The Sun. — London, England, 1841-06-09 00:00:00

MORN ING EDITION •-f' :J i•' -1/P ,11? ;; ;.' °.l 4:1 , OO P' I ' 6 ll l' ° VP' .1 e ti 3;• 11 ,„"' .40 'l4 , ',„js ,;1 1 10' 94 ' C , ; 00 , P l° f 4 , ........_, tea covered in 1537 cults, Bst 7lbs ; and fillies, Bst 41bs. bu Old mile (4 Subs.) e,ot Bedford', e 'Oakley (51bs.) St. limes's Palace Stakes of 100 sots. each, h ft. for colts, Bst_ libs; and fillies, 83t 41bs. Old mile. (4 Subs. ) tord W est*ticiter's b c Sa hist THE CUP (TO-310KHOW. men we l e f t the course, the odds stood as follows :- 2 to 1 asst 111 r. liidsdale's Bloomsbury 2 to 1 art Air. Rmsay's Lanercost to 1 asst Mr. P a ttiz 's St. Francis LITERATURE. DUBLIN ItEVIE W. Na. XX. Th e Dolnein London 1841. objection which we ' have so often urged likust this periodical—nainely, that it is heavy and monotonous in the character of its articles— ikitilies with less force than usual to the present losmunher, which c ont ai ns qu i te enoug h o f var i ety • aat 'sfy all cl as s es o f • rea d ers. A mong t h e fghter reviews is a notice of Moore's poetry, sli ggested by the late . Uniform edition of his 4 r its ) which is penned in, a lively, spirited man- . et') hut • i • 1 . f and indiscri is somewinit too lavish o , , at ",,l naf e in, its eu l og y . We bel i eve, there is con able truth in the ReViewer's assertion that i t tie Irish Melodieshad a great share in preparing eE° glisli mind . f or the measure of Catholic nl y a Isci p a tion; and we ca n readily imagine, and aloutepathise with, the feelings of just and honour jio P r ide with which Mr. Moore must look back rhis exertions in this patriotic cause. In an l irluent and even learned notice of Mr: Ha_ " Literature of Europe," the Reviewer, al -- sn'Af.'g incidentally to some of the religious ab IDs ties of the last thirty years, observes that doc trines ' fle ° of education still believe in the doc osof;tisicoo.tfe,that crack-brained enthusiast, Joanna. " having subMitted to the operation h /s !'ing' sealed, and what is still More conclusive, fa avin g wßiithtsht: paid for it." We must' eg to doubt this tiding it is so positively. 7 0 f i t :Ir n v?i t , .great apostle of, the Unknown f er :'gues, we are assured that " he was a man in- O u lu f ° no one in intellectual powers." This Mo ' v s l , v , e i., rntist beg leave to doubt, for we have t un : "411 once beard Mr. Irving preach iu.Hat spr "' li en, and 'never discovered aught in his 1,2 1 ,;tis but a certain. flashy eloquence, which . ill e..lculated to stand the.test of rigid exa fr:"ltti°ll. It *as the preacher's manner that gained 1.• *as io t ,a • c h.P9l. a 3 din su -ul tit ? • his niatter, when it n -was seldom much raised above i-et111111°11,Place: ". Mental Epidemics" is an ar ta d e , 1 : 11 ". 1 of useful suggestions respecting the best_ heliet•lteepino• the - mind in a state of sound th i , -- " ; :, dO not, however, agree with d t off - w riter in his strictures upon tea an toffee which, when not. taken to excess, are 'ions beverages, if not positively nutri tralft-• At o n -. y r..te, if they be poisons, they lay St b e, very `low ones, for Dr. Johnson, an eterate tea-drinker, attained his seventy-fifth caf a ik r; 1 " 4 Voltaire, who was as inveterate a N.(--,drinker lived to be an octogenarian... of 4viglible Polar Sea" is a sketchy notice 41)1411 expedition undertaken to the inhospit littiatt•s of the. North Pole, by order of the inr (ioveriiment, in she year 182.1. " Sport- Ireland" is just one of those light, ram itttr!" ent ertaining notices which used to be so zio,; lefl ‘ r :e in the - pages of Blackwood's Maga- Joke 't he Reviewer remarks that to " give a of t' ari d take a joke" is the great secret Irei'a velli ng happily and successfully through sod at 'd• Let the tourist be able to do this, c oin w e. are told that he may go through the ev e - r itr Y from Connemara to Cavan, and he met repl'where with good-humoured kindness, and w a - r e 're the hundred thousand welcomes of the rar„ilfhearted people to every description of P 4 rt in their vicinity. We quote . t h e roav-eLwer'a directions to the sporting tourist who O'C 17 anxious to have a day's hunting . with he "I ' ol , among his own wild native moun io s br e „ Li ,f Kerry. The sketch of the open-air giv es In this extract is so piquant, that it - 4,,ne -quite an appetite to read it:- 4 ' tourist must be stirring with the first light— kroi, -'Connell • generally setting out for his hunting Aare at four in the morning ; and, if he would keep th at with him in his walk to the rendezvous, he will find f th it e . f s° I ne previous practice, under the instructions ble He Wilir, r ned Captain Barclay, is extremely be d r es s r e a ldem . ex_ Ft„trind the hnnting-pack sma . .ll e i t n ha n t u amber , being left keg pine couple, about twice tiler business—that ; but he will see at ‘l o c nce that they understand for r ..uilsiness--that they are just . the description of dogs 1 110 untain country—well sized, but not over large ; b e l l bodied, but deep chested, and not at a . llleggy— , 4fi r ining about the head, and most musical in tongue $1 ° I Italian and German concerts ! never was such ro ° 4l -n .u t a... music as the cry of that little pack will draw . her breast of the grey mountain, wakening Echo in trethi,",waand caves, and seeming to make the giant crags co ol - „''' at th e roar. They will not be long before they tit4i t '' ) ,*' ll a trail, and the sagacity with which they un --e - ariutis Windin g s thereof, will delight the true th'e'ir4j4.ll. They are never helped —never lifted ; and 7: fl g a thing almost unheard of: Their 111"te as' o _ l/L4 e Irish, de scen di ng f rom an ancestry as re 411'1 of- the Milesians who followed the chase ; t ignur, endurance, and instinct, are almost t "rl • Some of the mountaineers always keep near " th,', l . l ' order to pick up the hare, when killed ; and 14. ki'livrator" is never far in tha rear. Two hares be- Iporrsai'lled, breakfast is antrainced ; and the hungry . 'with a 411 fi ntls a clOth laid in some grassy dell, covered nd n ProfuSion of cold Meats, hot potatoes, sandwiches, f tom anfrOquently a dish of mountain trout reeking taehtss°,2le cottage gridiron ; and copious acco . mpan l i-_ Provided in the shape of tea, coffee, milk, co d f *hieh porter, cider, and spirits of various kinds ; of thi s n atter articles there are now but few partakers in ‘vith„aetelibourhood, gentry and people being almost, l)erane,:„"eepti(m, followers of the " Apostle of Tem sav 4tlt. or Breakfast over, the stranger may amuse him lnadw,bile in reading the newspapers, or smoke a utp " look forth, over abrupt precipices, and across Ihitta,u,d tomantic glens, on the Atlantic, and muse on sands Lrother, Jonathan" is about. But hen u" all a i x 1. must be very very kid re refreshed, he must be ready for. a fresh start, Unlucky if he do not see five or amu•if h' e l i tlai killed by fair hunting, and fastidious indeed, n"t declare himself well pleased with his day's s, SIIADOW,j AN]) REFLECTIONS OF WHIGS AND TORIES. Th e Boone, London, 1841. to zu k t e ri t that pervades this work is a manly , n g i t i ff , P tchteUed one, and evidently the result of of Id a mts (it readino• and reflection. In some the eliapters the . Anther goes over precisely vett e : l l , l ' l e ground. that Lord Brougham had tra laglaCis't'fore hint ;. but we do not trace any from his Lord s hip's " Cha rac te rs o f I)4lguislied Statesmen ;'' far otherwise, the Vivid :talearly written from the Author's own tapre,Pressions of men and things. He rest that ' himself strongly, because it is mani heean"tit teels strongly ; and fixes attention, , s e he argues from conviction. Though is h o ' i r l ! ) .rk has a decided Whig tendency, there it. ,"',"g of The thick-and-thin partisan about toosidl'"e Author is superior to such petty stat es erations, and passes judgment on the whose characters he discusses, in an in s ,14!'", un compromising spirit, to th e b es t o f With most of his j u d gmen t s we leoie,„4,l:' a gree, but we thi n k h e h as b een too The t° wards th e notor i ous Duke of Newcastle, 'whet, i ltent porary of the eld er Pit t , espec i a lly Pro ve 'e ass erts that " th e a b use o f hi s G race blank s . n 'Alling but t h e i n h erent b aseness of Duk e fild, thereby making it appear that the jast a martyr to his own sense of what was e ver theenlightened in leoislation. Now if Nish ` re was a narrow, ficrgetty, purblind, in- Urer:tent statesman, disqualified alike by na 'sPonslils'!l„caucation, for holding any office of re -154e '''.„ l "t3', the Duke of Newcastle was that °q v, - ue was a mere fussy, restless busy ter one leading feature of whose cliarac lie 'as sts tek. r t itkatiable desire. for place, which % 101 l -to with'the tenacity -of a horse-leech. oib,eieZ'has- lett-us a sketch of this political' /r , l t nr ,"'ul 1 144 "*t'plbt, which though some -4,,,tt th e ' 7 ' .9,l „ 7 .erOtiarg..ed in its colouring, is correct da te,:th • ow,. anthOr's character of Lord e a ' nAtsh severely, is justly, drawn ; and th e ef l ui est' iii the strict propriety qeor f .; ‘ , .ertkin which he . has passed upon altlne.Third Of whom he says, in I Pat e . i i4 A a bigot ;_ _his soul :was des h or hi s heart false, he knew not . love ale_ '::11"lsbi; Pity. nor remorse. Crafty, sub• tsin't.4illidictive, he was never surprised ` into t Y, but ',.. whe ßri n h tain lie ' ies ranks gave he amono• way. AS oetr.u3iorsft of. GreatGreat t. "flierui otiarchs; th e h o ll owness of diaries ir wiehout hi s liberality- or taste ; the hi fie Pia arnes the Second without his sincerity. e-"tflge wa s at te in which he appeared t o t he g reatest Th a Levee or Drawing room • enn e „alone Ise sunk his political feeling was . tile pi!oPlY courteous to Whig and Tor o rb "gate dem 'gogne Wilkes was leo;eievveednwith W , . may tidd, that George the bettrliir° understood the temper of Ids conntryint'll ps than any man of his day and this is Perha „„...4e (Cason why, in au age, conip , ar t' 1 re;zlloing, of political ignorance, he retainaed"ll3' d o , Pe v e t and love of the undiScerning man;, wi t.h t i.; to the very last moment wheU f iitraWri froM public life.' In his f that fr u ,l'ice, the author states it as Portraithis pr„,,..`"" far-famed Letters of Junius were t i li e k• w ith him, who I _ e °etion of this eminent statesman. Few will are at all conversant with .tuirjet.swritings, which are as different from those thou'lts as can be imagined. The former deli 2 .l l l :2 l .. e L c . an . ,be concise enough on occasions, Unif,;.,..7.,c"nanN In amplifications; the latter is polit,' filly sententious and epigrammatic. In their 014 se te t ,urke was a Whig of the strait-laced ; • Ju nius. a demag o gue, whose ideas "s` to republicanism. We subjoin the au thor's critical sketeh of this great unknown, with which we close our notice of his lit4iit; desultory, and amusing volume :—" No writer was at any period, or in any country more popular than Junius. A t this day, seventy years since he first appeared, his fame is as enduring as ever. With a power of condensation unequalled since Ta citns, a stab in every sentence, a sting in every question, a darkness of colouring alMost ap palling, occasionally relieved by the ; scorching blaze of a vivid indignation, he sometimes plays with his victim, but only to tickle him to death; he combines the sporting ferocity of a tiger with the noble daring of a lion. His Letters exhibit brevity without obscurity, strength without coarseness, elegance without feebleness, great depth with extreme clearness." Junius may not be coarse in expression, but he frequently ex hibits great coarseness of idea, as may be seen, passim, in his attacks on the Duke of Grafton. MRS. HALL'S IRELAND.—Part. How and Parsons, London, 1841. In this number of the most popular work on Ireland that has yet appeared, we find some exceedingly curious particulars respecting the state of the lace - trade in Limerick, whose- lace, sayS the-Editor, " may vie in delicacy and beauty of finish with anything . of the kind wrought at the present• time in Europe ; while it is infinitely less costly than that manufactured in France or Belgium, and considerably cheaper than that of Nottingham, or either" of the lace districts. Of this country." 'The great attraction of Limerick; however, adds Mrs. Hall, is its " ma jestic and beautiful". river Shannon, of which we have an interesting account, together with short, pertinent extracts from Mr. Rhodes's Report on the subject of the Navigation of this noble stream, whose naturai advantages, „up to the present . time, have been altogether ,neg lect( d; . its munificent wealth having been " suffered to be as utterly waste as if its blessings wereonly to an utipeopled desert."' The Number is embellished with a clever engraving of King John's Castle and old Thomond-bridge, and also with a map of Limerick and the adja cent county of Clare. -- --- JUDICIAL STATISTICS of FRANCE The ilioniteur publishes a long report, addressed by M. Martin du Nord, Minister of Justice, to the King, and containing a general account of the administration of civil and commercial . jukice in France during the years 1837, 1838, and 1839. The 2,846 Justices of the Peace throughout the kingdom were called upon, in 1837, to decide on 603,898 affairs ; in 1838, on 655,046 ; and 702,423 in 1839 ; in all, .1,961,367 affairs. The proportion of affairs, as respected the population, was 1 for every 32 inhabitants. Of these - affairs, 496,927 were adjudi cated upon after discuSsion; 289,150, by default; 842,534 were terminated by a transaction or arrangement in Court, and 309,695 were abandoned by the parties with out trial. The affairs carried before the Justices of the Peace experience little or no delay, for only 8,368 re mained unsettled on the 31st of December, 1839. The 786,077 judgments, after discussion and by default, gave rise to 13,580 appeals, or 1 for 58 judgments. 9,007 of those appeals, however, were alone followed 'up, 5,244 of which were confirmed and 3,763 set aside. The Councils of Prild'hommes, sixty in number, who are appointed to decide in contestations arising between merchants, manufacturers, foremen, workmen, appren tices, &c., pronounced during those three years on 44,531 affairs, or, on an average, 14,844 per annum. 4%-?.08 were amicably arranged by the private board, and the 4,323 remaining Were referred to the general board. There were but sixty-two appeals atinst these judg ments. 13efore the 361 civil tribunals of first instance 372,153 affairs were entered for trial in the same interval-viz., 126,694 in 1837 ; 126,086 in 1838 ; and 119,373 in 1839. If to these be added the 60,379 lying over on the 31st of December, 1836, the total will amount to 432,532 affairs. Those Courts terminated 127,548 affairs in 1837, 132,111 in 1838, and 124,454 in 1839- in all, 384,113. The pro portion of suits was, one per 270 inhabitants. Of these affairs, 196,907 were adjudicated upon after discussion, 83,817 by default, and 103,389 were terminated by trans action, renunciation, &c. On the 31st of December, 1839, 48,419 civil cases were lying over unsettled. The increase of commercial affairs already noticed in the statistical account for 1 1 335 and 1836 still continued in the three following years. The 390 tribunals, both special and civil, appointed to try commercial cases despatched 156,875 in 1837, 147,280 in 1838, 162,487 in 1839, or 466,642 during those three years, or on an average 155,547 per annum. This average had only been 112,362 in the preceding triennial period. Of these, 126,581 were adjudicated upon after discussion, 270,334, by default, and 67,727 by transaction, renunciation, &c. ; 8,847 were still pending on the 31st of December, 1839. The average of commercial cased, which was upwards of 40,700 per an num in Paris, 8,000 in Rouen, and 6,900 in Lyons, was only 1'55 in the department of Finisterre, 146 in Morbi han, 147 in the Lower Alps, &c. Before the 27 Royal Courts 11,064 cases were entered for trial in 1837, 10,622 in 1838, and 11,095 in 1839. If to those 32,781 affairs be added the 9,179 pending on the 31st of December, 1836, the total will be 41,960. Those Courts terminated 11,303 in 1837, 12,259 in 1838, and 11,460 in 1839-in all, 35,022. 24,234 affairs were ad judicated upon after discussion, 2,885 by default, and 7,903 by transaction, renunciations, &c. ; 6,961 remained unsettled on the 31st of December, 1839. The Chamber of Requests of the Court of Cassation received 573 appeals in 1837, 588 in 1838, and 550 in 1839—0 r 1,711 during the three years. It delivered 443 decrees in 1837, 614 in 1838, and 519 in 1839—in all, 1,576. Of these, 864 rejected the appeals; and 712 ad mitted them, and sent the parties before the Civil Cham ber. The latter pronounced, during the three years, 655 decrees, 248 rejecting the appeals, and 407 breaking the judgments. The demands to be separated addressed to the Courts were 643 in 1837, 807 in 1838, and 772 in 1839 ; in all, 2,222, or, on an average, 741 per annum ; as compared with the number of marriages, returned in 1836, the proportion was one demand for every 8,360 mar riages annually. During the three years only one demand of separation was made in the department of the Landes, two in the Indre, Corsica, and the Lower Alps, five in the Correze, Ardeche, and Upper Loire ; four in Arriege, five in the Lot, Lozere, and Cantal ; 113 were instituted by the husband, and 2,109 by the wife ; seventy-three were entered into against the wife by the husband, on the plea of adultery, four on account of her having heen condemned to some degrading penalty, and thirty-six for illtreatment and severe injury. Of the 2,109 applications made by the wife ninety 7 five were grounded on the adultery of the husband, forty-five on his having been sentenced to a degrading penalty, and 1,969 for illtreatment and serious injury. 430 were with -drawn before trial in consequence of the reconciliation of the parties, or the death of one of them ; 1,618 were admitted, and 174 rejected. The number of legal adoptions during the three years was 257. The applications addressed to the Courts to the effect of interdicting persons from managing their property were 2,583 ; 978, in_lB37 ; 986, in 1838 ; and 619, in 1839. Of the 2,583 applications 1,568 were made by re latives, 1,279 of which were admitted and 289 rejected ; and 1,015 by the Attorney-Generals, 708 of which were admitted and 107 rejected. Only 70 appeals were tn tered into against those 2,583 judgments. The marriage dispensations granted under the law of the 16th of April, 1832, was 251 in 1832, 686 in 1833, 692 in 1834, 549 in 1835, 516 in 1836, 457 in 1837. 571 in 1838, and 597 in 1839. NEWPORT, ISLE OF WIGHT.—DISTRESSING A CCIDE NT.—An accident of the most distressing nature occurred here on Saturday, which has caused a gloom to pervade the whole town. As Miss Cook, the amiable and accomplished daughter of John Cook, Esq., of Belle Croft, was Superintending some favourite flowers in the greenhouse, which, having been attacked by the green fly, the gardener was smoking with tobacco, her dress came in contact with a lighted candle he had placed on the ground, and was in a moment in flames. In her fright she ran out of the greenhouse across the lawn, ere the gardener, and a man who was assisting him, could overtake her. She was so dreadfully burnt, that she expired on Sunday morning. The young lady was in her 20th year. This i• the third child , this respected gentleman has lost within a few months. SUICIDE IN A STATION-HOUSE.--MOlldaV night a man named Samuel Byford, about 30 years of age, who had been brought to the B division station-house, Elizabeth street, Pimlico, upon a charge of insulting females, committed self-destruction, by hanging himself from the circular grating of the window of the cell in which he was confined. The charge was taken at a quarter to eight o'clock, and it was ob served at the time that the deceased did not appear to be Ashamed of his disgraceful situation. He was visited several times between that period and half past nine, and betrayed no agitation whatever. At the latter hour the constable found him haning by the neck from the grating. He was cut down immediately. Mr. Fowler, the surgeon, was sent for, who opened the deceased's arm, and he bled freely ; the body wa, quite warm, but life was extinct.. The deceased was described upon the charge sheet as an artist. " DOVER, JUNE s.—Yesterday a report was dr culattd that a corporal of the 34th Regiment had been shot by one of the privates of the same corps on the road between here and Sandwich; but we are glad to find, on subsequent in quiry, that the manner in which the man met his death, through of a melancholy description, does not bear so criminal a Complexion. From the evidence at a Coroner's inquest held yesterday at the Little Rose, Whitfield, it appears that the deceased had - been sent %Nab two soldiers as an escort to con vey three prisoners to Sandwich, and on their return home 'they Went into the public-home, the George, at Welder hare, in company with two females, where they indulged in intoxicating drinks until they all became drunk. On leaving this plate to proceed towards Dover it would seem that de ceased turned off the road into Hazledean-wood, and shot him for he was found there two hours after mortally wounded from a musket shot, which had passed through his body.. One of the feinales was lying in the wood beside him, but she was in mid} a state of intoxication that she could give no account of the'melaneholy affair. Verdict of the Jury—" That the d‘ , - teased &tattled himself while labouring under a fit of tempo. riry insanity." ANigitICAN FIGURE OF SPEECH.—The verb "to fix" is universal, It means to do anything. " Shall I fix Your coat or your breakfast first.?" That is—" Shah I btu II your coat, or get ready your breakfast first ?" " Right away," forim nediately, or at once, is very general. " Shall I fix it right away ?"—i. e. I do it immediately ?" In the West, when you stop at an inn, they say_" What will you have ? ..B rown meal and common doings, or white wheat and chick en fixi ngs. " T h at i s —" Will y ou have pork and brown bread, or whim bread and fried chicken ?" Also—. Will yon have a tied or , cheek ?"—a dinnfv or a luncheon ? "In full blast"—som, thl sg in extreme. ‘.‘ When she came to the meet ing, with her yellow hat and feathell, wion't she in full braes ?' IMPERIAL PARLIA.MEINv?. HOUSE OF LORDS, June 8. Their Lordships assembled at the usual hour. Messengers from the Commons brought up several private .13111 s, .prineipally Small Debts' Bills. The Court Houses (Ireland) Bill passed through Com- mittee. The •Militia Ballot Suspension Bill passed through Committee. The Assessed Taxes Composition Bill passed through Committee. The Ordnance Survey Bill passed through Committee. The Jews Declaration Bill passed through Committee. The Sugar Duties Bill was read a third time, and ordered to be committed on Thursday. The Marquis of WESTMEATH would put a ques tion relative to a matter that had that day come to his knowledge. A person of the name of Connor had been tried and convicted, and sentenced to execution, for the forcible abduction 'of one Jane Matthews, some ears ago, and he had been just•appointed by the Irish Poor-law Commission as a Returning Officer for the Union of Athlone. Now he (the Marquis of Westmeath) wished for a return to be made to that House of the conviction. of Robert Connor, late a sergeant in the 73d Regiment, in 1825. • Lord DUNCANNON, in the absence of Lord Nor manby, said he thought there would be no objection to the return being made. . Lord ASHBURTON presented several petitions against the Corn-laws, upon which a discussion arose, and. The Earl of RADNOR took occasion to allude to a speech of the Marquis of Westmeath, in which he read him (the Earl of Radnor) a lecture regarding his state ment that wages in Ireland were never higher than 10d. a day, and he (the Earl of Roden) had ascertained that to be the fact. _ Earl FITZWILLIAM said he thought it very desir able . that no error should go uncorrected, but he thought it equally desirable to prevent any error being committed. He was himself an employer of labourers in Ireland to a very great extent, and the wages he paid never exceeded 10d. a day. That was the established rate of wages. It appeared to him (Earl Fitzwilliam) that the Noble Marquis (Westmeath) thought that some ad vantage accrued to the labourers from occupation of . land. • Now, the Irish labourer generally occupied land from the farmer who employed 'him,. and with whom he had a running account, and this running account was generally paid for with labour done by the occupier, and he (Earl Fitzwilliam) did not think that the labourer .was benefited by this system of occupation of land. . The Marquis of WESTMEATH did not think the system was advantageous to the llbourer;.he (the Mar quis of Westmeath) would rather see the labourer paid in money for his labour. The P.arl of RADNOR begged leave to state, that there might be no misunderstanding, that when he stated that wages in Ireland were not more than 4d. a day, he did so from recollection. But his statement was now obtained from the Poor-law- Commissioners. He had that morning looked at the Report, and he found that the statements contained in it completely bore him out in what he had said. It stated that the wages of labour varied from 6d. to Is. a day ; that the general average was Bid. a day ; but it appeared that taking the whole year together the average of the wages amounted to 25.• 6d. a week, which fully bore out his statement that the average amount of wages was front 4d. to sd. a day. Thu Marquis of WESTMEATH explained. The Earl of HAIWWICKE said that in all' those sort of discussions the Noble Lords who began it always had an 'advantage, because they came down ready primed to the House. The Noble Earl had yesterday brought forward evidence to show that the labourers were better off with corn at low prices than with Corn at high prices. Now it appeared, on the autho rity of the Noble Earl himself, that such was not the opinion of the labourers; The Noble Earl had given evidence before a Committee in • the House of Commons in 1836, in which he had stated, in answer to questions put to him, that he believed the farmers were under a general impression that a rise in the price of corn would be beneficial to their interests. The Noble Earl had the following question put to bim.—" If they could get 60s. a quarter for their corn, do they not think that there would not be so much distress in the country ?" To which 'the Noble Earl had replied " They do, and the - labourers thirds so too." In reply to another. question ' the Noble Earl had stated that the labourers throughout his part of the country were of opinion that a rise in the price of corn would be advantageous to them. "It is very absurd," said the Noble Earl; "but they think so."—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord had. last night entered into a statement with a view of showing that in 1836, when the price of bread was low the condition of the labourer had been improved, but in his examination .before that Committee he had said that it was to the operation of the Poor-law that the rapid improvement of the condition of the labouring classes was attributable, that before the enactment of that law there had been a great scarcity of work, but that whenever it had come into operation then the demand' or labour had increased ; so' that at that time the Noble Lord was of opinion that the improvement in the condition of the labourers was a consequence of the Poor-law Amendment Act. The Earl of RADNOR was glad to hear that the Noble Earl was so satisfied with the high value of his testimony. Not one word of that testimony was he in clined to withdraw.—(Hear, hear.) He would not deny that a great improvement had taken place under the Poor-law Amendment Act, but was that improvement the less, because the poor man had a cheap loaf instead of a dear one? That was at that time the opinion of the labourers, because they were then still under the effect of the mode in which the Poor-law had been admini nistered before the introduction of the Poor-law Amend n.ent Bill. Under that system every labourer received parish relief, and as the amount of relief was always re gulated according to the price of bread; the labourer had an idea that it was for his advantage that the price of corn should be high, because he then received a larger amount of money for parish relief ; but if the labourers were asked their opinion now, they would not state they were benefited by high prices. The Earl of STRXD A BROKE said that it was but na tural to suppose that when the price of corn was high, there was a natural desire on the part of the occupiers to employ more labourers. Allusion had been made to the rate of wages in Ireland. He employed many la bourers in that country ; their work was princpally underground, and their wages were never less than from Is. to Is. 6d. a day throughout the year. The Noble Earl then presented several petitions against any altera tion in the Corn-laws. The Earl of HADDINGTON presented a petition against any alteration in the Corn-laws from some lace in Roxburghshire. lie had been entrusted by a Noble Friend to present two petitions against any alteration in the Corn-laws. He at first hardly knew whether he ought to present them, seeing the scheme for an altera tion in those laws had been abandoned by those who, notwithstanding they had not the confidence of either House of Parliament, still continued to be her Majesty's Ministers.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl then presented a petition from the Grand Jury of the county of Dublin against any alteration - in the Corn-laws ; and another to the same effect from the inhabitants of the city of Dublin. MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS. Messengers from the House of Commons brought up certain Bills. EMIGRATION. The Earl of FIT ZWILLIAM presented a petition from the Emigration Society of Paisley, praying their Lordships to promote emigration, as a relief for the existing distress. THE SUN, LONDON: WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1841. CORN-LAWS. Lord HATHERTON presented petitions from eleven places in Staffordshire, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition from the Mayor, Aldermen, and Town Council of Chip ping Wycombe, in Buckinghamshire, in favour of the Government measure for the alteration of the duties on corn, sugar, and timber ; also a petition from a person named W. Brookes, who was unknown to him, praying to be heard at the bar against the Jews Relief Bill. The Noble Marquis then moved for returns of the ave rage prices of corn in London, and also for the king dom generally, during the months of July, August, and September, in the rars 1820, 1830, and 1840. The Earl of RII ON presented petitions from certain parishes in Sussex, against any alteration in the Corn laws. The Earl of HAREWOOD presented several petitions against any alteration in.the Corn-laws. Earl FITZ WILLIAM presented petitions from Hun tingdon, Strathraer, Wisbeach, and Several other places, all praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws. The Earl of YARBOROUGH presented a petition from the county of Lincoln, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented several petitions from Yorkshire, to the same effect. The Bishop of ROCHESTER presented a petition from the clergy of the Deanery of Worcester, complain ing of the present mode of rating tithes. The Earl of GLENGALL presented petitions from Tipperary and Lincolnshire, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. • Lord SONDES presented a petition from Kent, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. The Earl of 311;,,NTT0 presented petitions from Rox burgh and Melrose, against the Corn-laws. The Earl of DEVON presented several petitions from Devonshire, against any alteration in the Corn laws. Lord BROUGHAM wished particularly to call their Lordships' attention to the petition he was about to present, as it proceeded from a most respect able . meeting, which had been held at the Guildhall, in the City of London. That meet ing was called by public advertisement by the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor. It was attended, not only by persons of the greatest wealth and respectability in the commercial world, not only by persons who held the highest rank amongst the citizens, but it was also at tended by a most numerous assemblage. All persons were admitted to that meeting, and the Guildhall was I completely filled The petition was signed by upwards of 21,000 in the course of four days, and four days only. He had been inf. rased that the petitioners wore anxious to have the petition presented to their Lordships as early az possible, or double the number of signatures . would have been attached. Having stated thus much, he (Lord Brougham) thought he would be entitled to read the petition at length. (The Noble Lord then pro ceeded to read the petition, which was in favour of the measures which had been introduced by her Majesty's Government.) He (Lord B.) would state to their Lordships that the petitioners only prayed fir the alteration in the duties relating to corn, as tending to the ultimate abolitit nof the whole duty. It was the opinion of the petitioners that a fixed duty was not a sufficient change of the law, but they praYed for the present Measures as a step towards a further course of legislation on the subject, viz., a repeal of all laws affecting the prices 'o: the necessaries of lifi, , which are not objects of protec • Mr. BUCK presented petitions from parishes in Devon, against a fixed duty on corn. Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT presented petitions from parishes in Wiltshire, against the proposed alteration of the Corn-laws. Loral STANLEY presented a petition from Lanca shire in favour of Church Extension ; also several peti tions from the same county against any alteration of the Corn-laws. Mr. MACAULAY presented a petition from congre gations of Seceders in Edinburgh, against Church. rates ; also, a petition against the present Corn-laws. Mr. HAWES presented petitions from Wandsworth, Brixton, Richmond, and 25 parishes in the metropolis, against the present Corn-laws. 7- Mr. GICEG presented several petitions, signed by 2,065 persons, praying for the total repeal of the Corn laws ' • also, from two Dissenting-Congregations in Meri onethshire, praying for - the -abol4ion of Church-rates, and. the Ecclesiastical COurtS. :Mr. GEORGE PALMER presented two . ,petitions from Essex, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Mr. E. BULLER presented petitions, from the opera tiVes employed in 15 firms in the Potteries, praying for an alteration in the Corn-laws ; and petitions from New castle, Burton-on-Trent, aid several other' places, to the same effect ; also a petition against Church-rates. Mr. WAI)I)INUTON ;presented five petitions from Suffolk, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Mr. GALLEY RIGHT presented petitidna from the occupiers of land in Nottinghanishire, against any alte ration in the Corn-laws. Mr. SA-INFORD presented' a petition from Somer setshire in favour of ,the present system of Corn-laws from Wilston, in. Somersetshire, in favour of the fixed duty and from sail . manufacturers of East Chinnock, for artotal repeal of the Corn-law's, Sir C. BURRELL presented two. petitions from Sus sex against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Mr. HANDLEY presented a petition from Lincoln shire, very numerously signed, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. • ' • Sir T. , TROU.BRIDGt presented a petition from the inhabitants of Deal,. very numerously signed, in favour of the Government propositions. . Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET presented peti tions from Monmouth and Gloucester, against any alte yation in the Corn-laws. . Mr. AINSWORTH presented several petitions from Bolton, and other places in Lancashire, praying fur the repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Man chester, complaining of outrages 'perpetrated upon cer tain persons, assembled at • that place to discuss the Corn-laws, and praying the House to make inquiry into the circumstances. Also several petitions against the Corn-laws. Also. u petition, praying for the removal of clergymen fromthe Commission of the Peace. Mr. 11ASTII presented twenty petitions from Paisley praying for an alteration in the Corn-laws. " Sir B. HALL presented similar petitions from Mary 7 lebone. • - Mr. WARBURTON presented a petition from 300 females at Bridport against the Corn-laws. Also a peti tion from Dorchester against the taxes on corn and pro visions. Also similar petitions from places in the same county. Sir R. CLIVE presented a petition from Shropshire against any alteration in the Corn-laws. • Mr. PRINGLE presented several petitions • from Hampshire against the Corn-laws. Lord CASTLEREAGH presented petitions from Ire land against Church Patronage in Scotland, and against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Sir 1)E LACY EVAN'S presented petitions from the . parish of St. James's, Westmtnster, in favour of the re peal of the Corn-laws. The Earl of LINCOLN presented a petition from Lincoln, against any alteration in the .Corn-laws. Sir G. CLERK presented a petition from Renfrew, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Sir J. GRAHAM presented a similar petition from a parish in York. Mr. CRAWFORP presented a petition from the ward of Portsoken praying for the abOlition of the Corn-laws, Mr. HUME presented 67 petitions to the same effect, some of them in favour of the three propositions of the Government, and one praying .that if the Corn-laws should not be repealed, they might be suspended for three years.--(Cheers.) _ _ Mr. CRAVEN BERKELEY presented three peti tions from Cheltenham and its neighbourhood praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws. • • Mr. SHEIL presented a petition to the same effect from the town of Tipperary. • • The ATTORNEI-GENERAL presented 'eight peti tions from Edinburgh and its neighbourhood with a similar prayer. . Mr. BRISCOE presented petitions to the same effect from Chippenham, from a place in Surrey, and from two places in Wiltshire. . Lord HOWICK presented a petition to the same effect from a place in Northumberland. • Mr. WILLIAMS presented petitions from places in Warwickshire to the same effect. Mr. VERNON SMITH presented two petitions from the town of Northampton in favour of the commercial measures of the Government ; also a petition from a place in Northamptonshire praying for an alteration in the Corn-laws. Mr. W. FATTEN presented a petition from a place in Lancashire against any alteration in the Corn-laws. An HON. MEMBER on the Opposition benches pre sented ten petitions from places in Berkshire, praying for a fixed duty on corn.—(Hear, hear.) Also a peti tion from a place in Cheshire in favour of the present Corn-laws. On the motion of Mr. EASTHOPE, the Church-rate Abolition Bill was read, a first time, and ordered to be printed. TURNPIKE TRUSTS. • 11 r. MACKINNON begged •to ask the Hon. the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department a question relative to the subject of a Commission issued to inquire into the Consolidation of Turnpike Trusts. lie wished to know whether the Government intended to take any steps in consequence of that Commission. Mr. FUN 31A'ULE said that early in the Session, in consequence of the Report of that Commission, the Go vernment had determined to fram€ a Bill founded upon the Report of that Commission, but they did not mean, during the. present Session, to press it further than the second reading, in order that the country might have an opportunity of considering the question before the meet ing of the new Parliament. • • FACTORY. CHILDREN. Mr. HUME wished' to know whether there was any objection to lay on the table the ReportS of the Committee appointed to inquire into the state of the children em ployed in factoriesla the north. Mr. F. MAULE said a good many of these reports had been presented, but he was not aware that they were at present_ in a fit state to lay before the House. He would inquire into the matter, and if there was no ob jection he would deal with them as with the Reports of former Commissions on the same subject. . Captain PECHELL wished' to' know what was the in tention of the Noble Lord, the Secretaiy for the Colo nies, with respect to the Bills for the improvement and drainage of towns. Lord J. RUSSELL was understood to make some re ply, which was inaudible in the galltry. Mr. BAINES wished to call the attention of the Go vernment to the introduction of a Bill for the regulation of the registration . in Municipal Corporations. In Leeds and Liverpool recourse was obliged to be had last year to the registration of the-preceding year. The A'T'TORNEY-GENERAL said that the circum stances which occurred in the places alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman was purely accidental, and not likely to occur again. It was not his (the Attorney-General's) intention to propose any measure on the subject to the House. PETITIONS AGAINST THE CORN-LAWS. The CHANCELLOR. of the EXCHEQUER said that the 'Hon. Gentleman (Mr. G. Palmer) had , on the preceeding day put to him some questions relative to a petition against the Corn-laws lying for signature at the Excise-office. He (the Chancellor of the Ex chequer) had assured the Honourable Member that he would make an inquiry into the matter. He had done so, and the result appeared to be this. On the destruction of the Royal 'Exchange the merchants of London had applied to the Commissioners of the Trea sury for permission to use one of the great Courts of the Excise as a temporary place of business ; per mission was of course given, and they dealt with the court in all cases as they had been accustomed to deal with the Royal Exchange. It appeared, un doubtedly, that without any knowledge whatever of the: Commissioners, or any application to the Com missioners, there had been a petition lying at the court now employed as the Royal Exchange. He was bound to state that when the Commissioners were applied to some time ago by the LOrd Mayor of London, to know whether there was any objection on their part to let a petition relative to the Post-office lie for signature at the court already alluded to, was the, answer that they had no objection—that the merchants of London should be allowed to use the place in the same manner as they had been 'accustomed to use the Royal - Eichange. On the present occasion, he. ap prehended that the same course had been pursuel as on the former one. He trusted that this explanatiOn was satisfactory. 'Mr. GEORGE PALMER said that he was One of the members of the . Gresham Committee, and he thought it possible that the proceedings might have been sanctioned by one of the officers of that Committee, and he therefore felt it his duty to ask the man whom he saw, not in the court appropriated to the merchants, but on the stairs at the top of the court,'by whose permission he stood there with the peti tion, and the answer was, by permission of the Com missioners,of Excise. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had not entered into particular details, and it was quite true that the petition was placed on a desk at the side of the stairs, but then it. was a desk at which the merchants were in the habit of doing business. That was the explanation which had been given him by the parties to whom he applied. If,.however, the Hon. Gentleman .should make inquiries and acquire further information, perhaps he would be good enough to communicate it to the House. COUNTIICORONERS' BILL. Mr. EARDIGTON said that in the present circum stances of .the House, he did not intend to proceed fur ther with the County Coroners' Bill. He should there fore move: that the order of the day respecting the bill be read, for 'the purpose of being discharged. —Agreed to. lItI CHANCERY BILL. In answer to a question from Mr. LITTON, Lord-MOBPETII:said that it was not the intention of the Attorney-Generat fur Ireland to proceed with the Irish Chancery Bill if there was any likelihood of i.dis cussion .upon It. Mr. . LITTON .assured the Noble Lord that ther e uld be a good deal of discussion On the Bill. MEDICAL REFORM BILL Mr. tITTON .Said he also wished to ask the Hon. Member for Larnbeth whether he intended to proceed tion to any interest, and not the- proper subject of re venue. He (Lord Brougham) thought that a repeal of such laws would be a great measure of justice to the people, and the true line .which the law-givers of this country ought to take, and that it was a . line which the people of this country ought to expect. , • ' Lord ASHBURTON, thought the Noble Lord' must either have mistaken the object of the petitioners or the petition itself, as he said the petitioners were for a total repeal and not a fixed duty,„ Lord BROUGHAM said. was never more as tonished in his life, he • had read • the petition at length to their Lordships, and how could he make any misstatements respecting it. The Noble Lord had read the petition. lie (Lord Brougham) had no objection to his reading it, though bills were read three times, but petitions were generally read but once.--44 -laugh.) When the petition was brought, five or six `gentlemen accompanied it. They stated that they were satisfied that the measures of her Majesty's Government would prove a stepping-stone towards the gaining of a total re peal ; and it was with that object that the petition had been got up. Lord .ASHBURTON thought that if those were the opinions of only four or five gentlemen, it was unfair to the petitioners for the Noble Lord to state those opinions to the House on presenting the petition. He (Lord Ashburton) - recollected that when he and his Noble Friend were in the other Hoirse, his Noble Friend had supported as strenuously the present protective system of duties as he was now opposed to. it. . , Lord BROUGHAM, said that his Noble Friend had made .uSe of the most extraordinary misstatements he had ever heard ; for at the time to which his Noble Friend alluded,, he (Lord Brougham) was not a MeMber of the 1 - I(iitse of. Commons ; he was not there when ,the debates came on, nor was he in Parliament in 1815. He never took part in any of those debates, and he could not tell for whom his Noble Friend had mistaken him, but he could assure him that he was not in Parliament at the time. Lord ASHBURTON said that what made him recol lect the circtunstance so well was, that at the time his Noble Friend made some very severe remarks upon him.--(Laughter.) - Lord BROUGHAM said it must have been some commercial question to which his Noble Friend referred; most probably it was the Bill brought in by a Noble Friend of his (Lord Brougham's) relating to the cur- rency. Toe Earl of WINCHILSEA said that with respect to the principles of total abolition of the protective duties on corn and other necessaries, advocated by. the Noble and Learned Lord, he would ask how was our enormous national debt to be paid if protective duties were to be abolished ? Were not' the leather trade, the hat trade, and other trades, dependent upon the prospe rity of agriculture ? He would repeat, therefore, that if they abolished the protective duties upon corn, they might look fin. a total annihilation of the national debt. After a few words from Lord Brougham, Earl of Wick low, and the Marquis of Lansdowne, the subject dropped. The Marquis of BREADALBANE presented pe titions from Perth and its neighbourhood praying for an alteration in the present Corn-laws. The Earl of WINCHILSEA presented petitions from places in Kent against any alteration in the' Corn-laws. . . The Earl of CHARLEVILLE presented 'a petition from a place in Ireland to the same effect. The Earl of STANHOPE presented a petition with a similar prayer. Lord ASIIBURTON moved for a return of the quan tity of wheat imported into this country in each month of the years 1838, 1839, and 1840 ; and also since the Ist of January of the present year ; distinguishing fo reign from colonial wheat.—Agreed to. Earl FITZ WILLIAM moved for an enumeration of the different petitions for and against the measures pro posed by her Majesty's Government, with an enumera tion of the signatures to each class of petitions. The Marquis of SALISBURY wished they should have, in addition, a statement of the number of signatures in the same handwriting. Lord MOUNTCASHEL—And also the number of crosses. —(A laugh.) Lord DUNCANNON suggested that there would not be sufficient time for preparing the returns ; and that it would be advisable under the circumstances not to per severe with the motion. After some discussion this suggestion was agreed to. and the motion was withdrawn. Several Bills were then forwarded a stage, and their Lordships adjourned until Thursday. HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 8. The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four o'Clock. On ihe motion of Mr. ESTCOURT, Warrener's Es tate Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be com mitted. On the motion of Col. ROLLESTONE, the St. He len's Simll Debts' Bill was read a third time and passed. On the motion of Mr. CHRISTOPHER, the Lincoln Road Bill was read a third time and passed. On the motion of Mr. BRODIE the Salisbury Small Debts Bill was read a third time and passed. On the motion of Sir J YARDE BULLER Jackson's Estate Bill was read a third . time and passed. Lord HOTHAM presented petitions from different parts of Lincolnshire and Suffolk against the alteration proposed by her Majesty's Ministers in the Corn-laws. CAYLEY presented petitions from several pa rishes in the West Riding of the county of York, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Mr. WM. ROCHE presented a petition from Lime rick, numerously signed, against the intended change in the duties-on Corn and Timber:. Mr. KEMBLE presentel thirteen petitions from places in Surrey against any alteration in the Corn-laws ; and two petitions from Peckham and Lambeth, praying for Church Extension. Col. CONOLLY presented several petitions from the county of Donegal, against any alteration in the Corn laws. . . Mr. DENNIS'rOUN presented forty-one petitions, praying for an alteration in the Corn-laws. Mr. WALLACE presented a petition from Renfrew shire, and a petition from Greenock, praying for an alteration in the Corn-laws, and the adoption of the proposed alteration in the Import Duties. Mr. EASTIIOPE presented petitions from Leicester, and from places in Northampton, and Worcester, to the same effect ; also petitions from Leicester, praying for the abolition of Church-rates. _ Mr. PACKS presented several petitions against the Government measure affecting the importation of corn. Mr. W. TURNER presented a petition from Black burn signed by 4,920 persons, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws ; also petitions from the different Dissenting congregations of Blackburn, to the same effect. Mr. LEADER presented petitioes from the Tower Hamlets, from several parishes in 'Westminster, from Spitalfields, and from various other places in the county of Middlesex ; from Newington-butts, from St. George's, Southwarlc, and from other places in the county of Surrey; from Stratford, in Essex; from Scarmouth, and from Newburgh, in the county of Aberdeen; all most numerously signed, and all praying for a repeal of the laws affecting the importation of corn and provisions generally, to the existence of which the petitioners attri buted the present distresses of the country. Mr. HOME DRUMMOND presented forty-five peti tions against any alteration of the,Corn-laws. Mr. MUNTZ presented a petition from a Dissenting congregation in Birmingham,. praying the House to aid the Government in effecting an alteration in the Corn laws ; also a petition to the same effect from Henley4n- Arden, in Warwickshire, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws, and stating the opinion of the petitioners that the effect of those laws was to make bread dear and money scarce, thus producing a most disastrous effect upon the currency. • In that opinion he entirely con curred, and should therefore move that the petition be printed. The Hon. Member then brought up the petition. Mr. SCHOLEFIELI) rose, but was met with loud cries of " Order, order," from the Tory benches, and, after in vain attempting to gain a hearing, sat down. Mr. LEADER rose to order, he thought there must be some misunderstanding on the subject. The Hon. Member who had presented the petition,Jiad moved that it be printed, and he understood that the other Hon. Member for Birmingham had risen for the purpose of seconding the moticift4fid he imagined that his Hon. Friend was perfectly in order in so doing. The SPEAKER said that when the lion. Member for Birmingham had brought up the petition he had inti-. mated to him that he must give notice of his intention to move that the petition be printed. Mr. MUNTZ had misunderstood the Speaker's inti mation. He would now give notice that to-morrow he should move that it be printed. The SPEAKER—The Hon. Member cannot give no tice now, he must wait until five o'clock. Mr. FITZPATRICK presented several petitions from places in the Queen's County,. in favour of the Govern ment measure for an alteration of the duties on corn, timber, and sugar. Mr. BROTHERTON presented 15 petiti ons , si g n e d petitionspraying for the abolitio n o f t h e Corn laws.ne was from th e b orou gh o f by l9,oooo ft hese persons, o wereSalf f brd ro , msigpanieisdhbes in the county of Buckingham, an d 17,500 persons, and four petitions were signed by farmers and agricultural labourers. HINDLEY presented nine petitions in favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws from Ashton-under-Lyn e , signed by 4,500 persons ; • from Warrington, by 4,200 persons ; from Ardenshaw, in the county of Lancaster ; and from various other places in the Counties of Lancaster, Ches ter, and Buckingham. Also a petition from Ashton in favour of the Drainage Bill. Mr. VILLIERS presented the following petitions for the total repeal of the Corn -laws :—From th e borough of Wolverhampton, signed . by ,12,800 ; 'fromßowley, in Staffordshire, signed by 3,0001- from Chesh am , i n B uc k s, signed by 1,800 ; from Kirriemuir, in Forfarshir e , signed by 1,980 women ; six from different counties in North Wales ; and seven petitions from different. agri, cultural parishes in the county of Buckingham, c hi e fl y signed by agricultural labourers. Mr. THORNELY presented a petition, agreed ; on at a public meeting of the working classes held at Liver pool, praying for a total abolition of the Corn-laws. The o n n g o p p e o o ly p , le an of d Wol meeting was one of the largest ever held in that town, hav inge e f e r t o in l g n been attended by upwards of 10,000 persons. The tions proceedings had been entirely in the hands of the labouring classes ; and the chairman, a working man, had signed the p e titi r o ee n esffe o ne n etetd. be s h o a ,e lt: a ( l )f pe t t l i i (Cheers.) Also a petition t o h f a t t h e e v w er o y rk m i ,ver m ha r. m m pt . o p n a to th th i e p s s am p habitants of Manchester, complaining of great suffering espe cially the monopoly in f oo d, may be abolished ; also a and distress, and praying petition from the Licensed victuaiiet7s carrying on busi ness in the towns of Man chester and Salford - , praying that they may be exempted from the liability to distress for rent, as far as regards their Neer barrels. Mr. EWAIIT presented petitions front ,Liverpool, Spitalfields, Holborn, the Timer Hamlets, Bethnal green, Blv.kfriars, and other pills of the Metropolis, li*nst al* present Cum jaws. with his Bill for the regulation of the medical profession. Mr. HAWES saR that he had not the shghtest in tention-of proceeding further - with the Bill. • • .• • FACTORIES' BILL.• Lord' J. RUSSELL .moved the Order of the Day re specting the Factories' Bill, for the purpose of discharg ing it.—Agvevil to. • • On the m o ti o n of Lord. J. RUSSELL several of the Orders of -the Day were called <on : - for< the purpose of postponing. Them. The Noble Lord stated that it was his intention-to proceed with the Bribery at Elections Bill. to-morrow The Ecclesiastical Commissioners Bill, and the New 4ith Wales Bill. HERTFORD REGISTRY. Mr. Storey, _the Town Clerk of Hertford, was then called to the Bar, and in answer to a ques tion from the SPEAKER, he stated that he pro duced a copy of the . registry of Hertford ; but he did not think he was bound to produce it, inas much, as it belonged to the Magistrates of the county, who had paid for it ; and there was no other copy. The witness, amidst the loud laughter of the House, here quietly walked off, taking with him the copy ; but, having been brought back armin by officers of the Ho use , The SPEAKER ordered he should leave them the copy of the register, and the House would see what they should do with it. f The copy of the register having been left in the House, and the witness having withdrawn, Mr. T. DUNCUMBE said that it was a matter of in difference whether the copy belonged to the Magistrates or not. The Clerk of the Peace was the person who was answerable to the House, and it was his duty to obey their orders. There could be no doubt that the Magis trates had exceeded their power ; they had nothing at all to do with the printing. It was extremely unjust to the electors that they should nut be furnished with a printed copy as provided by the Reform Act. Between the Clerk of the Peace and the , linderSheriff the House had been trifled with ; and if the House did not take deci sive steps the effect 'would be that the House would be dissolved, and that the electors would be deprived of the register. He believed that such had been the object of the parties in Tefusing it. If an elector had applied for a copy on the 30th of May, he would no doubt have been supplied with a copy at a charge of 251.; that was not contemplated by the Act. The Hon. Member then moved that the copy of the register be now laid upon the table. Mr. ESTCOLTT! could. see no sufficient ground for taking the register. 'ficim the custody of th e officer. , There was no. doubt that the order of the House had been disregarded, but he saw no reason for imputing im proper motives to the Clerk of the Peace, who was the servant of the Magistrates, and had only acted under their orders, and if the - House should removethe register from-, his .custody, it would be impossible for him then- to comply with the Act. Ile would not object to a motion ordering a copy of the register to be furnished within a week, or any time which would he sufficient for the purpose. The motion as it stood was quite inconsist ent with the practice of the House. Mr. W. COWPER said that the electors of the county of Hertford were in this difficulty, that any per c)n who wished to obtain a copy of the register must pay for it the sum of 251. There could be no doubt that throughout the whole transaction there had been a de cided evasion of the orders of the House. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL thought this question was very properly brought forward.—(Hear, hear.) He did not think it expedient to t a ke the co py rom the cus tody of the person at the bar, but he would certainly submit to the House, that that person should be ordered forthwith to furnish the House with a copy. By the Re form Bill it was clearly the duty of the Clerk of the Peace, as soon as the register was revised, to be in a situation to furnish a copy to the public upon application. The order of the House required a statement of the ex penses attending the publication of the lists. That return stated that the sum paid by the Magistrates was 89/., but that it was not a sufficient remuneration for the labour of preparing these lists. It being the duty of the Clerk of the Peace to furnish copies to all parties at a reasonable price, some difficulty arose as to how he was to be remu nerated. But the Act said that the Sheriff and the Clerk of the Peace were to be remunerated for any expenses incurred in carrying into effect the provisions of the Act by the treasurer of the county, and therefore the Clerk of the Peace was not interested except in so far as con cerned the discharge of his public duty. • His remunera tion did not arise from the sums received by furnishing copies to the public. He was paid by the treasurer. In every county the electors were required to pay ls. to wards the expenses of the registry ; and in the present case there were several thousand electors, so that the sum must be very considerable; but that sum was not applied to the expenses of the printing copies—it was paid to the overseers, and was •added to the Poor-rate of the county. .The representation of- the county .being a matter of interest to the county, it was considered advisable that the expenses should be defrayed out of the county funds. It appeared to him that the party at the bar had no excuse for refusing to furnish a copy, inasmuch as it was a statutable duty im posed upon him without any condition. He was most unwilling to attribute motives to that gentleman, as he believed him to be a very respectable person, but he ap peared to him to be acting' under some gross delusion. When the application was made'to the Under-Sheriff in the first instance his'ansWer (not a very respectful one) was in substance " I want to know who is to pay .me."— (Hear, hear.) An Hon. Member had said " hear, hear," but he did not think that a safe principle to lay down. —(Cheers.) Because if the House thought it necessary to call for the production of any document it was the duty of the party, on whom. the order was served, to fur nish it, if in his power, otherwise no one. could tell how far the doctrine would go. (Hear, hear.) He . did not think the House . would so far disregard every sense of justice .as to refuse' proper remuneration to the party who had been put to expense in complying with its orders, but it should not be met, in the first instance, with the question of " How am I to be paid ?" The House had shown great forbearance in waiting from the 23d of March till now, the Bth of June, and if there was any longer delay the House would rise without having its order complied with. He submitted to the House, therefore, that Mr. Storey be required to deliver a copy to the HouSe forthwith, or, to prevent any inconvenience, lie would move that he be required to furnish a copy on Thursday next. Mr. WYNN said there were two questions belonging to the present case—the one was, as to the Clerk of the Peace not having complied with the provisions of the Reform Act, and then there was his not having complied with the order of that House. There was another point which should not be lost sight of, and that was what was the object of the Hon. Member in making the motion ? Now he presumed the object of the Hon. Member was that the public should be supplied; but he did not think the publication of these lists by the House would tend to any very great utility, because it would hold out an in ducement to the Clerks of the Peace to furnish copies to the public and have them printed at the expense of the House. It would be better, in his opinion, after the copy was laid on the table, to return it to the Clerk of the Peace, and to admonish him that he was bound by. law to furnish copies to the public at a reasonable price. Sir R. INGLIS said it was impossible for him to con cur in the suggestion of the Right Hon. Member' for Montgomeryshire (Mr. Wynn). The object which . was required would be obtained by following the advice of the Solicitor-General, and if his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Wynn) urged his suggestion, he. (Sir R. Inglis) trusted the House would not concur in it. Mr. WYNN explained. After a few words from Mr. C. WOOD and Sir E. SUDDEN, • • • Sir R. PEEL did not think that the privilege of the Hdttse was in any way called in question, so as to - render it necessary for Hon. Members to vindicate them. In his opinion the best practical course in the present in stance was that suggested by the Solicitor-General, and at an early period of next Session a Committee should be appqinted to inquire into the best mode of obtaining co pies of registers of voters at the least possible expense. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE• acceded to the course suggested by the Solicitor-General, and agreed to withdraw his motion. The motion was then withdrawn, and the amendment of the SOlieitor-General agreed to. Mr. Storey was then called to the bar, and The SPEAKER read to him the order of the House, directing him to cause a copy of the register of the elec tors of the county of Herttbrd to be presented to the House on Thursday next. The witness stated thatit would be impossible for him to have it prepared on that day ; and, in reply to a ques tion from Sir Edward Sugden, he said that it would take him three weeks to have a copy prepared.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) The witness was then ordered to withdraw. The ATFORNEY-GENEAAL said he had a feeling at first in favour of the person at the bar, but after his late exhibition, he certainly thought him contumacious. —(Hear, hear.) There could be no doubt the copy could be made within twenty-four hours s or half the time if ne cessary.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. ESTCOURT said he did not think the gentleman at the bar was contumacious, but that he was acting under an erroneous impression. Several lion. - Members rose to,43eak, when the Speaker reminded the House there was no question before it. ST. ALBAN'S ELECTION. • Mr. W.• WYNN moved that Mr. .Attorney-General be directed to prosecute Dr. Richard Webster for bribery !at the last St. Alban's election. lie would put it to the House whether there was not sufficient evidence laid on the table to enable the House to institute judicial pro ceedings. It was proved that 1)r. Webster gave two per sons, named Stebbings and Adams 121. for their votes in favour of the sitting Member. Adams was a person who went by the n ame o f " l y i ng Ad ams, " an d hi s ev idence therefore might not be to be depended on, but they had I in addition the. evidence of a clergyman that Adam s s: came on the' hustings during the election, bearing the. presence a small p a p er p ac k e t, w hi c h was opene in presence of the. can did a t es an d all the electors. the Mayor said "'What is this ?" and Adams d rep i li l :da,t " It is money, two five-pound notes and two sovereigns, given me to vote for Lord Listowel by 1)r. Webster." Dr. Webster appeared to be the chief mover in the busi ness of the election, and he (Mr. W. Wynn) could well conceive Why the Committee had come to the conclusion Which they had come to, that he did not act under the directions of Lord Listowel, for in fact, he was the prin cipal and not the agent. He (Mr. W. Wynn) looked upon this as a case of peculiar imiortance. If Dr. Web ster had any evidence by which this charge could he met, he would have an opportunity of producing it, but he (Mr. W. Wynn) would ask any Hon. Member whether if he sat on a Grand Jury, and this evidence bad been given before him, he would have hesitated to indorse " a true bill?" The only answer he had, heard to his motion was an inquiry whether he did not-also look at the election at Walsall. If there . had been , fifty persons guilty of bribery at Walsall, that :Iva* no reason:why he should not bring forward this , charge of bribery at St. Alban's. It had also beetf ynkl that Dr. Webster might be prosecuted by a qui ftiiii:a%!tiott, hut he thought the House would do very wr(Mg it:wttssatiOlei with such • course; and he MORNING EDITION: believed that. many of these actions ere , instituted simply to screen, the offinders Aiam real.paoae9ttitKS Mr. E. A. SANFORI) said - •that-having been man of the Committee, he felt it incumbent on him to make a few observations; It was not his - intention t, raise any opposition to the motion, but having attended' and given his best attention to the evidence given before • the Committee, he wished to state the impression on his mind - of- the course the House ought ,to plirsue. lie would refer the House to what took place on the' last. - day of the sitting of the Committee. .He had thougheit right, after the evidence that had been giveii, to make a special report, the draft of which he drew up, and - it was very strongly worded. . This, however,. was. rem considerably modified by the Committee. He bad wisheif that the minutes of the evidence should be - laid on the table of the House, that the HotiSe might act as it thought proper, for it. was his opinion that a further considera don of the subject should be made. He had certainly thought it a hard case that such chargea - sheuld be made by such witnesses against Dr. Webster, and that la.! should have no opportunity of rebutting . them. Tids.. however, was not the opinhnof. the. Connuidee. With' regard more particularly to the question before the if he ,were to give his opinion en the evidence given before the Committee, as a judge or as a jhyymaie, and it was put ta him whether he considered it - Sufficient to substantiate against 1)r. Webster. . the charge: of • bribery, he should decidedly say that it was not. But if they were not able to prove theeharge: they . would be incurring a great risk in instituting a prosecu tion. It was, therefore, his opinion, that the House. under the circumstances, would not be doing well to follow up the matter. He wished it would not be thought that he was influenced by unfair or by party motives on the occasion, as the impartiality of Chairmen. under the new law of Election Committeei especially, should he above all suspicion. He was aware, however, that the recommendation he had just given to the House might .• be liable to misrep resentat i on ; b ut st ill, as he did not think sufficient evidence _ had been adduced to prove bribery on the part of Dr. Webster, and to render his; conviction certain, it was his opinion • that the House . should not further interfere in the matter. If the House should fail in the prOseeution,' it -would - seriously affect the character and dignity of their proceedings. Mr. BLACKSTONE said that the- plan he should Most approve of would be the appointment of a Seleai Committee of the House for the purpose of inquiring:, into the alleged cases of bribery at the St. Alban's elec tion. He deprecated all vindictiveness on the par; ()law House on such an occasion ; but he thought tlist:. Webster should, for'his own sake, be allowed the Opp. Ore tnnity of clearing himself from all aspersion. • _‘ f Mr. C. BULLER o bj ec t e d t o the moduli before tie!!. House. He considered a prosecution against any Indi- • vidual on the part of the House of Commons as a. very , strong proceeding, and as one which should not be. adopted without very special reasons. He did not thiak,.., however, that such reasons _existed on the present, oc casion. The Right Hon. Gentleman wished to proceed on his own individual belief or suspicions, uosubstan dated by any decisive evidence. Besides the opinion of , the Committee, who had tried the election, was, that no further stepS should be taken on the subject. The pro secution of Dr. Webster, under such circumstances, would be an injustice to him, and would set a dangerous precedent for the future. • Mr. MACKENZIE supported the motion. He thought the evidence taken before the Committee established at least a strong prima facie case against Dr. Webster and, in his opinion, the House ought to proceed upon it. Mr. MILDMAY could not approve of the motion be fore the House. As a Member of the Committee, he had felt, and he continued to feel, that it e•ould not have been fair to take any proceeding against Dr. Webster, in consequence of charges brought against him, but from which he had had no opportunity of .defending himself. Had it been otherwise, he should have been ready ri gorously to prosecute the matter. He had, before he had consented to the Report, looked back Ao see how the - House had treated former cases of the same description. He had not been able to find a single case exactly in point, but he would, tell the House what he had found. The first two cases he had met with were the. cases of. ' Ludlokv and Canibridge.—(Hear, hear.) Had the House ordered a prosecution -in those cages ? No. Although the Committee had reported in each ease that the agents of the candidates had been guilty of gross. bribery, the House had not thought proper to order any prosetution. They , would not prosecute where they had a whole case before them, but here, where they had but halt' a case against a man, they pick out that man to prosecute him. --(Hear, hear.) Those were' the reasons which had induced him to act as lie had done, and he -felt that it would be a gross act of par tiality to let those two men escape, and then fix on one particular man, against whom they had only half a case, to prosecute him. It, might, for aught he knew, be the last act of his political. life. He cared not what was said to him, or of him, in consequence, but he should certainly walk out of the House and not vote for this prosecution. He should not vote against the motion, because having.been a Member' of the Committee he might be accused of partiality; but he should not vote for it, beCause he felt a perfect convic tion that if the House prosecuted this half-case and left the others untouched, they would go to the country as one of the. most disgracefully partial assemblies that had ever been kuown.—(Hear. hear.) • . . Colonel CONOLLY hoped the House would visit this case with great severity.- SeldoM in. the annals of Pttia• liamentary corruption had so flagrant a ease occurred. • - It was one that called aloud for punishment, and he hoped the proceedings of that night would show a determination on the part of the House to put down such corruption. He was surprised' at - the speeches of the Hon-Gentlemen opposite. The frequency of these cases of bribery was quite alarming. The frightful dex terity with which bribery was now accomplished, so as to keep the candidate quite free from Rik, showed the necessity of following up a case "Mere it had been so palpable and gross. Bribery had notilhetonie a perfect trade.—(Cheers from the y Ministerial benches.) It seemed to be an art to know how to bribe without detec- . • • tion—(Ministerial cheers)—and to .destroy all links. of ' . evidence to• trace the corruption up, to the real source . from which it had emanated.—(Hear, hear.) He called . upon the House, in the face of a staring dissolution— (Loud laughter)--Lto send that man before the tribunals of the country,- and all who voted for the dismissal of that motion he-should consider as abettors of corruption. Mr. MILDMAY. in explanation, would .read to the House what he had intended moving asan amendment to the motion of the Right Hon. Gentleman. • He had in tended moving as an amendment the following resolu tion :—That the Attorney-General be directed to prose cute, the agent -of the Hon. Manners Sutton, who had been reported by the Committee on the Cambridge elec tion to have, been guilty of bribery ; and.also the agents in the Ludlow case, who had been reported by the Com mittee to have b ee n gu ilty of bribery ; and also Mr. Richard 'Webster, who had been accused of bribery.— (Hear, hear.) He should not, hem ever, now propose it. Mr. WAR:BURTON said he did not understand where would be the inconsistency in the House not prosecuting in this case, where there was no report of a Committee, When they had the cases of Ludlow and Cambridge be fore them, in which there were reports, but in which the House had declined to prosecute. He wits not afraid to vote against the • motion, notwithstanding the threats of the Hon. Member respecting their constituents. lie ob jected to these proceedings, because the eb,;eet of punish ment was the.prevention of crime, while in these cases the punishment fell upon some subordinate party, and the more guilty parties escaped from punishment. if theybelieved they could put a stop to bribery by prosecutions, let them multiply them as much as they pleased, but if not, why did they reject the only means by which bribery could be prevented, namely the Ball o t ?—(" Oh, oh," and hear.) Mr. DCGDA LE said he had the misfortune to be a Member of the Committee, and he had certainly come to a very different conclusion to that of their Hon. Chair man.. He could come to no other conclusion than that 1)r. Webster was guilty of bribery.-L-(Hear. hear.) Ile thought thi s wasa, peculiar case. St-Alban's was a place greatly subject to briber and Dr. Webster appeared to be a very old offender. ' Ho thought the_ borough should be afforded- an - opportunity of washing away the stain upon, it before the next election, and he should therefore vote for the•motiOn. Mr. WARD. said the Hon. Gentleman had given. rather a singular character of the borough of St. Albans, but that borough had been represented in s eieralParlia- . • meats by the N o bl e L or d b e side the Hot'. Gentleman, and he presumed the pr a ctice was not, eonfined.exe. !nn sively to one side.' He said it W" gr°sB'lYriire:Yliid, because they knew they that House to treat this matter in the manner envies to act in precisely the same manner.—( -, "n agent in all They all• knew that money was the ma w ' , go with the their elections. He was quite ready but : he would not were all going e t i o the ,, r,6 l o i l l t! - ) - I v l o o t u e s for e t o il iis put .motion,do‘% -1 i „ ir pppors i enity lingford said it would aftbrd Dr. We e l) .},o jnodes of of justifying himself. There becti,'aesuesePthracet'Heeost;s.terlka—embeatir Nal 1, were theyil on . u G ul ettl b e e nt i a ) m ut o t l i l i g ig t a h l and pledring their t ; he:e ld, p l r v a h e e ti n ce m s, e . . ' ,to the table of that House, in „, t e t 4 se d li to -es : cornlll, tore at their elections, guilty' of bribery, or of _expo: v, - l a he should believe that other than was justified b y law, to put an end to the honour as ge - ttlemen that they had not any way been they were sincere in their desire ' practice: ' said they were neither going to fine Webster, but to, send him to trial. 1:1:::::10(!irLvioSf' one witness alone, there was a prima that if the whole He could not but think _ , _ . question rested the Attorney-General to prose noSrirititi'tj.7ison • upon the k , . . facie case for directing The proceedings of the House would be watched . with ete great a nxiety b. the people ; and unless it could be shown that the evidence against Dr. Webster was such as he had no opportunity of meeting, the country would not be convinced of the purity of his conduct Nothing but an authoritative prosecution on the part of the Attor nev-General could secure justice in this case. It was not . because the lion. Member for WineheSter; who had . stated that he could find proofs of guilt in other cases, that the House were to neglect their duty in this parti cular instance.. lie hoped the House of Commons would not, as a body, act differentlyin this case from what they would consider to be their duty, were they sitting as Grand Jurymen upon the evidence adduced.—(llear4) Sir C. GREY said bribery was a crime which under present circumstances might be prosecuted by any private individual in the name of her Majesty ; it ought, however, • to be prosecuted by some official person. In the present case he could not see what object could be effected ; whilst it would go flwth to the country that this gentleman was to be prosecuted, titanic would have no remedy whatever 1 against the injury which would be inflicted upon him. No .. ! preeedent for this proceeding had been laid before the house, and he . believed that none existed. The House was bound to • infer, from the circumstance that the Committee had made no report.that they did not think . it a case for prosecution.—(Hear, hear.) The lion. Baronet had compared this case to that of a Grand Jury. `I here was, howeyi r, . this slight differenee, that in this ease - there waS uo finding at all. Did the Hon. Baronet at, T i w . n o ofh opinion,ther ever hear of a case being sent to a:Petty Jury without a fi th n e flin c g so .: 4l y a t t i t i: 4l o ,a nd st J st u: d -y th. ? .., . t h eir e Me m ber s o f • ;'( ;i1 j~..'