN, I,ON Dols', _WEDNESDAY EVENI NG, MARCiI 1, 1848. been suggested by some 1 for it was extremely hard I that the aipp:)rt of the poor should f.‘.11 entirclyor one class. It ought also to be borne by the place holder and the fundholder. Another important question for the committee would be the operation of r, hat was called the " quarter-acre clause." Alto gether a strong ease for inquiry had been made out. Mr. CLEMENTS had heard with deep regret ; that the Government meant to refuse the Committee.' The unions in Ireland were, on an average, three times the size of those in this country; their extraor dinary size utterly prevented the proper working of the law. He disappri.ved of the employment of the paid guardians, and hoped they would be got rid of as soon as possible.—(Hear, hear.) In some of the unions there were as many as twelve relieving officers, while in no union in England were there more than six relieving officers. In the north of Ire land, where the unions were only half the size of those in Connaught, the law was found to work much better. The necessary effect of too large unions was to diminish the stimulus for the employment of labour, and to increase the rate in consequence.— (Hear.) The Hon. Member for Surrey had alleged that as the cost of maintaining a pauper in Ireland was only about half the cost in England, the aggre gate amount of the poor-rate would only be one-half le proportion. But this was not the case, for while the average amount of rate in Ireland was ls. Sid. in the pound, in England it had only been ls. 71d. The gross valuation to the poor-rate in Ireland was thir teen millions, in this country it was sixty-two millions; and as the valuation in Ireland was much nearer the net value than in England, the burden of the rate was proportionally heavier. Last year the amount of poor-rate levied in Ireland had been 970,0001., or about ls. 6d. in the pound. _ _ Mr. L ABOUC HERE expressed his regret that the Government felt themselves obliged to oppose the motion for a Committee, supported as it was by so large a majority of the Irish Members.—(Hear.) They did so because they believed that if the motion was carried it would have a tendency to paralyse the exertions of those who were now endeavouring to carry out the working of the poor law, on which the subsistence of thousands was at that moment de pending. When the poor-law was in full operation, and when its working had been tested by experience, he did not mean to say that the ob;ect of those who supported the present motion was not worthy of con• sideration. He could not, however, help believing that the wish to make the area of the unions - as nearly as possible co-extensive with private property was at the bottom of the present motion. To that principle he had a most decided objection, because he believed it would offer temptations to the system of clearances. His opinion was, that the area of taxation ought to be large enough to combine communities that would not be too extensive, and that they should not be so small as to make it rest on individual property. He could not hold out a hope that the commission would, as a principle, enter upon the task of revising the area of taxation. _ _ The Earl of LINCOLN said he would support the Government on the present occasion, because he thought the granting of a Committee would be likely to counteract the efficient operation of the poor law. He thought, however, that the Members from Ireland had grounds of complaint against the Go vernment on this occasion, because every member of the Government who had spoken had given a some what different explanation of the object of the Corn - mission. —(Hear, hear.) He believed that a Com mittee of inquiry would only confuse the subject, and lead to no beneficial result. Some members of the Government would, he hoped, yet rise and tell the House what was really to be the duty of the Com mission—what it was to do and what it was not to do. If it was only to regulate boundaries—to take a bit from one union and to add a bit to another—he did not think that was any answer to the motion, and he must say that it was a mere delusion. Mr. LABOUCHERE said that what he stated was, that the Commission was not to investigate with a view to change the area of taxation as a general principle ; but he did not deny that where the elec toral districts were inconveniently large, especially in the west of Ireland, they would be diminished in extent, and increased in number. The Earl of LINCOLN resumed—Did the Right Hon. Gentleman mean as a general rule to say that there was to be no re-opening of the question as to the area of taxation? —Because - if that - vote the'ease the Government ought to speak out upon the subject and let their intentions be known. As to altering the Irish poor-law, in respect to substituting town lands for electoral divisions, no real friend of Ireland could have proposed such a measure. If the Com mission which the Government intended to appoint was to be a working Commission, then it would effect great good. But he hoped it was not proposed for the mere purpose of passing the whole question by. First let the Commission get into operation and show what it was likely to do, and then if it was unsatisfactory let the present motion be renewed. The promoters of : the Hon. and Gallant Member's Committee would by persevering only hinder their own views from being carried out. He hoped, therefore, the motion would be withdrawn, for if it was not, entertaining the same wishes for the good of Ireland that were avowed by the Hon. and Gallant Member, he should deem it his duty to vote against him. Sir G. GREY, in explanation, said that the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Clare, was quite aware that he had received 'an urgent application froin several Members for Ireland, requesting him to nominate a commission to inquire into the present electoral divi sions as regarded the administration of the Irish poor-law, for the purpose of reducing their extent. He had then told the Hon. Baronet that he had always been most willing and ready to appoint such a commission, but that, having recently been in com munication with the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland on the subject, he expected to receive from that Noble man a plan already marked out for the appointment of a commission and the nature of its inquiries. Two or three days ago he did receive that plan, and then he bad informed the Hon. Baronet the Member for Clare, that a division of unions might be desirable, and that as he and others were not able to effect that object, it might be done by means of a commis sion. But, at the same time, he stated that the Go vernment objected to any proposal to diminish the area of taxation, as that might lead to extravagant expectations which could not be realised. All the Government could hope to effect was, to divide large electoral districts where they were found to • be too large ; but they could not undertake to lay down rules for the observance of the Commission, and, therefore, though he would not pledge himself to such a step, he had no doubt but that the result of the in quiry would be to recommend a division of the electoral districts. Mr. WAKLEY said that the Right Hon. Baronet had confined his explanation to the question of elec toral divisions ; and the Noble Lord who had recom mended the motion to be withdrawn had also referred only to the same point. He hoped, however, that on the present, as on recent occasions, Ministers would see the error of their ways, and relent so far as not to oppose the nomination of a Committee. After the statements that had been made that night there was a greater necessity than ever to nominate a Select Com mittee. W hen so striking a phenomenon was exhi bited, as that of the Irish Members all agreeing upon the motion, it was treating them with greatdisrespect not to grant it. There was a precedent for the mo tion, for the English poor-law was only passed in the middle of 1834, and at the beginning of 1836 a Com mittee of inquiry was appointed, which sat during the whole session. One Honourable Member had stated that there were thousands of Irish poor starv ing, and what did the Right Honourable Baronet (Sir George Grey) reply to the statement ? why, that the Irish poor law had not been enforced. Was that a reason for refusing an inquiry ? Was it not rather a ground for instituting an inquiry ? The House had also heard of the extraordinary length of some of the unions, extending to forty-six miles from one ex treme to the other. This could only be regarded as a device for torturing the poor. It had also been complained that the poor-law of England, and that of Ireland, were unequal in their operation ; but from all that he had heard stated respecting the Irish poor law diet, he should pronounce it to be the worst ever yet invented. The test applied to the Irish , as it had previously been done to the English, workhouses was to render them as uncomfortable as possible. — (Murmurs.) Yes, he repeated his assertion. The real workhouse test in Ireland, as in England, was excessive discomfort ; and in order that the test should be most fully applied, the guardians of the poor had, he was credibly informed, sought out the very worst species of food that human beings could subsist on, in order to provide that for the workhouse inmates.— (Cries of " Name, name.") The gentleman from whom he had this information was sitting in the House and heard him make the statement, but not having received his permission he could not name him.—(The Hon. Member for Cork here spoke to Mr. Wakley.) He was authorised to say that his informant was the Hon. Member for Cork.—(Hear.) Mr. FAGAN rose, and begged to be permitted to state that he had been informed by a board of guar dians in Ireland, that as the English workhouses had applied the system of adopting the worst possible species of food for the poor, so they thought the precedent was one which ought to be observed in Ireland. The Earl of LINCOLN said that he had visited the workhouse at Cork, and he could bear witness that he wished to God every poor man out of the English workhouses had as good food to eat as the paupers at Cork got. The bread served out to them was as white and as good as that eaten at the table of any gentleman in that House. Mr. WAKLEY resumed. The Cork union was not the one referred to by him, nor could it be, so long as the board of guardians had amongst them one so kind and so liberal hearted as the Hon. Member for Cork. The question he would put upon the dietary point was, what was the proportion of animal food served out in the workhouses in Ireland? lie ceuld annwer that questiee by averring .hat bodied labourers were for weeks in the workhouse 11 without receiving an ounce of animal food. Was that fit treatment for human beings, whilst the cattle were all sent to England for sale ?—(Oh, oh.) It might be unpleasant to hear, but what he said was nevertheless true. He hoped the House would not narrow the question down to the views expressed by the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir G. Grey), but that they would look to it as affecting the welfare of many thousands; and in his opinion the Government, so far from opposing the motion, ought to seek to make the inquiry as searching as possible. Mr. C. BULLER said he had hardly thought he should have had to interfere in the present debate for the purpose of defending the English poor-law, and he did so merely to show how little dependence was to be placed on information held at second hand. The Hon. Member for Finsbury bad deplored the intolerable abuses of the Irish poor-law, because, as he stated, the unhappy peasantry were put on a low description of food, worse than they had been accus tomed to—the same, in fact, as had been given in the English workhouses. There were many gentlemen present who were conversant with the working of the English poor-law, and they must be aware of the truth of the Hon. Member's illustration.—(Hear.) It had never been the policy of the English Commis sioners to encourage the use of -bad food, and when he told the House that they were standing out at that moment for four meat dinners per week in the work houses, he thought that very little dread would be felt on that score. But it was a great misfortune when gentlemen of quick imagination and eloquence picked up the facts they had to state in the course of the speech they were making. They had all heard the prompting which the Hon. Member for Fins bury had undergone, and how an Irish union had, in the course of his speech, swelled from 36 to 60 miles in length.--(A laugh.) Before an Hon. Member came forward in that House to complain of the dietary in the Irish workhouses, he should remember what the habitual food of the peasantry had been—(Rear, hear)—in how many cases the honest and industrious peasant had been unable to get as good.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member had taunted the Govern ment with having " harked back" on other questions, and asked them to do so on the Irish poor-law. He (Mr. Buller) wished to ask the House of Commons whether it had so far seen the error of its ways in passing the Irish poor-law, as to be ready to hark back at the bidding of the Hon. Member ?—(Hear, hear.) Ile asked the qnestion, because it was on that ground the Committee was asked for—it was felt that its appointment would be a heavy blow and discourage ment to the poor law.—(" Hear, hear," and " No, no," trom the Irish Members.) Oh, yes, the Irish Members of all religions and politics were unani mous on that point. The broad plain issue of this motion was not to inquire into any particular fact, or class of facts, connected with the poor law—it was to inquire into the working and efficiency of the poor-law in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) He said and maintained that it was deliberately putting the whole of the poor-law again in issue, and its working would be completely paralysed during the sitting of the Committee.--(Hear, hear.) The Go vernment did not refuse remedies when they were necessary, or to make strict inquiry into the details of the law, but that was a very different matter from taking its administration out of their hands altogether. He trusted that if inquiry were deemed necessary it would be entrusted to those who had to administer the law—(Oh, oh)—arid that nothing would be done to inspire the Irish people with any doubts as to the intentions of the British Parliament.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. GROGAN said that the speech of the Hon. Member for Liskeard was very happy, but it did not -it all coincide with the statement which at an earlier period of the evening had been made on the part of the Government. But, to bring back the House to the sober question, here was a point on which all the Irish Members had called for inquiry, and he could assure the House that all the Irish people were anxious in the cause. If English Members wished Irish paupers to be supported at home, they would support inquiry into the operation of a law under which the capital of Ireland was rapidly disappearing. Sir W. SOMERVILLE explained. Sir A. BROOKE could attest the lively interest felt in Ireland on this subject. He felt it his duty to Support the motion. Colonel DUNNE, in reply, said that he could not have made out a more complete case for his mo tion than that for which he was indebted to the Hon. Members who opposed it. Nobody could deny that the poor-rates of Ireland were rapidly absorbing the property of the country. Mr. WALTER did not rise to detain the House by any observations on the Irish poor-law, with which he was free to confess he was but imperfectly acquainted, but merely to congratulate the Govern• merit on the fortunate appointment they had made in the selection of a gentleman as President of the Poor-law Commission who had had the boldness to assert in that House that it was not the object of the new poor-law to offer to the poor of this country a worse diet in the workhouse than they could obtain out of it. To say nothing of the famous document which had been exhibited in the House, and which was thrown out as a feeler as to what was the lowest diet the poor could exist upon, had the Right Hon. Ge ntleman forgotten to what circumstance he owed his ap. pointment ?—had he forgotten that it was to the practice which was proved to have prevailed in the Andover union, where, in consequence of the in sufficiency of the diet, the poor had had recourse to gnawing raw bones to satisfy their hunger ? (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Walter) was glad to hear that the Honourable and Learned Gentleman had, since his accession to office, been engaged in an endeavour to improve the diet in the workhouses; but whatever might be the case now,, that could not affect the merits of the original object of the law, and he should have been wanting in the duty he owed to his constituents, and the respect he owed to that indi vidual who, while he lived, was always the determined opponent of that law, if he had not risen in his place to express his astonishment at the extraordinary state ment of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman (Mr. C. Buller).—(Hear, hear.) After a few words from Mr. WAKLEY, The House divided, and the numbers were— For the motion .. Against it .. 165 Majority —64 TEN-ANT-RIGHT. Mr. NEWDEGATE moved for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the law and custom of different parts of the United Kingdom, as between out going and in-coming tenants, and also as between landlord and tenant, in reference to un exhausted improvements or deterioration of land and premises occupied for agricultural purposes. Mr. PUSEY seconded the motion. Colonel SIB'HORP opposed the motion, it being his opinion that these matters should be left to arrangement between the parties concerned. He moved that the question be adjourned till that day iix months. The SPEAKER, however, having intimated that this amendment was informal, Colonel SIBTHORP moved that the debate be adjourned. Sir G. GREY said that, certainly if there was to be a debate on the motion, it had better, at that hour of the night, be adjourned. Mr. PUSEY thought that inquiry on this subject would be useful. Mr. CHRISTOPHER, on the contrary, was clearly of opinion that legislation upon the relations in question would be only leading the agricultural interest still deeper into the mire. Mr. W. MILES hoped the Gallant Member for Lincoln would withdraw his amendment. Mr. HEATHCOTE was as much against the sug gested Bill as any man, and hc: thought the clearest way to settle the question would be to appoint a Com mittee. Colonel SIBTHORP withdrew his amendment, and the motion was then agreed to. EXPENDITURE COMMITTEES. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER postponed the appointment of those Committees until Friday. ELECTION RECOGNISANCES BILL. Mr. WALPOLE obtained leave to bring in this Bill. The House adjourned at half-past Twelve o'clock PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS. ( From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of . Commons, TUESDAY, FEB. 29. The following Railway Bills were ordered to be brought in:— East Anglian (Ely and Huntingdon Railway Extension of Titre). Caledonian (Purchase or Lease of Wishaw and Coltness Railway). Caledonian, Lancaster and Carlisle, and London and North-Westerr , (Lease of Scottish Central Railway) Edinburgh and Northern (Roscobie, Keltyhead, and Glencraig Branches, &c.) SINGULAR SEIZURE OF SMUGGLED TOBACCO.— Late on Monday evening, as Messrs. Bayford and Lewins, officers of Excise, were proceeding up Great Russell-street, Bermondsey, they observed a man carry ing a heavy burden on his back, and on reaching him, Nfr. Lewins (having some suspicions of the contents) placed his hand upon . the packrge, upon which the man immediately threw it backward from his shoulders, knocking the officer down, and the bundle falling heavily upon him, at the same moment making a very busty retreat. As soon, however, as the load could be removed, the officers pursued the man for a considerable distance, but he contrived ultimately to make his escape. On their return to the spot where they first met with him, they proceeded to examine the bale, which turned out to be a large quantity (between 200 and 300Ibs) of leaf tobacco of a very fine quality, which, of course, had been smug gled. The officers then conveyed the prize to the Excise warehouse. PA RLIAMEN TARY DIVISIONS. (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Couvrody..) TUESDAY, FEB. 29. POOR-LAW (IRELAND). _ _ Ill.tion ma:le, and Question put, " That a SJiet Committee be appointed to inquire into the working and eilioie , ley of the Poor-law in Ireland." The House divided: campany was owing to the misplaced confidence in its ad visers, not only by the ditec:ors'hut by the shareholders themselves, Who had approved the contracts when they were submitted to them by the directors. He trusted, however, that the line, when completed, would prove sufficiently remunerative to atone for their past misfor tunes. The local traffic was very considerable, and of such a natare as to prove profitable to the promoters of this railway. The CHAIRMAN vindicated himself and the bcard of directors from the charges brought against thrill of neglect and culpability, as they had bestowed consider tible care and trouble upon the proceedings. After some considerable discussion the repert was agreed to. _ _ solutions authorising the forfeiture of a number of shares held by defaulting shareholders; for authorising a deviation in the line of railway as at present autho•• rised to be made; to increase the number and reduce the amount of the shares into which the capital is divided; to merge and re-issue certain shares subject to forfeiture, and to amend the Act relating to the railway, were also agreed to. The thanks of the meeting were voted to the Chair man, and the meeting broke up. CHARING-CROSS BRIDGE COM- PANY. The half-yearly meeting of this company was held yesterday, at one o'clock, at the offices, Villiers -street, Strand; W. Hawes, Esq., in the chair. The clerk (Mr. LAWRANCE) read the following report: "Your directors have the pleasure to report that the tolls receivcd in the !est' six months, amounting to 3,1831. 10s. Bd., have exceeded, though to a small ex tent only, those collected in the same months of the years 1845 and 1846. This sum will enable the proprietors, kfter discharging the current expenditure, to declare a dividend at the rate of four per cent. per annum on the Capital stock of the company for the six months ending 31st January, 1848. The rapid progress of the works of the South-Western Railway, and the probable early completion of the temporary station near the York-rood, have induced your directors to give instructions for the improvement of the access to the southern terminus of the bridge, under the provisions of the company's Act, Bth and 9th Victoria, for that purpose. The vast traffic which will be brought to the York-road station, as soon as the extension of the South- Western Railway is com pleted, cannot fail to produce most beneficial effects on the receipts of the bridge. Your directors regret they , have been unable, after repeated efforts in various chan nels, to procure a loan in the manner contemplated at the last special general meeting, and other means must now be adopted to raise the funds required to pay the pressing liabilities of the company. Your directors regret to an nounce, that the offers they have made to the directors pf the Market Company to refer the only point of dif ference now open between the companies to the decision pf two directors chosen from each board, has been de clined ; and the question as to the claim of the Market Company for compensation for the alleged delay in open - ing the pier, still remains to be decided. By the half yearly accounts it will be seen that the capital account is indebted to the revenue account in the sum of 1,707/. 15s. 9d., which cannot be repaid and distributed in dividends as it ought to be, till new capital is raised. By the revenue account for the half-year ending 31st January, it appeared that the receipts bad been 6,6721. Bs. 11d., which, after discharging the following— suudry charges for printing, petty cash, advertisements, &c., &c., 651. 55.; interest account, one year Exchequer Loan Commissioners, bankers, &c., &c., 1,3961. 14s. 9d.; rates and taxes, 516/. 9s. 2d.; salaries, 1501.; works, toll collectors, repairs of gates, gas, Hungerford Market Company law charges, 660/. Os. Id.,—left a balance of 3,9831. 19s. 11d." The CHAIRMAN briefly addressed the meeting. He said their affairs were brightening; the toll had gradually and steadily increased during the half-year, and he ex pected that as soon as the South-Western Extension was carried to the opposite side of the bridge, that a further itecession of traffic would take place. The most impor- tant matter for their consideration was what was to be done with the new quarter shares which they authorised them to issue at a former meeting, for the purpose of raising funds to discharge their outstanding and pressing liabilities. More shares, it was understood, were not to be disposed of until the shareholders had been further com municated with. He was now sorry to inform them that the directors had been unable to raise the requisite funds pn the security of their shares, although it was right to state that they could have done so in the early part of last year, when the shareholders refused to invest tht m With the requisite authority.' The directors having made this communication to the meeting, would use the best means at their command to raise money pa the shares. They would, however retain as many as possible in the hands of the company. Mr. STUTELEY, the chairman of the Market Com .panyv. regretted exceedingly that a clause had been in serted in the report, stating that the company which he iepresented had refused to refer the only point of diffe fence now open between the two companies to the ch-ci sion of two directors chosen from each board, because it could not fail to lead to the inference that a misunder standing still existed between the two bodies.—(Hear, hear.) On the 20th of May, 1847, a letter was received from the Bridge Company, bearing the signature of Mr. Curtis, the solicitor, stating that a difference of opinion was likely to arise with respect to the float, and sug gesting that it should be referred to the arbitration of two barristers. The proposition was acceded to ; but since then, up to the 2d of December, nothing but pro crastination on the part of the Bridge Company bad taken place.—(Hear, hear.) On the day he had men tioned a proposition was received from that company, offering to refer the matter at issue to two di tectora of each company. Looking at the delay of several months that had taken place, aad to the ap- parent difficulty of bringing the matter to a satisfactory Conclusion, (for they had experienced much difficulty in the past by settling matters by arbitration) the Market Company refused to accede, and actions had been corn- Menced by the Market Company for the enforcement 4f their view of the understanding with respect to the float. The CHAIRMAN said the Bridge Company wished to refer the matter of the float to arbitration, because they believed it would be amicably settled, and that some other matters of minor importance could be arranged at the same time. The question what money, if any, was due to the Market Company for the delay in opening the float was really the only question at issue. The Market Company not having appointed any arbitrators, the Bridge Company offered in December to refer the matter to an amicable settlement by two directors from each board, which proposition was rejected. This showed that they did not wish to get the shareholders into law, though many charges to that effect had been made against them. Mr. FLADGATE (one of the solicitors to the Market Comp - any) stated, in explanation, that an order for re ference was drawn up and dispatched to Mr. Curtis, who after considerable delay refused to accede to it. The CHAIRMAN said there were several special meet ings at the time in question, and that a reply was re turned at the earliest possible moment. Mr. CURTIS said he felt it his duty to advise the di rectors not to accede to the propositions which emanated from Mr. F.Fladgate. He objected to the proposition with . . respect to costs, which, if they had been returned at 60s. would have saddled the whole of them upon the Bridge Company. It was not visual for costs to abide the event of arbitration, and that they should be settled by the arbitrator. ,The Cli.intmAN stated, in reply to a question, that the market company claimed nearly 1,00001. The question turned upon the costs. Mr. aural differed with Mr. Curtis with respect to the practice of arbitration. The principle to which he objected was becoming more into use every day. After much discussion on the points, Mr. BROWNE complained that the directors had made it appear in their report that existed on the part of the Market Company towards the Bridge Company. Mr. FEW said if the dispute was carried into a court of law that the liability of the company only would be tried, as the judge would no doubt refer the amount of compensation to a barrister. A SHAREHOLDER—I think the best settlement we can adopt is to take the whole matter out of the bands of the lawyers.—(Laughter.) As long as they have got a farthing they will not leave us, and we shall not get a dividend for the next three years.—(Hear.) In reply to questions from Mr. ELLINS, The CHAIRMAN stated that they had paid the en gineer a balance of 5001. ; 2801. under the head of " bill receivable" was owing by the clerk, who at first received but a small salary. The directors had given him a little temporary accommodation, in order to enable him to pay up a few shares he held, which, owing to the bad ness of the times, he had been prevented from doing.— (Hear.) The liabilities did not amount to so large a bIIM as was stated in the last report. He was authorised to state, though he had not been able to get a final ac count from Mr. Chadwick, that his claim would not be so large as that mentioned in the last financial statement. 1,000/. would more than cover the suit of the Market Company.—(A Shareholder—That is a pretty good sum though.) The costs of the Bridge Company were 270., and of the Market Company 1751. 13s. 6d. The costs of the sale of the bridge and the Parliamentary charges for the last two sessions would be more than covered by the interest saved upon the 1,000/. of Messrs. Jackson. —(dear) The directors stated this two years ago. An arrangement had been completed with the Messrs. Jack son to the effect, that they should seekino interest up to let of January this year. Some time ago the claim of Messrs. Jackson might have been paid by 9,000/. ; but it could not now be settled for less than 10,000/. Mr. BROWNE took credit to himself for offering the payment of the 9,0001. The increase of the tolls was gratifying. The CHAIRMAN said the bridge had only been com pleted two years and a half. They might have wasted money in various ways—(Hear, hear) —but they had done the best they could for the protection of . their pro perty. The Hungerford Market Company had, it was true, lent their money, but they had had their quid pro quo. They had had great difficulty in raising money. 500 shares were at one time put up to auction, but they could not dispose of a single share, though they . after wards rose to 20 premium. Tbey had been driven to raise money disadvantageously. They had wished to refer hundreds of matters to the Market Company for arbitration, but the Market Company had never done so. The ordinary law expenses of the company paid to his brother-in-raw were under 44/.—(Hear.) The on of the p reportar paragraph p h received respecting an And tadopted,he Hungerford with t Market.he om is - s i The next resolution , d eclarin g a dividend of ten shillings upon each original share, and of sixpenc e a share upon each fifth share in the company for the half year ending the 31st of January last, was also put and carried unanimously. On the motion of Mr. BROWN, it was resolved that a committee of five shareholders in the Charing-cross Bridge Company , n ot being holders of s h ares in the Hungerford Market . Company, should be a ppointed for the purpose of investigating the claims of the latter company in respect of the float, and to report thereon to a subs, qutilt luteag. The following geutltmen were appointed the committee, nu mely,—Mr. Cope, Mr. Eikins, Mr. Muriel, Mr. Rudall, and Mr. Bro An. The 10;ove resolutions were arrived at after a very lung and diffuse conversation. Another committee was subsequently appointed t,. examine into the financial position of the company, and the meeting - separated after a sitting of four hours. A vote of thanks to the Chairman concluded the business of the day. FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE OF TUESDAY. DOWNING STREET, FEB. 28, 1848. The Queen has been pleased to appoint Edmund Murray Dodd, Esq., to be a Puisne Judge of the Su preme Court of the province of Nova Scotia. Her Majesty has also been pleased to appoint the Rev. William Abiah Newman, Master of Arts, to be Chaplain for Cape Town, in the settlement of the Cape of Good Hope. WHITEHALL, FEB. 28. The Queen bas been pleased to present the R. verend Angus Logan to the church and parish of Tongue, in the presbytery of Tongue and county of Sutherland, vacant by the transportation of the Rev. Hugh M•h(n zie, late minister thereof, to the Gaelic church of Cromarty. CAMBRIDGE-HOUSE, FEB. 25. The Duke of Cambridge has been pleased to appoint the Rev. Edward Burney to be one of his Royal High ness's Chaplains. CROWN OFFICE, FEB. 26. IiFJPAIRER RETURATRD TO SINE IX TICS lIILLSINT PAR- LLII.VENT. Borough of Devizes Lieutenant• Colonel James Bucknall Bucknall Estcourt, of Estcourt, in the county of Gloucestor, in the room of William Heald Ludlow Bruges, Esq„ who has accepted the office of Steward of her Majesty's Chiltern Hundreds. WHITEHALL, FEL 18. The Lord Chancellor has appointed Richard Green wood, of Skipton, in the county of York, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. WHITEHALL, FEE. 25. The Lord Chancellor has appointed Thomas Charles Augustus Brine, of Wiroborn Minster, in the county et Dorset, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. WHITEHALL, FEB, 26. The Lord Chancellor has appointed Henry Jubb, of Iferringthorpe, near Rotherham, in the county of York, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of Berwickshire. Berwickshire Regiment of North British Militia — Thomas Shairp, younger, Esq., to be Captain, vice James Pringle, promoted, Feb. 25. BANKRUPTS. William Hurst, jun., licensed victualler, Bagnigge wells-road, to surrender March 9 and April 14, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, assignee. Basinghall-street; Lawrence and Plews, Old Jewry chambers. William Henry Rains, wine and commission merchant, Liverpool, March 17 and April 14, at eleven, at the Li verpool District Court. Bird, official assignee, Liver pool ; Sharpe and Co., Bedford-row; Banner, Liverpool. George Wilkins, builder, Bristol, March 16, and April 11, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court. Miller, official assignee, Bristol; Ayre, Bristol. Stephen Bennett, teazle dealer, Bristol, March 16 and April 11, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court. Hutton, official assignee, Bristol ; Crosby, Bristol. William Francis Chapman, corn dealer, Worcester, March 15, and April li, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court. Valpy, official assionee, Birmingham ; Rea, Worcester; Wright, Birmingham. Daniel Daniel Ross and Edward Tatham, hat manufacturers. Union-street, Southwark, March 10, at one, and April 17, at eleven, at the Court, Basinghall street. Graham, official assignee, Coleman-street; Hartley, Southampton street. George Farr Arnold, carpenter, Apsley Guise, Bed fordshire, March 10 and April 17, at half-past eleven, at the Court, Basinghall-street. Turquand, official as signee, Guildhall-chambers; Gant, Nicholas-lane. Charles Tottmau Chapman, livery stable keeper, Cam bridge, March 10, at two, and April 4, at eleven, at the Court, Basinghall-street. Edwards, official assignee, Frederick's-place, Old Jewry; £horndike, Staple Inn; Bevil], Cambridge. James Lewis Kennaby, cork dealer, King-street, Snow - hill, March 12 and April 12, at twelve, at the Court, Basinghall-street. Johnson, official assignee, Basing hall-street; Bickley, Moorgate-street. John Atkins, wine and spirit merchant, West Cowes, Isle of Wight, March 7, at halt-past twelve, and April 7, at twelve, at the Court, Basinghall street. Penneil, official assignee; Harper, Kennington-cross. Joseph Beaman„' iron manufacturer, Southwick, Staf fordshire, March 15 and April 8, at eleven, at the Bir mingham District Court. Christie, efficial assignee, Birmingham; Dudley, Dudley; Motteram and Co., Bir mingham. William Wood, licensed victualler, Waddington, Lin colnshire, March 17 and April 7, at eleven, at the Not tingham District Court. Bittleston, official assignee, Nottingham; Brown, Lincoln; Bowley, Nottingham. Dovey Hawesford and John Hawesford, iron founders, Bilston, Staffordshire, March 15 and April 13, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court. Valpy, official as signee, Birmingham; Sparrow Wolverhampton; Mot teram and Co., Birmingham. James Lewis, mercer, Herefordshire, March 14 and April 18, at twelve, at the Birmingham District Court. Christie, official assignee, Birmingham; Davies, Here fordshire; Fuller, Birmingham ; Jones, Gray's Inn rquare, London. Thomas Batt Shuttleworth, brush maker, Sheffield, March 10 and April 22, at ten, at the Sheffield District Court. Freeman, official assignee, Sheffield ; Nixon, Clifford's Inn, London; Binney, Sheffield. John Sankey, blacksmith, Birkenhead, March 17 and April 14, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court. Turner, official assignee, Liverpool; Tincent, Temple, London; Atkinson, Liverpool. William Carter, innkeeper, Exeter, March 9, at twelve, and April 7, at one, at the Exeter District Court. Her naman, official assignee, Exeter; Daw, Exeter; Terrell, Gray's Inn-square, London. DIVIDENDS. At the Court, Basinghall-street. R. H. Pugh, Aldermanbury, warehouseman, March 21, at eleven—J. M. Machin, Waterloo-place, Pall-mall, wine merchant, March 21, at one—R. More, Nora ich, coal merchant, March 21, at half-past twelve—E. B. Smithies and J. A. T. Mathews, Great Dover. road, New ington, glass and lead merchants. In the Country. T. Avant, Dawlish, Devonshire, upholsterer and cabinet maker, March 23, at one, at the Court, Exeter— J. Wetherell, Manchester, publican and wine and spirit dealer, March 23, at twelve, at the Court, Manchester —T. Chatto, Morpeth, Northumberland, linen and woollen draper, March 21, at twelve, at the Court, Newcastle-upon-Tyne—T. Snaith and a Snaith, Bishop Auckland, Durham, ironmongers and plumbers, Marco 23, at eleven, at the Court, Newcastle-upon-Tyne — W. W. Spence, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, woollen draper, March 23, at twelve, at the Court, Newcastle-upon-Tyne —G. Brown, Sbiffnal, Shropshire, banker, March 23, at eleven, at the Court, Birmingham. PAYMENT OF DIVIDENDS. W. D. Hay, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, baker, *d., on Saturday, March 4, or any subsequent Saturday, be tween the hours of ten and three, at the office of Mr. Baker, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. li. Wanstall, Durham, grocer and tea dealer, Is., on Saturday, March 4, or any following Saturday, between the hours of ten and three, at the office of Mr. akley, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. S. S,tott, J. Stott, and W. Stott, Bacup, Lancashire, cotton spinners, 6s. 2d., on Tuesday, March 14, and every following Tuesday, between the hours of eleven and one, at the office of Mr. Pott, Manchester. J. Harford and W. W. Davies, Bristol, and Ebbw vale and Sirhowy, Monmouthshire, 2s. Bd., on Wednes day, March 1, or any subsequent Wednesday, between the hours of eleven aid two, at the office of Mr. Hutton, Bristol. NOTICES OF CERTIFICATES. At the Court, Basinghall-street. G. Windle, Judd-street, Brunswick-square, haber dasher and hosier, March 21, at twelve—T. Bromley, Leighton Buzzard, Bedfordshire, grocer, tea dealer, and corn dealer, also at Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, brick maker, March 21, at twelve--11. J. Hammon, Thread needle-street, architect, and Greek-street, Soho, jewel case maker, March 23, at eleven—T. T. Cattley, Cousin lane, Upper Thames-street, and Vimiera-place, Wands worth-road, colour merchant, March 23, at eleven— J. M`George, !'ardour- street, Soho, ironmonger and smith, March 23, at twelve —J. Sawytiir, Egham, butcher, March 23, at half-past twelve—W. T. Rickard, Regent street, Mile end-road, manufacturing chy mist, March 23, at half-past one—W. Giblett, New Bond-street, butcher, March 22, at half-past one—G. Burr, East Farleigh, Kent, market gardener, March 22, at halt-past twelve — G. Garner, Noble-street, commission agent and ware houseman, March 22, at twelve—T. C. Medwin, Huh land -street, Clapharn.road, and Borough-road, engineer. March 23, at one—J. M . Lee, Cornhill, underwriter, March 24, at two—F. Mackie, Southampton-row, Rus sell-square, tailor, March 22, at twelve. In tke Country. T. N. Benard, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, merchant, March 23, at eleven, at the Court, Newcastle -up on -Ty ne —J. Ri c hards, ;Merthyr Tydvil, Glamorganshite, woollen draper, March 23, at half-past eleven, at the Court, Bristol—T. Sartain, jun., Holt, Wiltshire, sheep and cattle dealer, March 23, at eleven, at the Court, Bristol ---W. T. Morgan, Neath, Glamorganshire, draper, March 30, at eleven, at the Court, Bristol—T. Burley, sen., Wolverhampton, grocer and tea dealer, March 22, at eleven, at the Court, Birmingham—W. Sutton, Stock port, Cheshire, cotton waste dealer, March 22, at twelve, at the Court, Manchester. At the Court of Review, March 21. W. Walker, Birmingham, hosier and tailor—E. Maude and G. Maude, Northfleet, Portland cement manu facturers—J. Hughes, Fronhaulog, Carnarvonshire, miller, corn factor, and quarryman—W. Trice, High street Stepney, grocer and tea dealer—T. Pope, Kid broke, Kent, cowkeeper and milkman—W. Bate, Bridg north, Shropshire, millwright—W. Jones, Liverpool, merchant—T. Berridge, Manchester, dealer in cigars and tobacconist—W. I. Barker, Sunderlaad, auctioneer, stock and share broker, and commission agent—H. E. Field, Mark-lane, eating-house-keeper—J. Russell, Leamington Priors, grocer—W. Fitzpatrick, Walsall, Staffordshire, railway contractor and brickmaker — W. H. 'loading, Gloucester-place, Portman-square, surgeon and apothecary—J. Hill, jun., Southampton, builder, surveyor, and brickmaker—G. Miners, Winchelsea, Sussex, wine and spirit merchant—T. B. Figgures, Blockley, Worcestershire, corn dealer—J. Hills, Billeri cay, Essex, auctioneer and appraiser. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. C. E. Secretan and J. a Capper, Change-alley, Corn. car a MINORITY-AYES, 101. Adair, Hugh E. Fitzwilliam, G. W Newdegate, C. N. Adair, it. Shafto Forbes, William Newry, Viscount Adore, Viscount Fortescue, Chichester Nugent, Sir Percy Aglionby, H. Fox, Richard M. O'Brien, Sir Lucius Alexander, N. French, F. O'Brien, Timothy Anstey, Thomas Gore, W. 0. )'Brien, W. S. Archdall, Captain Grace, 0. 1). J. O'Connell.l.l. J. Bateson, Thomas Greenall, Gilbert 0 Connor, Feargus Illackall S. W. Greene, Joha Osborne, Ralph _ _ Blake, M. J. Grogan, E. _ Bourke, Richard Si. Gwyn, Howel Pechell,lCapiain Power, Dr. _ . . _ . Boyd, John Hall, Sir Benjamin Reynolds, John Bremridge, Richard Hamilton, G. A. Buford, Francis Brooke, Sir Arthur Hamilton, J. M. Sadleir, John Sunbury, W. Mayes, Sir:E. St. George, Chris. Burke, Sir T. J. Heald, James Scholefleld, William Burroughes, H..,N. Henley, J. W. Scully, Francis Callaghan, D. Herbert, Henry A. Spooner, R. Carter, John B. Hood, Sir Alexander Stafford, Augustus Chichester, Lord J. Hume, Joseph Stuart, Lord Dudley Clements, Charles Keogh, With am Sullivan, Michael Clive, H. B. Ker, Richard Talbot, J. H. Cole, H. A. Lawless, Cecil Tenison, H. K. Conolly, Col. Macnamara, Major Thompson, Colonel Corbelly, M. E. Di•Naghten, Sir E. Wakley, Thomas Crawford, W. S. Maher, N. Walsh, Sir J. B. D&W8011, T. V. Meagher, Thomas Walter, John Deering, John Mahon, O'tiorman Watkins, Colonel Devereux, John T. Maxwell, Hon. J. P. Williams, John __ Dod, J. W. Mena, Sir Henry Willoughby, Sir H. Dinacuft, John Mousell, William Yorke, E. T. Fagan, William Moore, George H. Ferguson, Sir R. Afoivatt, Francis MIMIC Ftolliott, J. Muntz, G. F. Dunne, F. P. Fitzpatrick, J. W. Napier, Joseph O'Flaherty,lAnthony, MAJORITY-NOES, 165. Forteseue, J. W. Paget, Lord A. Galway, Viscount Paget, Lord C. Glyn, G. C. Paget, Lord&George Godson, R. . Palmer, Robert Graham, Sir James Parker, John Greene Thomas Perfect, Robert Grenfell, C. Pascoe Peto, Samuel Grenfel , Charles W. Pigott, Francis Grey, Sir G. Pllkington, James Grey, Ralph W. Pinney, W. Harris, Hon. Capt. Price, Sir R. Hastie, Alexander Pugh. David Hastie, Archibald Pusey, Philip Hay, Lord J. Raphael, Alexander Hayter, W. G. Renton, John C. Ileadiam, T. E. Ricardo, Osman Heathcoat, John Rice, E. R. Ileathcote, G. J. Rich, Henry Heneage, G. H. W. Robartes, T. J. Henry, Alexander Russell, F. C. H. Heywood, James Rutherford, A. Hindley Charles Salwey, Colonel Hope, Henry T. Scrope, G. P. Howard, C. W. Seymour, Lord Inglis, Sir It. Shell, R. L. Jervis, Sit:John Shelburne, Earl of Jervis, John Simeon, John Jolllffe, Sir W G. H. Slaney, R. A. Jones, Captain Smith, Vernon Keppel, G. T. Smith, J. A. Kershaw, James Smith, J. Benjamin Kildare, Marquis Somerville, Sir W. King, P. J. Spearman, H. J. Labouchere, Henry Stanley, E. J. Lascelles, W. S. Stanton, W. H. Lincoln, Earle( Strutt, Edward Lindsay, Colonel Stuart, Henry Littleton, E. R. Thicknesse, Ralph Mackenzie, W. F. Thornely, Thomas M'Gregor, joint Trelawny, J. S. Mahon, Viscount Tynte, Colonel Maitland, T. Verney, Sir H. Marshall, J. G. Vesey, Hon. T. Martin, J. Villiers, Charles Matheson, Alex. Vivian, J. E. Matheson,:Colenel Walmsley, Sir J. Melgund, Viscount Ward, H. G. Miles, William Wawn, J. T. Di itckell, T. A. Wilcox, Brodie Moffatt, George Wils•n, Matthew Morgan 0. Wood, Sir Charles Morpeth, Viscount Wortley, J. S. Morris, David Wyvill, Marreaduke Mostyn, E. M. L. TILLIGE.B. Molgrave, Earl Neeld, Joseph Abdy, T. N. Acland, Sir T. Aleock, Thomas Anderson, Arthur Anson, Colonel __. Anson, Viscount Armstrong, Sir A. Arundel, Earl of Baines, M. T. Baldock, E. H. Barnard, E.G. Bellew, B ß ße a l. rr r ek r h th e,l g e sy t n . , M. ViscountThomas Captain ir Blackstone, W. S. Bolder°, Henry Boyle, Colonel Brand, Thomas Bright, John Briico, M. Brotherton, J. Brown, W. Buller, Sir J. Y. Buller, Charles Campbell, W. F. Castlereagh, Visc. Cavendish, C. C. Cavendish, G. H. Cayley, Edward S. Chaplin, W. J. Charter. s, Francis Christopher, It. Christy, Samuel Cobbold, John C. Colebrooks, Sir T. Coles, Henry B. Courtenay, Lord Cowper, W F. Craig, W. G. Tufnell. H. Hill, Lord Marcus Cripps, W. DaiiyMple, Captain Davie, Sir H, Deedes, W. Denison, J. E. Drummend, H. Duncan, George Dundas, Admiral Dundas, Sir D. Dundas, George Edwards, Henry Elliot, John E. Evans, William Fergus, John Fordyce A. D. Forsater, 'AI &thew TO THE SECRETARY OF THE BRADFORD REFORM ASSOCIATION. SIR,—On Monday, the 28th, the Chancellor of the Exchmquer abandoned his intention of increasing the income-tax to 5 per cent. He further proposed to take the expenses of the Kafir war out of the ba lances lying in the Exchequer. It strikes me forcibly that this last is not a diminution of the expenditure. The further discussion was deferred till Friday. On the same evening Mr. Hume asked Lord John Russell whether it was the intention of Ministers to interfere in any way in consequence of the changes in the form of government in France ; and was answered most distinctly in the negative, which was received "vial ,cheers from all parts -of the House. Some of the orators on the Opposi.ion side' attempted in the course of the evening to draw the Prime Minister into debateable ground; and intimated that Mr. Pitt had made the same kind of declaration,—by way of inferring that a good jolly war was possible after all. But the result was only a repetition of the declara tion. A mischievous race, these orators I _ _ On Tuesday Lord Palmerston was asked by Mr. Mon ckton Milnes whether he had any information on the course intended to be pursued by the French Government towards foreign Powers. And the Minister replied, that he had this day assurances from. the French Minister for Foreign Affairs, that it was the intention of the French Government to maintain all the existing relations with foreign Powers, unless attacked. Nearly six hours were afterwards spent in debate upon a motion for a Select Committee on the work ing of the Irish Poor-law; which was finally ne gatived. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, T. PERRONET -THOMPSON. Blackheath, London, March 1, 1848. LONDONDERRY and COLERAINE RAILWAY. The half-yearly general rneeting of the shareholders of this company was yesterday held at the offices of the company, No. 5, Church-passage, Guildhall, for the purpose of receiving a report and statement of accounts from the directors, and for the transaction of the ordi nary business of the company. The meeting was also made special for the purpose of considering the subject of the forfeiture of certain shares held by defaulting shareholders, and for taking into consideration the draft of a Bill to be submitted to Parliament, autho rising a deviation in the line of railways as at present authorised to be made. ... The chair was taken at one o'clock by the Chairman of the company, John Griffith Frith, Esq. The minutes of the last meeting having been con firmed, the Secretary read the report, from which it appeared — "That this project originated in the belief that if the railway could be taken along.the shores of Lough Foyle, and within the Slob Lands, to be reclaimed from the sea, the land so recovered would be of value sufficient, not eta; . Ln eoe. r, kai t be a et t oth moderate , ncahkaer a c an character od only to pay for the works necessary for the reclamation, but also for the railway itself. " Contracts for the embankments necessary to -com plete the reclamation were entered into with Messrs. Bromhead and Hemming, at prices advised by the tv athen contractors ework, upon rp ko , n t stipulating phlea nd itr, e cutpo upon n o s perfect the works by the first day of Januar), 1849. were a dvised condition of double that sum being expended by the contractors for the same purpose. " The works h avin g thus been placed under contract, w but the dir ec t ors regre tt e d t o be o state, that notwith s t an di ng t h ey h a d afforded e facility the contra c t ors, an d ma d e the reqtrred e advance tocommenced; upon al plant, the contract for the embankment was not d u ly, or at all satisfactorily, carried on, and the directors became convinced that the contractors were unable to carry on the entire works simultaneously, and had determined that all their energies should be di rectede withto one in of b thei dmei,aie h rree proposed enclosures, leaving the even until that was completed; but tthe ti works did not ma k e t h a t pro gress ectore felt th e y h a d a r i g h t to expect; others. thiswhichthe g l i and the directors bad to report that they felt, under the circumstances, that they had no alternative but to take the contract for the reclamation out of the hands of Messrs. Bromhead and Hemming. " The present arrears of calls amounted to 64,0001.; of this it was computed the sum of 50,0001. would be paid, leaving 80,0001. to be provided for the completion of the middle enclosure in two years. " When the three enclosures shall have: been com pleted, the number of acres belonging to the company acre,aby the pre per twenty would be 10,200, being 2,000 acres l ess than originally designed, the difference bein g caused by the Admiralty having required the line of embankm ent to be set back laudwise, within the line chosen b y the engineers. But tsaeknitupgiatnh, at e i cent, under the lowest es timate p ut before the Parlia mentary Committee, th e y would produce 510, 0 001:; number ere s be i as ng enough, in all reasonable p robabilit y , to t i m t the n is value hed of iw. per of pay for the re clamation, and also to provide the capital necessarj ., tor the construction of the railway. " Having regard to this statement, the directors would submit that three plans suggest themselves for consideration. First, to stop, and to keep the present works from falling into decay. Second, t o proceed at a speed such as will serve to complete the Middle Enclo sure in two years. Third, to find the Weans necessary to complete it in a shorter time. " The first of these plas would 1 Plainly be disastrous, and could only be just n ified by the insolvency of the company. " The second promised a safe termination to the first and most important part of the work, but protracted much beyond the time anticipated, or necessary for its completion. " The third seemed to your directors the best way of forwarding the interests of the company under the pre sent circumstances. It presented, however, the difficulty of finding the sum within the time required. The diffi culty did not appear to be insuperable, and might be met by seeking part of the sum required in arrears of calls, and the remainder either in a loan, or an issue of prefe rence shares." Mr. Burrs stated that he bad lately paid a visit to the works upon the line, an d he regretted to see the state in which they were. It appeared to him that the present deplorable position of the company was owing entirely to the management of the parties having the control of the contracts and works. The sum of 200,0001. had been already expended, and they had nothing whatever to show for it. A tunnel had been made, but there was no communication with it, and the whole of the works he could look upon in no other light than that of " splendid ruins. Mr. TYRELL, the solicitor to the line, said that al though the expenditure might at present appear useless, it would nut ultimately prove so. The position of the - g hill, stockbrokers—J. Nicholson, sen., J. Nit. W. Nic k,lson, Kendal, Westmorland, hosiets facturers—L. Cherry, sen., and W. Cherry, Si Hertfordshire, drapers and tailors—J. T. Clay a— Eddison, Rastrick, Yoikshire, fancy woollen manufac turers—H. Hudson and W. Hudson, Leeds, paperhang ing manufacturers—R. Midland and J. Lackland, St. Helen's, Lancashire, crown glass toanufacturers—J. Webster and R. Ilarrison,:St. Helen's, Lancashire, bowie builders—J. Knaggs, Mornington-crescent, Hampstead road, and W. R. Rogers, Mortimer-street, Cavendish square, surgeons—J. L. Godwin and H. Barber, Bristol, tilers—J. Waterman, sen.. and J. Waterman, jun., Brenchley, Kent, n.altsters and farmers—T. Samson and E. Samson, Hoxton-square, Shoreditch, cabinet makers —R. Brimer and J. Wakefield, Manchester, crucible manufacturers—J. Stringer and A. Ogden, Lark-hill, near Middleton, Lancashire, roller makers—G. Finnis and J. Ronalds, Hythe, Kent, upholsterers—J. Wignall and R. Curwen, Fleetwood-upon-Wyre, Lancashire, timber and slate merchants—J. Yates and H. Yates, Prescot, Lancashire, stonemasons and builders—Mary Evans and 0. Jones, Ruthin, Denbighshire, grocers and drapers—T. Cooper and T. Massey, Church Greeley, Derbyshire, earthenware manufacturers and farmers—E. Savage, C. Smith, and E. Tasker, Birebin-lane, Cornhill, engravers (as far as regards E. Savage)—John Hockley Woodrow, sen., and John Hockley Woodrow, jun., Hat ton-garden, tailors and drapers—J. Nicholls, H. Cordon, and J Adams, Staffordshire Potteries, earthenware manufactures (as far as regards R. Cordon)—W. Cypl, and G. Barker, Longton, Staffordshire Potteries, earthen trtanufacturers—W. Aizlewood and W. Frankish, Ro- therham, Yorkshire, spring manufacturers— W. M. Browne and E. H. Browne, Peckham-rye, Surrey, builders and brickmakers—J. Hargrave, R. H. Bell, E. Bell, and E. Hastings, Munkton, Durham, paper manufacturers — G. Duncan and G. Newman, builders—Martha Robin son, Jane Kerslake, and Anne Rubinson, Bath, milliners and dressmakers—R. F. Swift and E. Smith, Wordsley, Staffordshire, ironfuunders and smiths—A. Cockburn, A. Cockburn, and H. Smithes, London and Oporto, merchants (as far as regards A. Cockburn)—J. Wilson, J. King. and J. G. Copley, Manchester, cotton spinners —G. Ware, B. Ware, and Mary Ware, Bimbury and Boxley, Kent, farmers—V. T. Higgins and W. H. Higgins, Liverpool, iron merchants—C. Morgan and A. Clarence, Bradford, Yorkshire, tea dealers—A. Mayhew and T. A. F. Reynolds, Carey-street, Lincoln's Inn, attorneys. INSOLVENT PETITIONERS. Silas Cressey, Fiddeford, Dorsetshire, hosier. Peter Mullen, Sandgate, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, publican. William Bailicliffe, High Seacombe, Cheshire, and Li verpool, paper hanger. Woodgatu Durrant, Tonbridge Wells. William Gwillim, Lugwardine, Herefordshire, surgeon. Thomas Hine and Henry Hine, Sidmouth, Devonshire. John Bill, Birmingham, baker. John Biddle, Birmingham, butcher. Samuel Young, Loughborough, Leicestershire, ware houseman. Edward Waters, Liverpool, boarding house keeper. John Symington, Welford, Northamptonshire, police officer. Hector Parsonage, Birmingham, paper hanger. Luke Lock Packwood, Birmingham. Thomas Vaughan, Birmingham, stonemason.' Thomas Calderbank, Broadheath, Cheshire, shopkeeper. John Jowett, Clayton, Yorkshire, manufacturer. John Tonge, Little Bolton, Lancashire, provision dealer. Frederick Hale, Hurst, Wiltshire, cattle dealer. William Strangeways, Richmond, Yorkshire, butcher. Robert Dunn, Little Budworth, Cheshire, farmer. George Potter, Kirby-moor-side, Yorkshire, ironmonger John Webster, Harum, Yorkshire, farmer. John Newby, Kirby moor-side, Yorkshire, innkeeper. Thomas I)ewhurat, Liverpool, grocer. Richard George Bibby, Liverpool, inspector of police. William Haynes, Liverpool, shopman. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS. J. Steel, Sanquhar, merchant, to meet March 4 and 21, at twelve, within the Queensbury Arms Inn, San quhar. F. Borland, Glasgow, merchant, to meet March 6 and April 3, at one, within the Star Hotel, Glasgow. A. Richardson, Abbey, near North Berwick, farmer and insurance broker, to meet March 4 and 25, at one, within the George Inn, Haddington. G. Campbell, Edinburgh, cattle salesmaa, to meet March 7 and 28, at one, within Dowell's Rooms, Edin burgh. T. Dunn, Glasgow, wood merchant, to meet March 6 and 27, at two, within the Blz_ck Bull Inn, Glasgow. W. Paul, Edinburgh, accountant, to meet March 6 and 27, at two, within Stephenson's Rooms, Edinburgh. G. Brownlee, Mid-Calder, merchant, to meet March 6 and 27, at twelve, within Stevenson's Rooms, Edin burgh. J. Borrows, Glasgow, baker, to meet March 6 and 27, at twelve, within the Albion Hotel, Glasgow. J. and A. Porteous, Kilmarnock, and Canonmills, near Edinburgh, to meet March 6 and 27, at two, within Ferguson's Ship Tavern, Edinburgh. E. M.Letchie, Glasgow, wine merchant, to meet March 6 and 27, at twelve, within Comrie's Hotel, Glasgow. RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS LIVERPOOL, FEB. 22. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Birkenhead, Lanca shire, and Cheshire Junction (311. Shares), 6. 5 / 1 dis.—East Lancashire, 19 c —Ditto, New, 514 dis. c.—Lancashire and Yorkshire (late M. B. and B.), 11 dis.—Ditto, Fifths, 1 c. dis.—Ditto, Fifths (West Riding Union), 3 1 4 c. dis.—Lon don and North-Western, 130—Ditto, New Quarters, 3 1 4 p. —Ditto, Quarters (A), '2 c. p.—Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire, Preference, dis.—Midland, Halves,s l / 4 e. dis. —South-Eastern and Dover, No. 4,271 i dis.—York, New castle, and Berwick (G. N. E. Purchase), % p. MANCHESTER, FEB. 29. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—East Lancashire, New, 6 dis.—Edinburgh and Glasgow, 39—Lancashire and York shire, Fifths, 1 dis.—London and North-Western (Manches ter and Birmingham), Quarters (C), 2% p.— Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire, Preference, 5i dis.—North Staf fordshire, A dis.—South-Eastern and Dover, No 4,2% dis. BIRMINGHAM, FEB. 29. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—North British, Ex tension, 3s. 9d. dis.—North Staffordshire, 1 dis.—Shrewsbury and Birmingham (A), 3 3 4 dis.—Shropshire Union, 3 di a.— South Staffordshire, 2 1 % dis. YORK, FEB. 28. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are— Great Northern, 3% —North British, Thirds, 24s.—York, Newcastle, and Berwick, Extension, No. I. 17 1 ,4—Ditto, No. 2 (late New Berwic.ki), ie%—Ditto (G. N. E. Purchase), 84. EDINBURGH, FEB. 28. STOCK ExcrrANGE.—The sales are—Caledonian, New (Si. 15s..paid), 41. 10s.—Dundee and Northern Junction, 29s. — North British, Quarters, 41. lSe. cash.—Ditto, Thirds, 235. WIDTH OF STREETS AND POWER OF BUILDINGS ACT TO PREVENT NARROWING THRM.—A building owner, Mr. Harvey, had commenced the erection of a detached house in the Lewisham-road far before the fronts of the adjoining houses on one side, on a line laid down by the district surveyor who had been previously employed by the owner to make a plan of the land for building purposes. The owners of the house next ad joining, thus materially injured, laid an information through their architect, Mr. George Godwin, jun., before ihe referees; meetings were held, at which all the parties attendee;; it was evident that laying down the line the houses on both sides had not been considered; and the referees (Messrs. Hocking and Shaw), made an award, the effect of which would be to put back the house in question very materially, and slightly lessen the injury to the adjoining owners, and to the appearance of the neighbourhood. The registrar, however, thought it his duty to withhold the seal of office, en the grounds that the " building in question being a separate and detached dwelling-house is not a projection within the meaning of of the Metropolitan Buildings Act, and that there is no rule in the Act which prohibits the erection of such a building in the circumstances in question." In opposi tion to this view, Mr. George Godwin has pointed out to the Commissioners of Works, to whom the matter has been referred by the registrar, that the Competence of the referees to determine the line of front, and award against the projection of the building before that lino!, has been admitted by . the registrar on many previous o ccasions. The question is a simple one, have the re f e r e es power to determine what is the general line of tents, and to enforce or prevent projections before it? If they have not power to determine it in this case, they have not in any other, as the Commissioners of Woods will speedily find out, should they be led to confirm the registrar in his refusal to affix the seal.—Builder. MEEIING OF GIBSON AND BRIGHT'S ELECTION COMMITTEE.—MANCHESTER, T UES DAY.—A . meeting of this committee was held this afternoon, in a . r?om in Newali's-buildings, for the p ur p ose of memorialising the Right lion. Thomas Milner Gibson and John Bright on the subject of Lord John Russell's budget. The chair was occupied by George Wilson, Esq., president of the comm itt e e, and the meeting was addressed by Alderman Warkin, James Watts, George Hadfield, and Archibald Prentice, Esqrs., &e. &c. A memorial was adopted. condemnatory of the income tax as it at present stands,. and the legacy and probate duties, and suggesting a tax upon landed property. A resolution was afterwards: , proposed by Mr. Nelson, and seconded by Air. Whyatt,, condemning the conduct of Mr. Milner Gibson for his; vote upon the window-tax and the grant for the Kafis: war. The meeting was attended by about 300 of emir most respectable merchants, manufacturers, &c., a . rail was most enthusiastic in its denunciations of the Mime-. terial budget. Several rounds of applause were give for the French nation, and resolutions calling upon Liar Members for this city to oppose any aggressive mov e inem that may hereafter be made by the Government' )5 i. the French nation. THE NEW NOVEL, " ANGELA," BY THE AUTHOR o 3t: 10 `• EMILIA WYNDHAM."—" It life w ere g iven to Ut 1, . says the Atlas, " only for ease a nd en j o y ment we shou desire nothing better than 'to lie upon a sofa and r e . lA . ( eternal new novels,' by the authoress of ' Emit 141, Wyndham.' It would be but a poor pretence not'., %,:, write the feminine noun. Such novels as ' Emil ia Wyndham' and ' Angela' areso womanly—they ha , a a grace, a tenderne ss, a trustiegness, a faith in th w holiness of affection and the virtue of self-discipline e such as we never expect to meet with in the works ot: the master artist. Such pictures of female heroism. w hether in doing or in suffering, are beyond the reach of man. ' Emilia Wyndham' was a delightful illustra tion of one aspect of womanly duty; ' Angela' resembles • it with a dillerance. It has the same appreciation of the • dignity of patient submission to the will of God, com-• biped with an active performance of human duties ; but. the circumstances which call forth an assertion of these qualities are in the two wvels widely different." YEOMANRY (IRELAND).—III conformity with a return moved for by Mr. Hume, a statement of the number of officers and men of the yeomanry in Ireland: on the Ist of January, 1829, 1835, 1840, and 1847, has• just been laid on the table of the House of Commons- It appears that in the year 1829 there were 1 , 157 com missioned officers of the yeomanry, 35,258 non- com missioned officers and men. For the years 1835, 1840,. and 1847 the return is nil, the yeomanry having been.. disbanded on the 31st, of March, 1634. t e 7.,;:: - Z-71 ii . - 03 ti,ti7 k•v- .o'',.. 0 1,-, F. , ! 47 .(7 . 1 ,/. ) ' • -1, _,., 1. , --", ,7 • ~L T 1 , -.)., -, e:::.,,, iotuat....ll ' . 4 Oil .., -_.- ,.- ,„:„.);-. :412 t , • .—..,—,............. ' • iipit "' *,. 4 :-- ieholson, and - and mann , . ;L lb Albans,. SAlabi .1„.. ; , ,. End W. - ~- ,-. 1