The Sun. — London, England, 1835-04-07 00:00:00

the N o bl e Lord the Member for Lancashire. Of. that , tr ° ° 4 he h a d read in English history an excellent Alas lutd°. It was in the thi r d vo l ume o f H ume ' s Hi story , an d tti reference to the Lord Stanley of that day.—(Laughter, Itiok ri "°f" Read.") J ust before the decisive battle of War ,;.,,_the Lord St an l ey of that day raised a powerful body of lends and retainers in Cheshire and Lancashire-Hear, thoor,rfilter)---but without openly declaring him, and lls filter)—but had secret assurance of his friendly intentions, r,r.ttnes of both sides knew not what to infer from his equi tit-410 Pehaviour.—( Cheers from the Opposition benches.) The . siste r ' at last approached each other at Bosworth near Lei r' Henry had 6,000 men, Richard's army was double o,enlliaber, and a decisive action was every moment ex iii;(; between them..—( Laughter and cheers.) Lord Stanley litttscr a manded 7, 000 men—(L aughter)--took care to post )11Stf Atherstone, not far from the hostile camps--(that ptp;sWow the gangway)—(Laughter)—and he made such pesition as enabled him, on occasion, to join either dnyi,;,;(l.aughter and cheers.) The Lord Stanley of th . i n s 14, 4 7 not a tail of 7,000, nor could the Derby dilly contain tortra, o t (h, oh, an d calls for a division.) He begged them zkoli,,elriber that n o t to pass th i s resolution would be tanta- I,t 4e G r a lelraefi b declaration was e t la h t e i n en cleared and the Committee divided. 262 237 resol Majority —2s ntsiritsoatnnnigtdwas consequently carried. Against that while strangers were excluded Mr. C. "Warburton each addressed the Committee for which several Members entered the House sitr°?,k their places on the opposition Benches.] the %nd Peel expressed hi s h o p e th a t th e nex t ti me i t was pY r Oeessary to put up a Gentleman to speak against time; l ee might fall upon some one who had something to namense cheering and laughter.) IRISH TITHES. lei ° 44 3 i • r e°ldreturn to the Gallery, we found that the House had Lo rd J . RU SSELL said that the Committe having acceded (4 resolution, he now gave notice that to-morrow he 111°Ve--- -" That it is the opinion of this House that no I lna rtl re e relating to Irish Tithes will lead to a satisfactory ” Si r ant, without its embodying the foregoing resolution.. to lie r PE t E o_m L o w rr a o s vv u ? nderstood to ask whether the motion the h ' be br ought on before the other motions which stood on I,, ll Meono s . RU SSELL said that the Hon. Member for Exeter '''sno t r u ted to postpone in his (Loi d J. Russell's) favonr, °lt on the s u bj ect o f Ch urch R ates. tr SUP PLY.—NAVY ESTIMATES. 'toy C°use then went into Committee of Supply on the kr pnates. 41%, LPHINSTONE was understood to put a question si,. 15 ,,` kr Cockburn's salary under his new appointment. d _ ll '' p. EE L said there could be no doubt whatever that 3 11 1)l o-fnee4urn would r • no salary on account of his Cock He could e a e ss r u iv r e e the Hon. Member that Sir 'der —ur ° himself would decline the receipt of the salary 3u ch cir„ t r mstances. mi t 4 eti ort ' at r t i t INSTONE was understood to express his sa -4,441 A si t i ° ,e,,,lplanation. Afe ro b e .14 tY said he had given the same answer to the sjat atl. r some time wro. k'ObRINGTO'N begged to ask whether Hon. ► l ll 'Men NI °lithe other side of the House were now aware r• D s 11. 1) 1, °rt e w tt s° l l had hoisted the Admiralty flag at the De rr g t n e--"? He had received information that the Gentleman had applied for permission. , and ° the "AL here interrupted the Hon. . ti ? i -h r t k ll . ll , ; r2 r P s e t r v f o i t m e e be fo in r g pu m tt o i v n e g d, the question had not arrived. to. , t O said, in reference to the question respecting it ot 4 .cep t Curles salary, that Sir G. Cockburn had consented S i n t. l.l n ew appointment, and was only remaining at his e l e Vest Indies till his . successor arrived.—( Cheers.) olletheuuttlNGTON said he would . now put his ques "agat r Mr. Dawson had authority to hoist the Admi- D evonport? Perhaps the Noble Lord opposite rt 434 not aware that if the Admiralty flag was seen b) any 114ttt tfileill7l. •e r, the Crew were bound to fire . a salute. The flag sec the Hon. Member amidst the noise which_ d f " A lu the House) was hoisted when the members of the 14,4te,:eigtatiralty were present in a body, but still the colours t i ,!o be could Jo. out of the arsenal itself. It was very import '47ii whether the Secretary to the Board of Admi k. a Prof,,?trfert, himself into the Board, and hoist the flag. ',l 3 ert s : s Pnal man he had very strong feelings on the im tilirtier . „Q the fl ag . tV R DINGE would ask the Gallant Admiral whe e course of his experience, he had known any lol, h eit7 g .b t , s fe . c? sal ( ul i e ea i r n .) consequence uence of the Admiralty gl' il yss H q believed the Gallant Ad uwsre that no such thing had ever oFcurred.— k I P refrile would also ask him whether, according to the . t iils r Tations, the navy were bound to salute the Admi -7 - 0' to s"" I3 RINGTON believed that it was incumbent on VII% J. kB allite. ttl7 l4ll CA . , l _ BERESFORD said he was sure that if the be IN ‘ginral had hoisted the Admiralty flag as Mr. Daw 14aaddupPosed to have done, namely, out of an Inn window, sils te l P have expected it to be seen by the navy, much d W i er lioi:** -- ( Laughter.) He was certain Mr. Dawson had y ed ted f i_ 8 as improper as those which bad been is- Oir ;per individuals. eilltillatfetrreaaßt:l.VVßßlDGE could not allow the question to phtAs a naval man he felt himself boundd wh o e the (111:,F ono his sentimeints. The . Gallant Admiral tLor h i eoita vithts s d on i d t r n. o p t a r w ee s . e eived a satisSactory answer. The Dawson hoist tae Admiralty flag, , and , „..11--rity for ss doin g? He sailed upon the Noble kitortft'usit ASHLEYeak ( Cheers from the Opposition.) 11 C er t la aiim 'e ; t :e — d that was bound to give an th rt kiit y ° o t f e que.stie,n, but 4 ‘-e had .. not as_ yet had an op otZ h ou making, the requisil r inquiries. It was but two or a g° Oat he had . een i n f orme d of the Gallant " ee .sot -M entio.a t o p u t th e piest i on, and s i nce t h at time he left kr t l .lll l', TR the House. ..( Hear, hear.) N I c o. 0 WBRIDGI. - a id the point was of much im -10 lief ° t hall not arisen yeserday, but had been for some s os r e the public. If Miiisters were not ready with_ timlitt t w L et. they ought to be .eatly. The Admiralty flag Pi s Net e tb ue trifled with. He begged to ask the Right Hon. li 4 .t Lo r r Member for Cumberland whether when he, as ,& 3 °t treard the Admiralty, hoisted the Admiralty flag it hie~'with every possible respect? R her o LT‘Y said, in answer to the attacks of the Hon. ), 11 - t e ss pn.ol3l.l)(3site, he could state that he had resided for three t 6 r e e l to the election within a few' yards of the place Sch e Admiralty flag was hoisted, and he could aver 41 1 ,,a ti n WO the fact—that the flag was hoisted. ti dt %itisi e s i 3 3l t * MEninElt said the Member for Sandwich was him irth ed before now for his seat to the influence of the Is tl3 l) 3 tif ));; every influence, fair and unfair, was used against was r ised ) L t ht Admiralty and the Government, and he kti o ,`° tear him, under such circumstances, state such k t, 4 llo(} canvass of Mr. Dawson. It 41 L t 1 10 N. MEMBER said he bad frequently seen the s l '"A„,ttlird hoisted by different candidates at elections. 4' 4 4, 4ge Meant as a party symbol, but simply a? was 11 311 t 0 i,Periaps a symbol of loyalty, and no objection_ rs th,!O t ii; e ither at the hustings or in that House.— ( Cheers. . $ ) Shles s I ,s'ut Admiral (Codrington) was very unlucky in bi th -13 t terely now, but at all times. He recollected kt ° S. 0e Mint Admiral brought charges against the Right t1 i 4 4 4 : in let - an below him ( Sir R. Peel we understood), nnJes - L as unable to substantiate them. He brought th ie re k e . tel), i lainst one of his own brothers in arms (Capt.o ki t ,"llt A - 7 in these, too, he failed.—( Cheers.) Reallythe . 'ilcoC'utiural, therefore, ' should be more cautious in bring tt:!r 4 , tons without piofs.—( Cheers and laughter.) 4 thi s; • .e'EL said he would call the attention of the House oc irrelevant discussion to the real point to be con- N et It was highly important that the votes on the .. Navy e, ll ll Should be passed. The question of the hoisting 1 '* already disctssed.—( Laughter, and hear,. hear. t o 4 ; l try tt .luel_ln proceed to public business, about which the he Ninterested.-_( Hear.) The Accountant- General et tt 'in pie 4 l v! had sent_ in a paper stating that several depart ,l 140 ith_p_rovidcd for—for instance, the sums for the 1 11 ' „,2nulling-yards would be due on the 10th of April, t -wisicn was made for that demand. Now, consider- OroeAtibric service, he hoped no impediment would be 1.11 the way of the appropriation of the public funds to Ca r e P.'inlae and necessary purposes. Ohl ~u I itIRKEL EY said a few words, which were in- Or e p t° 3, 10, It C')DRINGTON sa id, i n answer to t h e attac k t t zl i t — . r especting Captain Dickenson, he would move at 3 ,tle to L u ß time th a t th e re p or t o f th e C our t- mar ti a l on that ( tI A CC should b e l a id b e f ore t h e H ouse . 04 1 ; ,gue then ensued between Mr. HUME and Lord Asx tir,° Ras inaudible to MS.. L t ho h 'ME subsequently said that public money was given b''h• it o f Ministers under circumstances that money was to former Ministers, and for the first time the public ‘ 3l st to , the naval establishment was dishonoured. We un s.l4ris` th e Hot. Gentleman further to say that the dihs r. °I the late Parliament and the delays in voting t e "ttr ot l s t were the main causes in embarrassing the naval de- Til t 8. 4 ietstimate having been read from the Chair, i bt tl it of PEEL said the delay was unavoidable, and not the Q 14 ,1 th e Government. The estimates were limited to 11 5, 34) and Fridays, and on these days important amend tiPerlettl, motions on . other questions .. were proposed, which u "os, xju the discussion on the estimates. For instance an tr'ernber to-night said he would on Friday move that ,3 f 11 1 :" I nse ( - Ir , should take into consideration the claims o t t - „'''ocers of the East India Company. The fault was that of Ministers, nor was it their wish to create any I , l lt d h e : against, .;r obstruction to, the usual course of Parini- Vulz undue operation of their own. L' t VV,, — • F. YOUNG said if his Hon. Friend the Member ug ee_sahre4erster had not given notice to-night he could not S r his motion at all. 'Ol. l ' t • PEEL said he did not blame the Hon. Member_ for n in particular, but many other Hon. Gentlemen kti„sed their amendments, to the obstruction of the censide hlr °lthe estimates, and the injury of the public . service. . LABOUCHERE made some remarks which were in e to us. tir d ASH 1 1 3 4 h, LEY was understood to say that the Govern `here refused to pay the bills of exchange referred to._ 'Rs Were certainly particular bills which when p e r r esen r te o t jl_ll„,reovernment very properly delayed giving an order pro ‘teditl 4 surer of the Navy until they saw their way. T 1, 4e4 4 . was a secret one, and usual with former Governments i thh‘7 e d ; and h ow i t transpired he could not tell, nor did at frit fair t o ma k e i t the su b ject of a pu bli c di scuss i on in l us e• s'AEOUCHERE re plied, and was again inaudible. principle a time and id the will, ions which [ember for itroducing derivable tholic and destroyed. ale of both posing the lculated to as we un- id of prin ' the Irish vision was be heard ion of the e the Irish at the ex rather by ort. The hich every .ere a sur the benefit at a sort of h measure ced of the ley meant Clergy or ruments of be exclu land. He regretted ties of the nand, even mo tion of he gallery, ted to only nded that ishes with ago,. there that space as the con- E'unds. In few years lty of find ), but they and that it time one iidered it a Protestant ions educa )n between nee of the ralities and of Ireland, Whatever r propose to made this uld not stop le to an in" knew not , f knowing , an appea l ,, (site would he countrY Church--- er Church. in Ireland ns to give n , did th e to e ducate J. Russell) — a nd that ,t rest here. i o bl e Lord dle course , strea tn.-I they ae tea r u an ue • i m gh ake h' s )1 the Pro' -(Cheer .) Is in whie ll , ed in 1 82 * et.) t at testant betwe en roken, tha t firmly ea' the Union' of the Ca' Id to 10 1° 1 ra t e plan 0 to posy o 0 rch, neit ae l vea lthy an' e re in thor inure to eb td and g e " ade Jeen a e Year. "e len °n fi clP, the cc ! ) , nse sP c bt s theug . r s eiand by nholy eve of -d e his s , d satsabtloishthe notion and t here w as oppusito Mr. A. BARING said the Hon. Member for Middlesex talked of injury to the public credit. But the fact was, as he ought to know, that the money was not voted by Parliament, and the payment was therefore properly delayed by Govern ment.—( Cheers.) It was certainly very odd for the Hon. Member to complain of Ministers for not granting money without the concurrence of that House.—( Cheers and a laugh.) The navy estimates were produced on the 14th of last month, and the reason they were not proceeded with was that night after night one Gentleman or another proposed some resolution to impede them. It was most unfair, then, to blame Ministers for th e d e l a y.—(L ou d c h eer i ng .) If i t iad been in the department of the navy he would have taken pre cisely the same course as the Noble Lord. It was too bad that the Hon. Member for Middlesex, who, by making three hour orations which nobody listened to—(Hear)—on every occasion the word " estimate" was mentioned, was the main cause of the delay in bringing them forward, should charge the Government with unnecessarily keeping them back. Mr. HUME said he had not spoken for five minutes to gether during the present session upon the subject of the Navy Estimates. The vote was then agreed to. On the next vote, relating to the wages of artificers, being proposed, Sir E. CODRINGTON inquired whether any alteration in the system of classification in the dockyards was intended by the Admiralty ? The present system, it appeared, did not work to the satisfaction of the people there engaged. Sir J. BERESFORD replied that it was not the intention of the Admiralty to make any alterations until they had an op portunity of visiting the several dockyards in person, and thus judging upon their expediency. Whatever measures they, then should deem requisite be was satisfied would be framed in a spirit of the greatest kindness to all parties concerned. At all events, he promised he would go as far as man could go in seeking to satisfy every man.—( Hear.) After a few words from Sir T. Trowbridge, Dr. Bowring, and Mr. Hume, the vote was agreed to. On a vote of 160,7131. for naval stores being proposed, Sir T. TROWBRIDGE thought the estimate was much too high. He complained that new ships were continually building, whilst the old ships were left to rot. Lord ASHLEY justified the vote, and assured the Hon. and Gallant Member that they had now fewer ships than in any previous year. In 1791 there were 141 line-of battle ships ; now they had only 120. Of shipwrights there were upwards of three thousand in 1793, and now there were only two thousand and odd. There were now only seven hundred workmen employed on new ships building. After a few observations from Sir E. CODRINGTON, Mr. G. F. YOUNG animadverted upon the new system of ship-building of Captain Symonds's, which had been in troduced and acted upon so universally, notwithstanding that the Hon. Baronet the Member for Cumberland had stated that the new principle was only an experiment and under trial. Sir J. GRAHAM said that he had great pleasure in stating that since the last evening he had mentioned the subject, he had received a letter from an officer on the Mediterranean station, containing the most gratifying and convincing proofs of the superior sailing powers of the ships built on the new principle. It certainly had been an experiment, as he had said before, but the experiments had been tried and answered to admiration. He begged to confirm the fact that there were fewer line-of-battle ships in ordinary at present than at any period since the revolution. Mr. G. F. YOUNG contended that the ships built under Captain Symonds's principle had only the advantage under certain circumstances and in fair weather, but in a rough sea, would be found extremely uneasy. Sir E. CODRINGTON spoke to the same effect. After a short desultory conversation between Mr. Hume, Mr. Warburton, Lord Ashley, and others, the vote was agreed to. The sum of 19,5181. was then granted for medicine and medical stores, as was also 26,9481. for Government packets. 169,4501. was granted for transports. On the motion that the sum of 98,550/. be granted for de fraying the expenses of convicts sentenced to transportation to New South Wales, Sir E. CODRINGTON complained of the convicts being employed in the dockyard with men of untainted character. Mr. YOUNG said it was understood last year that the practice would be abandoned as soon as possible. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that the convicts were em ployed only in two depots, and upon labour which was of a very severe nature. On a question from Mr. HUME , Mr. G 4 O ULBURN said that the present number of con victs from the latest calculation was six thousand some odd hundreds. Captain BERKELEY made some remarks which did not reach us. Sir E. CODRINGTON expressed his gratification at the manner in which all inquiries had been answered by the Noble Lord opposite. The vote was then agreed to, and the Chairman reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again. MUTINY BILL. On the Order of the Day being read for going into Com mittee on the Mutiny Bill, some conversation ensued on the subject of the abolition of military flogging. Mr. HUME trusted that the House would find means of abolishing this degrading punishment, but believed that no alterations in the army would be effectual until a more liberal system of promotion was adopted. General SHARPE considered that the treadmill was a more degrading punishment than flogging. Sir E. C 0 DRINGTON was well aware, however unpo pular it might seem, that good soldiers were in favour of the continuance of the punishment. Something, however, must be done, for much injury had been done to the army by the late unhappy agitation of the question. Some punishment must be settled. He did not care if the men were hanged, so that the question were settled. In consequence of the suspension of the flogging, men were in the habit of going away for three days at a time, and when they came back they were " built up," as it was called, which was that for a certain time they were confined. They would then go away again, finding that imprisonment was the only punishment. In this way was the condition of the army deteriorated. This system of imprison ment, too, lost to the army—and the Hon. Member for Middle sex would appreciate his regard to economy—the use of a man. The service of a man was worth 201., and it made the good man work harder. lie wished some other punishment could be substituted. After some further remarks to the same effect from Mr. HUMS and Major BEAUCLERK, Mr. KENNEDY called the attention of the Committee to some cases of drunkenness where soldiers had most improperly used their sidearms. He himself had only within the last week been a witness to one such instance of misconduct. Sir H. HARDINGE said that there was no garrison in Europe where the troops conducted themselves with such regularity as they did in the metropolis and its neighbourhood. Mr. LAW concurred in the observations of the Hon. Member for Tiverton (Mr. Kennedy). He himself had been made acquainted, in his legal capacity, with a recent case where drunkenness had induced the soldier to use his side arms, and the loss of one life had nearly been the consequence. It was a ease that came before the Grand Jury, and he had thought proper to send the finding of the Grand Jury to the regiment to which the soldier belonged. Sir H. HARDINGE said it had been the practice for sol diers to wear their sidearms for the last century when walking in the streets, and he should be sorry, indeed, to see the time when they were deprived of them. Mr. HUME saw no reason, however much he might respect the wisdom of our ancestors, for allowing the soldiers to wear their sidearms when drunk, and after sunset. Mr. LAW did not wish to deprive them of their arms, but to place them under a wholesome restriction. Sir H. HARD INGE said that the punishment for any acts of violence could not be too severe, and he should be agreeable to any preventive regulation of the utmost severity, but he would never consent to deprive the soldier of his sidearms. The Bill was then read a first and second time. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and on the motion of Mr. BROTHERTON, the House adjourned at half past twelve o'clock. PRIVY COUNCIL. The Lords of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council met yesterday in the Council Chamber. The Lords present were—The Lord President, the Vice- Chancellor, Sir Herbert Jenner, and the Right Hon. Thomas Erskine. The appeal of Heathcote v. Heathcote, from the Arches' Court, was disposed of. In the appeal of Tufnell and Mason v. Constable and Bailey, the respective executors of the two wills of the late Mr. James Robinson, the Soli citor-General addressed their Lordships till four o'clock, when the Court adjourned. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT. IMPORTANT CASE.—Thomas Keeling, an attorney, was opposed by Mr. Cresswell, on the part of a Mr. Edward Bamford. In this case a question of considerable importance was raised. The insolvent had been sued by Mr. Bamford for penalties under the statute of Anne, for usury. The case was tried at Westminster before the late Lord Tenterden, in the sittings after Easter Term, 1832, when a verdict was given for the plaintiff, damages 8861. Is., on which he had been taken in execution. Some of his furniture had been seized, and the attorney for Mr. Bamford had received 1901. He said the action was a qui tans one, but he had not paid any portion to the Crown. Had he recovered the whole he should have paid half to the Treasury. Mr. CRESSWELL contended that the debt was owing to the Crown, and the Court had no power to discharge the insolvent. Mr. COOKE argued that it was not a Crown debt. He said the question was one of importance, and he wished the case to come before a full Court. Mr. Commissioner HARRIS assented, and the matter stood adjourned until the return of the other Commissioners from their respective Circuits. The Chief Clerk had had a communication with the So licitor of the Treasury in this case, and he had informed him that there was nothing on the schedule to prove that the insolvent was indebted to the Crown. At Dunchurch fair, on Monday, the sheared sheep sold at 4d. per lb. ; Wool Sheep sd. ; Beef 4id_ to sid. per lb. There was a good supply, but sales were rather dull. Rugby fair, on Tuesday, was about the same.--Warwick Ad. maser. - - IT - '~- -- --=A-- THE SUN, LONDON, SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. Lord John Russell last night unfolded to the House of Commons the course which he intends to pursue in reference to the Resolution it has adopted upon the subject of ecclesiastical revenues in Ireland. On re ferring to the report of last night's proceedings it will be seen that in the Committee the resolution which had been previously carried in the House was affirmed by a majority of twenty-five. The next step is, that the report of the Committee be received by the House, which may probably occasion another division. After this, if the majority should still remain with his Lord ship, it is his intention, as we collect from his decla ration, to move a further resolution, to the effect that it is the opinion of the House of Commons that no measure upon the subject of tithes in Ireland can lead to a satisfactory and final adjustment which does not embody the principle of appropriation. And, in the event of this resolution also being carried, it is, it seems, the further intention of the Noble Lord to move an Address to the Crown, conceived in the spirit of his antecedent resolutions. There is, it must be con fessed, considerable cunning in the course which the leader of the Opposition pursues, regarding him as an individual to whom it is an important object to displace the present Administration, and as the nominal leader of a party, comprehending among its ostensible mem bers a considerable number of individuals who are quite willing to annoy and embarrass the present Ad ministration, but have no wish to displace them. Lord John, with the small cunning which naturally belongs to minds of his order, leads on his doubtful troops, step by step, in hope that he may at length involve them in a position from which retreat will be impossi ble. It was not much to obtain from a majority of the House of Commons a recognition of an abstract prin ciple, of which the practical application was to depend upon the result of future inquiries into doubtful ques tions of fact. Such a resolution was agreeable enough to the men who are careless about any consequences which may arise to the nation from their votes, so that it do not necessarily lead to a dissolution of the Ministry or of the Parliament, and that they may re tain undisturbed the privilege of writing M.P. after their names, of franking letters, and of setting the danger of arrest for debt at defiance. But this suc cess was not only easy—it unfortunately was barren also. It did not open the way directly and immedi ately for Lord John Russell, Mr. O'Connell, and other expectants of place, in the various parties com posing the Opposition, to the delights of quarter-day. The thing to be accomplished, if possible, was, and is, to get a majority of the House pledged to a pro ceeding which, when considered in conjunction with an express declaration of the head of his Majesty's Go vernment, who is known seldom to speak without con sideration, and always to mean absolutely what he says, may infer a necessity for the retirement of him self and his colleagues. And it must be admitted that the resolution which Lord John Russell has announced his intention to propose, as soon as the report of his former resolution shall have been re ceived, is not ill calculated to secure the purpose in view. This resolution we have already described. It pledges those who vote for it to resist the Irish Tithe Bill of his Majesty's Government, unless a clause be inserted in it to which it is manifestly impossible for his Majesty's present Government to agree ; and it is intended so to pledge them after, and because, the head of his Majesty's Government has declared, that he will regard any obstruction on the part of a majo rity of the House to the Irish Tithe Bill as a proof that the House of Commons wishes him to retire. It is an excellent resolution for the purposes of the leaders of the Opposition, but we very much doubt whether it will suit equally well the purposes of many of their present followers. One characteristic of this resolution is, that it places the followers of the Opposition camp precisely in the situation in which their leaders, for their own interests, would wish them to be placed ; that it compels them to follow on, divests them indi vidually of their independence, and deprives them at once and absolutely of all future volition as to the manner or degree of hostility which they shall exercise towards his Majesty's Government. But another, and more striking characteristic of this reso lution is, that it does all we have above stated prema turely, irregularly, in a manner which is not only un parliamentary, but which indicates that the leaders of the Opposition are actuated by a very ungracious and suspicious impatience to fetter their followers. Why should any portion of the House of Commons be called upon to anticipate the discussion of a measure about to be submitted in due course to their full examina tion ? Why should they be invited to exact from themselves a condition precedent to the adoption of a particular measure, the adoption or rejec tion of which will be absolutely in their own power in all the various stages through which it must necessarily pass, before it can be transmitted to the other branch of the Legislature ? Is the ques tion of Irish tithes so little worthy of a full considera tion that the measure which the King's Government intends deliberately to submit to the Legislature for its final adjustment may be disposed of by anticipation, and prematurely condemned in patches ? Is the paci fication of Ireland a national interest of such exceed ingly small amount, that a measure having that object in view ought to be thrown down by the House of Commons, and made the mere stepping-stone to place and power for a grasping, rapacious, sordid, and un principled faction ? Do the British nation, or its re presentatives, sympathize so entirely with the eager desire of the Whigs to return to office that, rather than defer for a fortnight or three weeks this desirable ob ject, they are ready, in defiance of all decency, of all order, of all parliamentary usage, of all principle, to dispose of a measure of the greatest practical import ance to the country, before it has been regularly brought before Parliament ? Is it fit that a majority of the British House of Commons should be so enamoured of slavery and degradation as to launch their votes against a measure not yet submitted to their deliberation, for no higher purpose than to promote the selfish ob jects of Lord John Russell, Mr. O'Connell, and some half dozen of the friends of each ? We put these questions in the full assurance that whatever answer they may receive from the House of Commons, from the country they can receive but one. The people of Great Britain will not understand the motion of Lord John Russell to circumvent the Irish Tithe Bill, as conveying any other meaning than that he is weary of being out of place ; nor will they approve of resolu tions pledging the House of Commons to abstract pro positions, incapable of any other practical application or import than the removal from the service of the country of a body of able and honest Statesmen, in or der to make room for a combination of incapable dri vellers and profligate schemers. It would be well for the House of Commons to remember ,that the time is probably not distant when its Members will have once more to appear before their Constituents ; and, having this contingency in constant recollection, to begin to regard the confidence and esteem of the country as of some little value. Many Hon. Gentlemen will, we apprehend, discover, when it is too late, that this im portant consideration has not been sufficiently re garded.—Morning Post. The majority last night against Ministers was, in proportion to the number of Members in the House, as great as on Friday morning ; and this evening, we do not doubt, will terminate their political career. Never, at any former period in the history of this country, has an Administration more indecently or obstinately retained office, in contempt of repeated majorities of the House of Commons. We can only attribute this sulky adhesion to office to the know ledge of the Tory placemen surrounding Sir Robert Peel, that it is their last chance of official sweets, and to a sort of forlorn hope entertained by them that some accident might intervene to protract for a while the existence of his Cabinet. Ministers have been shamefully defeated in the nomination of a Speaker; they meanly submitted to the degradation of an Amendment on their A ddress ; they hare not even once succeeded on any party division ; twice they have been shamefully defeated on the vital question of Irish Church Reform ; and yet they linger another day in office, notwithstanding that on Friday morning more than half the full complement of the House of C o mmons affirmed the great principle of appropriation. Sir Robert Peel, in his gloomy and desponding answer to the City of London Addressers, stated that he le- ESDAY, APRIL 7, 1835. tamed office under all his humiliation, so long only as the House of Commons did not " mark its want of confidence in the Government, or enforce any great principle at direct variance with the declared sentiments of the Government." The resolutions, therefore, of Lord John Russell, and the majorities in their favour, enable the Right Hon. Baronet to get rid of his de voted Cabinet in the way most satisfactory to himself. On Thursday last Sir Robert Peel had wisely deter mined to surrender the seals of office ; and lie would have consulted his own personal character and sense of Ministerial duty to the King, if on Saturday he had acted on his own better judgment. What end can be answered by a pertinacious opposition to the majority of the representatives of the people ? Aby vote, with a 'chance majority in his favour, he well knows, what ever his whippers-in may think, would not reinstate his Government, or avert the legislative Act on the Irish Church, which he declares will never receive his Ministerial concurrence. In the meanwhile the whole clan of City Tories are sounding their worn-out tocsin of " Addresses." Is it then come to this, that the hack Addressers of the Metropolis are to usurp the functions of Members of the House of Commons ? Are the Sovereign and the Legislature to be dic tated to by a miserable minority of merchants and traders of the City ? If so, indeed, the Constitu tion is destroyed, and our representative system will become a bye-word of ridicule in free countries. The Metropolitan Members, and the Representatives of Middlesex, to a man, represent popular principles. The political sentiments of the great majority of elec tors were signally manifested so late as December last, in the contemptuous rejection of every Tory candidate for their suffrage, notwithstanding the influence of the Government and the great Corporations, lay and eccle siastic. What then is the real mirror of public opi nion—the opinions of the addressers, or the votes of the Metropolitan electors ? Mr. William Ward and Mr. Horsley Palmer have too often resorted to the old artifice of bolstering up a falling Cabinet, by se cretly conceived addresses. " Help Cassius, or I sink,' cries Caesar in the Tiber. This old stage trap is an invariable mark of disguised fear, and always pro motes the fall of an Administration instead of giving to it strength or vitality. The house of the Minister, or the Royal Gazette, is the receptacle of these absurd docu ments. The party promoters of them come forward under false characters. They dishonestly pass themselves off as the public, though they studiously avoid the light. It was once well remarked, that " they are to the pub lic what the locusts are to the tree." An imposition so palpable will not delude the Premier or the Legis lature. It was signally exposed and abortive on the great national contest in 1832. Every town and county then teemed with these hole-and-corner exhibi tions-; and what did they avail against the Commons and the people ? Even the Hells were yesterday saked out, and Crockford's Clubbists and Count D'Orsay (an alien) signed the " City Address of Mer chants, Bankers," &c. What, however, these agitators and secret political unions do by day, the Commons undo at night ; and Sir Robert Peel, by this time, has had a practical proof of his declared sentiments on the Reform Bill—that Toryism could no longer domineer over the country, or preserve the abuses of our social institutions. Some wild To ries threaten a dissolution of the Parliament. The Stuarts foundered on that species of destruc tive policy, and Sir Robert Peel is not the man to ruin himself, and endanger the Constitution, by such reckless advice to the Sovereign. He has appealed to the people ;he has rung every alarm-bell within his reach ; in despite of rotten Corporations, of corrupted constituencies, of the influence of the Tories derived from property in the counties, he has received his an swer in the Commons. In vain he has repudiated the ultra-politics and party mania of his coadjutors in office : the Commons judge him " by the company he keeps." With a good grace, therefore, though late, Sir Robert Peel will retire, on the ground which he has so distinctly marked out to his mourning' Ad dressers—that the Commons have enforced a great principle at direct variance with the declared senti ments of the Government. The Premier is a sacrifice to the blindness and bigotry of his party. He has now convinced them of his known presentiment—that public opinion has destroyed the once paramount power of nomination boroughs. The die is cast.—Morning Chronicle. The Tories having been again beaten last night by a majority of twenty-five, as we mentioned yesterday morning, are reduced to their last gasp, or rather, we should say, beyond the possibility of gasping. Sir Robert Peel fights for office with as much pertinacity as if his life depended upon office ; but Lord John Russell is staunch, and will not quit him. Sir Robert affects to disregard all the defeats he has met with in the Commons, and looks to the Lords (the Lord help him) for support in the hour of difficulty. It will not do ; the public have said vengeance, and vengeance must be their's. Lord John Russell, on behalf of the people, and with their cordial approbation and support, has intimated to Sir Robert that no bill connected with the Irish Church can pass into a law, unless there is a clause embodied in it sanctioning the appropriation of whatever funds there may be, over and above paying the Irish Clergy for doing nothing, to any purpose which the State may require. This is a virtual bring ing o f the question to issue, and if, after it has been decided, Sir Robert still clings to office, there is no knowing into what perils he may plunge the country. But we hope for better things, not from him certainly, but from those to whom he has always been opposed— the people's Opposition.—Morning Advertiser. If the late debate in Parliament has not been grounded in faction, we know not where to find a motive either for the motion, or for the long conti nuance of the discussion. - We may, perhaps, be pe culiar in our notions, but we feel a strong persuasion that the Roman Catholic religi on has generally given way to a general enlightenment of the people ; and that had the Protestant Church of Ireland made a proper use of the long era of elselusion and of ascen dancy which it has enjoyed, its i nembers, if not forming an actual majority of the population, would, at any rate, by this time have been mu ch more commanding in point of numbers, than the most sanguine enumera tion now exhibits them as being_ It is now full five and-twenty years ago that Mr. Croker, no mean au thority upon any subject, thus es:pressed himself upon this subject :—" To the Esta blished Clergy (of Ireland), ' . says Mr. Croker, " what shall I urge ? The times, momentous to all, are critical to them ; their flocks turbulent, their revenues invaded, their very hierarchy assailed : -these are not days for sloth. One-third of them are not resident absentees from their duties—mortmainers upon the land. The Establishment which laymen ire invoked to defend, Churchmen should support by their presence, dignify by their piety, and extend by their example." We readily admit that much of the keen but deserved cen sure thus thrown upon the Clergy of Ireland by one of their warmest friends has since been removed ; and that a sense of duty and of danger has taken the place of the sloth and indolence which he alludes to. But we deny that a shadow of pretence has, during this long discussion, been advanced, eitl• ter to prove that there is, or is likely to be, any actual surplus of Protestant Church revenues, after the de tluctions they are now permanently undergoing; or th EA, if there were, the purpose for which it was destined by Lord John Rus sell's motion could be a just one. Those who have most closely examined the subject of tith es, have been of opi nion that they were originally assigned for three purposes --the maintenance of the priesthood, th.e support of the edifice of the Church, and the- relief of the poor ; and if such a distribution of them in England has been abandoned, it has been, not that it was not well founded, but that the spoliatic in of tithes at the Re formation, and the placing so large a portion of them in lay hands, left the clerical , remainder of them ina dequate for the maintenance of the Clergy alone, and the other two objects necessarily to be maintained from other sources. But the principle remains the same ; and if, therefore, either in 'England or in Ireland, a surplus of ecc l es i as ti ca l revenue' should ever be found, the two objects to which it has never yet been applied have the strongest claim upon::: it. In Ireland the Church stands little chance of b .eing fok- the future too wealthy, or likely, indeed, to yi€ ;ld the smallest surplus when at one swoop the landlords, with pious zeal, are to take thirty per cent., or n early one-third, to their own share, as a bribe for sec Airing to the Clergy the =es ' - remainder. However favourable, then, we may be to the ells cation of the -people—an object which —as Protestants—we should warmly advocate in the abstract—every one not bent on the overthrow of the Church, on the one hand, or that of the Ministry on the other, must be convinced that, through the pro posed means, such an object was wholly unattainable, and, as such, utterly unworthy of the eloquence which has been bestowed upon it. In fact, as far as argu ment has been used, it has been necessarily all on one side. We should say, educate the people of Ireland by all means—we should also say, first give them bread—give the poor,the aged, and decrepit that claim upon the land which the law of nature has assigned them in both countries, and which in England they are entitled to by the law of the land. One or both of these objects are fairly attachable to the owners of the soil of Ireland, who have now, in addition to dispro portionate rents, 30 per cent. of the Church income added to their revenues. But to talk of the Church, with its reduced resources, doing the one or the other, and being singled out solely for the purpose, is a mockery and delusion too palpable to impose upon any but the most inflamed or jaundiced imagination.— Morning Herald. Repeatedly we have adverted to our own expressed opinions of last year on the questionconsidered as one of egeneral nature—whether an ascertained sur plus of Irish ecclesiastical revenue over the actual wants of the Established Church should not be con sidered applicable by Parliament to other homogeneous purposes. Our judgment, then, as now, was and is for the affirmative of that proposition. But our judg ment, or that of the House of Commons, was not then exercised upon the entire question with regard to which the House of Commons has recently decided—viz., whether the enforcement of such a principle should be left to the avowed enemies of British connection, and of the Protestant Church and State. The deceptions character of the resolution proposed by Lord John Russell arose from the necessary complication of prin ciples with facts, from the inevitable incorporation of the vote with its practical consequences. Now, for the first time, has it been pressed upon Parliament to make a set of men, who not only are, but who boast of being, disaffected to the supremaey of the Bri tish Crown and the United Parliament over Ire land, the functionaries for administering the affairs of the realm under that authority. Never be fore did any faction dare, under whatever pretexts, to confide the interests, temporal and spiritual, of the Protestant established Church to a convocation of Popish conspirators against her property and her existence. That is the real question upon which the House of Commons has lately voted, in a manner which it was never before called upon to vote, because, as we have said, the Imperial Government of last sum mer, though Whig and Liberal in a high degree, stood mainly independent of the clique of Irish Repealers. Would that be now the case? Let Lord John Rus sell search his conscience, and give us, if he can, a direct and faithful answer. Why, then, there is in the eyes of Englishmen no reason to find fault with those who, by resisting the motion of the Noble Lord, conceived that they were helping to avert the accession of his evil-compounded party to office, that misfortune being aggravated by the pre vious recognition of a rule of policy, which in the hands and under the guidance of a certain section of the new Government, could work no otherwise than for the destruction of the Protestant state. This view of the matter ought to be made familiar to the mind of every Protestant subject of the British monarchy. It can never be impressed with too much earnestness on the attention of our English countrymen, that the ac knowledged, ostentatious, and indisputable purpose of the Popish faction in Ireland, as declared by all their speeches and writings, with O'Connell's at their head, is to deprive the Protestant Established Church in that country of the entire pecuniary support which it now derives from law, as being an injustice to the Irish Catholics, because they are not of the Protestant reli gion, and drew no specific benefit from the establish ment. Nor is it any answer, according to their view of the question, to tell them that the property of the Irish Church is not a wrong against any Catholic individual, inasmuch as every proprietor of that per suasion originally took his acres, subject to the espe- cial condition that the Church should be, as it had been from time immemorial, a joint proprietor with him to the extent of one-tenth of the gross produce. The rejoinder to such a statement is, that the tithe was pre viously held by the Romish Church, and therefore that the Protestant is an Usurper. Here then we have laid open to us at once the nature of the wrong, by formal complaint, and that of the meditated remedy, by an inference which there is no mistaking. " Confis -cation" of the funds, enjoyed in the 16th century by the Popish hierarchy to Protestant uses, is the grie vance. The redress, therefore, can be no other than a restoration of the same funds, plus the tithe (whether actual or commuted) ever since held by lay impropria tors to Popish uses. We treat with utter scorn the hypocritical pretence of O'Connell that he does not contemplate an establishment of the Popish Church in Ireland. It is an outrage upon history, experience, and common sense, to imagine that Popery can ever tolerate the " voluntary principle" where it has the means of substituting an authorized es tablishment of its own Ministers. A coercive exclusion of _all independent creeds is the known foundation of the edifice of Popery, temporal and spiritual. Nor is its existence as an autho rized institution in the State compatible with the safety of any form of Government but that of military or arbitrary monarchy, against which it is unable to contend. Its natural enemy is a free Constitution, which, wherever it dares to make the attempt, it hunts down as its necessary victim. The priest is already by far too much the law-giver of the South and West of Ireland. What will he be when the powers of the State are formally committed to his hands ? Yet to this point is the country now pushed by the vote of 'the House of Commons, and by its threatened conse quences. The people of England must interpose by petition and remonstrance, or our Protestant Constitu tion is at an end. The Dissenters of both countries must make common cause with their Protestant brethren of the Established Church, or they will suffer the like fate with the Irish Dissenters in the rebellion towards the close of the 18th century, who began by confederating with the Papists, and ended by being sacrificed to their bigotted and treacherous rancour. But the people are apparently about to take part in the fray, and, terrified for the future, are beginning to declare their sentiments. Our paper of yesterday and to-day contains a number of addresses to his Majesty and Sir Robert Peel, thanking the Sovereign for hav ing had recourse to Conservative councils, and encou raging the latter to persevere in his resistanee to tur bulent and selfish faction. Oxford, Liverpool, the East Riding of York, the borough of Marylebone, and the city of London, are amongst the places from which the above addresses proceeded. There ,is, in deed, another subject for petition, at once too solemn and too frightful to be trifled with, which can hardly be understood by any but those who are acquainted with the practice of the Romish priesthood, and which is set forth in hideous minuteness by our correspondent, " a Father of a Family." If the people of England want to discover the species of inquisitions to which the vo taries of the Roman Catholic Church are subjected, and to follow out their effects in the enormous power obtained by that priesthood over all the actions, pri vate, public, and mixed, of those who are bound to confess to them, we refer to the interrogatories enu merated in our con espondent's letter. Yet it is sub stantially such a power, that the Opposition in Parlia ment would enable to crush and ruin the Protestant Church of Ireland, and to set up as the dominating and unc ontrolled authority over our trampled fellow Protestants. There is no time to be lost in avert ing this irretrievable calamity. If the -present Mi nistry be driven out of office, all the rest will happen in regular succession. The whole patronage of the Irish Government must be placed at O'Connell's feet —the whole policy of the Irish Government must be under his suggestion. The Whig Government here will have neither numbers nor moral ascendancy to support it. O'Connell and his 50 votes will hold the fate of the British Cabinet, whether its chief be Lord Grey, Lord Melbourne, Mr. Hume, Mr. Ward, Sir S. Whalley, or Lord John Russell, at his own pre carious mercy ; and too late it will be deplored that a miserable faction of place-hunters have been suffered by_the people of this great country to usurp the power; of the State, that they may destroy the principles of our Protestant monarchical ConstitutTon, and sever the whole framework of the empire. If the right of pe tition be vigorously acted on, the monarchy may )et be saved.— Times. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—YoRr, APRIL 4. WADDINGTON V. BROWNE AND LONSDALE. This was an action for an assault. The defendants, Mr. Geo. Buxton Browne, a gentleman of fortune, residing at Halifax ; and Mr. Lonsdale, a solicitor of the same place, were charged by this action with having violently assaulted Mr. Wm. Waddington, an innkeeper at Halifax, and forcibly dragged him out of his dwelling-house to the polling booth, with the intention of compelling him against his will to vote for Mr. Protheroe, one of the liberal candidates at the late contested election for Halifax. After hearing evidence, the Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, damages 40s. SEDUCTION.-SENIOR V. BOTTOMLEY. Mr. BLACKBURN stated that this was an action brought by the plaintiff, a small farmer in at Kirkburter, against the defendant, a young man in respectable circumstances, living in the same place. The action was brought to recover a compensation in damages for the loss be had sustained in being deprived of the services of his daughter. This was a case of considerable aggravation, as the seduction was ef fected under th e p r et ence o f an honourable courtship. A long intimacy had existed between the parties ;it was in deed commenced when she was- quite a girl, and on her friends objecting to his visits on this ground he said that she would grow older every day, and the intimacy continued until August last. At the latter period of their intimacy he talked of taking a farm and marrying her, and under that fair pretence beguiled her of her innocence, and, having accomplished that purpose, he soon after deserted her. She gave birth to a child in November last. Harriet Senior will be eighteen years old next July. She stated that the defendant had visited her ever since July, 1834. Her mother told him he was to blame in keeping her company when she was so young. The defendant said she would grow older every day. He continued to visit her until. August last, when he finally quitted her, saying he would not marry her, but would pay all exppses. She was then in a state of pregnancy by him, which she had communicated to him about two months before. Witness said the defendant had promised to marry her before she had consented to his wishes. A witness was called to prove that the defendant had represented himself as worth more than a thousand pounds. The Jury, after a deliberation of rather less than a mi nute, found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 1001. OROWN COURT.-MURDER AT SHEFFIELD. William Allott, aged 35, was this morning arraigned on a charge of the wilful murder of Martha Hardwick, at Upper Heeley, near Sheffield. Ilr. BAffiis stated the case. Mrs. Hardwick, the de ceased, was a widow woman, residing at Upper Heeley, two miles from Sheffield, and occupied a lone house, the persons composing her family being herself, the prisoner, and a boy named Wolstenholme. She had a small milk farm, which the prisoner managed, whilst she superintended the household affairs. On the 9th of September last the deceased was in perfect health, and between eight and half past nine in the evening received such injuries as caused her death two hours after. In the morning of that day the prisoner and the boy went to Sheffield, on some business at the Town Hall, and afterwards went to a public-house, where they continued drinking till three o'clock, when the boy left the prisoner, and returned home to attend to his work. About half-past eight some little girls, who were playing near, heard Mrs. Hardwick cry out, " Oh ! dear, he's killing me !" Another neighbour heard a shriek, and on going to the door of his house, heard Allott, the pri soner, using most abusive language to the deceased, say ing, " D—n thee, thou'st been robbing me every day." At a quarter-past nine the prisoner went to a neighbour's house and asked for a light, saying that his mistress was drunk, an assertion proved to be false. About half-past nine Wolstenholme, the boy, returned home, and found the front door open, and no person in the front room, but a quantity of blood on the floor. On going into the innerroom he there found the prisoner dragging his mistress on to a bed, in a bleeding state, with her clothes torn, and her cap off. He was in his shirt sleeves. The deceased's voice was very low, and she said, " Oh, help me." On the boy expressing surprise, the prisoner said he had seen two men run out of the house when be came in, who had done the deed ; and he ac counted for the blood on his clothes by stating that he had dirtied them in lifting her on the bed. The prisoner went to Sheffield the same evening for Mr. Wright, the surgeon, and told his assistant different accounts of the transaction. The same night the surgeon went to Mrs. Hardwick's ; but 'she was dead before he arrived. The Learned Judge summed up, and the Jury returned a verdict of Guilty. His Lordship then sentenced him to be executed on Mon day next, and his body to be buried within the prison. The prisoner being conveyed into the cell oppointed for him, was, as is customary, searched, and a large knife was found secreted at the bottom of one of his coat laps. WESTERN CIRCUIT. — .TAUNTON, APRIL 4. CRIM. CON.-HAMLYN V. CROSSLEY. This was an action brought by the plaintiff to recover compensation in damages for the seduction of his wife. The plaintiff was an articled clerk to a respectable solicitor of the name of Baker, who resided at Blagdon, near Bristol, and the defendant was managing clerk to Mr. Baker, at a salary of 2001. per annum. The plaintiff was married to his wife in 1829, and in the following year they had a child. In October, 1831, the defendant came to lodge at the plaintiff's house, and continued there until January, 1832, when he left Mr. Baker's employ, and du ring that time the act of adultery was committed of which the plaintiff complained. The husband was not informed of the fact till May, 1832, when a separation took place ; but the writ could not be served upon the defendant until last year. Witnesses were called who proved the marriage, and that the parties lived hapily _to gether ; and then came evidence showing the most extraor dinary curiosity and adroitness on the part of a servnnt, who was first cousin of the plaintiff, perhaps ever known. The witness (Charlotte Hamlyn), a remarkably fine young woman, it appeared had some suspiciOns, and she was deter mined to find out everything. On one occasion, Mrs. Hamlyn was sitting in the study of Mr. Crossley, which adjoined his bed-room, and she told the servant to put tea below stairs, and to ring the bell when it was ready. Char lotte thought this strange, so she went up into the study under the pretence of putting some coals on the fire, and looked into the bed-room, and on the bed she saw the legs of Mrs. Hamlyn and the defendant. On another occasion she and her sister slept with Mrs. Hamlyn when Mr. Hamlyn was from home. Mrs. Hamlyn told her not to lock the bed-room door ; this made Charlotte suspicious again, so she determined not to go to sleep. After they had been in bed Mrs. Hamlyn asked her if she was asleep ? she made no answer ; she then felt her eyes to see if they were closed, but Charlotte was fast asleep, and nothing could wake her. She heard her mistress get out of bed and go out of the room ; up jumped Charlotte and followed her down stairs, and she there saw Mr. Crossley, who was only in his shirt, hand Mrs. Hamlyn, who was in her night dress, into his (Mr. Crossley's) bed-room. Charlotte returned to bed and remained awake, till in the course of two or three hours her mistress returned. On another time she took some gruel to her mistress, who was ill in bed. The bed-room door was locked, and 111 r. Crossley opened it from within. One evening, when all the family were out but Mr. Crossley, Mrs. Hamlyn, and Charlotte, Mrs. Hamlyn told Charlotte she might go out for an hour or two, but Charlotte did not want to go. Her mistress urged it upon her. This made Charlotte more determined, and she refused. Her mistress then said she ought to obey her. Charlotte then took her bonnet and went out at the door. She listened and heard the door locked, She went to the back door and heard that locked. She watched the light and saw her mistress go to the pantry and take a glass of gin. Her mistress went up stairs. Charlotte jumped over a wall, and saw her mistress draw the curtains in Mr. Cross ley's bed-room. Charlotte ran to the stable, procured a ladder, put it to the window, ran up the ladder, and then saw the very act of adultery committed. All this, how ever, ended as might have been expected, by poor Char lotte having, as she termed it, a rape committed upon her by Mrs. Hamlyn's brother, and giving birth to a fine child. The witness was nearly three hours in the witness-box, with all eyes fixed upon her, and undergoing, as Mr. Baron Gurney stated to the j ury, one of the most severe and searching cross-examinations by Mr. Searjeant Bompas that he had ever heard in the course of his life. She had to speak to many transactions, to give dates and hours of the day ; she had been tried backwards and forwards in every possible way, and he believed that there was from first to last the most perfect consistency in every answer, which he thought the strongest possible proof of the veracity of her story. Several witnesses gave evidence of various acts of fami liarity between the parties. The Jury retired, and at a late hour came into Court, and said they could not agree, one of them saying he did not know how to put any value on such a woman, and wanting to know the largess damages that would not carry costs. The Learned BARON told them that they were to esti mate the value of the wife previous to her seduction, and added, that a Jury had nothing to do with costs. If they could not agree, they must be locked up till Monday morning. The latter part of the sentence had a great effelt, as they immediately gave a verdict for tho plaintiff---llamages 201. MI