The Sun. — London, England, 1841-06-11 00:00:00

EVENING EDITION Mr. WARBURTON did not regret that the aid of the Hon. and Learned Solicitor-General had been called in, but it would not induce him to vary the vote he had given on a former occasion. —(Hear, hear.) He thought it had been established to the satisfaction of the House that those were reprisals, and not captures, and that the parties were entitled to compensation. He need not refer to the case of the Spanish vessels which had been seized at the breaking up of the war in Spain, and in which compensation was granted to the owners. On the 22d of JuLy an embargo was laid on all the Danish vessels in the English ports, and an armament wee sent out to seize all vessels on the high seas belonging to that Go vernment. The armament ascended to the mouth of the Baltic, which every body knew was a close sea, and he thought it only reasonable, fair, and just, that where the British Government derived so large a sum of money from the capture of the fleet and stores and the condem nation of vessels seized in British ports, it was only rea sonable and just that compensation should be afforded out of that large sum. It was nothing for him to hear that the funds had been misapplied; it was no answer to, say that thirty years had' lapsed since the occurrence; that was only a stronger reason why the parties should immediately receive the small pittance of compensation to be awarded to them. He relied upon the want of notice to the British who were sending their vessels to the Baltic, and upon the withdrawal of the British fleet, thereby rendering capture certain. That was enough to justify him in departing frcm the usual rules in voting for compensation. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL did not wish for a moment to take credit to himself for any thing he was not entitled to, therefore, he must disclaim the credit given him by his Learned Friend, that his statements of last night were merely the arguments used in former :de bates, and put in a clearer form; he supposed the superior intelligence of his Learned Friend had enabled him to find it out. Sir James Mackintosh had distinctly laid it down that book debts and goods seized ought to be com pensated, because they were seized against the usages of war, and the law of nations; in such a case, he laid it down that it was the duty of the Government to enforce compensation by arms, or to make compensation out of their own funds. The application of the principle, how ever, he limited to seizures made against the law of nations and against the usages of war. That was an authority upon the present occasion. When he addressed the House yesterday he had refrained from reading the documents, contenting himself with stating them, and waiting until he heard whether they were contradicted. He would then read them; The first was a clear declara tion of war upon the part of Denmark against England ; and he said distinctly that that declaration was made on the 16th August. He would now state the facts—he would recapitulate them to the House. His Hon. and Learned Friend had stated that there had been an em bargo previous to the 27th of July. Now he could dis cover no such thing, and he should be glad if his Hon. and Learned Friend would refer him to the authority on which he made such statement. Mr. CIIESSWELL—It was so stated on bringing for ward the motion in 1831. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL would refer his Hon. and Learned Friend to the orders of the Admiralty for laying on the embargo, which were dated the 25th of August. He had inquired at the Admiralty, and there was no document there to show that any embargo had been laid on before the 25th of August, nor could he find at the Admiralty any trace of any application havine been made there, as stated by one of the persons interested in supporting these claims, by any persons for informs. tion, or that any information had been given by any per sons on the subject. On the 25th of August, the orders of the Admiralty authorising the detention of vessels were issued, and affairs continued in that state until the !Id September, when those orders were confirmed and ex tended by an Order in Council. On the 3d of Au gust the British fleet arrived off the coast of Den mark, and cut off all communication between the island of Zealand and the Continent of Eu ope. Now what effect on the mind of :any man of ordinary intelligence must the appearance of a British fleet off the coast of Denmark have produced? If it were unexpected, the more likely was it to excite alarm; and he contended that the appearance of that fleet, ac companied as it was by a large body of troops. was abun dant intimation to the merchants that they could not remain safely in the proximity of such a fleet, and that if they did so remain they must do so at their own ex pense and risk, and not at the expense and risk of the nation. From the sth of August until the 13th nego ciations were going on between Mr. Jackson, the repre sentative of the British Government at Copenhagen, and the Danish Government, relative to the surrender of the Danish fleet to the care of Great Britain. On the 16th of August the Danish Government issued the following proclamation, which would be found in the nine teenth volume of the " Annual Register," page 173. (The Hon. and Learned Gentleman here react the de claration of Christian VI., in which, after reciting the demands made by the British Resident Jackson, he stated that the Resident, on the refusal of the Danish Government to comply with those demands, had de manded passports for himself, and his suite, and that consequently the war between England and Denmark might be considered as actually broken out, and he called upon all his faithful subjects to arm to repel the Eng lish aggression. He further ordered that all English ships and property wherever found, should bo seized, and that all English should, until they could be sent out of the country,,be placed under arrest; and the declaration finished by stating, that, as a matter of course, all Eng lish ships and boats found upon the coast should be con sidered as hostile, and that all correspondence with English subjects should cease until further orders.) When the King of Denmark issued a proclamation on the 16th August, that war was actually broken out, could any man say that he was justified in remaining in the Baltic to prosecute commercial speculations, on the belief that pacific relations would not be interrupted? No relations of peace and amity subsisted between the nations after that proclamation; and on that day Ad miral Gambier and Lord Cathcart issued an address, in which they stated that they were ordered there by coin mand of his Majesty, to obtain by pacific negotiation, if possible, the surrender of the Danish fleet. That sur render was refused; and, on the 24th August, the Danish Government issued a further proclamation, in very hos tile terms. On the 2d September the bombardment of Copenhagen commenced. From that time there was no pretence for the statement that anything like a cessation of hostilities had taken place. On the 9th September, the decree was issued which gave rise to the claims for compensation--namely, that respecting the confiscation. On the 23d of September a British manifesto was Issued, showing the two nations distinctly to be at war. Now, when were these vessels seized ? On the 6th of August, and on the sth of September; but the great majority late in October, through November, and down to the 23d of December. On. the 4th of November Great Britain, never having entertained hostile feelings towards Denmark, but having acted on the principle of great State necessity, a necessity founded on the most absolute - justice—if self protection be consistent with justice—the ;Government of the day was restrained from presenting a perfect de fence, because we know that at certain times private in formation which the Government may procure may not be disclosed with safety to the individual who furnished that information, nor consistently with the means of ob taining further information which it might be desirable that they should possess. But afterwards - they discovered that F rance and Russia had determined, to seize the Danish fleet, and use it hostilely against Great Britain , and when the British navy arrived at Copenhagen, that place was in a state absolutely defenceless, so as to give every facility to the objects of Russia and France. It was complained that the English had taken the fleet when the ,Danes were not in a situation for defence. But that was their justification, for it became the imperative duty of the Government of the day to take wise, prompt, arid decisive measures, that that fleet should not be used for the invasion of Great Britain, and the British G overnment would have deserved impeachment if, on the inf ormat i on they possessed, tey had not wrested from the power of Russia such powerful means as the Danish fleet afforded. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman denied that they were at war. His acute and intelligent Friend behind him (Mr. Warbur ton) had looked too closely into the question to make such an assertion ; he had retired from that position. What constituted war? One nation appeared with a pow erful armament on the shores of another nation, demand ing- of that other to surrender its fleet ; that demand was resisted, and the Government so required published to its subjects that the two nations were at war, and imme diately directed the commencement of hostile acts. Did not that conststute war? Were the Danes to say whether they were, at war or his Hon. and Learned F r i en d?— (Hear, hear.) In their proclamations they stated that the war was begun. It was not a paper war ; a procla mation was issued by the Danish Government that the two nations were at war. What was the foundation for the statement that the two nations were not at war? There was not the slightest, unless his Honourable Friend could erase from the records this declaration of war on the part of Denmark. It was a most material fact for the House to bear in mind, and to adopt a distinct conclusion upon, were the two nations at war prior to the seizure of these vessels ? His Hon. Friend seemed to think that he had imputed to him a Want of accuracy in reference to the books. He had read the speech of his Hon. and Learned Friend atten tively, and, after readine- it, he was astonished at the result. Nothing but his happy ma nner of delivering what h e h a d to say could have made that speech effec tual to convince the House. His Hon. and Learned Friend seemed to think that ho (the Solicitor-General) was mistaken in supposing that he had drawn an incor rect inference. His Hon. and Learned Friend had not made any quotation from Grotius. He (the Solicitor- General) would refer the House to the authority of Vattel on the subject.of reprisals. Reprisals were those things which were taken by nations which had a cone plaiht against other countries, prior to the breaking out of a war, and with a view to obtain justice, upon a matter of complaint. (Hear, hear.) (The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then referred to the authority of Vattel with respect to reprisals, in justifica tion of the course the Government had pursued.) Now, what was the date of the seizure of the vessels in ques tion, what were the dates as compared with the declara tion he had heard that the two nations were at war? A few in the month of' August, still fewer in September, and fewer still in October and November. The two na tions were at war after the 4th of November. Apologies were made for the act done, but stating- that it was ab solutely necessary for the preservation of the country, by reason of the coalition of France and Russia. If his Learned Friend called that an apology he was at perfect liberty to do so; but, in his (the Solicitor-General's) opi nion, it was justice to the nation. These sei zures , there fore, he he said, were all o f th em a f ter. war, an d t h ere was 0 . ground for calling i n t o the subject any recognised prmeiple, for the ' case of goods and debts stood d up er on anddifferer, nt ground s .. NON, he .wi s h e d t o u wasstit tninthgen Isoround upon which this was put. eits4 4se lf that it was the peculiar circum stances of, the might be said, and saici al t leh l wa4 to .he the ground .it. had its peculiarsircumsta,nc es ; JontY' that- every ease NYO gases.cquld be identical ; if it was to be put on the grestest of pec u liarity of cir. cumstances, it should be put upon some great and intel ligible ground, such as could not be mistaken on future occasions. Now what was the pecularity here ? His friends said that they were taken by surprise—that no notice had been given of hostility to enable them to escape—was that the peculiarity ? How often would it happen? He hoped never to see such days as that, but if the experience of the past v. as mat ter of caution for the future, looking at the course of events what answer, he would ask, could they give to the numerous claims which stood upon the same foundation ? He denied that they had not sufficient notice, and even if they had not, if it was said that the absence of notice furnished a ground for compensa tion, then he said that the present case was peculiar for absence of any such ground. But he asserted that the parties had as much notice as was necessary. It was stated in the course of the debate that an individual of the name of Harrison had applied to Admiral Gam bier to know if he might safely go to the Baltic. It was said that the Admiral told him he might go. This might be the case, but the supposed conversation was given thirty years after the period referred to. But let them mark what followed. That individual wrote home to England to obtain an insurance. What did that writing home for an insurance show ? Did it show that he might remain there without fear of war ? Certainly not. The merchants who traded to the Baltic were a very adventurous set of men—they chose to speculate— they stayed to load their cargoes, but they stayed too long. The British fleet was detained for a time to put the Danish fleet in a state to come to England. Why did not the vessels come away with the fleet ? It was argued that the British fleet did not leave sufficient pro tection for the vessels in the Sound. That would be no ground for compensation. A large fleet such as that was must have been some time preparing to sail. Could those in the Baltic be ignorant that such a fleet was about to depart or had already departed ? Decidedly not. If they chose to remain they did so at their own risk, as they did for their own profit. That, then, would form no ,ground on which to sustain these claims. Something had'' been said about a conversation which took place at the Admiralty. Would that House say that on the ground of a conversation said to be held at the Admi ralty, about which nothing certain existed, they should vote away a large sum of money ? That was certainly too futile a ground to be upheld. No application on the subject existed in writing. It was asked if they had thought it fit to take the fleet, why did they give any compensation at all ? Compensation was given in the former cases, because it was intended at the time the fleet • was taken to return it in perfect safety. When the Danes refused to surrender their fleet, and assumed a , hostile attitude, we were obliged to consider them as enemies, and the ships were therefore taken in state of of warfare. It was to the Danish captains that compen sation was given for their private expenses and freightage. It could not for a moment be contended that the property seized by the British Government from its enemies should be applied to the payments of the losses of pri vate individuals. He regretted the loss these parties had sustained in the pursuit of their commercial specu lations ; but there must be some broad and intelligible ground on which such an application should be made. The Spanish case had been referred to as forming a pre cedent, but he denied that there was any analogy be tween these cases. Before the House granted the pre sent application they would do well to consider what was the precedent which they were about to lay down; and he was satisfied that on every principle of justice and ho nesty the parties now before the House had no claim whatever upon the public funds.—(Cries of " Hear.") Mr. A. CHAPMAN contended that the Government was bound to remunerate these parties for the losses they had sustained, because, when application was made to them, they stated that there need be no appre hension whatever, and, acting upon that advice, one of his constituents, with his family, had been entirely , ruined. He contended that these claims stood upon pre cisely the same footing as the book debts and the goods seized on shore. He himself had sent out a ship which had been seized at Copenhagen, but it had been after wards re-taken and delivered up to him by Admiral Gambier. He trusted that the Government would see the justice and expediency of no longer withholding the settlement of these claims. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared— For bringing up the Report Against it 64 Majority SUPPLY. The Report on the Committee of Supply was brought up, and the resolutions agreed to. BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said the Committee on the Bribery at Elections Bill stood upon the Orders of the Day, and he wished to state what his feelings were with regard to that Bill. If he could expect to obtain the attention of the House, the present was a period at which it would be most important to carry it. He owned he very much feared that having to go through the whole of the clauses, they would not be able to give it that attention at the present advanced period of the Session which it required. These were his feelings ; but if it was the wish of the House he should have no objection to proceed with it. Sir ROBERT PEEL had voted for tho second read ing of the Bill, because he was most anxious that the law with regard to bribery and treating should be pro perly defined. Many parties innocently offended against the law because they did not know what bribery and treating was. On the whole, however important as the Bill was at the present moment, he thought it would be a great misfortune to pass it in a hurried manner. On the whole he was inclined to think that, considering but a few days would elapse before the House was dissolved, the Noble Lord had exercised a sound discretion in not attempting to: pass it, and he had no objection to share in the responsibility. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL. On the question that the Municipal Corporations Bill be read a third time, Mr. CRESSWELL opposed the Bill. After a few words from Mr. MACKINNON and Sir J. Y. BULLER, The House divided, when there appeared— For the third reading 54 Against it 9 Majority On the motion that the House go into Committee on THE BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS BILL, _ _ Lord J. RUSSELL said that he proposed to proceed with the Committe on the Bill to-morrow (this day). Mr. WYNN said that it would be well if the measure were carried into a law this Session. It would be ad vantageous at the commencement of the next Session of of Parliament to have the Bill in operation. The 6th, 7th, Bth, and 9th clauses of the Bill, which referred to the protection of witnesses in the case of giving evi dence, were particularly valuable. He thought that these clauses ought to be passed in the form of a separate Bill. Mr. S. O'BRIEN said that the passing of the mea sure would be of the utmost value on the eve of a ge neral election. Lord JOHN RUSSELL proposed to go into Com= mitten on the present occasion, to consider the sug gestions of the Right Hon. Member for Montgomery shire (Mr. Wynn), and to go on with the Bill to-morrow. Sir s ROBEitT H. INGtIS said that the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, had left the House under the impression that the Bill should not be pro ceeded with. Mr. WAKLEY did not understand the Noble Lord to withdraw his Bill. He (Mr. Wakley) thought that the Noble Lord's remarks were merely thrown out to ascertain the opinion of the House on the subject. Mr. W. WYNN hoped that he should not be under stood as objecting to the principle of the clauses ; what he feared was the difficulty of carrying them into exe cution. Mr. FRESHFLELD said all clauses upon which any question could arise might be postponed, and the House would proceed with the others. The House then went into Committee. Lord J. RUSSELL said it was his intention to aban don the first clause ; but if Hon. Gentlemen wished it, he would not object to postpone it. After a few words from Mr. ;A. CHAPMAN, the clause, with the four folloWing clauses, were struck out. Clause G was agreed to with an amendment. Clauses 7 and S were agreed to. On clause 9 being proposed, Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN asked if the clause would en able an Election Committee to proceed with the in quiry as to alleged bribery after the petitioner should have withdrawn his petition ? Mr WYNN said that additional machinery would be required in order to do so. Mr. WARI3URTON thought the clause was an ex ceedingly proper one. Lord JOHN RUSSELL agreed that the object of the Hon. G ent l eman was an exceedingly important one, but it would be necessary that in such cases as those al luded to, the Committee should report the circumstances of the case, and that public officer should b e ap pointed to prosecute ths°elnequiry before the Committee. Mr. S. O'BRLENsuuc l e , sted that the inquiry s h ou ld be conducted at th e p Lord J. RUSSELL thought that the matter had subject of a separat e Bill. better be made the subj The clause was then agreed to. Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN then rose to propose a c l ause for the purpose of enacting th a t the same me decl a r a ti on should be taken by Members a s was now taken by elec tors with regard to bribery. Lord JOHN RUSSELL hoped the Hon Member would defer his, motion until the Report should be brought up. Mr. WYNN hoped the Hun. Member would not press his motion during the absence of the Right Hon Baronet the Member for Tamworth, who took a great interest in the subject. Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN must press his motion, and he would briefly state the reasons which had induced him to propose the clause. The Member bribing an elector was much more guilty than the poor elector re ceiving the bribe. He was surprised that the Hon. Member for Bridport was apposed to the declaration, and the ground that he assumed that such a declaration would be useless, would :apply equally to every oath and declaration taken. He proposed that a person taking such declaration falsely, should be liable to all the penalties of perjury ; and he believed that in nineteen cases out of twenty such a declaration would be effec tuaL To be consistent the Hon. Member should pro pose to repeal . all enactments requiring such a declara tion from electors.. The Hon. Member then proposed the following clauses And be it enacted, that every Member returned, to serve in Parliament shall, after tak ing the oaths prescribed to be taken at the table of the House of Commons, before he becomes entitled to sit and vote, also make and.subscribe the following declaration —' I do solemnly affirm and declare that I have not, directly or indirectly, made use of any bribery for the purpose of being electecl.at the late election as a Mem ber of this House for the county of (or county of a city, town, or horougli, as the ease.may be.)' And he it enacted, that if any person shall makaand subscribe such declaration falsely, every such person, being duly convicted thereof, shall incur and suffer such pains, pe nalties, and disabilities, as persons convicted of wilfu and corrupt perjury are by law liable to, and may k prosecuted for the same at any period within five year: after he shall have made such declaration." Mr. WARBURTON simply asked himself whether such a clause would be effectual in preventing bribery en rot.—(llear ' hear.) It would have the effect of making the public believe that electors were purer than they really were. As to the effect of such a declaration, lu would merely allude to the declaration taken by officer of regiments when their commissions were bought or sold. On such occasions both the buyer and seller de clared on their honour that they had neither given nor taken directly or indirectly a greater sum than the regu lation price, and the colonel of the regiment certified that he verily believed that the regulations with regard to price had been strictly complied with. Yet every one who knew officers, knew that these regulations were never complied with, but were absolutely considered dead letter, and this took place among a class of men who were considered as the very pink of honour, and who wen bound to sacrifice every thing rather than that honour. Yet it was among these gentlemen that this asseveratiot was violated. A solemn asseveration was made the , certain things were done, and yet the declaration mad( had not the slightest foundation. There was another in stance in which the oath was prescribed, but equally dis regarded. By the 28th of Henry VIII., c. 15, sec. 9. all Bishops and Archbishops, upon ordaining clergy men, were required to put to them a corporal oath tha: they would learn the English language and teach it, and support a school for that purpose, and also that they would assume the English garb and fashion. Every one knew that that oath was constantly violated. The oath, to obey the statutes at the Universities af forded another instance of the manner in whiel, such asseverations were evaded ; nor was any discredit attached to these parties. Under these circumstances, how could it be imagined that the pro posed declaration would have the effect of preventing bribery ? His opinion was, that the only effect would be to cause the agents to conceal what had occurred till a considerable period had elapsed. He wished to see Members elected, not for their money but for their merits, and believing that this Bill would not promott that end, he could not give to it his support. Colonel SIBTHORP said the effect of the Bill would be to prevent the rich from benefiting the poor even by giving a few shillings in charity, and it should have his strenuous_opposition._______ Sir DENIiAM NORREYS was in favour of making the oath as stringent as possible. Ile considered bribery by an agent no less deserving of punishment than bri bery by the party himself. kr..E. TURNER and Mr. W. ROCHE supporte the clause. Colonel PERCIVAL opposed the clause. Mr. T. B. HOBIIOUSE said that no declaration con be made that would not be evaded. Sir R. HARDINGE wished to know by what tribu nal any Member of that House was to be tried when he had been guilty of bribery. Mr. O'BRIEN apprehended that he would be tried iri the usual manner, and by the Common Law Courts. Mr. BROTHERTON apprehended if it was the wish of the House to put an end to bribery, there could not be any objection in a Member declaring that he had not been guilty of bribery. He was for adopting any course that would put an end to bribery. Mr. WAKLEY said that he believed the House was not sincere in its wish to get rid of bribery— if it was, the cure was easy, and that cure was to enlarge the constituency.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped the Noble Lord, from what he had experienced, would put aside his views of finality ; and, if he did, he (Mr. W.) did not despair of seeing him come forward shortly as the Radical Doctor to cure all the evils that at pre sent existed in the representation of the country. He did not believe that any declaration would prevent Mem bers from bribing. He believed if the clause was car ried, it would have no good effect. He trusted, there fore, the Hon. Member for Limerick would withdraw the clause. Lord J. RUSSELL thought if the declaration was not productive of good, it was calculated to do a great deal of harm. He could not conceive that any good ef fect would be produced by a declaration. He believed that after a short time a declaration would become a dead letter. He did not wish to make any final declaration on the subject, but, as at present advised, he could not agree to adopt the clause. Mr. COURTNEY said they had for some long nights had sugar debates, in which much sympathy was shown for the negroes ; last night they had a long debate, in which dogs were talked of with sympathy ; but why should not some of their humanity be shown to them selves ? If the clause became law he would envy the,7ife of the toad under the harrow to that of a Member of Parliament, living perhaps under weak nerves for five years at the mercy of any disreputable informer. The Legislation they were now engaged in was useless, and therefore mischievous. He trusted the Hon. Mem ber for Limerick would not force them to a division, for the motives of those who conscientiously voted against the motion would be sure to be misrepresented out of doors. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, the House divided, when there appeared— For the clause 22 Against it , 5l Majority against the clause ...... —29 On our return to the gallery, we found — Mr. S. O'BRIEN calling the attention of the House to the expenses to which candidates were put to bring ing up voters. It was most desirable that, in Ireland at least, such expense should be brought as low as possible, and that such payment or allowance should not be deemed bribery. He would confine the allowances to ss. for the expenses of attending at the poll, and 6d. per mile for travelling—to that extent it ought not to be con sidered bribery. He brought up a clause to that effect. Sir B. BATESON agreed with the Hon. Member, but the greatest blessing that could be conferred on Ireland in election matters would be to extend to her the English system of voting at various places in the county. It would save much of drunkenness and loss of life. He was certain that if they did away with treating in Ireland they would disfranchise more than one-half of the county electors, for they could not travel 30, 40, or 50 miles to the county town, and remain there five days at his own cost. After a few words from Sir G. GREY and Colonel SIBTHORP, the clause wa's withdrawn. The House resumed, the Report to be received to morrow. The Report of the Committee on the Banks of Issue Bill was brought up.; The Metropolitan Improvement Bill went through Committee. The County Bridges Bill was read a second time. The Highway Rates Bill was also read a second time. The School Sites Bill was reported, with amendments. THAMES EMBANKMENT. Sir F. TRENCH moved the re-appointment of the Select Committee on Thames Embankment, for the pur pose of considering evidence in support of a plan to form, upon the embankment, a quay of communication from Blackfriars-bridge toHungerford-market ; the whole of which could be provided for by a railroad between the same termini, without any demand for the public money, or any reference to the value of the land recovered from the river. Mr. HAWES objected to the motion. He begged the House to consider the great amount of property that would be affected by the formation of the embank ment proposed ; and he believed it would not benefit navigation, but, on the contrary, would impede it. Mr. KEMBLE trusted that, under all the circum stances, his Hon. Friend would not press the motion to a division. Mr. PRYME supported the motion. The CHANCELOR of the EXCHEQUER trusted that at this period of the Session the Hon. and Gallant Member would not press his motion. Sir F. TRENCH consented to withdraw the motion. The House then adjourned at a Quarter past Eleven. From the late Henry Cowper, Esq., of Tewen Waters, Herts., to Messrs. S. and B. Solomons, 39, Albemarle. street, Piccadilly, opposite the York Hotel, and 76, King William. street, Bank of England.—" Gentlemen, having been deaf for many years, I was induced from recommendation to try your Invisi ble Voice Conductors, and I have great pleasure in telling you that they enable me to bear persons in company and at a place of wor. ship most distinctly; and in consequence of the great advantage which I have derived, I have recommended many persons to you, and their report is similar to mine—most favourable. The Spec. tacles and Hand-glass which you have sent me are very excellent, and suit my sight precisely, and surpass any thing of the kind I have ever tried ; the transparency of which is so brilliant, that, although I have passed my 86th year the 22d of May last, yet they enable me to read, ace., by candlelight with the greatest ease and comfort to myself.—Gentlemen, I return you my best thanks, and remain your most obedient servant. HENRY COWPER.— June 22, 1839."—General Browne Clayton feels desirous to ex press the comfort and advantage he has derived at his advanced age of 70 years, and after two years' trial, from the use of Messrs. S. and B. Solomons' newly-invented Spectacles ; their valuable invention ully merit the patronage they have received of the Royal Family and so many individuals of high distinction, as well as of the nume rous scientific and eminent medical practitioners.—London, the 25th Feb, 1841.—Address, Addignton Hall, Lancashire. [ADVERTISEMENT.] PERSONAL ORNAMENT.-A highly-interest ing work might be composed oh the various and dissimilar modes of personal embellishment practised among different na tions, and the chapter devoted to the teeth could not but prove one of the most attraeive in the volume. Among many savage nations the practice is well known to prevail of dying the teeth black, which is esteemed a high degree of ornameet ; while, on the contrary, our British fair, relying on nature for their at tractions, seek only to preserve the charms which she has so richly bestowed on them, and endeavour simply to preserve the white and pearly character of the teeth. Among the various means suggested for this object, we would select the celebrated " Odonto, prepared by Messrs. Rowland, of Hatton-garden, as the most admirable and perfect dentifrice yet submitted to the public. THE COUNTESS OF BLESSINGTON S NEW Wonx.—We are requested to state that " The Idler in s F t r r a e nce," by the Countess of Blessington, in 2 vols. bvo., is M published thi s d ay b y M r. C o lb urn , o f G rea t arlborour.,,h et, and may now be bad at all the booksellers. Mr. Col burn has also just published :—l. The Hon. Mrs. Damer's Diary of her Travels, in 2 vols. 8 vo. 2. The Life and Lite rary Remains of L. E. L., 2 vols. small Bvo. 3 Campbell's Life of Petrarch, 2 vols. 4. Ideas and Reflections on the Properties of Music, by his Royal Highness the Crown Prince of Hanover, price ss. 5. 111 r. Fowler's " Three Years in Persia and Koordistan, 2 vols. small Bvo. 6. Trollope's Sum mer in Western France, 2 vols. Bvo. 7. Woman ; a Poem by E. S. Barrett, 3s. 6d. 8. The French Stage and the French People, edited by Theodore Hook, Esq., '2 vols. small Bvo. 9. Dr. Croly's Personal History of George IV., 2 vols. small Bvo. 10. The Book without a Name, by Sir Charles t a e nd La rs from dy t tlo r the arts an, u 2 rts v e o f ls . Europe, smallo 28 vole. 8 1 ; o Sin . an b d u r n i 2 e s LTeht e Life and Letters of Beethoven, edited by Manholes, 2 vols. small Bvo. A marriage is rumoured in the fashionable cir cles, and with all appearance of truth, that an Hon. Baronet, Member of Parliament for one of the border counties, will conduct to the hymeneal altar at the close of the season the only datighter of a Gallant General related by marriage to eue of the leading statesmen of the day. .SIR ROBERT PEEL AND MR. ASHWORTH. (From the Manchester Guardian.) TO THE EDITOR. OF THE MANCHESTER GUARDIAN. Turton, 6th mo., 8, 1841. RESPECTED FRIENDS,—I have to request your insertion of the following correspondence, which has passed between Sir It. Peel and myself, in reference to certain statements, made in his speech on the sugar duties, on the 18th ult. I hal%e prefixed to it an extract from that speech, and also a letter, previously addressed by me to Sir Robert Peel, through the medium of The Sun newspaper. This letter has already appeared in the Guardian, but I think it deairahle now to re peat it, with the view of rendering the subsequent correspon dence more intelligible. As a week has elapsed without a reply to my letter of the Ist instant, I presume the correspondence is now terminated. I am, respectfully your friend, HENRY ASHWORTH. [We emit the letter and the extract, as not necessary to make our readers acquainted with the facts of the cage.) Turton, Bolton, 5 mo. 29, 1841. Respected Friend, Sir Robert Peel, Bart.—l find that thou bast stated, in reply to an inquiry of Mark Phillips, Esq., that thou hadst not received any direct communcation from any of the deputation who waited upon thee, from the Man chester Chamber of Commerce, concerning thy statements to the House as to their opinions of Mr. Greg's pamphlet; and that, if any such were now sent, that thou would frankly state the result." It would also appear, that then hast demurred to notice my puplished letters to thee,—probably upon a point of etiquette, because I had not previously submitted them personally to thyself. _ should regret, if I had inconsiderately disregarled the usual courtesies of life ; but be pleased to reflect for a mo ment :—After thou had assailed my constituency, time, and not etiquette, became my first duty to consider in the removal of so foul an imputation; and my determination to publish at once, was hastened by the recollection, that thy reply to the note of the deputation bad kept them waiting seven days. If I have failed in respect in not forwarding a copy of my published letters on the day of publication, I regret it. The subject which requires thy explanation is thy assertion that the deputation, and especially myself, had advocated opinions in favour of protecting duties to our colonies. Thou wilt bear in mind that, at our interview, the deputa tion handed thee a copy of the resolutions passed at the Cham ber; also a copy of their " Report on th e i n j ur i ous e ff ec t s o f restrictions on trade ;" these thou promised to read, and upon them we rested our case. As the documents deprecate the discriminating duties on British colonial sugar, and as the deputation most fully con curred in stating that they repudiated the principle of " pro tection and monopoly" as a system of legalised robbery, it is due to them, as welLas to myself, that thou should explain how thou happened to misrepresent our views and opinions. Jam, respectfully, thy friend, ITENRY ASHWORTH. • Whitehall, Alay 31, 1841. Sir,—l have this day received your letter of the 29th instant, and hasten to give that re ply to it which I would readily have given to other letters which professed to be addressed to me by you, if I had received them. . - I make no complaint of discourtesy on your part ; but I took for granted that you did not expect an answer to letters respect ing which you made no communication whatever to me. It is true, as you observe, that some days elapsed before I made an appointment for receiving the deputation of which you were a member. I made it, however, previously to the discussion to which the interview referred, and 1 would have made it at an earlier period had it been in my power. It is no easy matter, I assure you, to attend Committees in the morning, debates in the evening, trans act all the other business that is connected with Parliamentary life, and to make immediate appointments with parties who wish for interviews on public matters. You observe, that " the subject which requires my explanation is my assertion that the deputation, and especially yourself, had advoc a t e d opinions in fa vour protecting duties to our colonies." Now, 1 beg leave to say, that I made no such assertion. Since I received your letter, I have looked at the report of that which I did say, as given in the Morning Chronicle (I select that paper on account of its political bias) ; and it appears to me that the report is a fair and correct one. I beg leave to refer you to that report, and I will state in addition the facts of the case according to'my recollection of them. I received a depu tation from the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester. That deputation urged very strongly the doctrines of free trade, and the universal application of them, and placed in my hands ' a document chiefly founded on the evidence taken by the Import Duties' Committee, enforcing similar principle!. I remarked, that however true the doctrines of free trade might be in the abstract, there were occasionally considerations in the practical application of them, which could not be safely disregarded. I urged encouragement of slavery and the slave-trade as a consideration of this nature, and one which might fairly be urged against a strict application of the principles of free trade to the produce of slave labour. Upon this I was asked by one of the deputation whether I had seen a pamphlet of Mr. Greg on the subject of the extinction of the African slave trade; and if I had not, whether I would under take to read it. It was described as a very able work, and cal culated to make a great impression by its force of reasoning. I answered that I had not seen the pamphlet—that I would certainly read it ; and on my inquiring where I could procure a copy, I was told that one would be sent to me. That copy was sent to me by you with a note, which I read in the House of Commons, in which "you commend the pamphlet to my attentive perusal," and remark, " that you had not heard that either Sir Fowell Buxton or any of his adherents had even at tempted an answer." When I read the pamphlet, in fulfil ment of my promise, I found an able and powerful argu ment in favour of the continuance, for the present, of a high discriminating duty on foreign sugar ; an argument not urged slightly and incidentally, but urged at the con clusion of the pamplet, after a full review of the question of the sugar duties, and in anticipation of many of the arguments used subsequently in the debate in the House of Co mmons . I ascertained that ihis pamphlet was written by a gentleman who is the brother of one of the Members for Manchester; it was commended to my perusal at ao interview which I had with a deputation from the Chamber of Commerce of that town. It was sent to me by the member of that deputation who took the leading part at the conference which I had with them, and was described by him as a pamphlet to which no answer had been given. Finding in this pamphlet, coming into my possession under such circumstances, an elaborate and successful argument in favour of my views as to the policy of continuing for the pre sent a high protective duty on foreign sugar, I considered then, and I consider now, that I was fully justified in the use which I made of it. I think Mr. Brotherton, the Member for Salford, who, before I could mention the pamphlet, exclaimed in the House, " Now it is coining," must have laboured under impressions very similar to mine. You are perfectly at liberty to make whatever use you please of this letter. I have the honour to be. Sir, your obedient servant, To Henry Ashworth, Esq. ROBERT PEEL. Turton, Bolton, 6th mo. Ist, 1841. Respected Friend, Sir R. Peel, Bart.—On reading thy let ter of yesterday, and the report in the Morning Chronicle, to which thou refers me, 1 am by no means convinced that the statement made in my letter of the 29th is incorrect, namely, that thou had in substance asserted, that the deputation, and especially myself, had advocated opinions in favour of protect ing duties to our colonies. find, in the report to which thou refers me, the following passage in relation to Mr. Greg's pamphlet :—" That the members of the Chamber of Commerce at Manchester were the advocates of free trade, and were the men who were now agitating the country against the Corn-laws ; and they it was who asked him ( Sir R. Peel) to read this pamphlet; they told him they would abide by the decision he came to upon this pamphlet."—( Morning Chronicle, May 19.) Thou must be aware that this statement, so made by thee, was incorrect ; that the deputation did not, as on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester, ask thee to read this pamphlet ; that it was myself who directed thy attention to it, from con siderations arising incidentally out of the previous conversa tion ; that this took place after the business of our inter view had been concluded ; that this (Mr. Greg's) pamphlet was not given thee by the deputation, but was sent to thee some hours afterwards, in my own name, accompanied by a note, having a reference to Sir Fowell Bux ton's schemes, and not to any advocacy of protective duties ; and that nothing was said to thee, from which thou could draw the conclusion that we had been deputed by the Chamber of Commerce to lay that pamphlet before thee ; and thou must also be aware, as I have before reminded thee, that it was not this pamphlet which the Deputation left thee, but the " Re port of the Chamber of Commerce on the Injurious Effects of Restrictions on Trade," and the "resolutions "of the Cham ber, founded thereon ; these thou promised to read, and upon them we rested our case ; and that neither myself, nor either of my colleagues, ever said that we should abide the decision thou came to upon Mr. Greg's pamphlet, or any thing to the like effect. It was with considerable surprise that I found, by thy letter, the following defence of the course thou halt taken. Thou sayest, " Finding, in this pamphlet, coming into my poss-s -sion under such circumstances, an elaborate and successful argument in favour of my own views, as to the policy of con tinuing, for the present, a high protective duty on foreign sugar, I considered then, and I consider now, that I was fully justified in the use which I made of it." I conceive, therefore, that I, the gentlemen with whom I acted, and the body by which we were deputed, have all a right to complain of the colouring wh:ch is given in thy speech to the conversation which took place at thy house. The Chamber of Commerce of Manchester was responsible only for the acts of myself and my colleagues as a deputation ; and, though it may be considered fair by an astute politician to catch at an expression of private opinion by an individual on an incidental point, and to try to fasten it upon the body by which he was deputed, I do not think that such a course is calculated to promote that frank and unreserved communication with pub lic men, from which I am sure they, and the community, may frequently derive considerable advantage. I am, respectfully, thy friend, HENRY ASHWORTH. SIR ROBERT PEEL AND THE DEPUTATION OF THE MANCHESTER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. Chamber of Commerce, Manchester, June 7, TO THE EOITOR OF THE MANCHESTER GUARDIAN. Sir,—That the public may judge of the misrepresentations which have been made in Parliament, and in the public jour nals, respecting the interview of the deputation of the Chamber of Commerce at Manchester with Sir Robert Peel, we beg to hand you the correspondence which has passed between that gentleman and ourselves, which we shall be obliged by your inserting in your next publication. We are, Sir, yours respectfully, J. B. SMITH, HOLLAND HOOLE. Chamber of Commerce, Manchester, June 1, 1842. Sla—The statement made by you, in the House of Com mons on the 18th ultimo, with reference to your interview with the deputation of the Manchester Chamber of Com merce, led Mr. Ashworth, one of the deputation, to address a letter to you, through the public journals ; but, having left. London, we were not aware, until we saw by your reply to a question from Mr. M. Philips, in the House of Commons, that you had received no direct communication on the subject from Mr. Ashworth. So many MisrepreseEtations have appeared in the news papers a ris i ng out o f your repor t e d s t a tementin Parliament of what passed between von and the deputation, that you will not be surprised we feel called upon, in our own justification, and that of our colleague, to repeat the facts as they oc currcd, for th e p urpose o f g i v i ng you an opportunity of cor recting the mis-statements which are contained in the re ported account of your speech. You are reported to have said, " That it was not the first time you hail been indebted for arguments to the Cham ber of Commerce of Manchester—you had had the benefit of the arguments of the Honourable Gentleman the late Pre. silent of that Chamber (Mr. G. W. Wood) ; you had to re turn the same acknowledgments to that Honourable Gentle man's successor." Now, you did not in your speech (as reported) think proper, on this occasion, to make use of a single argument adduced by the Chamber in its " report," or in its " resolutions," or through its dep u t at i on ; b ut, i nstea d thereof, you have chosen to select from commended to yo ur perusa l b y M r . Ashworth with reference a pamphl e t wr itten by Mr.. W. R. Greg (re solely to Sir Fowell Buxton's scheme) certain passages , never adverted to by Mr. Ashworth, and representing to the liouso the opinions expressed in that pamphlet, as those of the deputa tion, and on which they rested their ease. -- - You are reported to have sa'd, " Here was a man connected with the manufacturing interests—a member of the Chamber of Commerce at Manchester—deputed by them to come to London to represent their interests, prepared to take an en larged and liberal view of this question, with reference to the interests both of the manufacturer and the consumer. And what were the conclusions to which this gentleman mire ? He said few things could he more certain than that the situa tion of the sugar cultivator would be ruined, that capital would be destroyed, that it would lead to the abandonment of the land by the present white population, and that not only would the great measure of emancipation have signally failed, as far as negro slavery was concerned, but the moral effect on other countries would he wholly lost. "—Morning Chronicle, May 19. Not one syllable of th e a b ove, attr ib ute d to the deputation, was uttered lay any one of them. You are further reported to have said, " The Honourable Member who laughed might not be a member of the Chamber of Commerce at Manchester, but he should recollect that the members of the Chamber of Commerce at Manchester were the advocates of free trade, and were the men who were now agitating the country against the Corillaws ; and they it was who asked him (Sir R. Peel) to read this pamphlet ; they told him they would abide by the decision he came to upon this pamphlet."—Morning Chronicle, May 19. Now, what the deputation invited you to read, and on which they were satisfied to rest their case, was not Mr. Greg's pamphlet, but the Report of the directors to a special general meeting of the Chamber of Commerce and Manufacturers at Manchester, on the injurious effects of restriction on trade, and the necessity of i:nmediate changes in our commercial policy, held I Ith March ; and also the " resolutions" adopted at another special general meeting of the Chamber, held on the 22d April, both of which documents were handed to' you by the deputa tion, and which you promised to read. Not one word will be found in these decuments in favour of the " temporary continuance of the present discriminating duties on sugar." On the contrary, the report of the Direc tors before referred to, states that—" The tax imposed on the consumers, by being obliged to give above double the prices for sugar and coff e to our colonies that these articles can be purchased at from other countries, amounts to upwards of 6,000,0001. per annum, levied for the exclusive benefit of the colonies, to whom, a few years ago, the British people paid 20,000,000/. for the abolition of slavery. " The total value of British and Irish produce and manu factures exported to the British West Indies, in 1539, amounted to 3,986.598/. ; of which about one-fourth is reexported to the South American and neighbouring States ; so that, at the present time, including the interest on the slave-compensation money, the British people are paying 7,000,0001. per annum to our West India Colonies for the privilege of selling their products of the value of 3,000,0001. a year." The second " resolution" unanimously adopted at the spe cial general meeting of the Chambt r, held on the 22d of April last, is as follows : That it is inconsistent with just government to impose taxation for any other than purposes of revenue ; that all pro tecting or discriminating duties, imposed for the purpose of raising artificially the prices of home or colonial productions above their natural prices in the markets of the world, are an unjust tax upon the great body of the consumers, for the ex clusive benefit of a privileged class." It was furthermore expressly stated to you by the deputation that they considered monopolies as unwise and unjust, and, stripped of their disguise, they could view them in no other light than as legalised robbery. The _propriety of admitting slave-grown sugar for consump tion was a point introduced into discussion by yourself. You intimated your dissent from placing it in competition with that of free labour, and thus indirectly encouraging slavery; whilst the deputation contended, that the only possible or rational mode of abolishing slavery throughout the world was to show the superiority of free over slave labour. But that you did not mistake their opinions on the subject of free trade is evident from the following questions which you put to them, viz. : Do you advocate universal free trade ? They replied, certainly. Then, have not the West Indians a right to demand free trade? Certainly. Then I, as a West Indian, might say, Give me a free trade in slaves. To which they replied, that human beings were not considered to be a legitimate mercantile com modity. _ When the business of the deputation had closed, and the Members had left their seats to depart, Mr. Ashworth asked, in reference to the question of free and slave labour, whether you had seen some observations upon Sir Powell Buxton's schemes, in a pamphlet published by W. It. Greg. On your stating that you had not, Mr. Ashworth promised to send you the pamphlet. This pimple and true recital of the circumstances of our in terview calls upon us to declare, both in justification of our selves and in defence of the body which sent us, that the re presentations which you are reported to have made in Parlia ment do not convey a correct account of that which actually occurred ; and we respectfully request that you will do us the justice to correct, before the House of Commons, the mis statements which, we trust, have been unintentionally made, or incorrectly reported.—We have the honour to be, Sir, your obedient servants, J. B. SMITH, HOLLAND HOOLE. Sir Robert Peel, Bart., M.P., London. 'Whitehall, June 2, 1841. Gentlemen,—l beg leave to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of yesterday, referring to the debate which took place in the House of Commons on the 18th of May, now nearly a fortnight since. On Monday last (the 31st of May), I had a letter from Mr. Ashworth, being the first communication which had reached me on the subject of that debate. I replied to Mr. Ashworth's letter on the day on which I received it; and, as he was a member of the deputation, and as I have stated to him my re collection of the conversation which passed, so far as concerns the pamphlet of Mr. Greg, and the circumstances under which it was recommended to my notice, .I be g leave to:refer you to that letter, of which I have authorised Mr. Ashworth to make whatever use he pleases. In that letter, I observe that I had referred to the report of my speech in the Morning Chronicle, and that it appeared to me a fair and correct report. There certainly is, however, a material error which is no ticed in the second page of your letter. It would appear from the Report, that I had ascribed to a member of the deputa tion the statements " that the situation of the sugar cultivator would be ruined—that capital would be destroyed--that it would lead to the abandonment of the land by the present white population—and that not only would the great measure of emancipation have signally failed, as far as negro slavery was concerned, but the moral effect on other countries would be lost." In reference to this passage you observe, " that not one syllable of the above, attributed to the deputation, was uttered by any one of them." This is perfectly true. Those state ments are in the pamphlet of Mr. Greg, and I so described them to be, and read from the pamphlet the particular passages of which the above report gives only the general summary. I am sorry to say that my recollection is at variance with yours on some parts of your statement. For instance, as to the claim of the West Indian proprietor to be allowed a free trade in slaves. My observation clearly pointed not to a re newal of the slave-trade for the benefit of West India pro prietors, but to the unequal footing on which a British colony would be placed by the strict application of she principles of free trade, if that colony had to compete on equal terms in the home market with the produce of Cuba; when in the one case slavery and the slave trade were effectually abolished, and were not so in the other. Then as to the circumstances under which Mr. Greg's pamphlet was recommended to me. It is true that, when the conference was over, and the members of the deputation had left their seats and were about to depart, I inquired where I could procure the pamphlet of Mr. Greg, and was informed that it should be sent to me-; but there had been a previous conversation as to that pamphlet, and it had been strongly re commended to my perusal towards the close of my conference with the deputation, and in consequence of my remarks as to slavery and the slave trade. If I am asked any question in the House of Commons on the subject adverted to in this letter, I shall be prepared to state my recollection of what passed at the interview which I had with you, in conformity with the communications which 1 have made to you and to Mr. Ashworth. I have the honour to be, Gentlemen, your obedient servant, J. B. Smith, Esq. ROBERT PEEL. Holland Hoole, Esq. Chamber of Commerce, Manchester, June 3, 1841. Sir—We have received your favour of yesterday, in which you acknowledge that a portion of the report of your speech to which we called your attention, as reported in the Morning Chronicle, which attributes certain statements to the deputa tion, is incorrect ; and that those statements were described by Sou in your speech as, extracts from Mr. W. Greg's pamphlet. There is another point, however, which you have not noticed, but which we deem of more importance, as between us and the Chamber of Commerce, by whom we were deputed; as we are made by the report of your speech in the Morning Chro• nicle to have put in Mc. Greg's pamphlet as our ca•e, and to have expressed ourselves willing to, abide by your decision on that. We beg, therefore, again to call your attention to the report of your speech as follows ;—" That the members of the Cham ber of Commerce at Manchester were advocates of free trade, and were the men who were now agitating the country against the Corn-laws; and they it was who asked him (Sir R. Peel) to read this pamphlet. They told him they would abide by the decision be came to upon this pamphlet."—Morning Chro nicle,May 19. We have again to reiterate, that this is totally at variance with what really took place at our interview ; and it will afFord us pleasure to be honoured by another communication from you, stating that this part of the report of your speech is aho incorrect. We have the honour to be &c., J. B. SMITH, HOLLAND HOOLE. Sir R. Peel, Bart., M.P. Whitehall, June 5, 1841. Gentlemen,—l am not aware of any error in that part of the newspaper report to which you refer in your letter of the 3d instant. If here had been, 1 would as willingly have admitted it, as I did admit the error noticed in my further letter. I have stated to Mr. Ashworth my recollection of the cir cumstances under which the pamphlet of Mr. Greg was strongly recommended to my notice, at an interview which I had with the deputati•sn of which you were members. Mr. Ashworth took the leading part at that interview. If it were intended by :Mr. Ashworth to recommend to me parts only of the pamphlet of Mr. Greg, the reservation ought to have been made at the time. If, again, Mr. Ashworth was speaking sometimes in his individual capacity, and at others as a member of the deptvation, or if he offered to me suggestions from which you dissented, I cannot but think that an intimation to that effect ought to have been conveyed to me during our interview. I have the honour to be, Gentlemen, your obedient servant, J. B. Smith, Esq. ROBERT PEEL. Holland Hoole, Esq. Chamber of Commerce, Manchester, June 7, 1841. Sir,—We have received your letter of the sth inst., in which you state that you are " not aware of any error" in that part of the newspaper report to which we referred you in ours of the 3d inst. We are the more surprised at this reply, because we have since received a copy of your speech of the 18th May, published by Murray ( which we take for granted is corrected by your self), in which we perceive that you have omitted that portion of your reported speech of which we then complained as being a misrepresentation, viz., that we would abide by the decision you came to upon Mr. Greg's pamphlet. We were further surprised to find, that all the mis-statements in every part of your speech of the 18th May, as reported in the Morning Chro nicle (called by you " a fair and correct report,") which first led us, in our own justification, and that of our colleague, to call your attention to, are also, in your said authorized speech, either altogether omitted or corrected. Why you still declare that you are " not aware of any error" in certain Passages in your speech, as reported in the Morn ing Chronicle, misrepresenting our interview with you, and yet in your speech, as corrected by yourself, you have either omitted or alt ere d th ese passages , is best known to yourself. We deem it unnecessary to make a single comment on th 4 conduct. The public will make its own. We cannot, how ever, close this correspondence without deeply regretting that a statesman, aspir:ng to the first office in the bovernment, should, even by implication, have justified the suspicion of having'sought to procure a temporary triumph of party in terests,.not only at the expense of the character and reputa tion of the Deputation of the Chamber of Cemmerce at Man chester', but also at that of truth and justice. We - have the. honour to be, Sir, your obedient servants, J. B. SMITH. - • • . • HOLLAND HOOLE. RoliettTeel,-Bart.,. M. P. -London. • • SPORTING IN ELL. GEN C.E. ASCOT HEATH RACES-YESTERDAY. Yesterday was the " grand" day of the meeting, and with a slight qualification, the adjective has seldom been more cor rectly applied; the weather was delightful, the dust immense, and the multitude great,—the presence of the Sovereign, with A brilliant Court, imparting a grandeur to the ensemble which n o other race course can parallel. For those who look for totals this' brief proem will suffice, but as there is a certain class of readers who look for items, we will enter a little into detail. Be it known then, that in anticipation of a visit from the Queen and her Ilbostrious Consort, swarms made their exit from the metropolis by the various modes of conveyance now in vogue, and that the rail and the road were in a bustle from an early hour in the morning. The " Great Western," as might have been expected. drew immensely, but not to such an extent as altogether to supersede coaches and post-horses ; the difficulty and expense of getting from the Slough terminus to the course had weight with many, and properly so, as in reality very little saving of time or money was effected by those who gave steam the preference. Another inducement to " take to the road" was the meanness of the Railway Directors, who, having ruined every posting eitablishmesit on the line (a source from which a good Plate was always available to the races), and established a monopoly without making compensation to its victims, have from the first refused to contribute to a Meeting' from which they annually derive s everal thousand pounds. As the races were advertised to commence precisely at half past one o'clock, an early arri sal was essential to those who were anxious to obtain "good places ;" accordingly, by twelve o'clock, clouds of dust, almost drirkening the sky, gave evidence of the coming throng, and calk d into play all the energies of those to whom its disposition wa s entrusted. The Grand Stand absorbed nearly all the higher cthsss of visitors; but many per sons of rank, determined to look royalty in the face, and at the same time enjoy their luncheons in the old-fashioned way, took their stand within the carriage itwiosure, setting at nought both heat and dust, with the certainty of being at least one hour later off the ground than their nei ghbours, and thereby encoun • tering the dangers and confusion incidental to the journey home. The foot people poured in by thousands, hut by the good-humoured firmness of the police all were packed as well as could be expected, where two were constrained to squeeze themselves into a space in w hich one would have been barely comfortable. It is almost superfluous to add that every stand was full, that thieves and thimble• riggers abounded, and that a powerful body of the A dis ision of the police, under Superintendents May and Grinsokl, and Inspectors Pearce, Hughes, and Partridge, were kept in constant.and vigorous employment. At twenty minutes past one the approa.ch of the Royal pro cession was heralded by the shouts of the spectators, and an avenue was immediately formed, up which it passed amidst the most enthusiastic cheering. Exactly at the half-hour her Ma jesty reached the stand, and on her app,ta.rance at the window immediately after, was greeted with every possible demonstra tion of loyalty and regard; similar feelings: of attachment. were displayed towards her illustrious consort, w h ose appearance, we are happy to say, gave a contradiction to Ca e late reports. In the carriage with her Majesty and the Pri n ce were his Royal Highness Prince George of Cambridge. I n the others were the Duke of Sutherland, Duke and Duchess of Bedford, the Marquis of Westminster, Marquis of Exeter, E an and Countess of Erroll and Lady Ida Hay, Earl of Albemarle , Lord and Lady Hobart Grosvenor, Countess of Charlemont, Ea rl of Uxbridge, Viscount and Viscountess Jocelyn, Lord Kinnacu-d, Sir Henry Wheatley, Lord Poltimore, Lord in Waiting-.; Honourable Sir William Lumley, Groom in Waiting; .t.ord Alfred Paget, Equerry; Sir Edward Bowater, Equcrry to his Royal Highness Prince Albert; Mr. George and Lionourable Mrs. Anson, Hon. Charles Murray, Lady Barham, Lady in Waiting, and the Hon. Harriet Lister and Amelia Murray, Maids of Honour. Lords Segrave and W. Lennox, and several other noblemen, had the honour of joining the distinguished party at her Majesty's dinner-party in the evening. In addition to those included in the list of her Majesty's visitors, there were present the Duke and Duchess of Beau fort, Duke of Rutland, Marchioness of Clanricarde, Earl an.d Countess of Lichfield, Earl of Chesterfield, Countess of Albes merle, Earl of Southampton, Earl Aboyne, Earl Jersey, Earl Verulam, Earl Wilton, Earl of Pembroke, Earl Mil. town, Earl Rosslyn, Lord G. Bentinck, Lord Kelburne, Lord Maidstone. Lord Somerton, Lord E. Russell, Lord J. Fitzroy, Lord G. Paget, Lord C. Paget, Lord C. Manners, Lord An dover, Lord Macdonald, Lord Drumlanrig, Lord Tenterden, Sirs Minto Farquhar, John Shelley, Francis Collier, B. Hall, W. W. Wynn. Colonels Peel, Wemyss, Westenra, Synge, Hall. Honourables—General Grosvenor, G. Anson, J. Mac donald, H. Baring, Petre, G. Fitzroy, A. Villiers, J. Vil liers, R. Grimston, Paulett, Ct . :axles Forester, and many others whose names have appeared in our former report. A few minutes before two, after one false start, the race commenced for The Grand Stand Plate of 1001. (handicap) ; once round and a distance. Lord Albemarle's Janus, 4 yrs, Bst 51b.., (Robinson) 1 Mr. Osbaldeston's ch f by The Colonel out of Galatea, 3 yrs, sst 131 b.. Mr. Wright's Folly, 4 yrs, ist 121 b... 0 Mr. Bradford's Quicksilver, aged, 7st 101 b....... . . 0 Mr. Shelley's Hellespont, 4 yrs, 7st 91b ..„ 0 Sir G. Heatbcote's Tonquin, 3 yrs, 7st 61b.... 0 Mr. Pettit's Emotion, 3 yrs, 6st 21b .... 0 Betting. —3 to 1 agst Janus; 4 to 1 agst Hellespont; 5 to 1 agst Quicksilver; 6 to 1 asst Galatea ; and 6 to I agst Emotion. Janus made all the running; followed very closely - by Quicksil ver,the Colonel filly having the third position to the (.*rand Stand, where she passed Quicksilver, and made a push for the Plate, without, effect however, as Janus held his lead to the end, and won cleverly by a length. _ Sweepstake; of 30 sovs. each, 20 ft, for two year old colts, Bst 51b ; and fillies Bst 21b ; winners 31b. extra. T. YC. 3 subs. Mr. Shackel's Meal, by Bran, (Buckle) walked over. The Windsor Forest Stakes of 50 sovs. each, h ft, for 3 year old fillies, Bst 41b ' • the winner of the 2,000 G u i nea s t a ke s , Derby or Oaks, to have carried 51b extra. Ohl mile. 5 snbs, Mr. Treen's Una, by Glancus (Conolly) I Duke of Grafton's Florence 2 Lord Albemarle's Minaret I 3 Betting-6 to 4 agst Florence, 2to 1 agst Una (t), and 2to 1 agst Minaret (t). Florence made play at a good pace to the distance, where Una went up, left her in a few strides; and-won easy by two lengths. The Gold Cup, by subscription of 20 sovs. each, with 200 added from the fund ; 3 yrs, 6st 101 b ; 4 yrs, Bst 51b ; 5 yrs, 9st. ; 6 yrs, and aged, 9st 31b ;m.& g. allowed 31b. From the Cup post on the new mile, once round and in, about two miles and a half. 15 subs. 11r. Ramsay's Lanercost, by Liverpool, 6 yrs ......(Noble) 1 Duke of Rutland's Flambeau, 5 yrs ... Mr. Pettit's St. Francis, 6 yrs 0 Sir G. Heatbcote's Bokhara, 4 yrs Mr. Ridsdale's Bloomsbury, '5 yrs Mr. Wigram's Teleta, 4 yrs . Betting-11 to 8 agst St. Francis, 9 to 4 agst Blooms bury, 4to 1 agst Lannercost, 11 to 1 agst Flambeau, and 25 to 1 agst Bokhara. Lanercost rendered a long description un necesary by taking the lead, making all the running, and winning by a length cleverly, without having been headed, the pace good only for the last mile. Behind him the race was contested with much spirit. Flambeau followed the winner fer half a mile and was then passed by Teleta, who lived only round the top turn; St. Francis took her place and held it to the straight running, where he was jollied by Flambeau ; Bok hara reaching them at the distance; a splendid race home ended in a dead heat for second between Flambeau and St. Francis, Bokhara not being a length from them ; the others were beaten off. Sweepstakes of 100 sovs. each, h ft ; colts, Bst 71b ; fillies, Bst 41b, out of mares that never bred a winner previously to the July meeting►, 1838. New mile. (8 Subs. ) Mr. H. Combe's The Nob, by Glaucus.... ...... ...(Rogers) 1 Duke of Bedford's Oakley Betting 2to 1 on Oakley. The Nob made the running, and after a beautiful race from the distance won by a neck. The Wind%or Town Plate of 50/. ; 3 yrs, 7st 41b ; 4 yrs, Bst 41b ; 5 yrs, Bst 101 b ; 6 yrs, 9st ; mares and geldings allowed 31b ; the winner to be sold for 100/. T.Y.C. Mr Greville's Pickwick by Camel, aged (Nat) 1 Capt. Gardner's Dismal Jemmy, 4 yrs... Mr. Westbrook's Decision, 3 yrs 3 Mr. Scott's Abel, 5 yrs Mr. Lucas's Traitress, 3 yrs 5 Betting-2 to lon Pickwick and 3to 1 agst Decision. Dismal Jemmy made the running to the distance, where Pick wick ran by him, and won in a canter by a length. The Buckingham Palace Stakes of 200 sous. each, h ft ; for three yrs old colts, Bst 71b, and fillies, Bst 31b ; untried mares or stallions allowed 31b ; if both, 51b. Swinley Course. (5 Subs.) Lord Westminster's Van Amburgh, by Pantaloon (Scott) I Lord Exeter's Cesarewitch, 31b........ 2 Betting-8 to lon Van Amburgb, who made a waiting race of it to the distance, where he went in front, and won in a canter by two lengths. Her Majesty and Prince Albert left the Heath after the Nob's race, at five o clock, but the day's spurt was not brought to a conclusion until after six. The Workington Stakes for this day have been divided into two Classes as follows FIRST CLASS. st. lb.! st. lb. Arctic, aged Cainelion, 3 yrs 8 13 Launchaway, 6 yrs ...... 7 8 Camclino, 5 yrs .. 8 10,Langolee, 3 yrs The Corslir, 5 yes . ..... 8 6 Dromedary, 4 yrs 7 1 I Knight-of-the-Whistle, , Abel, 5 yrs 3 yrs ,. 8 6 Myrtle, 3 yrs Factory-Girl, 4 yrs Ben Brace, 3 yrs 7 12 Hellespont, 4 yrs 6 9 SECOND CLASS. st. lb. .. __. John O'Gaunt, 3 yrs ... 8 12 Silistria, 3 yrs Cesare VV itch, 3 yrs Carlow, aged ... 8 2 Decision, 3 yrs Folly, 4 yrs 8 0 Hampton, 3 yrs 6 10 Spangle, 4 yrs Variety, 4 yrs 7 911. a Gitana, 3 yrs .........6 0 Windior, 3 yrs Sultana, f 3 yrs 7 71 The list promises plenty of good sport. st. lb. CHILDRENS' FRIEND SOCIETY. TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN. 9, Throgmorton-street,recT, June 9, 1841. Sir—The Committee have this morning received an intima tion, from a gentleman, who is convinced that the Society has heneli:ed many poor children, who would otherwise have be come a burthen upon the community, that he will present the munificent donation of 5001. if the Committee will continue their endeavours to ameliorate the conditim of destitute chil dren, by receiving them as heretofore, and training them in religious, moral, and industrious habits. 'the Committee beg you will favour them by the insertion of this note.-1 am, Sir, your obedient servant, J. SPARKE, Secretary. [This liberal offer we are afraid has come too late. The Society is broken up, in consequence, of the false statements and ingratitude of the very parties for whose relief it was established. Captain Brenton, who was the founder of the institution, died of a broken heart when he found his humane and incessant labours for the benefit of poor and deserted children so ill requited. It is altogether a melancholy history, which we believe some of the conductors of London papers would gladly sink into oblivion.] MR. COBDEN FOR STOCKPORT._ We scarcely know whether to rejoice or be sorry at the announcement we have to make, that Mr. Cobden has received a requisition from the electors of Stockport, earnestly soliciting him to become a candidate for the representation of that borough, and that he has complied with -their request. A majority of the electors have, by the requisition, pledged themselves to support Mr. Cobden with their votes, ss that there can be no doubt of his success. Stockport will achieve for itself immortal honour by the election of the man who is the impersonation of the spirit of justice and the free trade principle ; but if, as we f:ar, the brunt of the battle has yet to come, the movement out of doors will sustain severe loss by the removal of Mr. Cobden from his icdefatigable lahou:s among the people to the less congenial atmosphere of St. Stephen's. —Anti - Brwd-tax Circular. BELFAST.—Our accounts from Belfast this morning are most cheering. The letters speak with perfe c t . confidence of the suc cess o f L or d Belfast and Mr. Ross, wh ose . admirable speech,. at the-Ulster Association, published in this journal on Saturda7, has won him many friends from the Tory ranks. Emerson f onnent yesterday issued a piece of delusion in the shape of an Address, and commenced, his canvass, blit already he must 'feel that h . doom is Sealed. gvening Post. THE SUN, LONDON. PRIM kY. JUNE 1, 1811. EVENING ED I TioN. SUMMARY OF THE rsIORN/N O JOURNALS. From an unu sua l press o f ma tt er , we are compelled this morning to confine ourselves to a brief summary tbe pnitti" cal articles of the Morning Journals.—The 7lntes contain!: leading article on the subject of the conduct of Ministers, l ' ti reference to the Administration of Justice Bill, in of which, alluding to the present position of Ministers, 061. Contemporary observes :—" The House of Commons has gi/fi i them notice to quit, bus declared them unworthy to exercise the powers already vested in the Ministers of the Crown , 45 charged them with treachery to the British Con,titution. The); say, we will not quit—we will keep our places in defiance 01 you—we appeal from the House of Commons to the country; and then two days afterwards, they come down to the h em the course House of Commons, and ask for new powers Leven e them pending their appeal, and that without pretendingocan that such a grant is necessary for the public, glt The arguments by which they back their rgl ii . !! are, if possible, more preposterous than the thing itself f —The Morning Post, in an article suggested by the debate 0_ Tuesday night in the Commons, enters at some length ti", abuse of Ministers. The article contains nothing extract. The Morning Herald has an 'article the subiF i c , , of the Corn-law question, in which our Contemporary' rai.:„ through the greatest part of two columns, against the ()p r o ne!: 6 of monopoly. The Morning Chronicle thus rails t o t n n e political tactics of the monopolist faction :—" There is 4 subject especially on which the monopolist faction is net 10 , trusted ; their game, in town elections, is to hold out tllu promises of mitlgatine. the bread-tax. They laid it 0 ,1 +: 1 4 have kept it on, and they will still keep it iftrjais can. Tney have forgotten the decorum of 01 lative Assembly in order to reject inquiry in the most sor e I, worthy in"{ and insulting manner. Their skill in Parliamentary tactic,/ and the full force of their party organiza,ion, bring ng ( c :c e i v „. individual to the vote, have been employed, purposele win; eessfully, to quash the discussion of the subject. Theyhnathe Ve overpassed the ordinary bounds of party warfare to Pu els )ate fiVuliinimistproystf.or c A la n ri , n i g no t l o v c t o h n o t y em s p h l r a i t n e k t hefroumaitifgaairtliyongoolint;) i t s o l t he country as the bread -tax party." MONEY MARKET a n d CITY - Pi, IV FROM THE 1113RNING PAPERS OF TIOS CHRONICLE.—Inacti v ity still pervades the Stee; no • ls change, and the F un d s continue almost stationary, bu t I for the opening have improved a shade. , them We have heard f rom un d ou b ted author i ty t h a t tne„' - c k is for payment of th e next di v id ends on the Portuene'c ' l° C orla ready in depo s it, an d on t h e expected rat i f i cat i on of the wer e tract by the Cort es on t h e 3d or 4t h i nstant, t he itu i ' to be transferred to the financial agency in London.' but s P 0 ST. —Th e i format ion f rom Frankfort holds ou t : CV gloomy prosp ec t f or t h e h o ld ers of the Danu b e an d Mr se bila nal shares, i ssue d some years s i nce by the house of 11° dig' and Co. Those shares have for a long period been at sub' count of nearly fifty per cent, on the cost, or money 15th scribed; and we now l earn t h at t h e d i v i dends ( Inc on " 1 ' (or instant, anti 15th of December next, fixed at 16 fr, 3ll , j s er crs) 16s. to 175.) per sh are , are lik e l y to b e pa i re d dirin yu lr to 7 francs 40 ce n t s . ( or 12 s . to 13 5. ) per s h are . n ' e ust• lie at Frankfort were l oo ki ng w i t h great anx i ety for soul s no t munication upon th e subject from the Bavarian Go v; which might be relied upon as authentic. its° is SUN.—The accounts from the United States by the 13r seem to hold out a promise of improvement in eel e turit affairs ere long, but t h ose f rom C ana d a are no t satis'' be tter though we trust th e y w ill b y th e next pac k et ex hibit orb ig statement. The question of the ti m b er d u ties was ab s ' all attention in the provinces. to , fe The funds closed rather fi rm ly. C onso l s improved sto ck buyers for the opening. There was no transfer of morel after one o'clo c k. Exchequer Bills were Ss. to 10 5 . Pr c , gag and India Bond s 3 s . premium ; the Reducid Three - so u-- - per Cents. brought 97a to-,. Actif e The foreign securities were still neglected. SPa uls Bonds receded to 23 and 221, and Pertugaese Three p er to In. Mexican Bonds were at 27i, and Colombian st Belgian stock realisedin to 100. quir Shares were dealt a fair extent, at the previn o 5 tat ions. reos 1":"....rn° THE MARKETS. COUNTRY MARKETS. .1 Wheat. Barley. Per Quarter. a. to s. Bath Blandford 52 e 2 Bridport 68 Chard 56 62 Exeter Gloucester 53 62 Guildford 62 71 Newbury 42 70 Reading 50 73 Salisbury 52 62 Shcrborne 156 58 Shepton Mallet 56 61 Uxbridge —.— Warminster 45 dB Winchester 45 66 teovil 4B 56 LEEI Wheat, Norfolk and Stith --- York. and Lincu Barley, Norfolk and Sutli ---- Yorkshire and Lii Grinding Beans 63lb. Oats, Potatoe 51ealing, For. —d. to.—d Shelling DEVIZES COI Per Sack. s. d. a. d. irst Wheat 31 A to 32 0 Second 23 6 30 t' Third Barley 27 0 30 C e. to a. 39 ns at 32 28 32 27 34 28 32 30 25 23 32 26 36 27 34 YS 31 30 34 37 43 2 11 Oats. j aea n I. to s. 27 32 23 26 a. to 10 , .1 44 D V 46 -- 41: 26 21 29 22 30 %4 30 23 30 30 20 v 8 24 26 21 27 23 28 25 27 as 42 40 50 40 4 5 $8 45 40 45 40 5 ° 40 42 SS I° 40 44 6. '' 2S 34 !24 4 i .... d 3 CORN MARKET. )Ik, 601 b. 58., to 014 En. 60113. .. ...... .5 5 '. 19 01. 4 Ilk gs re. to. 0 1 $ sib r , toolnshlre !255. to •;; , jd • ........ 5, to 1. , , F i 2111 tore Se .....Eng. ll%d. to 19.3, ii. p le' , p, 29. to 29J. RN MARKET. d. , i 0 Per Qum ter. e. N' 0 0 o 20 ° t° Oats n "„ ' 0 0 Beans (per sack) lB ,11 Flour (per bag) Bread (perga Bon) i ' _ -- 42 b° d.t`~ 6 I 6 fi g I . CHELTENHAM MARKETS. Per Bushel. s. d. to s. d.s. d•I Per lb. Wheat tiarley. 0 0 3 9 Mutton ................. .. Oats 3 0 3 9 Veal ......................•.• Beans . Pease Hay 4l, 51. to s'. 103. Oct. per ton. 10 CHELMSFORD 111 a. RK ET. `-' ll " . 4 0 Wheat, White 6O to 101 Oats Red Batley Ch eralier 33 36 I Beans, Tick 34 Grinding CANTEEBU RI MARKET. to mss. Wheat, white--....,... 58g. to 683. Old --1 , S, "'"'""'" to -- B — arloy, A r l e i t :ltiog -- 2 6, 1 0 ; .. t W o 3 6 2 1 : : .......... w. G O r l lnding.. — 1 : t o te s. Oats .........—............—. 255. to , 78. row. Old "'" L ~ •!.. 8can5—....,.....—.......... 34s to 3A.+. —.. Old, - , . - - g• t o S. Pea5e........---. 425. to —s. .......... Grey 39%. ms s. Pease • IS The Journal de Cherboug of the 3 ,1 i ` 04 relates the following story :—" A few . / days ago, whi le %ilia' lady was walking with her family in th e dusk of the ec iw or she had a note slipped into her hand by a person wh° .vot dir t diately walked away with so much haste that she coula liet , 10 tinguish him. On reaching home she opened the i f iaali. found it an entire blank. On showing it to a Pa r lY: Li gges Ar t friends, one of them more knowing than the res 6 , l , - ,,fic l; that something might be written upon it in EYM . P a' ;S(I t om : The paper was accordingly held to the Ate,' ii,di , fdlowin,g words were brought to light in D p g - littl e ; Fair Miss, I love you. If in return you can love rue L ' i , f ell , I will wait for you every day, either at any hotel, fr °l° eitil,g;, , till two, or at the Place of the Church at nine in the e' o a. , I have a proposal to make to you. lam rich and e 'l ' you happy, if you will only consent.' The young l ad',, r discreet, and disposed to treat the proposal with conteTt;lll some of her young companions were desirous of mistifP e ,f a iley swain, and she entered into their plans. Having flo es upon an old and confidential servant to lend herself „ Tho', trick, they enveloped her in a long cloak with a larg eat' and sent her to the place of rendezvous. The il ia , M I ; nothing suspecting, hurried her to the door of the ti c "„iied i b o gleterre, where his carriage was waiting, and having ' a t 1 11 , prize in it, and placed himself at her side, drove D eli `,ut ~l speed for Valonges. Several days have elapsed vit a : , d t',. news of the fugitive or the companion of his cs capade' it i o ti g ~i giddy girls, who did not expect such a result, are we 0117 intelligence of them with no small uneasiness." Ih ,, he given de Cherbourg announces that a handsome reward wi"„wee..... o to any one who will bring an account of them to its ''_. - 14 41111 -- -- ------ o PLATE.—A. B. SAVORY and SONS. sip factoring Silversmiths, No. 14, Cornhill, London , ol'P p ° o , Bank of England. The best wrought SILVER , : ',.' be i:il t , and FORKS, Fiddle Pattern, 7s. '2d. per ounce. „ f rig' o Pattern, 7s. 4(1. per ounce. Tho following are t" vol t recommended, but the articles may be had lighter or at the same price per ounce : Fiddle Pattern. • Kin Ist i• ' 14 1 8 oz. s. d. £s. 41 • , 7 4..• ~ 1 , 4 12 Table Spoons 30 at 7 2...10 15 0 12 Table Spoons 41)a 7 4. . . 1 3 12 Dessert ditto 20 7 2... 7 34 12 Dessert ditto 20 7 .1, 1 1, .11/: 12 Table Forks. 3 , ..) 7 2...10 15 012 Table Forks 441 7 4. , ' 4 + 3 O 12 Desse , ttlitto2o 72.. 7 34 12 Desserttlitto 2 11 7 .1... , 0 2 Gravy Spoons 10 2... 311 it 2 GravySpooris 12 7 4... 14,, 1 Soup Ladle...lo 7 2... 3H 8 1 Soup Ladle. 1 2 7 10.. ' ',l' 'AI 9 4 Sauce ditto...lo 7 8... 310 4 Sauce sato... /2 At). 4 4 Salt Spoons (gilt strong) 1 0 0 4 Salt Spoons (strong ..' . ' I , ...... § 0 I Fish slice 0 10 0 1 _Fish Slice .......... , 10 ,. , 5 , 12 Tea Spoons. 10 78316 8, 12 lea Snoops. 14 ~ ' to f • fa 1 Pair Sugar Tongs 0 15 01 1 par Sugar Toni- .. 11ig;..1 t i,c N.B. A Price Current, stamped as a Newspaper, ~,, t 0.,.. es Pattern,i e j o.l by drawings, and containing every information ret t i : a pP li o v it purchase of silver or Sheffield plate, ma; be had , sat , tion, or will be sent into the country, free to a paid letter. , er ' 0 a • of postage, i TABLE CANDLESTICKS, stiPet d i e ctic' s ll; for durability, equal in appearance. Table cab- „i i m• inches high, 7s. per pair; 9 inches high, ; ~hey per pair ditto, with rich shell mountings, 9 inc he 'hs, t 'e' l per pair; snuffer trays, with shell mountings and 11 , 0 1 tre, 4s. each. The particular metal •f wl;icli 1 : 1 ; 0 - 1,1 great variety of other articles are made, can only, lr ' silver by reference to the stamp. Catalogues 121 10 1,, RIPPON and BURTON, Wells-street, Oxford'3 ior to BIRTHS. o , ilat ..,tgi On the 9th inst., at Tynem ou th, th e l a dy of C ar t he 87th Royal Irish Fusileers, of a son. II recite'', . On the 7th inst., at Napleton Lodge, near v' r ° lij as lady of J4hn Beeke, Esq., of a son. lady °f 11'1 On the Bth in t., in St. James's-place, the la-1 /Cripps, Esq., of a son. MARRIED. I go On the sth inst., at St. John's Church, Invernel!: Ij,. Britain, by the Rev. C. Fyvie, William Cruiek: l , l % ° , ) tsi' l 93d Highlanders, to Jane Mary, eldest daughter of `'-' 44 B. Marlow, Royal Engineers. ' i aft 0 4 % 1 At the house of the liritiFh Resident, Zanto, an' 1 .,. fle;,, c o according to the rites of the Roman Catholic Churc;i;tql.,,,B Knight Storks, Esq., Major in the 38th Relime nt '.6 ol r e l. of Mr. Serjeant Storks, to Eliza, only child of e Sig n ; o tric l)- 0 Nizzoli Milan, Consul de Sa Maje , te l'Empereur d' , " 00' 1 4., On the Bth inst., at Trinity Church, N er ving l a te Radcliffe, Esq., to Virginia, eldest daughter oi the 11, Rte ,0 0 Green, Esq. On the Bth inst., at Warminster, the Rev. Jor t s , 'o° lll M.A., to Ellen Elizabeth, only daughter ' of the l a. c o Davis, Esq., 'of Portway Housi., Warminster. ~ , te e- of On the Bth inst., at Frank, Davidson Beatson, • 1 1 1 ',.;,,,t5 0 ' to surviving son of the late Major-General Alexander 'fi c 'le o ,' 11, Henley, Sussex, anti formerl Governor of ' , ":„ . catpl e Anne Henrietta, second daughter of the late .I.°''' l' Esq., of Lyston ' Hall, Suffolk. Sal lu aliti t ' On he ` Bth inst., at Finehingfield, the R e y : at 9' - st” Field, A. 8., son of John Field, Esq., of her Mai%) ;., I tell y to Harriette Sophia, daughter of thßev. James A.M., Vicar of Finchingfield, Essex. 0 1 f P c6°) On f t a h n e t 2 s ‘ .. ) l n i n: f t h at InLa syA.DIED. On the 7th inst., suddenly P H rocks Esq'' 0 Cottage, Chertsey, Surre ' the O i „„„ Jr) • 1 ‘ • , ytchett, near Poole, th e , be( On the sth inst., at Mile- r end, der k E at s n Nor r ic ” lt . , s'G ' 'F'.l::: ;: el t i.ft ; Esq., lee of Lynn Regis, Norfolk. On the 7th inst., Ma Grant,' Esq., ilaug htil t . :)tant 0' Lewis Grant, Esq., who was for many yea" A `' il M°' 5i On Royal Hospital, Chelsea. On the eth inst., at thins Wiiks, Esq. 1 .3 • w ith co , On the 6th inst., in Bishopsgate-street • , Lot) Freeman, aged 73. Sibton House, Davi" On the 6th inst., at Broxbourne, Herts, r7i• near Cant i e rj r , blr) i : .1 ,1;0 Vir• 11. O Esq., late of the . 3d Dragoon Guards. nthfeAltdhetinsgsat.t,e.WoirlelicatTaLgeedwiis9,.only son choll n , of Mr. H O f London: Printed and Pablidied by MNa 112, RDO 1°46401, Ne. 112; Strd; at Th Stilt Oftlee. •' he el ane —Frißai LI • 161/ ' 2. ~ A- Li on e kriy tj ,u; 41 s ;