The Sun. — London, England, 1841-05-26 00:00:00

EVENING EDITION to be useless to the others. In summer they worked .from six in the morning until six in the evening. They :ad but a pint of nruel and half a pound of bread for breakfast ;on Sunday they had five ounces of meat. In winter they had to rise at half-past -six in the morning, ..nd to work during the day without fire or anything to mitigate their sufferings. How different had these poor people been treated from the Hunts and the Burdetts, when they were confined for political offences.—(Hear, hear.) The next in order was that of George Henry Smith, who complained that he had been ill all the time he had been in prison—so much so, that he had taken twenty-three bottles of medicine, besides pills and powders, and had had both blisters and plasters applied to him, and that upon his release he was called upon to enter into secuilties for his good behaviour to the :i.mount of 7001. Was it not nonsense to call these poor men, when they were called upon for such heavy bail ? Why, they could not ask more for Sir F. Burdett. Gre!! died in prison from the hard work upon the tre: o ill hurting his back. Loyal stated that he had been induced by his solicitor to plead guilty on a promise of pardon. His case was a !lard one ; he was a sober, industrious man, who had been led away by the evil disposed leaders of the Char tists, and was one of those who were wounded before lie Westgate ' • he suffered much from his wound, but he was sentenced to transportation for life, which sen tence was afterwards commuted to five years' imprison ment in ,the Penitentiary. A petition had been pre se ted in his favour signed by the late and the present Mayor of Newport and 150 clergymen, gentlemen, and inerchants, but it yet had had no effect. There were other cases ; these were all that were connected with Houses of Correction, but these were not the only places here hardship was inflicted. Many complaints were made of the discipline of the gaol of Manchester, while some of those who had been in the Castle at Lancaster spoke of the governor as a father and a gentleman. —(A laugh.) While so many were complained against it was his duty, as it was his pleasure, to bear such testimony to one who had exercised humanity. - Arr. F. O'Connor was not put to hard labour, neither was - Jr. O'Brien ; they were only under the same restrain _!nit other political offenders were placed under in for pier times. The question was, whether this treatment aught to be inflicted upon persons guilty of political of _f,,nces—whether they ought to be treated worse than felOns. Felons were not asked at the termination of their imprisonment to enter into sureties to keep the peace, but political offenders were ! Now that he asserted was treatment which political offenders ought not to be ,1113jected tp. He wanted to know what was to be by keepirr , these individuals in prison. He maintained that the public opinion was against the ,loption of such a course. The cruelties that had inflicted upon these parties, who had been guilty •f no crime, was unworthy of a great country like England. These individuals had no moral stain upon them ; on the contrary, the parties whose petitions he had presented would be considered by the people as •uartyrs. He would venture to say that the House knew - nothing at all of human nature if they thought they -ould prevent the people entertaining certain opinions y persecution.—(Hear, hear.) This, perhaps, was the 1-ist opportunity, that House would have of receiving a wsign ed ‘by so many of their fellow-cotmtrymen; was, therefore, for them to say how far they would receive the petition and comply with its prayer. He gusted that he had done what he conceived to be his uty without giving offence to any one, or prejudicing :c cause of th petitioners. He now desired to leave it the hands of the House, hoping . and trusting that the - pinions which Hon. Members might express, and the .rte they might come to in the present case, would cause 4 0y and satisfaction to thousands throughout the coun-, ry. He would therelOid begleave to move that an hum madips4 bz‘firese - iitCd to her Majesty praying that she, A.laciously phuscd to take into her merciful considers on. the cases of all the prisoners at present confined for , olitical offences in England and Wales. Mr. LEADER seconded the motion. Mr. FOX 31A ULE, who spoke with his back to the - porters' gallery, and frequently in a most indistinct •,nc of voice, so as to be quite inaudible at times, said ::at in rising to address himself to the House on the object whiti had been brought forward by the Hon. •"ienteman who had just sat down, he must express his tfrom the charge which had been made against that Louse of having treated with levity a petition relative to oe national charter which had been presented to it : . Imt , ti me ago. He (Mr. F. Maule) could bear testi ony that no signs of levity or frivolity were shown by House on that remarkable occasion, when the largest etition u4it4l had been for a long period presented to the House, was introduced by the then Member for Binning in a manner which he (Mr. F. Maule) was sure ..i l tstined the approbation of all parties in the House, • 4 iethar adverse or not to the prayer of the petition. •-n the present occasion no disposition was ex 'oiled generally to raceive the petition with any 7, 'icy. It was the petition of the working classes . '•-• that country, a body of whom, he might say, whatever might be the causes which in aenced them on certain occasions, had, during some : , ..fmths past of severe privation, conducted themselves in a manner ihich insured to them the respect of the iN-Aintry at large, even though many of them made de . ands for political privileges of so exorbitant a nature rondo-NI it impossible to grant them. With regard to •. !iat his lion. Friend had stated, relative to that House ..ti.:rftfaig with her Majesty in the exercise of the pre ,. ,gative of mercy, he (Mr. F. Malik) thought the case s _Tested by his Hon. Friend was by no means suited to 'he present question (as we understood). He , ~Ir. F. Manic) was not one of those to whom it seemed ri.,ht that that House should interfere with the Crown in exercise of any of its prerogatives. He admitted at .ce that it was right that the representatives of the .eoploshould address the Crown on any subject they - ought it to be their duty to their constituents so ) do. But he much questioned the expediency of the ruse interfering with the Crown in the exercise of the • •erOgative of mercy; if they did so, it should be under -e most urgent circumstances. In his opinion, the pre : gative of mercy was established in the Crown as an in .ent right, for the purpose of extending it to all cases here its doing so was called for, as in cases of doubtful v relicts, &c. It was for that House to watch that the rerogative of mercy should not be exercised for any bad • improper purpose, But if that House took upon it : 'Sr to address the Crown on the exercise of the prero- tive of mercy, especially under such circumstances as present, he feared that circumstances would arise, in • ich parties would be encouraged to enter into the corn : ission of offences, such as those which were called po `ical, from a hope that a course similar to that now {opted would be pursued in their behalf. He, there f, re, doubted the prudence of the course now taken by Hon. Friend. With respect to the details entered to by the Hon. Gentleman, he (Mr. F. Maule) was not !pared to meet them—some of them, at least, which • _re quite new to him. But this he could say, art in matter whatever had any sentence of the law been Acted with any great degree of severity. With re • , ect to the meetings which those parties to whom the I...sent motion referred had held, he (Mr. F. Maule) saw , , se meetings first begin in a constitutional manner, and • dually assume that unconstitutional appearance which • last led to the interference of Government to sup •ess assemblies where good order ought to have pre iled instead of seditious practices, which called forth immediate interference of the law and the autho- - ies. With respect to the open violation of the law ich had been committed, they all knew that political fences meant something more than the word Implied. - 'dative to the punishment, out of three hundred and enty-nine convictions, there remained only thirty . incl for punishment ; of those, nine were sentenced transportation, having b4n found guilty of high , anon ; one was sentenced to transportation for ten are ; and of all the persons who had been found zilty and sentenced to death, not one suffered the ex , wee penalty of the law. The prayer of the petition • leded to addressing the Crown for a free pardon for . .4'rest, Williams, and Jones. He should be deceiving V.) House and those individuals if he attempted hold out any hope of a free pardon being ex eided to them. He could hold out no such hope, either an individual or a member of the Government 5...; for the othei t .part of the prayer of the petition, that • AS matter for the consideration of the House. He fisted, therefore, that his Hon. Friend, instead of per . , ens' . g in endeavouring to obtain an address to the .eewn, would give that House an opportunity of ~enseing the principles of the Charter and embodying , principles, if the House agreed to them, in a Bill. ith reference to the whole question he trusted that his ‘. l in. Friend, having brought it fully before the House, ..I having awakened the attention of the Government to t .h,ituation of those individuals who were now in prison, ..v.:Aild not press his motion to a division, because he t !ought he could neither improve the condition in which I was placed himself by the statements he had made, or 1-In,t of the parties. With respect to the statement that had * -en made by his Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury, it Mr. O'Connor and Mr. O'Brien had not been put to rd labour, he must remind him that the sentences, if vt...v were different, had been passed by the Judges, and t' at it was only in those instances where the Judges had dered hard labour to be inflicted that it was adopted. conclusion he must say that he deeply regretted the ti. ' aimstances in which these several parties were placed, e, of this he was certain, that the door to the Royal money was no more shut against them than it was to • -y; other subject of the Crown ; he therefore trusted t et his Bon. Friend would withdraw the motion. Mr. O'CONNELL said if his Friend the lion. Member i. • Finsbury divided the House he should certainly vote h him, as he thought this was a case in which the It use should press upon the Government to discharge t.. , i5e parties. It was a case in short in which the opinion 4, the House ought to be in favour of mercy-. The Hon. C ntleman who had spoken last had adverted to the 4. .duct of the working classes, and had passed a high egium upon them. He had stated however that they I ti been punished to deter others from committing Filar offences. Now, what was the case ? Why , e was no Chartism in the country.—(Hear, hear.) lie thought therefore tbat the House ought to extend 0 awn of mercy, in order that it might be said that I re were no political offenders imprisoned in the country. - (Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentlem an h a d adverted to England and Scotland, but he had forgotten Ire : ed. He (Mr. O'Connell) thanked God there were no • itical offenders in the prisons of that country. wy therefore did not want mercy there. All that they :ed foe was justice.—(Hear, hear.) In conclusion he t ited the House would take the subject -matter of the Won into consideration. LEADER could nejt allow a subject of such mortanee to the maintenance of peace among the com / unity to pass without making some few observations. .ere was a feeling among the working classes that !re was one law for the rich and another for the poor. 1.. must confess that his own opinion was of late there • been a great exhibition o f p ar ti a lity with respect to . treatment of parties who had committed offences, and several meetings whiel he had attended lately the arse which had been adopted l with respect to Lord Iligan and the E ar l o f Waldegrave, had been coal rith that which h a d b een adopted with respect to William Lovett. What, he would ask, was Lovett's offence ? Why he had written a political libel for which he was punished, but in doing so he had committed no offence that affected his moral character. What, on the other hand, had been the conduct of Lord Waldegrave ? Why, he had been convicted of a brutal assault on a policeman, by which he was greatly injured, and his life for some time despaired of. It was true that Lord Wal degrave was punished for this, but what was the amount of the punishment ? Why, Lovett, who had com mitted no moral offence, was confined for a year in one of the most stringent and strict goals in the country ; while Lord Waldegrave was only confined in one of the outer wards of the Queen's Bench, where he could enjoy every luxury, and receive and see his friends. The only inconvenience he was subject to, was not being able to drive a cabriolet during the present fine weather, or go to the Derby.—(Laughter.) The Hon. Gentleman had said that these parties should not have adopted the agitation they did, but that they should have applied to their representatives in the House of Com mons. That was the chief complaint, and the only re source which they had was to agitate, in order to make converts to their principles. What harm, he would ask, could it do to liberate these thirty-three men? The Chartists were not now agitating ; there was no danger of outbreaks in Manchester or Birmingham ; and, there fore, what harm could result from such an act of grace on the part of the Crown? He begged of the House not hastily to dismiss this petition from its consideration. Mr. GILLON denied that the petition had been re ceived with levity by the Members of that House. He believed there were many who would object to go to the whole extent of the demands made in that petition; but it would be most unfair to suppose that the Members of that House were indifferent to the prayers of 1,500,000 of their fellow-subjects. It appeared to him that the people having been shown that they could not recklessly set the law at defiance, some mitigation of the punish ment of these men might now take place. He thought another reason for agreeing to the proposition of the Hon. Member for Finsbury was, the great disproportion of the punishment to the offence. It was a sufficient jus tification of the assertion that was made in many quar ters, that there was one measure of justice meted out to the Peer and another to the poor man, and he could not help referring to the case of the Earl of Waldegrave, who was suffering a trifling imprisonment for what a man had a short time previously been sentenced to seven years' transportation. He trusted much to the returning good sense of the Chartists, and even if the Hon. Mem ber did not press his motion to a division, he was satis fied that the discussion would be productive of much good. He believed that these men were beginning to see the folly and absurdity of their conduct, and he hoped they would see no more of it, any more than of the unnatural coalition that had lately taken place be tween the Chartists and the Tories. He should give his cordial support to the motion.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. HUME thought the present was not the time to discuss the conduct of the Chartists, but what they were to take into consideration was, whether, as had been urged by the Hon. Member who had preceded him, the punishment of these unfortunate men had not been greatly disproportioned to their offence. He believed much of the severity exercised towards these men arose from the unfounded apprehensions which then filled men's minds, and which subsequent events had shown to be completely unfounded. He sincerely trusted that the Government would see the justice and expediency of re considering the case of these men who still remained in confinement, and confer a boon upon the millions of that country by restoring them to liberty. Mr. WARBURTON complained of the severe treat ment to which these men had been subjected, and which in itself formed a sufficient justification for a merciful consideration of their case on the part of the Govern ment.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. WAKLEY said the treatment of these men was a sufficient ground for the interposition of the Government, and he trusted the hint would not be lost upon them, and that it would not be necessary to press the motion to a division. Nothing had taken place in that country for many years which could be put in competition with the punishment of these men, and the Government might very fairly exercise some leniency to them, now that these events had passed away. He could not understand the awful silence that prevailed on the other side of the House—(Hear, hear)—unless it was that the Right Hon. Baronet was taking a careful review of the circumstances of the country, and that the confinement of political offenders might form one of its most prominent fea tures. It appeared to him that a word from the Right Hon. Baronet would be of immense service to these men, and he hoped it would not be withheld. The Right Hon. Baronet and the House ought to view with consideration, and a merciful feeling of forbearance, the errors of these men, who had been incarcerated merely for stating their opinions in an honest and manly manner, at publicmeet ings.—(flear, hear.) The working classes had no re presentatives in that House, and that it was which made them so restless and discontented, and justly so, and they would be undeserving the name of men if they were not discontented until they had representatives in that House. They were not called upon to support the prayer of the petition ; they were merely called on to support the motion of his Hon. Colleague, and to that motion no man could possibly object. It merely prayed her Majesty to take into her merciful consideration the case of the prisoners confined for political offences, but it did not ask for their discharge. If the Ministers thought the motion objectionable they mi,9-ht refrain from voting upon it, and leave it to the decision of the House. It was a matter worthy of their consideration, that 1,348,000 unrepresented men had addressed that House in favour of these men, and he trusted it would meet with their favourable consideration. Sir R. PEEL did not think the Hon. Gentleman had any right to complain of his silence, for he was not, whatever other imputations might be cast upon him, chargeable with evading difficulties.—(Hear, hear.) He certainly would not pursue the course of the Hon. Member, and put so shabby a construction upon the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. Why, the manliness of the Hon. Member himself would repu diate such a construction.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member had said that the time was come when these political offenders should be discharged, and that the Crown would act well in extending its mercy towards them. Let no man vote for the motion under the im pression that the object merely was to pray her Ma jesty to take the case of these men into her gracious consideration. The real understanding of the motion was—and the Hon. Member for Finsbury would not deny it—its real object was to obtain the discharge of these men. He should act in conformity with the prin ciples on which he had always actitd, namely, to leave the matter in the, hands of the Crown. He thought the consideration of these cases ought, con sistently with the Constitution, to be left with the Crown. The functions of the House of Commons were clearly separated by the Constitution from the prerogatives of the Crown. He remembered a similar instance to the present occurring when he was Secretary of State, re specting Mr. Hunt, then a prisoner for a political of fence in Echester Gaol, and then he (Sir R. Peel) stated that he could not take upon himself to advise the Crown to mitigate the punishment. It should be remem bered that this was not advice given to the Crown with respect to punishment inflicted by the adjudication of the criminal law, but given upon the opinion of the House of Commons. It was, therefore, on constitutional grounds that he was unwilling to establish a precedent which he knew might be easily followed—(Hear, hear) — and that he must resist the motion of the Ho nourable Gentleman. He (Sir Robert Peel) opposed no obstacle whatever to the free consideration of these cases; he thought it was the duty of the Crown to consider them well, and to act upon the judgment thereby formed of the justice of continuing or remitting these punishments. On this point he gave no opinion, but he trusted the House would not be influenced by the desire to acquire popularity—(Hear, hear)—but would look to the permanent interest involved in considerations of this nature; and he trusted also that they would re member the painful duties which devolved upon the Crown in the administration of criminal justice. He thought they would be placing the Crown in an unneces sary and an unfair position if they persevered in claiming for themselves that favour and those opportunities of showing indulgence which properly belonged to the Crown alone. He was sure that a popular assembly would never ask for the infliction of punishment. He frnsted he had now fairly stated his opinions on this subject, or posing no obstacles to the cautious and merciful consi deration of these cases; he only wished that where favour and lenity could be shown the grace of showing it might belong to the Crown.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. EASTHOPE, who was very indistinctly heard, said he could not consent to give a silent vote on the pre sent occasion. He agreed, as a general principle, in the r caselaid for d was ' an bynowto ra,tehxbecuetlpitiighohent to o lio tihed m e Baronetsentiments the a n p Md r ee views s m e n b t e li itself g favourable h t itnot e express la to general expedient rntoissi that the House ofthe from should rule ? penalty in cases so distinguished t the general rule ? lie trusted he should be pardoned for mentioning an ad ditional reason he had :for voting for the motion, that some of the individuals of the constituent had the honour to repre sen t had presented a petition that one of these offenders should be so • circumstanced that he might become a candidate for the representation that town in Parliament.—(" Oh, oh," auhar.") He of (Mr. Easthope) desired that the re s h ould be no inter ference with the proper and just exp ress i on of an opinion of that sort. He intended not himself to interpose obstacle to the expression of that opi n i on , andh e any on sidered this as an additional reason why h e should con sidered the motion before the House.—(He a r, h ear, h ear.) Sir DE LACY EVANS said he thought it an addi tional reason in favour of this motion, that the only two Members of that House who had expressed an opinion against it, the Hon. Under-Secretary for the Home De partment, and the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel), had not addresSed themselves to the merits of the case, but had entirely defended the course they took on some rather fine-drawn doctrines of Consti tutional law.(Hear, hear.) He would again draw their attention to the fact that this petition was signed by up wards of a million of their fellow-subjects, and of that class who were not represented in that House. They (lid not come forward praying for an extension of privileges for themselves, but merely to solicit the alleviation of the punishment of those misguided persons who still re main in the prisons of this country for political offences. Under these circumstances, he trusted that the Govern ment would take a favourable view of their case.—(Hear.) Sir B. HALL said, that being connected with the county inwhich the outbreak had taken place a year and a half ago, he had been .then called upon to take a re sponsible part as a Magistrate, from which responsibility lie did not shrink, and he thought it his duty to come forward and state his opinions on the present occasion. Being intimately acquainted with that county, he must say that he had never known it more tranquil or quiet than it now was, notwithstanding that the working po pulation are looking forward to a great reduction wages in consequence of the great stagnation of the iron trade. --(Hear, lwar.) He thought that if ever there was a time in which a merciful consideration should be given to the cases of persons confined for political offences, it THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNFSDAY; MAY 26. 1841. was the present, when the whole country was in a state of tranquillity.—(Hear, hear.) He should, therefore, support the motion. Mr. AGLIONBY, who rose amid loud cries of " Di vide," said he thought the House having spent so many days in debates of less importance, might allow five mi nutes to any Hon. Member who wished to state his opinion on this subject.—(Hear, hear.) It was , ad mitted that crone case, whatever might be the opinion as to the constitutional mode of procedure, the expression of an opinion by that House had led to a mitigation of the punishment, and he could not but think that any ex pression of an opinion by that House would have its due weight with the Crown. He quite agreed that it would not be becoming in the Home-office to urge this upon the Crown as a matter of popularity. With respect to the Chartists, he thought they had not done their duty by them. If Hon. Gentlemen had attended more their general meetings and evinced more sympathy with the interests of that class, he thought they should not have heard so much of the disaffection which existed among them towards that House.—(Hear, hear.) Lord SANDON said that, although on a former occa sion, he had expressed his sympathy with the working classes, he could not carry out the sympathy in the manner now proposed. He could not consider the objections of his Right Hon. Friend (Sir R. Peel) as matter of official etiquette. He represented a large constituency of the working classes, and he dared say their feelings gene rally sympathised with these political offenders, though he knew of no constituency so free from the taint of Chartism. But at the same time he could not overcome his constitutional objection to the motion, however much these persons might have been misled—however much they might be " more sinned against than sinning," and, however, much agitation from a higher quarter had urged them to the very verge of the law, but punished them severely for trespassing one inch beyond it. Lord J. RUSSELL said, with reference to the case which had been alluded to and which he had brought before the House many years ago, be believed it was a strong exception to the general rule, because, whereas in this case, the advisers of the Crown might think themselves at liberty to advise a remission of the punishment; yet where the House had interfered to ask for the prosecu tion of offenders, the Crown might think itself restricted in its prerogative. It was with that view he brought for ward the case of Sir M. Lopez. Having elicited from Lord Castlereagh a declaration that the motion he made should not be any obstacle to the remission of any part of the sentence which the Crown might think fit, he moved the motion that been alluded to. That case appeared to him a particular exception to the general rule, but motions of this kind were generally felt to interpose great obstacles in the way of the consideration of these cases I?) , the Crown, in the way in which they ought to be considered. Petitions in favour of offenders should be addressed directly to the Crown, and not to that House. He had felt this difficulty greatly with respect to a case that oc curred some years ago, that of the Dorchester labourers. It appeared to him, in reviewing that case, that what ever were the reasons that induced the Judge to pro nounce that sentence, after a certain time it might be the duty of the Secretary of State to advise the Crown for its remission ; but the greatest difficulty he felt in so advising was, that a motion had been made and repeated in that House upon the subject, when he was obliged to declare, that if that motion was carried he could not advise a remission of the sentence, although he might feel on other grounds that it might be unjust to those men to refuse it. But having given that notice he had felt since that considerable evil had resulted from it, and that the favour was received not with the acknowledgements due to the Crown for its mercy, but with boastings that though the House of Commons did not directly interfere a motion had been made to which the remission of the sentence was due, and not to the clemency of the Crown.—(Hear, hear)' He therefore hoped that Hon. Gentlemen would consider that those who were charged with the responsible duty to advise the Crown upon these subjects, instead of feeling themselves assisted by the interposition of the House, felt themselves restricted by it. Feeling fearful that the effect of this motion would be to produce others for offences of a similar kind, and that offenders would thus be induced to look to parties in that House to take up their case, and not to look to the Crown as the natural and constitutional source of mercy—on these general grounds, and without saying a word on the other points, he should give his vote against the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury. Col. SIBTHORP opposed the motion. Mr. WARD begged his Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury to reflect on the nature of the motion, and not to press the House, under the circumstances, to a division. His Hon. Friend had seen the imputations to which tht motion gave rise ; they were told it was not a motion honestly brought forward, but had reference to questions out of doors. The best answer, however, to that impu tation, into which he was sorry to find that the Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool had fallen, was, that the petition had been in preparation for many months, and that it had emanated at a time when no one entertained the remotest idea of a dissolution. His (Mr. Ward's) opinion was, that if his Hon. Friend had been desirous of submitting his motion to the House at the moment most embarrassing to Ministers he would have chosen the pre sent, because it was impossible for any Government, what ever their feelings might be, to concur in it without ex posing themselves to the imputation of taking such a course for the purpose of gaining popularity out of doors.—(Hear, hear.) Let them discard those unworthy considerations, and look solely to the merits of the case ; and on that subject lie should say he differed entirely from the Right Hon. Baronet the Mem ber for Tamworth and the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies, because he did think there were circumstances -in the case which not only warranted, but in some degree called for the interference of the House. Political crimes were very undefined in their nature ; and although he did not censure either the Judges, the Juries, or the Government under whom the late prosecutions had taken place, he did feel that some of those political offenders had been treated with great severity. He admitted, however, that in other instances the grievous nature of the crime committed merited the severest punishment. There could be no doubt, too, but it was necessary at the time these prosecutions had been begun, to take strong measures for the peace of the com munity.—(Cheers.) Still he was persuaded that many of those parties now in confinement had more than ex piated the offences they had committed.. He was at the same time of opinion that after the explanations which had been given by the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies, his Hon. Friend might injure his own cause by proceeding to a division. Lord STANDON explained. He had expressly guarded himself against any imputation on the motives of those who had supported the motion. He only referred to the inconvenience which might arise from the interposition of the House at that particular time. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that his only object in bringing forward the motion was, that he might give effect to the wishes of the numerous body whose petition he had presented that night. He had confined himself to the case of political offenders at home ; and he was rather surprised to find that his Hon. Friend, the Under Secretary for the Home Department, had mixed up with that subject the principles of the Charter, and the case of Frost, Williams, and Jones. He complained of the injustice of the treatment -which many of the offenders had undergone ; they having been in many instances confined in houses of correction with hard labour, con trary to the sentence of the Judge. The subject was one which well deserved the consideration of the House ; and his belief was, that he would betray his duty to those whose interests he represented, if he did not call for the opinion of the House. If he was sure the case of those individuals would be considered with a view to their dis charge, he should be too happy in withdrawing his mo tion ; but as he had no assurance that an Act of Am nesty, so much desired by thousands out of doors, would be granted unless an Address was carried to the Throne, he should divide, with the hope that he would have with him a majority of that House. The House then divided, when the numbers were— For the motion Against the motion 5B Majority The SPEAKER then'gave his vote against the motion and it was consequently lost. CHURCH-RATES. Mr. HAWES presented several petitions from Dissent ing congregations, praying for the total extinction of Church-rates, and the abolition of Ecclesiastical Courts. Mr. DENNISTOUN presented similar petitions from four dissenting congregations. Mr. C. WOOD presented six petitions from Dissent ing congregations in Halifax to the same effect. Captain PECHELL presented similar petitions from 4,460 inhabitants of Brighton assembled iu public meet ing, and from a Dissenting congregation in Sussex. Sir A. DALRYMP.LE presented a petition from a place in Sussex, praying the House not to pass any law against the rights and privileges of the Church of England. Mr. EASTHOPE presented a great number of peti tions from Dissenting congregations in Lincolnshire, and from Moorfields, Bethnal-green, and other districts of London, praying for the abolition of Church-rates, and against the practice of the ecclesiastical courts, and that no further grants of public money be made for the pur poses of Church Extension ; also a petition from John Lowry, the vicar of Burleigh, in Cumberland, in favour of the abolition of Church-rates. ABOLITION OF CHURCH-RATES. The HON. MEMBER then rose to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice, for leave to bring in a Bill to abolish Church-rates, and to empower the members of the Established Church to levy a tax on the pews and seats for the maintenance of churches. He said he was sure he would not in vain entreat the House to abstract itself from the excitement under which the House and the country existed for some time, and apply its attention to a subject which, though not so exciting, was not less important, inasmuch as it related to the re ligious establishments of the country. He was confident that the House would set the good example of showing, that in the midst of that excitement it was not prevented fro:n interfering in a subject which was intimately con nected with the religious interests of the country. He was confid en t th e H ouse wou ld , i n t hi s di scus sion, divest itself of all party views, and, above all, rid themselves of any imputation that whatever differences of opinion might exist amongst them on the subject, their object was not to diminish the just influence or, above all, to inter fere with the due exercise of the religion of the establish ment. There was one feeling Ivith which he (Mr. E.) approached this discussion, and that was surprise at this question being allowed to remain so long unsettled. It would be in the recollection of the House that there was scarcely one individual of rank, distinc tion, or influence, now in the House, or who had formerly a seat in it, that had not considered that the question was one of importance and difficulty, and which ought to be set at rest. He would call the attention of the House to sentiments of men of eminence, as to the neces sity of settling this question. [The Hon. Gentleman here read extracts from speeches of Earl Spencer, Lord Stanley, and other Hon. Members, in the debate on this subject in the year 1834, in which the expediency of setting the question of Church-rates at rest was enforced. The parish of Dover had been in the habit of voting the stipend of the Minister in the form of Church-rates. The result was, that an individual had been cited before the Ecclesiastical Court, and was undergoing all its at tacks. Could any advantage be derived to the Esta blished Church from such a state of things ?—(Hear; hear.) A Church so wealthy, so amply endowed and sufficient for the purposes of religious instruction, ought never to have resorted to such means of support ; it was altogether indefensible. He deeply regretted that neither the proposal of Lord Althorp in 1834, nor that of Lord Monteagle in 1837, had received the sanction of the House. Nothing was more necessary to the peace of so ciety, or to the prosperity even of the Established Church, than an administration of its funds, by which it would be enabled to maintain with dignity and propriety all that was requisite for its conduct. It was stated by Lord Al thorp in 1834 that the amount collected by way of assess ment was about 360,0004 and that there could be no doubt that one-half of that was of a very equivo cal and needless character, and might have been avoided. The Hon. Member for the University of Oxford, on the proposal of a grant to the College of Maynooth, had stated that he would not voluntarily or willingly pay for the support of a system from which he conscientiously differed. Surely that ought to form a reason with the Hon. Member for relieving the Dissenters from this in tolerable grievance. It had been confidently predicted in that House, that unless this question was equitably ad justed, it would continue to be the subject of strife and of conflict. He would ask the House whether those pre dictions had not been fulfilled. The Hon. Member for Kilkenny had presented a petition that night from an individual who was suffering incarceration for the nonpayment of this impost. That had been followed by the incarceration of another indivi dual in the town which he (Mr. Easthope) had the honour to represent. He had formerly stated to the House that that individual was an object of deep and general sympathy in the town ; and, as a proof of this, in a ward comprising 20,000 inhabitants, he had been una nimously elected a member of the corporation. The ministers of that town felt it to be one of the greatest hindrances, and one of the most aggravated difficulties with which, as ministers, they had to contend. It had been stated to him by a gentleman whose name was well known in the history of this country, and who was nearly connected with the great man who had made that name memorable, the Rev. Mr. Erskine, that during the whole course of his Ministerial career nothing had ever Afforded him more pain or more deeply afflicted him in the discharge of his ministerial functions than the ques tion of Church-rates.—(Hear, hear.) Now, was it pos sible that could arise out of such a conflict ? At the present time there were legal proceedings taken in the following places :—Braintree, Bradford, Encomb, Hack - ney, Brentford, Portsea, Weymouth, Dover, Ringwood, Lancaster, Great Yarmouth, Abergavenny, and several other places. Not only were Church-rates annihilated in many large towns, but the strife of legal proceedings was at this moment in operation. Many families were kept in a state of uncertainty, their feelings worked up to desperation by the fear of imprisonment because they would not contribute to that which their consciences repudiated. He was aware that he might be told by the Honourable Member for the University of Oxford, that individuals were not entitled to consider Church-rates as a grievance upon their conscience, for that it was simply a question of property. Such had been the argument of the Hon. Member on former occasions. But how could it be a question of property, when it was made to depend upon the will of the voters? If it were simply a question of property, the question would be how much they should vote, but it was a question whether they should vote any sum whatever.—(" No, no," from Sir R. Inglis.) The Hon. Baronet said No., Hp supposed the Hon. Baronet referred to the judgment of Chief-Justice Tindal in the Braintree case, in which it was stated by way of impli cation, that the parish church must be maintained; but it was also stated in that judgment, that if the case came on in another form, it might possibly receive another adjudication. In a pamphlet addressed by the Attorney- General to the Noble Lord, the Member for North Lan cashire, it was distinctly affirmed that it was not a ques tion of property, and that no rate could possibly be made except by a majority of the voters in parish vestry; and that any rate, levied otherwise than in that form, could not be maintained either in the courts of common law or in the ecclesiastical courts. The civi- liens and common lawyers had never supposed that the churchwardens could make a rate by their own authority, unless none but themselves attended the vestry. The opinion of Lord Holt was cited in suppor of that view. He would now state what he had to propose to the House on this subject. In the first place he proposed to abolish that which was the chief cause of the dissension, namely Church-rates. Should he be told that the Church would not be able to maintain its fabrics ; that the members of the Established Church, comparatively so numerous, comparatively so wealthy, he would not say comparatively so indifferent to the cause of religion, would not subscribe like the Dissenters for the maintenance of their own places of worship ? The Bill which he proposed would empower those who attended the Established Church to rate themselves in respect to pews and seats for their families. He was aware that a difficulty would arise where churches had been rebuilt by funds provided from mortgage. Of course, in all such cases no Act of Parliament should apply until all the monies had been repaid. The Biil he had to propose was simply for the abolition of Church rates, and to empower the inhabitants to rate themselves with respect to pews in the church, which, he believed, would be found at no distant period to be more than sufficient for the maintenance of the fabric of the church. In confirmation of that he had a letter from a member of the Church, not from a party indifferent to interests, but from a clergyman of the Established Church, the Rev. J. Lowry, vicar of Burley, near Carlisle. That gentleman stated that he was a friend to the Established Church, and he believed that unless an alteration was made relative to Church rates, the congregation would soon fall off from the church. That letter - was evidence not to be slighted, as it was not the evidence of a Dissenter, but a Member of the Established Church. He had also a letter from Mr. Bone, the church warden of St. Andrew's, Plymouth, to a similar effect. He had also a letter from an individual who signed himself as " A Sincere Enemy to Church-rates," deprecating in strong terms the present system of Church-rates. These letters showed a case which he hoped would convince the House that not only Dissenters, but even Churchmen, were of opinion that Church - rates were an impost that ought not to be tolerated. The So ciety of Fi iends had submitted to those imposts for upwards of 200 years, but they had led to discontents and strife. He would read to the House a letter he had received from a member of the Society of Friends, in which he detailed the course pursued in the collection of durch-rates from members of that body. He believed the facts he should furnish from the Society of Friends would show the House that there was jobbery and robbery in the collection of Church -rates, which the 1 House would not tolerate. The Hon. Member then read a letter from a member of the Society of Friends whiciistaTedari instance where, for a Church-rate of Is. 2 1 / 2 d, property worth 30s. was taken in execution. It appeared to him drat the House had neglected its duty to the country in allowing the question to remain for so long a period in the unsettled state in which it at present was. In the case to which had alluded the individual had sustained a loss of not less than 351. 14s. 9d. He could scarcely imagine it possible that there was any Mem ber in that House who did not feel with him that it was most desirable that some Member of the Government, or some of the great party opposed to the Government, should take up the question and bring it to a satisfactory conclusion,—( Hear.) He could however scarcely hope that, under the circumstances in which he brought the question forward, that it could be carried to any satisfactory issue at present, but he trusted that another year would not be allowed to elapse without its being taken up by the Government of the day, and thereby put an end to the bitterness and acrimony that unfortunately prevailed with regard to it. The Hon. Member eoncluded by moving for leave to bring in a Bill to abolish Church-rates. Mr. GOULBURN said the Hon. Member had not distinctly stated how he intended to meet the deficiency which the aboli tion of Church-rates would create ; and before the question was put, he wished to suggest to the Speaker whether the motion of the Hon. Member was not infor ma l, i nasmuc h as h e i proposed fhe (Mr. Goulburn) understood him correctly, to levy a tax upon pews_and sittings, for the maintenance and re pair of churches, and that was such a measure as must origi nate in a Committee of the whole House. Mr. EASTHOPE begged to explain that he had followed the precedents which,had been adopted in similar Bills ; and, further, that it was not intended by his Bill to make the levying of the tax upon pews and seats compulsory, but to leave it optional with the vestries.—( Cries of " Chair, chair.") The SPEAKER said it was quite true that no Bill impos ing a tax for the repair of churches could originate unless in a Committee of the whole House, but he thought the explanation of the Hon. Member removed the objection. Lord MORPETH did not mean to offer any opposition to the introduction of the Bill; but the principle to which the Government were not prepared to give its acquiescence, was that of leaving it to chance or option as to whether the tax should be imposed or not. No man was more alive to the im portance of the subject than himself, and no man was more anxious to see the litigations and imprisonments, the heart buntings and which the present system gave rise to put an end to. He was therefore friendly to any well-con sideredenactment which would provide a aubstitute for Church rates. The Governments of Lord Grey and Lord Melbourne had introduced propositions with that object; but upon being introduced and laid before the House, it did not appear to them that they would have commanded that degree of acquiescence which would inspire them with a hope of bringing them to any satisfactory termination. He understood that his Hon. Friend proposed some method to supply the deficiency that would be occasioned by the total abolition of Church -rates ; it remained to be seen whether this would be anything more thin chance.—( Hear, bear.) But, so long as it was so, he could not give his consent to abolish the compulsory powers that nosr existed. But as it was most desirable that this matter should be duly considered and properly settled, without taking on himself to pronounce any opinion whether the substitution proposed was adequate in amount, or satisfactory in its application, without giving any opinion except as to the general princitles of the present mo t ow, on th e part of the Government he should give his sanc tion to its introduction.---( Hear, hear. ) Sir R. H. INGLIS said that when a similar measure to the present was brought forward a short time ago, it was opposed by the Government en the ground of the pressure of other business, in consequence of which it could not be properly considered. This objection applied still more strongly to the present moti on , and he was therefore surprised that the Go v discretionernments hould of g t i h ve e tchoeuinrtraysseto the assent to it. The present mea sure was to t rans f er the ancient method of taxing by the po pular Vestry— a system more illusory could not be well conceived. It was on the ground that there was a slight distinction be tween the present mo tion and that of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, that the Government were ieduced to give their consent to it. He could only accouut for their conduct on the ground that the present measure contained some extraordinary emcee for the various evils complained of, or that they could not now afford to give it s negative.—(oh, oh, and hear, hear.) So far as he understood the decision of the Court of Queen's Bench, it was that the extreme measures had not been exhausted by which the law as it stood might be vindi cated. Before, therefor e , th e y i n troduced a measure which would completely overturn the fabric of the church, let them first see whether the present law w as not sufficient for every desirable purpose. The power of the country to provide for the rr pair of churches could not, in his opinion, he denied ; and property was fairly subjected to such an impost. It was in order to prevent the Church of England from being starved thatout— i(leLosuudppl7ed laughter)--o p f re th se e n means se sy n s s te o m f . meeting the spiritual wants of the people, which was their best inheritance, The measure they were called upon to sanction ss asto be adopted optionally, but that would remove from the Church the solid grounds on which her claims now rested. For these reasons he felt bound to oppose the motion. Mr. HUME said that the time of bringing forward this measure was agreed to in December last, so that there could I be no allegation more unfounded than to state that the motion was submitted to the House for the convenience of the day. ' In April, 1834, the Hon. Baronet opposite had himself voted for the abolition of Church-rates.—(" No," from Sir R. H. Inglis.) That was his (Mr. Hume's) opinion, though he had not then the votes by him. The Church had no more right to enforce a rate against the will of the majority of the rate payers than any man could have a right to put his hand into the pockets of another. But in any case what could be more unworthy of a Christian country than those scenes of violence and strife which the present system led to? Was it fitting, seeing that Ireland was relieved from Church-cess, seeing that in Scotland there were no Church-rates except in Edin burgh and Montrose, that the present contest should be going on in England with a Church that was so rich ? The clergy had robbed the Church, they had taken to themselves that portion of the Church revenue which should go to build sa cred edifices and the support of the poor. Since the year 1800 there had been paid the Church 5,678,0001., inde pendent of 5,500,0001. which wai t received in tithe. The interest of that sum ought to do much more than build and repair sacred edifices. In England members of the Esta blishment were to the Dissenters in the proportion of five to four, in Scotland of th ree t o f our , and in Ireland of one to nine. He therefore hoped that the Hon. Baronet would not object to the present motion. Mr. GOULBURN said, if he thought it possible that the Bill could proceed further in discussion in the present Session, he would enter into details to show the fallacy of the views which the Hon. Member (Mr. Easthope) had advanced. He was sure no result could be arrived at by obtaining leave to bring in the Bill, then to have it printed for the use of the Members, and then let it die with the Session. He was not disposed to offer any opposition to the introduction of the mea sure ; but in giving his assent to its introduction, he must guard against his being supposed to give the least assent to the principle of the measure. The Hon. Gentleman proposed to i levy a tax on the inhabitants of the parish who might attend religious instruction at the church. In the time of Queen Elizabeth a tax was laid on every person who did not attend church • but the Hon. Member proposed to l ev y a t ax on a ll those ;he went to church.—( Laughter.) He had departed from none of the opinions which he had formerly expressed on this subject. He still maintained that it was the duty of the State to provide, out of the general funds of the country for the religious instruction of the people.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. C. WOOD said he could give no opinion at present on the Bill under consideration ; but he was sure that nothing could be so desirable as a measure by which the heart-burning and dissensions which now prevailed throughout a large portion of the country would be removed; and they ought to be grate ful to any person who introduced a measure with a view to that effect.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. PLUMPTRE said he had voted on a former occasion for the abolition of Church-rates, but he had done so upon the understanding that a substitute was to be provided. He would not support any measure which did not provide what he should consider an adequate substitute.' Dr. LUSHINGTON said he could not but express his thorough conviction from much experience that it was impos sible that Church-rates could continue to be levied in their present form.—(Hear, hear.) Where they were enforced by the power of the law, the result was to excite and exas perate the feelings of the people. The Hon. Member for Oxford seemed to think that the Clirch-rates from the commence ment were a tax upon property. In his (Dr. Lushington's) judgment, they were no such thing. The Church-rate origi nated in the circumstance that every person in the land was supposed to be a member of the then existing Church.— (" Hear, hear," from Mr. Easthope)—that consequently they had a right —for no man could say then that he did not belong to the Establishment. They had a right to compel him to contribute to that worship, which he not only did not deny, but preferred ; and which it was a crime, according to the law of the country, not to prefer. The whole of the au thorities told them that it was binding upon the individual by reason of his possession of . property of any sort in kind, and not by reason of his possession of real estate. The law, as laid down at the time of the Reformation, was, in case the friends of the Church failed, three or four persons should be selected for the purpose of taxing every person resident in the parish, not according to the estate which he held, or accord ing to his stock in trade, but according to the whole means which he possessed. He alluded to this in order to repudiate the notion that , it , was. simply, a tax upon property, and to put it in its proper light„namely, thatof telt upon, persons resi dent in the parish, according to the ikons they possessed, He perfectly agreed in the statement of Chief Justice Tindal, that the Church-rate was at this moment a lawful tax, and that there were means of enforcing it. For many years after he had commenced practice, no opposition had been made to the rate. Twenty-six years ago there was very little feeling upon this subject, but from that period, from time to time, cases upon cases had arisen, in which there had been resistance to the pay ment of these rates. The Dissenters said that Church-rates were a tax placed upon the people of England when the whole people were Catholic, and that at that period, when the Act of Toleration came into operation, and when all parties were al owed to profess freely their religious sentiments, the law was not altered, which the Dissenters contended ought to have been the case. They said, that when they were sued for Church-rates they were proceeded against for their soul's sake, and the correction of their manners, according to the reli gion that existed at the time the Toleration Act came into operation. The general feeling of the Dissenters was, that the Church of England had large property, out of which their ministers were maintained; that the Dissenters had no property by which they could support their ministers, and they therefore considered it a hardship to be compelled to support the minis ters of a Church which they did not attend. There was another grievance of which the Dissenters most justly com plained, and that was that they were compelled to maintain many other things connected with the Established Church. They were compelled to maintain the organ and even the singers. Now such grievances, he considered, ought to be im mediately redressed. With respect to the measure introduced by his Hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, he shoul.l wish to reserve his final opinion on it till h e h a d h a d an opportunity of seeing it. But if the principle of the measure was that those who belonged to the Church should con tribute to the maintenance of the edifice, in consequence of the advantage they derived from occupying the pews, that he considered would be a just and righteous imposition, and one that any person who flinched from ought not to consider himself a man of the Church. He would give his hearty con sent to the introduction of the measure, believing, from the statement of his Hon. Friend who introduced it, that it was likely to allay discontent, while, at the same time, it upheld the services of the Church. Mr. ESTCOUftT thought the proposition of the Hon. Member to abolish Church-rates would be attended with the worst results. He should protest against the proposition of the Hon. Member for Leicester. If the measure should proceed to another stage he would take the opportunity of expressing more at length his opinions against it. Captain PECHELL said his Hon. Colleague, having referred to a petition that had been presented on this subject from Brighton, he felt it due to his constituents to state that though, as stated by that petition the question of Church rates had been carried in that town by a large majority, yet that the number of persons voting was much less than the number of votes, as the votes were taken under Sturges Bourne's Act. The opinions of that town on the subject were much better expressed by a petition which he himself had pre sented, adopted at a public meeting, and signed by 4,400 in habitants.—( Hear, hear. ) After a few words from Sir A. DALRYMPLE and Captain PECHELL, in mutual explanation, Mr. HINDLEY said that in the town which he had the honour to represent, the bell of the parish was at that moment silent--( Laughter )—in consequence of a dispute respecting Church-rates. This proved that there was something defec tive in the present law, and he should therefore vote for its al teration. After a few words from Mr. EASTHOPE in reply, the motion was put and agreed to, Mr. SLANEY moved for leave to bring in a Bill to enable the ratepayers of any parish, or division of a parish, under certain circumstances, to make a school rate, of limited amount, for the education of the children of the poorer cluses.— Granted. Lord INGESTRIE moved for a Select Committee to in. quire into the Post-office communication with the South o Ireland. Sir D. NORREYS seconded the motion. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had no ob jection to the appointment of the Committee. The subject had been for some time under the consideration of the Go.. vernment. After some further conversation the motion was agreed to ; the words being altered, on the suggestion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to Post-office communication between Great Britain and Ireland. Sir G. GREY obtained leave to bring in a Bill for affording further facilities for the Conveyance and Endowment of Sites for Schools. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER obtained leave to bring in a Bill to extend the Assessed Taxes Compo sitiotrAet for one _year. Mr. FOX MAULE obtained leave to bring in a Bill for the better Drainage of large Towns and Villages. The other Orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House Adjourned at Half-past Twelve o'Clock. SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. EPSOM RACES.—TuasnAy. Baron DE TESSIER and Sir G. HEATHCOTE, Stewards. That amusements of every kind should be affected by the electioneering movements arising out of the recent debates, it was reasonable to expect, and it is no small proof of the in trinsic attractions of Epsom Races, that the difference betwixt the attendance yesterday, and on occasions when the politi cal thermometer has been at "temperate," was so slight as almost to escape notice. The public, in fact, drawing their inferences from the satisfactory manner in which the majority of the plates had filled, and the immense number of horses congregated in the neighbourhood, calculated upon a sufficiency of sport to repay the trouble of a visit to the Downs. They were not disappointed, the provision for their amusement, minus as it was of the " Woodcote" Stakes, having exhibited the cus tomary average of racing. Their enjoyment ~of it was en hanced by the fineness of the weather and thejudicious ar rangements made for the maintenance of order, arrangements with which they have been familiarized under the present energetic stewardship. The " fitting up" of the course was on much the same plan as last year, the only alteration that struck us was the addition of a high stand to the row in front of the winning post, and the conversion of the old Prince's Stand into a Police station, thus avoiding the necessity of con veying offenders to the old place of confinement under the Grand Stand. The duties of Judge, Clerk of the Course, and Starter, were severally performed by Messrs. Clark, Farrell, ancbyerren, in a manner creditable to themselves and satisfactory to all parties. The Grand Stand, to which a back entrance has been opened, was as well attended as usual on the first day ; many of the fashionables enumerated in the fol lowing list appeared in the privileged apartments in the course of the day :—Dukes of Rutland and 13eaufort • Marquis of Exeter ; Earls of Chesterfield, Uxbridge, Lich field, Jersey, and Verulam ; Lords Maidstone, Paget, W. Russell, G. Bentinek, Godolphin, C. Fitzroy, Miltown, Vil liers, Albemarle ; Honourables G. Anson, H. Baring, G. S. Byng, 11. Rous, Paulett, G. Fitzroy, R. Grimsten ; Sirs G. Heathcote, T. Goodricke, J. Shelley, C. Cockerell - Colonels Synge, Cranford, Peel ; Messrs. Brand, Delme Rad cliffe, Payne, Higgins, Clive, Irby, Greville, Batson, Gregory, Crommelin, J. White, Hawker, H. Coombe, Codringtou, Angerstein, Shelly, Rush, Meiklam, Magennis, Vausittart, Brriadllead. The racing commenced punctually at the appointed time (half-past one), with— The Craven Stakes of JO sovs. each, for three years, Gst 81b ; four, Bst 101 b ; five, 9st 41b ; six and aged, 9st 101 b. Craven Course. 5 Subs. Mr. Dixon's eh fby Saracen, out of Delightful, 3 yrs (Bell) 1 Lord Lichfield's b b, The Corsair, 5 yrs 2 Mr. Westbrook's b e, Mobarek, 3 yrs Mr. Mostyn's hr f, Birthday, 3 yrs Colonel 11, yndliam's b c Father Mathew, 3 yrs Betting—Even on Mobarek, and 2 to 1 agst The Corsair. After the first quarter of a mile, Father Mathew took the lead, and made play at a good pace, followed by The Corsair and Birthday to the turn, where he resigned and the running was taken up by Birthday, who live I only to the distance ; The Saracen f went on with Corsair, and won cleverly by a length. The Shirley Stakes of 25 soya. each, for 3 yrs old colts, Bst 71b, and fillies Bst 41b. One mile. (Four Subs. ) Lord Albemarle's Minaret Duke of Grafton's c Mosque 2 Captain Ridge's b c, by the Wanderer—Monody Betting-5 to 4on Mosque, wlio made all the running to the distance, where Minaret challenged, and after a good race won by half a length, Captain Ridge's colt was beaten a long s‘ ay. Sweepstakes of 5 sovs. each, with 40 added ; 3 yrs, 7st ; 4 yrs, Bst 21b ; 5 yrs, Bst 101 b ; 6 yrs and aged, 9st 21b. Mares, &c. allowed 31bs. The winner to be sold for 2501. New, T. Y. C. ( Eight Subs. ) Mr. Dixon's Camelino, 5 yrs (Buckle) 1 Mr. Balchin's Dromedary, 4 yrs...-.. Mr. Walter's ch h, Sir George, 4 yrs The following also started, but were not placed :—Mr. Greville's ch c, Perseus, 4 yrs ; Col. Anson named ch c, All Fours, 5 yrs ; Mr. Westb roo k' s c h f , D ec i sion, 3 yrs ; and Mr. Lichtwald's br c, by Augustus, out of Courtesan, 2 yrs. Betting-5 to 2 agst Camelino, and 3to 1 agst All Fours. Decision made play at her best pace, followed by Perseus, the others lying behind with waiting orders. At the distance Camelino went to the front with Sir George and Dromedary. and after a very pretty race d e f ea t e d them by half a length ; a capital race for second. Plate of 501. for 3 yrs, 6st 91b • 4 yrs, Bst 61b ; 5 y rs , B s t 121 b; 6 yrs and aged, 9st 21b. The winner to be sold for 2504, &c. 2 mile heats. Mr. Shackel's ch c Cantle, 4 yrs ...... ...(Butler) 0 0 1 1 Mr. Goodman's br c Mungo Parke, 4 yrs 1 0 2 dr Mr. Hornsby's ch g Whalebone, aged... 0 3 dr Mr. Sowerhy's ch f Phingari, 3 yrs .. 2 4dr Mr. Booth's br m Isabella, 6 yrs Mr. Wright's br m Camilla, 5 yrs... ..... 0 6 dr First heat.-6 to 4on Isabella, who made all the running, Mungo Park waiting till half-way up the distance, where she went up and won cleverly by half a length. Second heat.— Even and 5 to 4 on Mungo Park, who followed Cantle after the first mile, challenged him half-way in the distance, and made it a dead heat. Third heat.—Cantle had it all his own way, and won by two lengths. THE DERBY (THIS DAY.). The following is a list of the horses likely to start, the odds of such as are in the betting, completed up to the finish of the races yesterday afternoon, and their jockies : BETTING. 4 to 1 agst Mr. Rawlinsen's Coronation—taken Conolly 11 to 2 agst Ld.Westrilinster's Marshal Soult (t) Scott 6 to 1 agst Lord Albemarle's Ralph Bto 1 agst Lord Westminster's Van Amburgh Holmes 11 to 1 agst Lord Lichfield's Belgrade 12 to 1 agst Mr. Vansittart's Galaor—taken 27 to 1 agst Mr. Dixon's Knightsbridge—taken Buckle 30 to'l agst Lord Jersey's Joachim—taken 30 to 1 agst Mr. Batson 's Potentia 33 to 1 agst Duke of Rutland's Sir Hans—taken W. Boyce 33 to 1 agst Col. Crawford's Ermengardis • Templeman 40 to 1 agst Mr. Copeland's MustaphaMuley—(t) Marlow 50 to 1 agst Col. Peel's Cameleon Mr. Wimbush's Finchley Mr. Greville's Palwmon Nat. Mr. Thornhill's E. 0 Pettit. Captain Williamson's St. Cross Calloway. Mr. Griffith's Hereford ... Cheswas. Mr. Coombe's The Nob Sir G. Heathcote's Mongolian Mr. J. Negus's Negus Portsoken A. Perkins. Lord Orford's Arundel Mann. Mr. Ford's Young Quo Minus Mr. Rush's c. by Plenipo—Obelisk's dam .. Robinson. Colonel Wyndham's Monsieur le Sage J. Day, jun, Mr. Saddler's Protection Rogers. Lord Exeter's Cesarewitch Mr. E. Buckley's Gilbert ... M. Jones. There is some talk of the Knight of the Whistle and Caniz zaro running, but both may be looked upon as very doubtful. FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZETTE. LORD CHAMBERLAIN'S OFFICE, APRIL 19, 1841. Notice is hereby given, that her Majesty will hold a Draw ing Room at St. James's Palace, on Thursday, the 17th of June next, at two o'clock. FOREIGN OFFICE, MAY 24. It is hereby notified, that her Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs has received a despatch from her Al a jesty's Ainbassidor at Constantinople, dated the 21st of April last, transmittiog••the' j eopy Of an 'official tithe from the Sublime 'Porte 'd? the' 19th •Ctf' the same month, con taining' W notification , of ifs intention to .establish on, the' 15th , of the instintmerith of May;:a.i . blisckade* the etiqre coast of the Island of Candia, with the exception of the porti of Canea, Retimo, Suda, and Candia • and to maintain and en force the same according to the rules and principles observed and acknowledged in similar cases. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the West Riding of Yorkshire, and of the City and County of the City of York. Southern Regiment of West Riding Yeomanry Cavalry— W. B. Martin, Esq., to be Captain, vice Wortley, resigned. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of Norfolk. Norfolk Corps of Yeomanry Cavalry—G. B. L. Knight, Gent., to be Lieutenant, May to. DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY. WILLIAM COOK, licensed victualler, Deptford. 1 BANKRUPTS. RICHARD MARCH, hatter, Cheapside, to surrender June 4, at three, and July 6, a t half-past eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, Basinghall-street, official assignee; NValmisley, North-street, Westminster. JOHN ANDREWS, schoolmaster, Ongar, Essex,. June 4 and July 6, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Cannan, Finsbury-square, official assignee; Lofty and Potter, King street, Cheapside. JAMES DOUGHTY, licensed victualler, Bristol, Juno 8, at two, and July 6, at one, at the Commercial.rooms, Bristol. Phippen and Craven, Bristol. WILLIAM BROWN, cattle-dealer, Sutton-under-Whit stone, Yorkshire, June 4 and July 6, at ten, at the Golden Lion Inn, Northallerton. Mewburn, Great Winchester street, London ; Mewburn and Hutchinson, Darlington. JOHN WALFORD, grocer, Wybunbury, Cheshire, June 22, and July 6, at one, at the White Bear Inn, Middlewich, Cheshire. Graham, Ironmonger-lane, London ; Jones, Hough, near Nantwich. GEORGE DICKSON and RICHARD GLOVER, spice_ merchants, June 7, and July 6, at one, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool. Taylor, Sharpe, Field, and Jackson, Bedford-row, London ; Harvey and Falcon, Liverpool. WILLIAM PATERSON, common brewer, Chelsea, June 4, at eleven, and July 6, at two, at the Coprt of Bankruptcy. Gibson, Basinghall-street, official assignee ; Turner and Hens man. Basing-lane. WILLIAM THOMPSON, ship-builder, Monk Wearmouth Shore, Durham, June 4 and July 6, at twelve, at the Thomp son Arms Hotel, Sunderland. Moss, Cloak-lane, London ; Wright or Brown, Sunderland. JAMES PORTER, victualler, Honiton, Devonshire, June 10, and July 6, at eleven, at the Old London Inn, Exeter. Smark, Flood, and Mules, Honiton ; Rhodes, Beevor, and Lane, Chancery-lane, I.ondon. ROBERT BUCKELL, merchant, Newport, Isle of W_ight, June 8, at two, and July 6, at twelve, at the Bugle Inn, New port, Isle of Wight. Holme, Loftus, and Young, New Inn, Strand, London ; Beckingsale, Newport, Isle of Wight. HUXLEY SMALLMAN, draper, Edgeware-road, June 1, at half-past eleven, and July 6, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Graham, official assignee, Basiughall-street; Drake, flouverie-street, Fleet-street. JOHN BEARDSWORTH, timber merchant, Wrexham, Denbighshire, June 1, and July 6, at twelve, at the Wynnstay Arms Inn, Wrexham. Pinniger and Westmacott, Gray's Inn square, London ; Hayward, Oswestry. CUTHBERT POTTS, ANDREW POTTS, and JOHN POTTS, ship-builders, Monk Wearmouth Shore, Durham, June 4, and July 6, at eleven, at the Thompson's Arnie Hotel, Sunderland. Moss, Cloak-lane, London ; Brown, Sunderland. AARON MILLS and WILLIAM GRIMSAW SEED, cotton manufacturers, Manchester, June 8 and July 6, at two, at the Commissioners'-rooms, Manchester. Kay, Barlow, and Aston, Manchester; Bower and Back, Chancery-lane, London. WILLIAM GRIMSHAW SEED, calico manufacturer, Manchester, June 8, at ten, and July 6, at two, at the Com missioners'-rooms, St. James's-square, Manchester. Makinson and Sanders, Elm-court, Middle-temple, London ; Atkinson and Saunders, Norfolk-street, Manchester. JOHN JEVON, jun., innkeeper, Bilston, Staffordshire, June 11, and July 6, at twelve, at the Swan Hotel, Wolver hampton. Miller and Fallows, Piccadilly ; Holland, West. Bromwich, Staffordshire. JOHN PRIOR, maltster, Kingston-upon-Thames, June. 1, at eleven, and July 6, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Turquand, Copthall-buildings, official assigner, ; Hartley Bridge-street, Blaekfriars. HENRY tiOWN, stock-broker, Clarendon-terrace. , Cam berwell New-road, June 1, at two, and July 6, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Green, Aldermanbv. ry, official assignee ; Anderson, Cornhill. JOHN EMMERSON, innkeep er , C ro ft * Y or k sh i re, June 4 and July 6, at eleven, at the Golden Lic.n Inn, Northaller tonAllison, . Tilson, Squan n. ce, and Tilson, colever_n-street, L on d on ; Darlingto Lurer, Wolverhampton, - FRANCIS FISHER, clock manufte June 11 and July 6, at eleven, at Ott Swan Hotel, Wolver . Wolverhampton ; Wright hampton. Manby and Hawksford, and Girdlestone, Golden-square, 1.,. 0nd0n. brewer, Egremont, Che- WILL I AM HOULDSW OR" shire, June 7 and July 6, at two, at the Clarendon-rooms, Strand, London ; Peacock, Liverpool. Dean, Essen-r' two, Liverpool. THOMAS LEWIS., tavern-keeper, Lincoln, June 5, at ten, and July 6, at twol .ve, at the City Arms Hot e l, Li nco l n. Cooper. Ironmonrer-lane, Cheapside, London. JOSEPH Di,Vis, gun-manufacturer, Baker-street, Port man-square, Jv.ne 8, and July 6, at one, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Als'ager, Birchin-lane, Cornhill, official assignee ; Stevens, Wilkinson, and Satchel], Queen-street, Cheapide. GEORGE BROCKLEHURST, HENRY DIRKS, and JOHN BAILLIE NELSON, engineers, Liverpool, June 5, and July 6, at one, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool. Payne, Liverpool ; Adlington and Co., Loudon. DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-street. A. Mason, corn dealer, Chigwe.ll, Essex, June 17, at half past eleven—B. Bennett, comeAssion agent, Clement's-court, Milk-street, June 17, at tw'j—J. Taylor, stone merchant, Maiden-lane, King's-cross, June 17, at half-past one—C. Young, common brewer, Osborne-street, Brick-lane, White chapel, June 15, at twelve—J. Brown, silk warehouseman, Bunhill-row, June 15, at half-past twelve—J. H. Skelton, warehouseman, Chandos-street, Covent-garden, June 15, at one —R. Woollven, butcher, High-street, Southwark, June 16, at eleven—J. Morris, coal merchant, Pimlico, June 16, at twelve —F. L. Langston, merchant, Old Broad-street, June 16, at one—W. Harrison, bookseller, Portsmouth, June 15, at twelve —A. Lee, banker, Guildford, June 14, at half-past ten—W. Hamilton, merchant, Leadenhall-street, June 15, at half-past one—C. Hart ant ) , T. Ll ewe lli n , woo ll en warehousemen, New gate-street, Jun 15, at twelve—J. Warner, linen draper, Bed ford, June 15, at half-past twelve—C. Terry, quill merchant, Shoe-lane, June 17, at one—R. Wontner, woollen draper, Cloth-fair, June 17, at eleven—J. T. Ratcliffe, stationer, Blackman-street, Southwark, June 17, at twelve—T. Read, perfumer, Crawford-stre et, Portman-square, June 15, at eleven. In the Country. J. Settle and A. Bentley, flax spinners, Leeds, June 18, at one, at the Comm:.ssioners'-rooms, Leeds—S. Rogers, grocer, Newport, Mourn. outhshire, June 14, at twelve, at the Westgate Hotel, Newpor',,—J. Coleman, builder, Ipsv;ich, June 17, at one, at the Sr . ,ffolk Hotel, Ipswich—R. Th o '. npson, j o i ner, New castle-upon- Tyne, June 18, at one, at the Bankrupt Commis sion-room. , Newcastle-upon-Tyne—H. Wheeler, innkeeper, \Vitton, r ,;heshire, June 19, at one, at the Crown Inn, North wich—r I'. Rogers, innkeeper, Salisbur , ,, June 17, at one, at the Black I lorse Inn, Salisbury—E. E. Tiouse, stationer, Worces ter, Jv ne 17, at one, at the Offices of Gillam and Son, Worces ter— J. and R. Lawton, drapers, Leigh, Lancashire, June 18, at one, at the Commissioners'-rooms, Manchester—G. Massey, Pitt tuber, Congleton, Cheshire, June 17, at eleven, at the Mae. clesfieb:l Hotel, Macclesfield. CERTIFICATES —JUN E 15. F. Sanders, licensed victualler, Hoy on Old Town. -J. S. Tiry t and T. R. Kitching, linen drapers, Ludgate :hill—lL 11, dtelitfe, coach maker, Lowestoft, Suffolk—J. De• i ltry, inn keeper, Leeds—J. Dearden, coal dealer, Liverpool- -T. Vinson, tailor, Bideford, Devonshire —W. H. and J. T. c.igston, drug- Leeds---W. G. Taylor, cotton spinner, Little Bolton, Lancashire—T. Hoskin, j un ., h orse dealer, Tl'.orley, Hertfore shire—J. Soper, broker, Mark .lane—T. sad, hair dresser, Crawford -street, Portman -square -- a. V Joolven, butcher, High-stree t, Southwark —G. Corbett , builder e, Lewisham, Kent. PARTNERSHIPS PASSOLVED. C. Willey and J. Green, tailors Jermyn-street, St. James's —A. Mitchell and J. Goldie, r,a;penters, l'mehouse—E. E. Brooke and J. Bishop, chemists, Bath—S. Lyon and J. Hall, woo:staplers, Penkridge, Staffs rdshire—W. and C. M. Paul ton, common brewers, Bohm -le-Moors, Lancashire—H. Luke and J. Clegg, printers, Burn) ey, Lancashiro— V. Chalmer and J. C. Catton, provision merchants, Livery ool—B. and R. C. Smith, general factors, Devlonport—G. Ha l h , G, Marsden, EVENING EDITION, and W. Leonard, fancy woollen manufacturers, Huddersfield' Yorkshire—J. Mitchell and J. Temple, colliers, i3irkheadsr Northumberland—W. Hilliar and F. Nowlson, linen drsPer._,.! Islington —H. Hotham and J. R. Nicholson, hosiers, New' . tle-upon-Tyne—E. Redfern and W. Clews, grocers, Lengtel l ' Staffordshire—H. Tyler an d H. Tyl er , jun., bricklay er ' Long-lane, B ermon d se y —W. L eec h an d F. Roberts, patter!' card makers, Manchester—E. and H. Cotman, silk merc er* Norwich-1. V. Wart and S. Naylor, merc h an ts, Sheffield--• J. J. Butterfield, J. Butter fi eld, and j. Dawson, whiteseit hr ' Leeds—T. Routledg e , sen ., T : Routledge, jun., and R. Lucas/ jun., terracotta and scagliola manufacture, Belvidere-mo d (so far as regards T. Routledg e )—C. H. Oli v i er an d S. ~,,FL_Cu lu t: verwell, boarding-house-keepers, Finsbury- s q u are —W. " jun. and T. Wright, millers, Sutton, Cambridgeshire--4 wright, T. Appleton, R. R. Holt, and P. Cort, bleacher!: Turton, Lancashire (so far as regard s R. R. H o lt) —T. end Humphries, carpet manufacturers, Kidderminster, Worces ter ; shire—J. Humphries, T. Humphries, and G. Barrett, esrP e manufacturers, Kidderminster, Worceslershire--W. Nottnao, E. A. Judkins, and C. Blake, pianoforte manufacturers, i° 1111 „; street, Tottenham-court-road (so far as regard s E. A. Jaa, —J. Cardwell, W. Cardwell, and J. H a i g h, coa l merenit. Dewsbury, Yorkshire—J. St a rkey and J. Linnit, gold lace nufacturers, Old Bond-street—C. Hanmitt and J. Weed iv "" ; ealenderers, Manchester—J. Woods and W. L. Cope, r i g merchants, Keppel-street, Russell-square--T. Hedges and • Milsom, wadding manufacturers, Bradford, Wiltshire. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATION. JAMES BAILLIE, currier, Airdrie, May 26 and hoe 16 ' at twelve, at the Office of J. Morrison, writer, Airdrie.. JAMES WILSON, general merchant , ' 'Edinburgh, 14.1 26 and June 16, at one, at Swales's Tavern, Edinburgh. I ', PETER COLQUHOUN, commission agent, GlasV June 1 and 29, at twelve, at the Writi ng Ch am b ers o f R. tuw' Glasgow. ARTHUR STEWART, fiesher, Abe r d een , M a y 28 11 . 2 . a June 18, at eleven, at the Royal Exchan ge C o ff ee .h ou se, Ed' l3 burgh. PETER BROWN and CO., commission agents Glasfe May 31 and June 21, at two, at th e Ch am b ers o f J. 'M o nteith' Glaigow. SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE. NOTICE TO MARINERS AND OTHERS. l , The following is a copy of a Circular received at I4 l °Y rom the Spanish Con su l, i n E ng l an d , relat i ve to t h e ,__.„, vance of certain regulations to be oberved in all ports of Sr .. ' by commanders of vessels and consignees : o f "It having been noticed, with regret, that captso% foreign merchant v esse l s d o not observe, with due punctu 34 B l; the established reg u l a ti ons an d di sposit i ons on their arr i „„.. and clearance in Sp an i s h P orts, an d i t having recen tly I t. , curred in Cadiz th a t one o f th ese vesse l s sailed by stealth: 11,1 out having cleared a t th e C ap t a i ns hi p of the Port (Capitava t: Puerto), nor received the bill of health, admitting, therebY , , b , satisfy the Admiralty fees, the provisio na l regenc y of :al Kingdom have resolved, through th e fi nanc i a l d epartm ents - follows : " That vessels coming to a certain consignment shall rem' . under the responsibility of the Consignee, who shall be sr swerable for all infractions of the laws, and— trsds " That the Consuls as a gen t s an d pro t ec t ors o f the of their country, shall guarantee, not as private individuri but as such Consuls, the punctual observance of the laws, shall further offer the just vindication of their Governe l 7. o against those who may infringe th em , or w h o may evade We Penalties by taking to flight. By order of the R e geneY - inform you of the above, that yo u may ac t accor di ng ly o end it due publicity. (Signed) " JOAQUIN MARIA DE FERRER " Madrid, April 12, l 841." ODE ON THE BURIAL OF SIR JOHN MOOO 4 , —This celebrated ode first a pp eare d i n t h e Newry Pie; graph, with the initials of the author, Charles Wolfe. 0 writer in the same paper, one " Canis-Lupus Hibernia% has just compliment e d Mr: Macintosh, the : Scett' s o , schoolmaster, who cl a i me d th e authorAip, ..by the whole into doggrel after the , feltewing-fashiOn:- - "Igo useless coffin is iosedlis breast' Nor in sheet nor in shroud we bound him ; But he lay like'" our doininieall in his best, With his Macintosh' around him I" PORTRAIT OF THE WINNER OF 0 1 DERBY, —Bell's Life in London of Sunday next, Mar"; will contain a Portrait of the Winner of the Derby, with copious account of all the " Doings" of the g , Epsom wo k ' —Price of Bell's Life Fivepence. I , is THE TRUST EE . Thi s new nove l , wnicii from the pen of a successful dramatist, has nuf dt ;i which will comman d f or it a p l ace among the stands A works of fiction of the day. The character of J lt h c o ~ Scamper alone is eno ug h t o ma k e i ts fortune. co cleverest and most enterpri s i ng o f scamps w ill a t 011 , take his place among th e p o p u l ar f avour i tes o f the crii He is more enterprising, an d no t more scrupu l ous , tl t , Jack Sheppard ; mo re ü bi qu it ous an d more faithft ) „• 4 his pals than the Artful Dodger ; more versa tile in opinions, and active in his movements, than Jim 0 01° . e i more romantic and senti men t a l i n hi s cups t h a n D i n a Swiveller—in short, he is the most entertaining a o f original vagabond on record. The entire plot, too, ~j , this clever novel, is constructed with uncommon skl!ii and developed with a rare degree of interest. 1 ": 11 te , certainly make a hit—if, in these days of overexc i ment, anything se natural can hope to do so. COMPLETE COURSE OF INSTRUCTION I 0 0 THE FRENCH LAN GUAGE , so as t o ent i re l y obviate; . necessity of leaving E ng l an d to learn French.--Not wi standing the numerous Pltempts to accomplish this d'p r deratum, none can be compared with the very Cl ev e - a little progressive 17,00 ks of Mons. Le Page (adve r S o ls jo in our paper this day), which consist of " to Paris," " Gift .of Conversation," the " Last Stel ) French," and the " French Master for the Nurs er - 7 0 'f which, for iudicious arran g em en t, s t an d un rivalled the easy acquirement of this accomplished language* . 0 The great delay experien ce d b y the pu blic 1 the production of maps of importance has long b een : cause, of great annoyance to p u bli s h ers , and we have ran' , plev,sure in calling their attention to avery clever inven; " which will assist materi a lly i n reme d y i ng t hi s e' as by the " Ommigraph," a machine patented byMessri' Becher and Co., of Holloway (which will perform the work in an eighth of the time usually employed by al e most rapid letter engraver, with the greatest precisi° ll and uniformity possible.) Maps, Charts, Bce., can be , V duced at a cert a i n h our name d , an d at a vast saving ° expenditure both of time and money. SALISBURY RAILWAY.—We are enabled t t o h confirm, on the best au th or ity, the , flunous dab the Pti si Western Railway Company have it in contemplation to W in o branch line to Salisbury. The point of junction will r avo Bil•hopstoke, between Southampton and Winchester. We „ill since heard that the Great Western Railway ComPl oti til probably seek to secure f or t hi s li ne some of the traffic of Wilts and the adjacent district, by forming a branch from or the neighbourhood, through Warminster and Sslis bull Dorset Chronicle SUPERIOR LONDON-MADE WATCgr'o, A. B. SAVORY an d SON S, Watchmakers, N o. 9, CAirde kill, London (opposite the 'Sank of England), submit forao lection a very l arge STOC K of Highly-finished London-010 WATCHES, the wh , ;;ic of which being manufactured 1 sell at least 25/. 0 their own i ns p ec ti on , on their own premises, they can aff' r W.I. cent. below the usual trade price for tide of the sam e quality. A printed warranty is give n each Watch. PRWES MOUNTED IN SILVER CASES Fine „ er t. .ical Watches, jewelled, with double- A 0 "cPatent' engine-turned cases, warranted ... £ 4... detached Lever Watches, capped, jewelled in i"r holes, maintaining power, hard enamelled dial, 'fit;l seconds hands, and double-backed engine- 6 6 ° tv rned cases, w arran ted... E ithcr of th e a b ove i n s il ver h un ti ng cases, 10s. .A large variety of second-hand Silver Watches, vilue', o o , bee n carefully examined,and can be warranted at £2 25 •1 GOLD CASE'S, SIZE FOR LADIES. Fine Vertical Watches, jewelled, in engine-turned 8 0 £3 1 gold cases, and gold dials, warranted Male Vertical Watches, jewelled, with double-backed 12 0 engine -turned gold ea ses an d go ld di a l s , warran ted 12 Pe tent detached Lever Watches, jewelled in four holes with double-backed gold cases and gold dials, 1 4 0 warranted GOLD CASES, SIZE FOR GENTLEMEN . Patent detached Lever Watches, jewelled in four holes, seconds, and d ou bl e -b ac k e d go ld cases , w ar- is 0 ranted Patent detached Lever Watches, capped, jewelled in six holes, seconds, double-backed gold cases and 17 .enamel dials, warranted l7 Patent detached Lever Watches, capped, jewelled in :six holes, seconds, double-backed gold cases and 0 0 gold dials, warranted , ', 'ma t t Esther of the Gentlemen's W a t c h es may b e h a d i n gold has cases, for 31. 3s. each extra. N.B. Second-hand Watches purchased in exchange SUPERIOR LONDON TABLE 0 1 op; with Ivory Handles, 14s. per dozen wb • Dessert Kn , Y es ' bone ite r s Carvers, 51. 6d. per pair ; Table Knives, with handles, Bs. Bd. per dozen , Dessert, 6s. Bd. ; C ar ,lbs , Pei ; per pair ; Globe-shape Tea-urns, 4 quarts, 275. ; n e ibe 395. ; Papier Mache Tea-trays, gothic shape, 60 9 ; full sizes. D ish' C atalogues, containing the pri c e of every ar ticle ing ironmongery and cutlery, gratis. RIPPON and BURTON, W e ll s - s t ree t, O x f o rd- Established IWO. B IRTHS. 4 0n the 23d inst., at the Vicarage, Hannington, the W i fe, the be Rev. Henry W. B. Daubeney, incumbent of Cai Gloucestershire, of a dauo-hter. of On the 23d inst., at langlee, Roxburghshire, the la" ,„ E. Bradelaw Smith, of a son. On the 24th inst., at Hackney, Mrs. Frederick T r of a son. jet On the 24th inst., at M er t on - grove, t h e l a d y o f Alela Atherton Park, Esq., of a son. MARRIED. nobi l4 On the 25th inst., at Wal,hamstow, by the Rev., - ,. i . r iet! Jarratt, A.M., John Corrie, Esq., of Manchester, to r::" Elizabeth, eldest daughter of the late John Kennard, 11 Clapham-common. of 17 . On the 23d i ns t., a t Ch es h un t, Alf re d, secon d son o urf i. Aubert, Esq., of Brasted, Kent, to Emma Ann, eldest 5 ving (laughter of the late Richard Martian, Esq. On the 25th inst., at St. Igargaret's Westminstetr,ol%; Huntley, of Burford, Oxon, to Charl o tt e , 'daughter 0 f h Rev. Richard Hunt, Vicar of Medmenham, Bucks. „ e , On the 25th inst., at. the parish c h urc h of Maryleb2;so l Whitton Arundell, Esq., of Gray's-i nn - squar e, to Dw re , sauna Mackey, of Upper Berkeley-street, Portman-s9j r a t ivole' On the 17th inst., at St. B re l a d es, J ersey , John f taai r Esq., fourth sou of the late Tho mas W a l po l e , E s q., an u : b ter Margaret W alpole, to Harriette, only surviving daub 0 0" Lieutenant-Colonel Henry Browne: Smith of the sth Reg of Light 11 ..ladras Cavalry. WY P° On tl,e lgth inst., at Lakenham, in Norfolk, Marv' noo; third ton of William Dacres Adams, Esq , of Bowdon , " . : a bte' sliirc, and of Sydenham, Kent, to Anna ' Maria, eldest ( I " 6 ' of the late Major Edward Hodge, of the 7th Hussars lED. 6P On the 14th i ns t ., at Po rt ea, David Judah J acob, ' son of Mr. I saac M yers, aged 0 1. Al On the `2lst inst. at New House, St. BEchaers , bans, Willi am S m i th, Esq. aged 73. of t be On the 22d inst. at Gl ' asgow, Mrs. Smith, widow 80.ibe late Willi am Smith,, Esq., merchant of that city, ef e nu isap ' On the 23v1 inst., at Littlefiamptan, Sussex, '- wife of th e R ev. F reder i c k Vi ncent. fJ 4tl' o On th e 23d i nst., at Cl apton , M r . W i ll i am 13unneYt erass-lane, aged 38. VA " On the •23d inst., on the Tena,ce, Walworth, John lc Medley, E sq ., age d 29. gat re, e On the 24th inst., Mr. GOO' . .tings, of Clapton-Ple ney, aged 84. . ,-_-.,-17.....• , .......Tirr" , " 1 " ......... o f London ..Printed and• Put . fished by-111UfiTICI IL6 fi d, 10 No. 112, Strand, at Th_ e Sun Othee, No. 112, Soitrl the cuunty of Aliddlesc..z......wwnesday, May 26) l' • jl. . ..,.. 1111111‘' tell 4