The Sun. — London, England, 1828-03-07 00:00:00

children mangled around him, than forswear his laisaniity to the penal laws which oppressed his Catholic fellow subjects. The country had recently been told, that those laws were to be continued. Scarce had the tocsin of that annunciation been sounded in Ireland, before the Roman Catholic , ' met peaceably and s imultaneously in every perish within its cunfines, and immediately on their being called to pay the tax levied upon thene for the expense of outing up petitions for the repeal of those laws, the Catholic rent rose from 40/. and 501. a week. to 800/. in the first week, 6001. in the eteeend week, and 500/. in the third week. He repeated it, ecarcely bed the trim-mi t:Ate, which recently acceded to the Cabinet, got safely inte their seats, before the Catholic rent swelled 5,0t/01. ut amount, He should not trouble the House further at wpre sent, as are then opportunityouhl shortly ar i se i n w hi c h he could give his opinion mare fully on the subject of Ca tholic E rn aneipation. He trusted that, when that oppor• tunity should arriee, Mon. Gentlemen would thielt it right to sacrifice their difference of opinion on the altar of their country, end permit the iticense of their harmony to ascend to heaven as a propitiation to their God for the common offence': they had committed against their fellow-countryrnee.. 3lr. PEEL, when he came into the House East night, said ho was perfectly prepared to acleieace in the motion of the lion. Baronet. But whilst he made that state` rent, he was obliged br the speech of the Kota, Member for D u bli n to a dd, t h at haying studied very carefully the words of the Treaty of Limerick, and halting referred very :industriously to the construction put upon it in the workc coternporary writers, he hail come to a decided convic tion that no privilege was at present wiOtdraven from the Catholics, which they had the power to claim under that Treaty. The lion. Gentleman bid acid that certain per cons were inclined to consider that Treaty out of date, owing to the length of time which hail elapsed since ito ta tification, and to argue that whatever might have been the stipulation' of it at the time, the Rotnein Catholics of the present day hal no debt to claim any benefit from them. —Now he would frankly declare, that if any such pevcaoa did exist, he was not one of them. He did nnt mean to say that no reference ought to be male to the political con sideretiona which might have grown up since the ratifies 'Sion of that Treaty, and that an over-ruling necesaity might not have justified Parliament in deviating from the strict tense of Its stipulations. His view of the question of Ca tholic Emancipation would certainly be altered, if he could bring himeelf to believe that the Roman Catholics had ts signed certain advantages, which they held. at the time of signing that Treaty, upon the faith of receiving others eraw withheld from them. In resorting to that Treaty, lie Thought that the real question was slop' y this—were the Roman Catholics admitted by it to seas in Parliament? The Hon. Gentleman had referred to two articles in the Treaty of Limerick,—the first and the ninth.—which he says opens to all the Roman Catholics of Ireland all the steivilegee which they had in the reign of Charles 11., limn their submitting to take the oath of Allegiance,— ' I am surprised," said Mr. Peel, " that the Right Hon. Gentleman should say, that by the terms of the ninth article it was evidently the intention of King Wil liam to leave the privileges of the Roman Catholics as to the Protestants of Ireland. The first article is couched in thee* terms t—' The Roman Catholics of this king dom shall enjoy such privileges in the exercise of their :religion . , as are consistent with the laws of Ireland, or as they did enjoy in the reign of King Charlet 11. ; and their Mniosttiee, as soon Re their affair' will permit them to summon a Parliament in this kingdom, will endeavour to procure the said Roman Catholics such further secu rity in that particular, as may preserve them from any disturbances upon the account of their said re- And the ninth article, on which the Hon. Gentle man also relies, is 'worded thus:—' The oath to be admi nietered to such Roman Catholics as submit to their Ma. teaties' Government, shall be the oath above said,' meaning the oath of allegiance and no ether.' Now to what class of persons - do these two articles refer I Not to the whole Catholic popnlation 01 Ireland, but to those persons meu tinned in the second article, who should submit to take the oath of allegiance to his Majesty's Government. And what are the terms of the second article ? That all the inhabi tants or residents of Limerick, or any other garrisoe now in the possession of the Irish, and all officers and soldiers DOW in arms under any commission of King James, of those authorized by him to grant the same, in the several eoun ties of Limerick, Clare, Kerry; Cork, and Mayo, or any of them land all such as are tinder their protection in the said tountiesj, and all the commissioned officers in their Ma jesties' quarters that belong to the Irish regiments now in being, that are treated with, and who are not prisoners of war, or have taken protection, and who shall return and submit to their Majesties obedience, and their and every of their heirs, shall hold, possess, and enjoy all and every their estate.; of freehold and inheritance, and all the rights, 'titles, and interest:, privileges, and immunities, which they and every or any of them, held, enjoyed, er were eigistfudy and lawfully entitled to in the reign of King Charles 11., or at any time since by the laws and statutes that were in farce in the said reign of King Charles 11., And then follows, as I before stated, the ninth article, which states the oath that shall be administered to those who seek to obtain these immunities. Now, I ask the Hon. Baronet, whether it is possible for him to contend, upon the language of those articles, that all the Roman Catholics of Ireland are to be admissible to seats in Parlia ment, on merely taking the oath of allegiance ? If it he, tes he contends, what reason does he give for the Govern. ment of King William inserting au article in the Treaty which should place the Roman Gatholics of Ireland even on a snore favourable footing than their Protestant coun trymen ? But it is quite plain that the version which the Hon. Baronet has put upon these articles cannot he correct ; for what says the 7tii article of the Treaty? Every nobleman and gentleman comprised in the said second and third article shall have liberty to ride with a sword and case of pistols, if they shall think fit; and keep a gun in their houses for the defence of the same, or for fowling.' Is it possible to suppose that such an article could have been introduced into the Treaty, if it had been intended to admit every noblemen and gentleman to a seat in Parliament, un his merely taking the oath of allegiance?—(Loud cries of Itear, hear.')--Now let me ask the House to look at the state of Ireland at that time, for as this is a question of dry law, and unconnected with political consideratient, we may look at it without any of that warm political feeling which intrudes itsels - es too often in spite of our selves into our debates when we lank at the present state of Ireland. It is argued, that it was intended by the first article of the Treaty of Limerick to admit all Ca tholics into Parliamteut en taking the oath of allegiance. Now I think that there is sufficient evidence to chew that neither of the contracting parties to the Treaty of Lime eick contemplated the possibility of admitting Roman Ca tholics into Parliament. For, as I asked before, what was then the condition of Irelaud ? The Treaty was signed in 1691, and a Parliament had been sitting in Dublin under the authority of King James in the latter part of 1689. I will not ask of what description were the acts of that Par liament, for I wish not to introduce any irritatiug topics into the debate, but I will ask of what persons did it consist ? It consisted of 211 members ; it sat for two years, and during all that time it had only six Protestant, in its numbers. Now it it possible to conceive, that with the experience of that Parliament before him, King William would have been so impolitic as to chow Roman Catholics to sit in Parliameut ',mon such terms as the Hen. Baronet has represented ? It seems too great tin absurdity to suppose, that when the Roman Catholiee had fur some time been excluded from Parliament by the Oath of Supremacy, a matter of such importance at their re-admission to it would be under such a settled at once without any discussion, and general form of words as that they shall enjoy suck pri vileges in the exercise cf their religion as are consistent with the laws of Ireland.' Why did not the Roman Ca tholics, with all the legal talent which they had at their command,—for Sir Toby Butler was with them at Lime rick,—get the words political privileges' inserted in the TreO.tY, supposing- that King William was willing to grant them such extensive political privileges as were now claimed for them ? But I have another reason for saying that the yos!iesslon of such privileges as were now asked for them, never in the contemplation of the Roman Catholics of Limerick. Does the lion. Baronet recollect the terms in which they ;misted plevioualy to the signing of the Treaty ? The House will, perhaps, excuse use, for shortly recapitu lating them. Previously to the capitulation of Limerick, the Roman Catholics sent a proposal for a cessation of arm.. to Genera! G ineltle. It was g rout ed. The next day they su b m itt e d their proposals to hi m in th e seven propos i t i ons following al will,by ' lit. That leo . Majesties an A c t o f Lidera nity, pardon all past offences whatever. " 4 2d. All Irish Catholics to he restored to the estates of which they were seized or p ossessed before the lat e revise . lution. up, a n d " ' sd. To allow free liberty of religious tvor s l • elle priest to each parish, as CVCII in towns and cities asin the country. " 4th. Irish Catholics to be capable et holding all ens pinyments, civil and military, under the Crown, and of exercising all trades, professions, and callings whatsoever. " .sth. The Irish army to be kept on foot, and received in their present condition into their Majesties against France ft ervice, in case they be willing to serve their Majesties agut or any other enemy. " ' 6th. The Irish Catholics to be at liberty to reside ;a vitiate and towns corporVe, to be members of Corp°. rations, and to el.erci‘a all corporat€ fianthises and im munities. " ' 7th. An Act of Parliament to be passed for ratifying and confirming these conditions. Now I think it quite evident that the conditions which the Roman Catholics then asked for are by no means equal in importance to those which the Hon. Baronet says were granted to them by the 9th article of the Treaty subse quently concluded. And what does the House suppose was General Ginckle's answee to them? The proposi tions submitted to him were so extravagant that he refused t o mos them. The Hon. Gentleman opposite has said something about additions made to the Treaty on its ratifi cation by King William, of which I heard for the first time this night with 7Ci'y considerable surprise. I shall say nothing upon it a t p resen t, excep t th a t I h o p e that hisynotton will include every syllable caunected with this ratification. I wish that Hon. Gentlemen, before we come to the discussion of this Treaty, would read the argument of Sir Toby Butler upon it. rot- they will then find, that, when Sir 'l'. Butler appeared in 1702, at the bar of the flenee of Commons, to argue against a Bill, then pass ing through it, he did not say one word respecting the in justice of excluding Roman Catholics from seats in Perna scent. At least such is my present belief. You will find his argument at length in several publications, in " Plow den's History of Ireland," for instance, and also in the his torical apology fir the Roman Catholics, which was drawn up by Mr. William Parnell. 'lhe Honourable Gentle man opposite has referred in the course of his speech ' to the authority of Bishop Burnett, with the intention of showing that he conceived that the garrison of Limerick treated not only for themselves, but for all their country men in arms. He saes that Bishop Burnett wee high in the tonfidenee of King William, and that his testimony was mast Important en that particular point. I must hero entreat the House to give me its attention whilst I state ouc fact. In 1992, I think it was, immediately after the ratifi cation of the Treaty of Limerick, the oath of supremacy was requited to be taken in the Irish Parliament by an Act passed in the English Parliament. I am not now called upon to say whether such an Act was legal. All I say is, that it was acted upon in the Irish Parliament. Bishop Buruett.,---the very Bishop whose testimony the Hon. Gentleman deems so conclusive,—with a full knowledge of that circumstance thus commences the third volume of hie history—' I now begin on the I st of May, I'M, to prosecute this wurk, and I have now before me the reign of King William and Queen Mary.' He was therefore at that time perfectly well aware of the construction put upon the Treaty of Limerick, and the practice which prevailed nuclei it. lie states the manner iu which the Roman Catholic., had entered into that Treaty, and then he proceeds, after the quotation which had been made imperfectly by the Hon. Gentleman, to observe that 'the articles of the ca pitulation were perfectly and impartially executed, and that some doubts, a hich had arisen out of the ambiguous manner in which the Treaty was worded, had been ex piniued in favour of the Irish Catholics.' That is the construction ;:ut upon the Treaty by a person whose au thority is declared by the Hon. Gentleman to be most cogent, because he was in the immediate confidence of William 111. If, then, the due execution of the Treaty se Limerick is to be decided by the authority of Bishop Burnett, we must conclude that the stipulations of it were faithfully executed, and that the ambiguous part, of it were explained in favour of the Irish Catholics.— I have looked at the subject at different times with great interest, because I wished to consider it impartially. From all I have read upon the subject, I have a strong imptes- Rion on my mind, that at the time of signing time Treaty, it was not in the contemplation of either of the contracting parties that the Catholics should be allowed to claim under it admission into Parliament, or into the high and efficient officies of the State. I admit that the passing of the penal laws teas a violation of that Treaty, and that if nut justi fied be circumstances at the time, it Was a violation for which no sufficient excuse could be alleged. But I say, at the same time, that no privilege is now withheld from the Roman Catholics of Ireland, which they have a right to claim in consequence of that Treaty. That is the view which the Catholics took of their condition in 1793, when the first act was passed for their relief and benefit, and that is the view which I believe to be the correct one. Ido nut mean to say that the ancient date of the Treaty is any bar to the faithful execution of it at this moment. If I were satisfied that the object of that Treaty was to admit Roman Catholics into Parliament on merely taking the oath of allegiance, I should be so far from thinking that the age of the Treaty was of no avail, that I should permit it to have full influence on toy judgment whenever the Reman Ca tholics came to this Hors: to ask for the fulfillment of I their claivns. Mr. SPRING RICE claimed equal credit for sincerity when he declared his firm belief in favour of a different con struction from that which he (Mr. Peel) had put upon the articles of this great national stipulation -_a Treaty not con tracted, as lawyers, would say, without a consideration, but which at once transferred to King William the full posses sion of Ireland. How happened it, that when the Right lion. Gentleman depended so much upon Bishop Burnett's authority, in behalf of his opinion that no violation of the Treaty had taken place, he had overlooked the strong fact, that at the very time the Bishop was writing, in 1703, .otne of these penal laws, which were infractions, had ac tually been enacted? Mr. PLEI--" Bishop Burnett was, you know, only writing the History of William and Mary." Mr. SPRING RICE said, that was true, but in point of date, the Bishop was engaged in writing the work after 1701, when some of these penal acts had actually passed. (Hear.) That horrid Act against the Education of Ca tholic children—the most wicked which ever disgz aced a Statute Book—had previously passed under the cognizance of Bishop Burnett. Both the law and the fact were upon this point against the historian. But the Bishop was good authority in another part of his work, where he spoke of the occurs sues of direct facts under his own eye, and stated in plain terms, that so intent was the Government to obtain an end to the war in Ireland, that the Commis sioners were instructed to keep their terms in good faith (alluding to this very Treaty), " to the no small grief," says Burnett, "of tunrin English who wished to ruin the Irish for their own purposes." The passage in Burnett was as follows When they came to capitulate, the Irish insisted on very high demands, which were set cu by the French, who hoped they would be rejected ; but the King had given Ginckle secret directions that he should grant all the demands they could snake that would put au end to the was. So every thing was granted, to the great disappointment of the French, and to the no small grief of some of the English, who hoped this war would leave ended in the total ruin of the Irish interest. Those of Limerick treated not for themselves alone, but for all the rest of their countrymen who were yet in arms. They were indemnified, and restored to all that they had enjoyed in King Charles's time. They were also admitted to all the privileges of subjec.ts upon their taking the oath of allegiance to their Majesties, without being bound to take the oath of supre macy." By the first article of the Treaty of Limerick, or of Ireland as it was more properly described, the Catholics were restored to all the privileges which they had enjoyed in the time of Charles 11., to be ad mitted to all the privileges of all the other subjects, without taking any other oath except the oath of alle giance. All the privileges constituted a comprehensive description, and necessarily included the right of sitting in Parliament—a right subsequently and violently taken away, by the enactment which added two oaths to the qualification by the oath of allegiance. The articles in the Treaty were these —" 1. The RomanCatholies of this king ' dons shall enjoy such privileges in the exercise of their re ligion, as are consistent with the laws of Ireland, or as they did enjoy in the reign of Charles 11., and their Ma jesties, as soon as their affairs will permit them to summon a Parliament, will endeavour to procure the said Roman Catholics such further security in that particular, as may preserve them from any disturbance upon the account of their said religion "—a 9. The oath to be administered to such Roman Catholics, as subjects to their Majesties Go vernment, shall be the oath aforesaid (of allegiance) and no other." He would here take the opportunity of referring to A curious tract which threw some additional light upon this subject. It was entitled " Great Britain's Just Complaint fur late Measurei and present Suffer inga," a Jacobite tract, by W. J. Montgomery, printed Icy ROO, and reprinted in Lord Gower's Tracts :—" The Prince hag taken a large and broad steps towards a dis pensing power as any that can be charged on King James. The Irish Treaty furnishes us with a convincing proof of this, where such indLlgences were granted to them solely and singly by his own authority, with relation to the exec.- , cise of their religion, dispensation from oaths, &c., as were directly contrary to the laws of the land, and the safety, rights, and privileges of the Protestant subjects of 1 that kingdom. This Treaty Ido acknowled g e was after wards ratified by Parliament, but the new life commeneeth only from the date of their sanction." " But," said the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, " did not the original rejection of the Irish proposals involve a striking contra diction of the supposed construction which was now con tended for ?" Certainly not; for what were the original Propositions? The Irish proposals rejected by Ginckle were, free liberty of worship; Papists to be eligible to all employments civil and military ; Irish army to be kept on foot and paid ; corporations opened, and a public estab lishment of a priest for every parish. These were wheat Ginckle rejected, and surely they were very different front those for which the supporters of the Treaty of Limerick now contended.—(hear.) Mr. PEEL—" No ; what General Ginckle said, was, that these propositions were contrary to the laws Of Eng land." Mr. S. RICE—The establishment of Roman Catholic 1• Priests, and of the Roman Catholic Religion, was, in fact, the grand objection. For that he had the authority of the Right Hon. Gentleman himself—the authority also of Lord Liverpool-_that if such measure were to be enacted, it would be a violation of the King's Coronation Oath. It so happened, that about the lot of August, 1691, a let ter was addressed to the Irish Government by General tinkle, representing how absolutely necessary it was for the peace of Europe that the Irish war should be termi nated. In short, while there was in the leish army a French party, anxious for the continuance of resistance, there was in the English army an English patty, which wan desirous that no terms should be made with the Irish, hop ing, in the event of their defeat, to benefit by the for feitures and confiscations that would, no doubt, ensue. The Government, however, stepped in, and, by concluding the Treaty, did that which no other party could. If the terms of the Treaty were so objectionable, how did it happen that for so roan;- yearn no complaint was made of them ? When, in fact, did the first notice of them take place ? When Sir Tohy Butler was heard in the House of Lords against the passing of an Act which went to deprive the Catholics of many of their best privileges—that Act which first took away from the Romeo Catholics the elective franchise. That Act was, therefore, a gross violation of the Treaty of Limerick. Sir Toby Butler thought so, and on that precise groomd had he argued against the 13th section of the Bill, which took from the Catholics the elective franchise. Therefore, instead of its being a new doctrine in favour of the repeal of the Catholic disabilities, to refer that Treaty, it was an old doctrine, a doctrine of lawyers, brought forward within the walls of Parliament; and al though Parliament had rejected it—for fortunately the speech of Sir Toby Butler remained, and showed that the feeling existed among persons who were cotemporaries of those who had been parties to the Treaty. The Right lion. Gentleman asked why, if that Act had been a vio lation of the Treaty of Limerick, the Irish Catholics had not appealed to the British Parliament. What ! Were they to apply to that Parliament which had just declared the Irish wool trade a nuisance, and had addressed the King, requesting of him to discourage it ? Ile admitted, that in the government of King William there were to be found many distinguished names —among others that of one, au ornament to the science any the lite rature of the country (Sir Isaac Newton), who was the then Master of the Mint. (A laugh.) Many other• most excellent persons held office under that Government— but neutralised as that Government had been, he would ask, was it not quite vain to say to us that we had not justice at our side--because in King William's time n o appeal had been made ? He was sorry to have intruded so much at length upon the patience of the House, but re presenting as be did that place in which the Treaty bad been concluded—representing persons, every one of whom knew that Treaty by heart—having also a sort of here ditary right to contend for the observance of that Treaty— he should not have been doing justice to them and to him self, had he refrained front presenting himself to the no tice of the House on that occasion. (Here the Hon. Gentleman referred to the situation of the Catholics iu the reign of Charles 11., when the first attempt was made to exclude Catholics front Parliament, and to the manage ment of the Duke of Ormond, who had, first by pro roguing, and afterwards by dissolving that Parliament, got rid of the Bill, time heads of which declared its object to be the exclusion of Catholics from Parliament, and the Duke of York from the succession to the crown). In fact—and a roost remarkable fact it was—that it was not until 1782, that Catholics had been really disenabled to sit in Parliament. From the moment the Irish Parlia ment had declared that the English Parliament had no right or title to bind his Majesty's subjects of Ireland— from that moment the right of England to impose an oath respecting the admission of members into the House of Commons ceased. lie wished there were a legal tribunal before which the question was to be decided, and he would gladly and with pleasure join issue upon the con struction of the Treaty of Limerick. If any Hon. Gen tleman still continued to doubt on the subject, he entrea ted of him to recollect the nature and the situation of the parties to it. That the Irish were the weaker party could not be doubted ; yet, although previous to the con clusion of the Treaty a reinforcement of 18,000 men arrived to their assistance from France, the Irish refused to avail themselves of them, and remained faithful to the preliminary artieles.—(Hear, hear, hear.) At that very time too a Prelate, from the pulpit, in Dublin, in a political sermon, declared that no faith ought to be kept with the Irish. It was a principle, uniformly recognized, that wherever in the construction of the ternis of a Treaty any doubt arose, to interpret them in favour of the weaker party ; and bearing that principle in mind, and looking at the subject under all its circumstances, he was quite sure those Members would come to a conclu sion different from that of the Right lion. Gentleman. They bad now at the head of the Government a great mi litary character—a man conversant with sieges and with treaties—and he (Mr. S. Rice) would ask, if this had been a Treaty by which the Government of Spain was conveyed to her legitimate rulers, would it not be recognised and enforced by the aid of all the PoWers in Europe ?—( Hear.) Mr. Secretary PEEL explained. _ Mr. MOORE rose to express his 'dissent from the views taken of the Treaty of Limerick by the lion. Gentleman (Mr. S. Rice), and some others who had preceded him in the debate. That the exercise of their religion was all that was intended to he conceded to tip! Catholics by the Treaties of Limerick and Galway, would appear from a document, alluded to by au historian who was eye-witness of the events (the Rev. George Storey), namely—the pro clamation of the Chief Justices, promising to such of the rebels as should submit, " that they should not be prose cuted or disturbed on account of their religion." The Hon. Member concluded by expressing his hope that the Right Hon. Gentleman, in moving fur a copy of the Treaty of Limerick, would tnave also for a copy of that Proela• 'nation of the Chief Justices. Mr. A. DAWSON trusted that if any argument used by him, or the speakers on his side of the question, should raise a doubt in the minds of their opponents, the House would give the benefit of those doubts to the weaker party. The motion was• then put to tke vote, and agreed to without opposition. SCOTCH ENTAILS, Mr. KENNEDY, in moving, pursuant to notice, for leave to brine in a Bill to alter the l a w o f Entail in Scot land, took that step saith the full accordance of many of those who lived under the operation of that law. That law had been originally made with e view to sustain the aristo cracy of Scotland, but unless some alterations were soon made in the system, it would cause the downfall of that order. One especial reason he had for the introduction of such a remedy was, that he was himself interested in it, as he lived under the tyranny of that law. In 1685, the Scotch Parliament passed an Act, enabling the proprietor of a fee simple estate to nominate numerous unborn heirs to it in perpetuity, and so to regulate the appropriation of it through successive generations, that any ect of any of the possessors for the time was held invalid if against the intention of the original entailer, and the property was for feited by the possessor so acting against the will of the en tailer. By one of the clauses of that Act, the entails were required to be recorded ; and, from the records, it appeared, that from 1535, up to the present time, the num bar of entails made was not less than 1645. The con sequences of this system were the prevention of the natural influx of English capital into Scotland, and the creation, iu Scotland, of a race of absentee aristocracy. He was sure that if this law were modified it would cause much more capita! to be employed in Scotland, and intro duce many other improvements into that country. So greatly were the inconveniences he had mentioned felt that in 1717 au Act was passed to encourage the improvement of land, which was completely stopped by the then state of the laws. Those laws were said to be intended to u phold the aristocracy ; but they must end by reducing it to beg gary. They gave each heir the power of robbing his suc cessor, by providing not for the living family merely, but for the different branches of that famiiy. In 1826 Mr. Irving published a hook on the state of the law regarding entails in Scotland, in which the whole of these vexations were diecussed with remarkable acuteness. There was another gentleman of great literary eminence, Mr. Sel kirk, whose statements were entitled to great attention ; indeed the measure he was so anxious to submit to the House was founded upon the views of that gentleman. He wished it to be understood that he proposed to except from the operation of the new law, or rather to leave un der that of the old, the Peers who at this time possess property in Scotland. This was a concession to what he must call prejudice ; fur it would not be found, on com parison, that the Peerage of England had maintained itself with loss splendour than that of Scotland, although bound by a less rigid rule of law. Although he wished the main operation of the law to be made prospective, he could not help thinking that what was bad fur the future, must be bad at present, and he proposed, therefore, to touch the property now held under entails. What he proposed would not injure one substantial interest of any individual, as he was ready to pledge himself to prove, to the satisfaction of the Committee op stairs.--(blear.) He begged to move for lcir,= to bring in a Bill, to alter and amend the law of entail in Scotland. The question having been put, The LORD ADVOCATE did not object to the man lier in which the Flon. Member proposed to bring the sub ject before the House, as during the time it was up stairs the country would have an opportunity of expressing its opinion on this important measure. It was the more ne cessary to give the country this opportunity, as it was the very obvious tendency of the Bill to do away with en tails entirely in Scotland.—(No, no, from Mr. Kennedy.) He could not see what other tendency the giving every heir the power of disentailing one-third of his entailed es tates could have ; for thus, iu the course of three succes sions, the whole of an entail estate might be alienated. ?le thought that the people" of Scotland were not prepared for su violent a measure. Mr. SUGDEN did not approve of the measure, as it ap peared to him to strike at the root of all the settled pro perty of Scotland. He should, however, watch itt pro gress, and if he found it was only intended to give a rea sonable liberty in the disposal of property in Scotland, he should be happy to concur in it. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL suggested, that the Hon. Member had better divide his subject into two parts —that which regarded the future, and that which regarded the present. Mr. KENNEDY did not propose to do away entirely with entails in Scotland ; all be wished was, to establish a better system of entails. Leave was then given to bring in the Bill, and Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Abercromby were appointe , l to prepare it. COLONIAL SLAVERY. Mr. WILMOT MORTON rose, pursuant to notice, to move for Minutes of Evidence taken before his Majesty's most Hon. Privy Council, in the matter of the Demerara and Berbice Manumission Order in Council. I move for those Minutes of Evidence, in order that they may be laid upon the table of the House and printed. I beg, at the same time, to be understood, in what I am about to say, to have had no communication with any member of the Government on the subject. I;was myself present at the Privy Council during the discussion, and it is in consequence of what I then learned that I now, as an individual member of the House of Commons, think it my duty to raake this motion. That resolution (the Right Hon. Gentleman continued) was to this effect—" That the stare of Sla very is repugnant to the spirit of the British Law." That resolution was rejected by the House, and others were subinittei, partly to the following effect :—" That the House was anxious to pass such laws as may be compatible with the well-being of the slaves themselves, the safety of the Colonies, and the interests of private property."— it vas necessary to observe the series of circumstances which had conducted them to that point at which the Ber bice appeal had been brought. The appellants prayel that his Majesty would be graciously pleased not to issue any orders in Council, to enable the slave in Berbice to obtain his freedom by appraisement, or otherwise, without allowing the petitioners to he first heard by their Counsel. The Right Hon. Gentleman begged to observe, that with respect to that clause of compulsory manumission, his ob servations had contained no direct allusion to it. The his tory of the clause was this ; the resolutions of 1823 pledged the House to the alternative of reconciling the freedom of the slave, by purchase or otherwise, with the interest of the master. Earl Bathurst, in his despatch dated the 9th of July, sent out certain instructions to the West Indies, requesting the Legislative Colonies, and di recting those which were more immediately under the con trol of the Crown, to adopt measures in furtherance of the principles contained in that elespatch.l ,In that despatch no allusion was made to the subject of manumission ; but at the same time Sir R. Woodford, the Governor of Tri nidad, was directed to prepare the draft of an Order in Council embodying all those instructions ; and, in fact, those instructions, with the single exception of the principle of slave evidence, upon which there un doubtedly was now more accordance than upon any other, were sanctioned by the whole of the West India body. in England. Sir Ralph Woodford, in obedience to Lord Bathurst's despatch, framed the draft of an order in council according to the Spanish law on that subject as it existed in the Colony of Trinidad. Mr. Canning, at the time he brought forward his motion in the beginning of 15124, had laid down these as the principles of the Government : that it was expedient to collect together all the various measures of improvement to be found in any part of the West Indies; to concentrate them and to form them into a general slave code for the West Indies; consequently, com pulsory manumission, or manumission by appraisement, being found to be part of the law of Trinidad, was deemed expedient to be introduced into this general code, and the fact was announced accordingly to that Hettwe by Mr. Canning. No sooner was it extended, or proposed to be so, to De marara and Berbice, than the Court of Policy there, to which was entrusted the duty of preparing a general law on the subject, condensing and interweaving the Dutch law with the Spanish law, recognised in the instructions issued from home, made a strong protest against this pro posal of compulsory manumission. Protests were sent over to the Secretary of state ; difficulties and inconveniences were discovered to attach to it, and the Government here were prayed to modify, or revoke it altogether. Volu minous documents had been from time to time laid on the table of the House connected with that subject ; but though much information was conveyed in the despatches to the Secretary of State, no law was yet in operation in De merara, as to compulsory manumission, varying from that law which existed in Trinidad. Now, he would go to the length of saying, that if the abolitionist* were pre pared, as he had understood them to have declared, to stand or fall by the law of Trinidad, they were prepared to stand or fall by that which could scarcely be said to exist. At a time when a slave market was in existence the history of such compulsory manumission was simply this ; the slave, who, under this lox non scripta (for such it was, as however indisputable its exis tence, it was extremely difficult to find any written traces of it), had obtained money enough to pur chase his manumission, went to his master, who appointed two appraisers, who struck between thins what they con sidered a fair price for the slave ; and with this price the master went into the market to obtain another in his stead, and thus no general or particular inconvenience resulted • from such a transaction. In Trinidad, before the cessation of the Slave Trade, this law remained—one very easy in its operation, in consequence of the growing importation from day to day of slaves into that Island from the poorer soils of the West Indies. The master was thus enabled, without any difficulty whatever, to part with slaves by this process mar • manumission. The House would not fail to ob serve, that when the trade from Africa was stopped alto gether, the whole case was altered in respect both to the master and the slave. Now the clauses in the Trinidad order in Council required " that a fair and just value shall be taken of a slave applying for his manumission, and that if any difficulty should arise on this head, the owner of the slave and the protector of the slaves of the Colony shall nominate a third party whose award shall be binding." Nothing could appear to be more simple or less complex than this direction in terms. Nothing could be imagined more difficult of execution. The House would observe, that there was nothing in this order which ascer tained or directed the principle on which this appraisement of value was to be made.—(Hear, hear.)—Now, although while a market existed to which the master could have re paired to replace his slave this omission would have been of no consequence, it was one, under present circumstances, and, after that market had altogether ceased in our Colo nies, of the moat essential character. The whole question turned on one single point therefore, and upon one difficulty _ . of this sort ; namely, the difficulty of the slave owner re placing a slave whom he might so lose by manumission thus purchased. In 1823, this country, as he (Mr. W. Horton) felt bound to observe, was deluged by assertions that it was the grossest mistake which had ever been known, to sup pose that free labour would not execute more beneficially for the purposes of the master, the duties of sugar cultiva tion than slave labour could execute them. No man living but must wish most heartily, and from the bottom of hie soul, that this were the fact ; but unfortunately, it was not so. The Hun. Gent. then went on at some length to dilate upon the various difficulties of his subject, and adverted to some animadvertions of Mr. Brougham on a preceding night upon his (Mr. Horton's) presumed argu ment in favour of compensation to the West India Pro prietors. He denied that lie had maintained the principle in the manner suggested by his Hon. and Learned Friend ; but the analogy which his Hon. and I.earned Friend had attempted to estrblish between their case and the case of private interests, like the Silk Trade, was really untenable. He (Mr. Horton) had been asked who bad over heard of such a principle as compensation in such a case as the Silk Trade? But surely the House would at once per ceive the wide difference between a question of that nature, and one in which large sacrifices were demanded under the circumstances peculiar to the West India question. Had it been true that free labour could effect the cultiva tion of sugar, for instance, to the extent at which the ad vocates for free labour calculated that it was capable of doing, slave labour would long since have vanished from the West India Islands. The Hon. and Learned Member for Winehelsea had also intimated that be (Mr. Horton) had expressed an opinion that compensation to the slave owners should be made before any dhc:ssion on the sub ject of these Orders was proceeded with. Now he in truth had never said any such thing. The House would see that, though as far as measures of ameliort Lion were concerned, they were fret to adopt an) course they pleased, tither by the exertion of their own power, or by recommending strongly where reemnmendation was the course, it might seem more proper to pursue, they should not pledge them selves on a subject of so such difficulty to any act of impro vident legislation, which might be productive of substan tive injustice to the West India proprietors. When his Hon. and Learned Friend, whose absence he so much re gretted, reproached him (Mr. IL) with being opposed to the abolitionists, he must beg to inquire of what aboli tionists ? Because he conceived that this House, and the other House of Parliament, were equally pledged to carry into effect the resolutions of 18.13 ; and as for himself, ac cording to his understanding of those resolutions, he chal lenged any man to show that he had ever done anything which had not proposed their accomplishment for its ob ject. These resolutions certainly contemplated the gradual advancement of the slave to freedom, at the satne time that they respected private property. Now, such terms it was easy to write, but they involved, in practice, a most tremendous and responsible difficultv.—(Hear.)— He could as little admit to his Hon. and Learned Friend that this was a question to be disposed of by any arith metical references to those pointo of the Resolutions of this House which had been attended to, of neglected by the legislative assemblies. It would be well to conciliate, by every fair, and reasonable, and deliberate consideration of the various difficulties attaching to the case, the pro prietors of slaves in the West Inslico, before the House at tempted to legislate upon it. Above all, it was necessary, if it was meant permanently to maintain the interests either of the slave or his master, not to put them in collision with each other. No pecuniary advantage could accrue to the master, no benefit to the slave. In respect of the lat ter, coercion was a mode of treatment which must now be sure to fail—a conclusion which the Right Hon. Gentleman came to, from considering the verydifferent state and circum stances under which the creole slave was now placed—in a condition of slavery in which lie had been born, and in which he had always lived, from those in which the slave newly imported from Africa, and suddenly exchanging a state of freedom for a forced slavery, was formerly placed. He did not mean to enter into any defence of the Colonial Legislatures ; all that he wished to be understood by the House as saying was, that they would do well, in propor tion to their power, to set the example of forbearance at this critical moment. There was a disposition in those Colonies—in Demerara and Berbice it had been expressly declared—to assist in promoting the views and measures of Government; therefore, additionally on that account, he thought they ought in their legislation to show a disposi aion towards the protection of property. The Right Hon. Gentleman concluded amidst tile cheers of the House, with thanks for the attention which had been paid to hint, by moving that— " An humble Address be presented to his Majesty, to give orders that the Papers referred to in the opening of :he speech, be laid on the table of the House." Mr. KEITH DOUGLAS seconded the motion. Lord NUGENT did not rise to prolong the discussion. His only object was, on behalf of himself and others, to reserve the right of protesting, on some other occasion, against some of the doctrines laid down by his Right Hon. Friend. Mr. WHITMORE contended that it was a fallacy on the part of the Right Hon. Gentleman to assert that there was a difficulty in fixing a scale by which to measure com pensation. Mr. W. SMITH protested, as lie ever had and should do, against the doctrine that the ownership of slaves could be assimilated to the laws applicable to any other species of property. Man never could become the pro perty of man. No prescription in slavery could render it just. Mr. A. BARING would say, that under all the modifi cations of slavery, his Hon. Friend (Mr. W. Smith) could find many classes more wrathy of commiseration than those persons supposed to be in a state of abomination, for that was the term of the quackery so prevalent in the couatry....._ (Hear, hear.)—He said thus, because the people of Eng land had the notion that the state of the negroes in the Colonies Was nothing but one of cruelty and of abomina tion, If a Governor made a report, he was said to be biassed, because he had vat the turtle and drank the punch of the planters, and if Gentlemen connected with the army and navy did the same, who, from their professions, were necessarily persons of liberal ideas, they were not believed ; but ealumniee continued to be poured forth every day, upon a state of country, which only existed in the imagination of those who uttered them. He, how ever, felt it his duty, although not connected with the West Indiee, to repel these calumnies, and to say, that as respected all the physical wants of life, there were few, even here, so well situated as the negroes on a well.regu lated plantation.—(Hear, hear.) His Right Hon. Friend (Mr. W. Norton) had fairly stated the difficulties of car rying the resolution of the House into effect, which he himself was as anxious for as any one, but he had no de sire to ruin the property of any individual. The House had decided in favour of gradual abolition, but his Hon. Friend was of a different opinion, and did not wish it to be postponed. Mr. W. SMITH—I beg my Hen. Friend's pardon. I do net mean any thing of the kind, Mr. BARING continued—But his doctrines were, at least, such as would not allow slavery to continue tire trAnutee--(Hear,)—and, certainly, if it was a state so utterly repugnant to the laws of God and man as was stated, it ought not to be allowed to exist five minutee.—(Hear.) The great and only difficulty seen by the Right lion. Gen. tleman (Mr. W. Horton) was the effecting of compulsory manumission. And there undoubtedly, the difficulty did exist, when applied to the practical case, as to where the cetnpeneation was to come from. He should now come to what had been stated about free labour, with respect to which it seemed to be admitted that free and slave labour could not jointly operate. In* any thing he had read upon the subject, he certainly did not see how free labour was practically in use, and if reference were had to Mr. Coleridge's book, the account of the free labour as Trinidad was, that there was ns labour at all.— Whether the morals of the free labourers were calculated much to excite admiration, he doubted, and if Mr. Cole ridge was good authority, his account contradicted that re luctance which the free men were said to entertain towards working with slaves. The Hon. Gentleman then said that these who were called Wilberforce negroes were called so, as a term of reproach from their habits. He trusted that amelioration in the condition of the negroes would he fol lowed up, as far as was practicable, and that Government, would shew that they had no intention of resorting to violence. Mr. Secretary HUSKISSON said, that the people and the House both concurred in the desire to see s o m ethin g done by which the state of slavery should he a meliorated, and he :therefore lamented, when he heard what might make it appear to those connected with the West Indies, that they were not recognised to possess a legal right in their slaves. He knew that they bad the same right— that it was defined and limited by the same laws, as they bad to other property ; at the same time that he agreed with his Hon. Friend (Mr. W. Smith), that they stood in a different point of view, as owners of this property, as compared with any other.—(Hear, hear.) At the same time he would not have that lion. Gentleman suppose, that the principle of compensation was to be departed from if they were to part with this property, or that any inquiry, under such circumstances, as to how they bad dealt with it, were to he permitted. Laying aside all ab stract rights, the resolutions of Parliament treated the negroes as vested property ; but at the same time had the object of effecting such a gradual change in them, as would raise them to the condition of the other subjects of the country. The Right Hon. Gentleman went on to contrast the present intelligence and condition of the slaves in the West India Islands with the state they were in be fore the abolition of the Slave Trade, and said a change for the better had taken place since 1807, greater than had ever occurred in any part of the world in the same space of time. He had had an opport u nity, within a few days, of learning from the high authority of the Bishop of Ja maica, much upon the subject, and be felt pleasure in as suring the House, that that Prelate's report was highly satisfactory, both as respected the present state of the negroes, and the progress made in amelioration. He, there fore, so far agreed with his lion. Friend (Mr. B.) that it was better both for the negroes and for the interests of humanity, if Government in its interference did not disturb a state of things which was every day getting better, and which, if rashly meddled with, would only lead to expense without benefit. He would not detain the House by going through all the arguments which bad been urged, but said that the mode of compensation by appraisement did not present such in superable difficulties to his mind as it did to that of o thers. He begged the House to look to the resolutions of 1823, which embraced two points. The first AWL* an ameliora tion of the condition of the slaves, and the ether part re ferred to the gradual chauge from slavery to freedom, anci for that purpose nothing was ever suggested but compul sory manumission ; and he begged those connected with the West interfered Indies n ot to the G ove rnment run aw y wit w ith u l t wshooeruyilddemadatenhpuaamtr depart. from unless srim,o Parliament the pursuance of the system of compulsory of course aecoupanied by compensation. They were bound, he was perfectly free to admit, to attempt some mode of melioration of the slave population, not rapidly, of course, but surely and steadily. Done it must be, though he conld not say in any time to be specified—but eoener or later a change Must, of course, be effected in their civil condition. Mr. F. BUXTON said, that they were told that little difficulty stood in the way of manumieeion, but yet, when a proposal for cute ing it into practical opetation mere be d fore Parliament, the most insuperable difficulties Preece 7 0 themselves. Similar results attended upon the attempt ie do away with Sunday markets. The West Indiolrope tors called for compensation ; but were they not bound uy the laws of God, and a regard to the sacred right , ofints to make restitution to the unhappy Negro of 41: 1 he i been deprived of. The Hon. Member had spoken OA e I 1 happiness of the slaves—had described their conditiot r one which might be envied by the peasantry of these costae tries—that, in short, they were the happiest of men and tb% best el Christiane. Now, if the Hon. Gentleman, and, those who egged with him, tficeeght the West Indiat negT' such a very good Christian, why slid they reject his feeti many in a Court of Justice? if they be 80 ver y happyooe very religious, and, consequently, so very searai and enligh- - tened, as the Non. Member had described theee; Faith what consistency could it be alleged that they were arse s able of comprekending the natere and moral obligation or'ae Alta? If it be the fact that they are so well fed, so well eleeee'ed,! r etee little worked, how did it happen that their numberteverea decreasing at a rate entirely unequalled in the history of • man ? The negro population of the West Indies was Chi- • appearing at a rate such as no population had ever dis appeared in any part of the world. If the whole family of man were to decrease in numbers at that rate, the earth would be depopulated in fifty or sixty years. Whatever opinion miglit be entertained of the personal characters of the planters of the present day—whateerer might be thought of their claims to compensation, it was uneentestable :that ; their property in their fellow men had its origin ia crime-. He (Mr. B.) was not for Emancipation--he was not for: immediately investing the slave with the xiril rights ef:a., freeman, but he desired to postpone that great. measure: now from no regard to the rights of the i danterse--eliry . could have no rights which should interfere with it. He, would postpone emancipation, because he feared that the , slave was in a state in which it could not be ineparted to' him-ebecause he felt that slavery bad infused suet: a moral , poison it.to the negro—had so ground and sunk hint to , earth, that be was not fit to stand on terms of equaMty with men who, from earliest infancy , had been acenstotroel t* understand an a ppreciate freedom. British law might have led the pi„,: h er into this system of slavery, but Itritie law dragged the net ro into it. It did not compol! the had been led into so leng planter—it did compel ; be slave. He was " 1 7 tb4 he things they were under an nnae. theL eed a discussion, but one of' two. oidable necessity of doine.-. d they must talk the matter over ree. 7ilY andispaleionataly, he might say delicately ; or, if driven •to an opposite coarse, they must speak out plainly and vigoratse.:". time the Go- Mr. BERNAL observed that it was high vernment should declare its intentions—it S'lse lukt s r" &mak out with honesty and firmness. Mr. SYKES stated, that the slave population w de creasing at the rate of per cent. per annum. Colonel WILSON complained of the aspersions throwue out against the West India Proprietors, whenever an•ope portunity for doing soloccurred. He would say toe his compassionate brethren over the way, who were galloping. away thousands of miles from their own country and seek ing to bestow their benevolence every where but in tlinee• places where it was most wanted, " look at home—gieto Ireland and Seotlaad—there you will find wretchedaess• enough—there you can be at no loss to discover plenty of starvation.—(A laugh.)—ln these places you may fin&: persona, perhaps, related to yourselves—(laughter)—in a state of the utmost destitution--actually starving. When, you have done what you ought to do in this respect—when , you have relieved the poor of your own country, greatiroadi as fast as you like; relieve Ireland first, and then I willgo , band-in-hand with you in assisting the West Indies, evisicli„, however, be it remembered, stands in need of assistance , much less than the places already mentioned." I declare upon my honour, before my Maker and the Horne (conti nued the lion. and Gallant Member . ), that I have a small' property.—(A laugh.)—l own a little bit of a parish in, the North of England, and some property in the West In- Indies—that is ail. I found my parishioners a few years ago in a very bad state indeed. When they fell sick they had no money to pay the Doctor to keep them alive—they could not get a single glass of wine if they %vented it; cone sequently they must go without it.—(A . laugh.)—This never happened in the West Indies.—(liettr.)—Tho Hon. Member went on to state that he was vot standing there to impede the progress of instruction; rte was the very mart for it; but he wanted to have it done ralocierateli• He would lend a helping hand if they would go proper], to work, and every Wert India planter, he wt told b e bound, would do the same ; but the House Must 410 tb: planters justice first ; that was the only channel by is 4 tif" to realize what they wanted. The motion weathers put and agreed to. eeo L Mr. Secretary PEEL moved, that leave be given t(' b th r e in s g itt in ing a s e n f i t ll he ta Co e u n rt ab o l f King's enable the Justices Beie snch. f — Bench..-Leave the a Peasenta for ; Westminster to bold Sessions in Term time, and darioX egrad • The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at One o'Clock. We are requested to state, that SAMS, of St. James's-street, has just published an entirely new Gata logos of his extensive Subscription Library, (the terms to which may be had on application,) comprising a choicre collection of standard Works, and every modern publica tion of merit that has appeared to the present time. Also that, encouraged by the patronage with which be has besot honoured by the Nobility and Gentry, he has just pnr chased several excellent Opera and Theatre Boxes, in ad dition to those already in his possession, which may be• en gaged by the Night, alternate Week, or Season. THE ATHENA:um, No. 13, published this , Morning - , contains, among other interesting and original Articles,-1. Sketches of Contemporary Authors, No. 8 ; Percy Bysshe Shelly-2. Pictures of Society, drawn from Life, by a Nobleman, No. 10 ; containing Anecdotes of the Grand Duke Constantine of Russia, the Emperor Alexander, &c. &c. ; Adventures of Prince 'Ypsilanti in Greece, his Arrest, Imprisonment, and Death-3. Letters of Crito, on Mr. Lockhart's character as a Novelist, his Valerius-- 4. Reviews of New Books : Personal Narrative of the Irish Rebellion, by Charles Hamilton Teeling ; The Kuz zilbash, a new Oriental Romance; Origines Genealogical; The Aiaericans as they are; Notices of the other English, and Foreign Publications of the Week-5. Public Amuse menti : The Philharmonic Coacert ; the Theatres-6. The Foreign Quarterly Review -7. The Magazines of the 111anth-8. Letter from the Continent-9. Review oe New Music—lo. Varieties, Literary Intelligence, &c. & This new Literary Journal, containing sixteen royal 4t* pages, is published every Tuesday and Friday, by W. LEVIFR, at the Office, No. 147, Strand, near Somerset house, and may he had of all Newsmen, Clerks of the Reads, &c. price only 7d., or stamped, for country circu lation, by post, 10d. ARRIVALS.—The Earl and Countess of Limerick, and the Ladies Pery, in Mansfield-street, from Southill Park, in Berkshire ; the Marquis and Mar chioness of Salisbury, in Hanover-square, from Hatfield House, for the season ; Colonel and Mrs. Vanaittart, and family, in Great Cumberland-street, from their seat, Shat tesbroke, near Maidenhead ; the Marquis of Winchester, in Cavendish-square, from his seat, Amport House, An dover ; Sir Edmund Stanley, at the Hotel, Dover-street, from Surrey ; Rev. Archdeacon Prosser, and family, at their house in Burton-street, Berkeley-square, from their seat Easington, Durham ; Sir William Rowley, Bart., and family, at their house in Grosvenor-street, from their k seat, Tendring Hall, Suffolk ; Mr. and Mrs. Addington, in Brook -street, from Brighton; Hun. Capt. Cue, M.P. in Charles-street, Berkelersquare, from a tour ; Capt. Bait, in Wimpole-street, from Paris ; E. Wellan, Esq. and the Misses IVellan, at the Beruers - Hotel, Bernera-street, from Bath; J. Barnwell, Esq. at ditto, from Liverpool; Edw. Graham, Esq. at ditto; J. Page, Esq. at th e Royal Hotel, at S ditto, t. from Bath;James's-street, D. G fronlrhis seat in K e nt ; Capt. Brymer, ilway, a t ditt o , f rom B r i g ht on ; Mr. and Lady L. Os w a ld, at the London Hotel, Albemarle street, from Surrey; Sir Wm. Cooke, Bart. at ditto, from his seat iu Yorkshire ; Sir James and Lady Witshoad, at ditto, from Suffolk. D EL , ARTURES.—INIajor Thornton, front St. James's -street, for Brighton ; Captain Otway, front the British Hotel, for Plymouth ; Arthur French, Esq. M.P. from the Royal Hotel, for his seat, French Park, Ireland; L e i ce stershire and icr.t cr, ll , l i t Pemberto n , r l ; ;A.L e .A 1 i to r m i e r l iccailly, for their , 3 Es d ri.fromi seat ließern in Bernet, Hotel, for Shenley. ARRIVALS AT BATH.—Lord Chief Jus tice, Lady, and Miss Best, Lady C. Bathurst, Sir Coign houn Grant, Sir Wm. and Lady Williams, Sir John Greene, Commissioner Harris, Dean of Connor, Lieut.- Colonel Vilett, Major Fawcett; Captains Huntly, Cla ridge, Dovetou, Rose, Seward, Bouverie, Justice; Rev. M e ss rs . Dodd, Butler, Ward, Phillips, Williams, Lee. Winett, Rockett ; Mr. Mrs. and Miss Coles; Mr. and Mrs. Thring and family, Templeman, Bacon, Pulsfind, Hollis, Stevenson, Bookes, Farrer, Fox, Rolf and family, Stables, Carew and family, Upham, Lloyd and family, Churcham, Williams; Messrs. Harming, Hornyold, Baker, Payne, Keplin, Bunbury, Bath, Reeve, Dix, Monday, Kington, Egington, Ogle, Tanner, Hamilton, Hickmart Maddocks, Sparman, Truernore, Benny, Weeks, Watson , Mills, Angelo, Sibley, Noyes, Hampden, Rowe, Pattivot, Hawes ; Mistresses Ilbetson and family, Ford, Attersolfr Bingham, Northtnore, Wallace, Armstrong, Dowdinfl, May, Hutchinson, Higman, Lee, Swayne, Jeboutt, Wi IA gett ; iThlsee Btuten, Keorick, Kelly, Monypenny, WOW Oka TO TI TOF WIC w Royal My 1 ,, axed I hs rapport Reprrse G 1 true of nay E tion:wi and I re If it situation duties NV tild to p CI of Cor • Treaty GRAT' tr,mied the ref well a fluted( Smcor was as of Mr. appeal oppres which of his of the Comm PrAtn< Mr. Treat: ment < now r CORSO( Thi conce: will when under mean men bar tc If I N was t mere] far fri no av fluent tholic their den Cl the toy ittunt URio collo the e prom of th do tr Conn a col calla n th the Plain diact ♦este delq Tl yeas ble retiri are f able whic to t Erni bag from the in tl real publ nit. Rlll Doi that Info: the 1 beat the quill mitt berP WT and Mnig edit of t of I nati Exc ing TeAl detzi 1 16 a Item ord4 Qn on . w 1 al Wip i