The Sun. — London, England, 1841-02-20 00:00:00

Elrin4lNG EDITION. .shish Lc himself professed. The . Court of Appeal was eft - entirely to the Speaker. • Whon they considere 1 he duties which that Court had to perform they would see at onto how important it was that no Possible thubt should exist as to the motives which led to the kl ppcinttnenta. He believed that the independence of the Si)e.iiccr, the position which he eajoycd, and that 4. able station which was wsigredt; him on both !ides of the House, would be considerably lowered and Tlarnafred such po:ver were placed in his hands. e y appointment by him would be rigorously car.- on both sides of the House, exceptions would taken ra the exercise cf his power, however honestly I conveleaiously he might perform the duties, and would he exposed to temptations which by the titution of the House he had nrver teen exposed to , re. He (Sir E. Sugde3) considered bimself (if he H give him leave to sav so) the advocate of the Speaker is occasion. He desired that the Speaker should be phcel in a situation hi which none of his prede _l stood. You yaurse:f, Sir, (continue:l the tlsmao) can scarcely be aware of the dangers osed in the execution of these be eNc What were the duties of the Court of Ap reel ? It would have to perform duties which at pre sent t' ere were no means of performing. The Court of Appeal which would have to decide these great ques tions, would virtually have to decide, in a great men which of tLe two great parties should have the preconlinance. at the ensuing election. Who in that Ecu9a was prepared to say that they would leave the dcdsic.n cf thet question to such a tribunal when they t'nnosel , es would net undertake t) do so ?—(Hear.) Would they leave t 3 other parties the power of ciecid • • neestion, which might, in so great a degree, 'suing elections ? No party would con .n.n,h a sacrifice ; he would not ask Hon. Gen lemen on the other side to do so, and he would not concnnt to such a sacrifice on his own part.. If they locked to the Irish Registration and the Scotch Re gistra:ion BillS, and found that the Speaker was to have the nomi, - .ation of the Court of Appeal in both those countries, in the same manner as in England, then it would be evident that it was the intention cf the Government to alter altogether the tharacter of the Speaker of that House.—(Hear, bear.) Speaker Lenton, in the time of Charles I. had said to that Mccarch, thet he bad neither eyes to see, nor tongue to Speak, except in obedience to the orders of the House, whose servant he was. Now that ~vita perfectly true, but if these powers were given to the Speaker, instead of being the servant of that House, the most honourable &legation a commoner cool I fill, he would be the master I that House.—(..Theers.) The House would abdi- The more he looked at these ap ctionable did the plan appear. esirft the registrations . ;.lerougheut the country en simultaneously threnkthout England. When new Judges should be appointed, they would take 'tlo whole year in their perambulations. The • they should hold their Courts would de es. They - would break into the would break tats the Quarter Sessions real; into the Assizes--tire: would in tirnrs of the sittings of the Ho: so. any given and fixed period, ter h-st suited themselves, Tocy ve of the these at winch they r t ;l :r diqtriet, and the pay n t „tut would depend upon the n;ent t for holding their Courts, and -4 rates taking place at a .~t!e3, ,5 CO E. ent to to funaie ments t,112 mnrc obj ~_ _: F: rem;'lv going at, al - a to r any parties 3 In that distr ix p,!rinti in pv.ts of the country, it Then these Registration ins•Lquenen would be that rent parts of tiqc some county there would be (hi rit.9 of voting, rot in consequence of ony ►. ,, ':;ltivo en ctmcut, but in consequence ur,on r.!.! h 2 lw ; the c, fc:n of newittigled cfaus.a. Lt to the franchise fl. use certidoly wished, e Noble L^rcl oppositts, in Eng'and, he Lad acte(i rnaoper than he had A 3 to be alOred by the Bill, hut NI Wll to hc eff”, t -d ip a way which he (Sir e ) weal 1 tak•-... the liberty of call t? I. .0 I t tr.r;hic ly ald S :Ctfi:C a sktfk- d t:.;e franchixe I but wa3 infmated indirectly, and ch bad obje..2ts. Ho would not then as not hirly e'c.-tive franchise alterel or But, rt ail ev;t=, (bat W , bkli such a work- shouM and *;,at was 11{ - .t tt nilnner in which filch ition sbc ul , l be brongt:t 1 n'ore the House. Lie :'rang ( - Npreif;ions, in designating the con- verraL.2rt on the ecca-lue, but he Lot. without pre '. - r th 3 1 - I. , :forni Act, 'r*: t'..-! ii,._:uN. a ;t of rtAll. t tliai; a party, in enai.in I to rot , , shoull -pay taxes. But Nobl, Lora intvntlecl t', make such a pro °neut. c.lirly to have t tt°,l it to the Hawse I to 1 - ::° (Su' E S t ;ken eic I,\. : l t. nit, r lien be could _ .ss~ c 4.- • At, t !1.2, bare, irg DT irod ply r •, he (Sir create d (3:u2tlon of the Lo (Sir Edward SYlen) Ithl srco to induce him to Val the frine':;. , . , e, woult P.sk, t (.ther 1311 whizth t :in cs , :thdratl of pre-cent var that Nobti L Ancther rOdUCtion 0 0 provlsion ilorc to produce fraud, tl wake three rich man fig rert rig •cbr a Ulf• the rich a•;c1 the poor objectious to tlle B 11 ; LEttl the Houle it a tribunal thOtlg . t,t, ti c No, no.") Ile various 17a1 rt pr d co :.Pry was satis&d with the Revising ieers - ‘• No, uo.") There were smile ti - :fit were notliing,. but when lion. .iissatisfaction in that res.,' ect, would ask tile a-, thz.t they should point cat t' - at ..vould work beler.—(Hetr, hear.) re maoliiaery of the pre eat'l3l.l way not what to be, and thererore it was that he objected to re respects to which he had adverted. Now, acre tho amendments he proposed? Why, he 111 tag t . , ) take t h e N o bl e L or d' s Bid of 1838 3 . 39, wth a slight modification of the registration. wool I ask, could th e NoWe Lord reconc il e hi s .tr!t 1 ,it year with that he was now pursuing ? Last the NoLl Lord brougt in a Bill to define the !hire, but on the present measure the Noble Lord ail the dfsculty en which the franchise depended • decided by the Court of Appeal. In conclusion, Le would give notice to the Noble Lord, that it was his interition, in Committee, to mova the.expulsion of such parts of the Bill as he had referred to, and he should 4sk leave to introduce other clauses, which would have the cfiect of carrying eut...the objects he had in view. Mr. GISBORNE was happy to find.tbat there was so large a perfon of till present Bill which was net nicely to be opposed by the other side. He was sur prised to hear the Right Hon. and Learned Gentle aim stAtl tsiat ve.-y littla evil had arisen from the con- Meting decisions of the Revising Barristers under the preyeet system. The Right Hon. Gentleman had not had so much experience in the Barristers' Courts as he had, hut he rememberel an instance in which two Beniiters, sitting, in the same room, with only a par tition betweeo, were deciding one one way and the et' GC: anetl:a: ;'one Barrister was :admitting the trus tees of all chapels, and the other.was rejecting them. He recollected another Ina Ince, where in one part of a county two Quakers were admitted to vote, and in another part were struck out. The,Hon. and Learned Gentleman particularly objected to the Speaker having political appointments, or appointments having a poll f.cal tendency. He begged to remind the House that a proposal somewhat sire ir to the present had been made by the Right lion. Baronet the Member for Tamwoith, when ho introduced his plan for the ap poictment.of the Committee of . selection for election petitions.—( Heir, hear.) There was some part of the remarks of the Right Hon. Gentleman on the subject of established voters in which he entirely concurred. Teis Bill - gave great encouragement to persons to establish their votes. That was undoubtedly a privi lege ; but. the extent of the benefit conferred would de pend entirely upon what 0;e voter was called upon to establish before he could be admitted to vote. The words of 'the Reform Bill were, that the claim o f t h e party wasto be proved to the satisfaction of the . Barrister ; 'cords giving the Barrister very extensive powers, and leaving a great deal in his hands. He believed,• how ever, that the usual custom of the Barristers had been, not to call upon him technically to prove his title, but, if Lc was in the receipt of the rents and profits, to hold that that was sufficient proof ol title. He (Mr. Gis borne) considered that that was the true mode. If a person was unlawfully in possession of property, kt the law be applied, but the Court of Revising Barristers should not try the question of the title of persons to the property for which they claimed. The 56th clause of this Bill read thus .-- " Nor Amu any objecti on to the title of any eStablished viLvt I to il voter to bold any land-or tenements be allowed." That was the cave of a person objected to as an established voter. The plain inference from that was, that if the. party was not an established voter the Revising Bar rister should have power of inquiry into his title. If not, why were those words introduced ? 'Why was it Said that the title of as established voter should not be inquired into unless it was open to the Revising Barris ter to inquire into the title of those who were not esta blished ? His view was that possession should be taken as a sufficient title, and that would remove one of the great objections which he should otherlise have to the system of making a' distinction between established voters and voters not established. There was another provision which he thought ought to be introduced, in order to make the Bill consistent. If a person were ob jected to, it was now for the first time required that the grounds of objection should be stated. It. would be going too far to say that when a person had been brought up upon ore ground of objection only, and that had been decided in his favour, he should be considered as an established voter ; but having sustaieed bis vote upon that ground, be thought he ought not to be ob jected to upon that ground again. Doubtless, there would remain great objections to the dividing voters into two classes—the established, and the non-esta blished. To the person of property it would be a mat ter of little consequence, but to the. poorer weer it would occasion great inconvenience.—(Hear, hear.) Let them take the case of a poor man pos sessed of a 51. house, who bad mortgaged it for 31. He would have to procure the attendance of the. mort gagee and of the .lawyer, so that there would be con sidrable difficulty and expense in the way of his esta blishing his right to vote, which the rich man would not experience ; in fact, he would be left as a mark to be shot at by any person who chose to object to him. He did not say that this was a sufficient objection to the making two distinct classes of voters, but he mentioned it as an illustration of the disadvantages under which the non-established voter would labour, and also with a view of showing that when once one ground of objec tion had been established to be untenable, the voter should not again be liable to objection on that ground. He thought there was something in the objections taken by the Right Hon. Gentleman to the ambulatory character of the Commissioners for the revision of the lists, but on the whole great advantage would accrue from the establishment of a Court of Appeal, without which there was no prospect of their obtaining anything like a uniformity of decisions. He thought, however, on the whole, notwithstanding the objections that might be urged against some of its details, that the Bill pro ceeded on an equitable principle, and that it would cor rect many of the abuses of the old system. The objec tions were to the minor points, and he felt great satis faction in witnessing the introduction of the measure. Mr. W ARBUItTON said that as there was to be no division on the second reading of the Bill, it was not his intention to enlarge on the objection urged against it. He should observe, however, that he thought it was a settled point that the present constitution of the Courts of the Revising Barristers was highly objection- Ale, and had been found exceedingly inconvenient by the electors, as wcil as by the House, in consequence of the great number of disputed points that came be fore Election Cernmittees. He believed he might al lude te the neectiations which hod taken place between both sides of the House in 18.18, on the constitution of the Courts of the Revising Barristers, by which many of those points ..•:ere decided, to which the Right Hon. Baronet opposite had objected. The Right Hon. Ba ronst had complained of that provision of the Bill which took away from the Revising Barristers the opportunhy f again returning to Westminster Hall ; but he (Mr. Warburton) aid sot think that such a provision would operate unfavourably. The Commissioners cf the Court of Bankruptcy were placed in the same poSition ; and he, whatever might be the other defeats of that Court, believed that no complaint had ever been made upon Cast head. The fact was, that cases of the most complicated nature in law and equity %multi come be fore the" Revising Courts: and these would be sufficient y their entire attention. He would reserve any other observations he might have to make on this sub.' jcct till the House went into Committee on the Bill. Mr. HUME said diet he thought it would he easy to avoid many of the inconveniences which it was urged woell follow from the Bill. The Government might get rid of the objections to the measure by defining the franchise as they had done for Ireland.--(Hear, hear, from the Odpesition Beuchea.) He had ahvays under stood that whet was good for England was good for Ireland, and what was good for Lelaod was good for Ea and.—( liar, hear.) As far, howevsr, as the 1 .11 went, he thought it was a gre it improvement in the pre• vent sv:tem. to occ Mr. ROWLAND ALSTON supportel o , ie Bill, as he thouglit it high free that the pre:ent syvem sheul , l be a:te ed._ _ . Cull: el SIBTUORP begged to ask what the salary of tic Barrister would le. Perhaps that subje(t was below tire Noble Lord's consideration ; but he should eertninly take tbe zen:e of the tiouEe on it in Com- Lord. JOHN RUSSELL was not prepared anti! tl-y tint il+'i 1C C C t) St mount. of rsd Galia Membcr ~ i nr of wxmomy, v becd to inform bll :? a .t , L;v:: - g probthly of 15,000/. proposei systcm. At preFeat tht, cost wts , 35,000/. or 86,000/., and it would be ah - mthalf that sum under the new cyst. m. Now when the Hon. end Gal lent Member wou'd see the reduction of expense, he wculd perhaps give his suppott to the measure, bet of . course ester; V wont into Cuminittee it wou!d be for hi m t o p ro pose any further reduction if ho thought proper. The Right lien. Gentleman opposite had tulde a great many observationi on the details of that measure, but he (Lo:d John Russell) would nut falfew him. It wi-,s sail thA there was :•orncurafairne:s in the orci!;7ion of the tst of the payment of taxes. He had thought it very inexpedient to keep up the test of il.c p.lytr.e:a of taxei and rate, ni each had often dir fraezh:.el a number of vt.t..:rs who were otherwife fully entitled to cote.---( oar, Few.) It was certainly his intention to make some &he:rat:on in the (huge with respect to the pa:i wont of rale3 and taxer and the change of o7ouPation, When his Hon. reield the Me:liter for Kilkenny bad asked why not make the franchise th,!slmc in Encrb,lnd as in Ireland ? had been cheered by the Hon. Gentlemen opposite; l)ut he dii not know whether they meant by that to abolish tily2 403. free holders, or to introduce ,s3gain thc 40s. frcel:olders to Ireland. He certainly was not inclined to agree to r,ny proposition for aborishing the 40g. freel,o!dt - T6 it E, 3 1 4 , 4 d, b ec ause he thought them a Most useful and important class of voters. • _ _ _ _ The Bin :vas ttea read a second fmo, and ordered to be committee that day e'nriight. 'EAST INDIA RUM BILL. Oil the mot'on of Mr. LABOUCHERE, the East India Ruin 13!:1 tints real a second flair, and ordered to Le comakted on Monday. IRELAND Thn Tithe Coinposi;imla (Irc'and). Bill was nal a third time And poised. The Committee on the Turnpike Ae!s Continuance (Ireland) Bill Wll3 postponed to Fiiday. MACHINERY. Mr. BROTHEItTON moved that the following be nominated the Select Committee on Machinery :—Mr. Mark Philips, Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Labouchere, Lord Francis Egerton, Mr. Hume, Lord Viscount Sander, Sir George Strickland, Mr. Emerson Tennent, Mr. Morrison, Mr. Bolling, Mr. Vl:Hers, Mr. Townley Par ker, Mr. John Heatlicoat, Mr. Colquhoun, and Mr. Oswald. st B AC id Ind hnt .41 ill T.) 11'11 I,:oug nsk I tr;;;lnt bat. in- tL e of vr t;.ng, not oily nnd taxes, b: , t alio Sogdcn) at that time considrred that ..7.1 , ,01'1 ng tln,t 1111 a landlord's land- tNc , en tw. SYRIA. On' the motion for the House resolving itself into a Comin'ttee of Supply, Mr. HUME said it would save the time of the House if instead of making a motion for an address, of which ha had given notice, he were to ask a question of the Noble Lord. It would be in the recollection of the House, that at the- commencement of the Session the Noble Lord had consented to lay upon the table of the Howe ail papers relating to the Syrian warfare. Three weeks had elapsed since tl.at promise had been male, and the pa:era Lai not yet been laid on the table. Now he wished to ask the Noble Lord whether it was his in tention to lay those papers before the House, and if so, whoa it was likely they would be laid on the table ? When they were hid on the t Me it was his intention to bring the whole question before the House. Lord PALMERSTON' could assure his Hon. Friend that no unnecessary delay had taken place. There was a great mass of papers to bo arranged and printed, and at present there was a great press of cur re..t public business in his office. He could not fix any particular day, but he could assure his Hon. Friend that no unnecessary delay'should take place. Mr. HUME hoped the papers would be laid on the t able as soon as possible, as the Noble Lord had stated that the object of the Treaty of July having been accom plished, there ought to be no delay in bringing the papers before the House. AMERICAN BOUNDARY. Sir ROBERT PEEL wished to ask the Noble Lord is hat was the precise position in which this coun try stood in relation to the United States, and the North Eastern Boundary. Two Commissions had been appointed to ascertain the Boundaries between the Province of Maine and the State of New 'Bruns wick. What he wished to know was, whether, since some portion of those Commissioners had made their Report, any steps had been taken, in concert with the Government of the United States, to bring' the ques tion to a satisfactory settlement ? Lord PALMERSTON said, that a convention had first of all been proposed by this country, to which the Government of the United States had objected, and had sent over to this country a draft of a counter-propo 'hien to that. Her Majesty's Government could not agree ; anti in the early part of last year they had made a third proposition, to which he hoped the Government of the United States would have agreed. They, how ever, had not done so ; but, in reply, had sent another counter-propositio n , to which her Majesty's Govern ment could not agree, and to which they had sent a reply. A survey had, however, in the meantime, been ordered to- be made, for the purpose of acquiring an accurate knowledge of the geographical features of the country, by Commissioners appointed by her Majesty's Government, without any reference to the United States. These Commissioners bad reported, but, of course, the Report, although there was no reason to doubt its accuracy, oould only be looked upon as an ex-parte statement, and not at :41 binding on other par. ties. The United States had also sent Commissioners of their own to make a survey, without any reference to the Government of this country. Sir R. PEEL understood, then, that the Report of the Commissioners had been made without reference to the United States, and that there was no General Com mission acting on behalf of the two countries, and that no proceedings had been undertaken in concert between them, to bring this question to a settlement. The plain fact was that reciprocal propositions bad been made by the respective Governments of Great Britain and the ILlited States, which had been reciprocally rejected. Lord PALMERSTON wished to explain. The two Governments had agreed upon the principle of the question at issue, but they had not agreed as to the de tails by which it should be carried into effect. Mr. Featherstonhough had been sent by the authority of the British Government without the authority of the Ame rican Government, although the American authorities had afforded him every facility. Sir ROBERT PEEL was desirious of knowing if the American Government agreed to any arrangement for the settlement of the points in dispute. Lord PA LMERSTO N—The American Govern ment had at first proposed a Convention of one kind, to which the British Government had agreed ; they then proposed a modification of that arrangement. The American Government then proposed a Convention of a different kind, containing a provision for the appoint. ment of a Commission of Arbitration. The first Con vention contained no proposition for the appoint ment of a Commission of Arbitration ; they then proposed such an arrangement, to which and to that change we had agreed, as we thought it desirable to have some arrangement for arbitration. The two Governments were agreed on that point. lie did not think it right to enter into further details, as to the negotiations. The difference between the two Govern ments was not as to the principle, but as to how the principle was to be carried out. THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDNY,,FEBRtTARY 20, IS4I COURT OF SEWERS FOR W.EST, KMINSTER AND PARTOF MIDDLESEX. A Court of Sewers for the City and Liberties of Westminster and part of Middlesex, was yest-rday held at the office of the Commi:sioners, in Greek street, Soho-square, at twelve o'clock, Thomas Leverton Donaldson, Esq., in the chair. The minutes of the last two Courts were read. During the reading, The CHAIRMAN stated that ho had received a note from Sir G. Tarrant, stating ,the worthy Commissioner's intention to withdraw the notice of motion which he had given, it being his intention to bring it forward in another form. The minutes were then, confirmed. The Collectors' Reports were then received, and cer tain summonses and warrants were issued against cer t ain defaulters. _ The CLERK then read his Report of the state of the collectors' accounts, and of the money in the trea surer's hands. Mr. Jot WHITE then rose for the purpose of calling the attention of the Court to the Marquis of Normanby's Drainage Bill, and stated his opinion that this Court had already done all that could be done with respect to drainage. Mr. Slaney had called upon him yesterday, and he had called upon Mr. Slaney to-day, but had not met with him, Mr. ADEY rose to order, and protested against being called on to discuss a matter of this importance at a moment's notice, because the Clerk had laid the Bill on the table. They ought not to discuss any thing that was not in the business paper. Mr. LESLIE hoped Mr. White would be permitted to 1 races". Mr. ADEY objected to proceeding with anything not in the business paper. The CHAIRMAN said the matter must be postponed. The next business therefore was, to order payment of 1,696/. 13s. Id. to the Equitable Gas Company, being the amount tendered in the case of Medley v. Pritch ard, in pursuance of the order of Court of the Ist .De cember,lB4o. Upon which Mr. LESLIE Moved," that the sum of 1,696/. 13s: Id., as a compromise in the action, Medley v. Pritchard, cannot legally and therefore ought not to be abstracted from the Sewers' Rate by the Commissioners of Sewers, as the cause of such action is shown in the records of the Commission to have originated from an illegal or der of the Commissioners, by which a private be nefit was conferred on one of the Commission ers by making an unnavigable. stream a naviga ble one ; and that the legitimate source from whence such compromise ought to be paid is by a refunding of so much of the purchase money paid by the Equitable Gas Company for a property so illegally benefited and improved in value, and not by a tax upon the pre- Feet rate-payers of the Western Division of West minster Sewers. The whole proceedings being con trary to the st instes on sewers and the judicial decisions thereon, and consequealy void ale initio." The tender had been made on the 3a of April, 1835, heFore the action, Medley v. Pritchard, bad been brought, and after this Court had bean triumphant is the Court of Chancery, and bad had the ex parte injunction, ob tained by the Equitable Company, dissolved with costs. He would go at once into-the merits of this question. He would call upon Mr. Dowley, surveyor, to produce the original plats of the King's Scholar-pond sewer in 1808. There were two brick coh etts, with self acting flaps, with an area of 25 feet 7 inches, through which the King's Scholar-pond sewer drained iete the Thames ; and now the Commissioners would perceive that by no possibility could it be navigable to or from the Thames. Tire sewer rose in Hampstead, drained property on an area of about five and a half miles in length, and three quarters of a mile in breadth. Sir G. FARRANT rose to order ; they had no right to go into the history of the sewer. Captain BAGUE said Mr. Leslie could not speak un 1C33 his amendment. was seconded. The CHAIRMAN decided Mr. Leslie was in ardet. Mr. WHITE said, that on the face of the proceedings themselves was the grossest libel, and he protested against the Court being made the medium of publish hag libels, and perhaps it would net end there. The CHAIRMAN thought, upon the point of order, Mr. Leslie had a right to proceed. Mr. LESLIE then proceeded to describe the state of the sewer according to the Reports of the Surveyors in 1808, the defects of which were a want of a free out let into the Thames, and an increasing capacity as it advanced to the river. Contiguous to this outlet of the sower there was the property of a Commissioner of Sewers.—(Hear, hear.) There was a Special • Committee appointed, and this Commissioner sat upon the Committee, and the contractors who exe cured the works were also Commissioners. From Charlotte-street, Pimlico, to the outlet at Millbenk, distance of 5,128 feet, there was expended on the King's Scholar-pond sewer nearly 21,000/ , of which about 3,0001. was spent on the portion abutting on the property in question. The Special Committee met, and came to various resolutions. First, they de cided that flood-gates should be placed next the Thames, and subsequently they resolved that they should be tensed .higher up the sewer, which would have the effect of making it navigable for a considerable distance up the property in question. Then they decided that for the security of the walls of the sewer, there should be introduced piles, with one fende: plank. He thus showed that this Special` Committee did that in pri vate, which ought, by the laws re hating to sewers, to have been done in open Cuui t, and that the public were damnified in consequence. The worthy Commissiorier then went at great length into the history of the forma tion of the sewer, quoting the minutes of the Special Committee for the different works undertaken as be went along, which the Chairman and the Cl wle read as Nit.. Leslie called for them. The Honourable Corranissioner then read from the Minute-book of the Court, 28th a Oethber, 1808, an extract, showing that the Surveyor, in obedience to the direc tion of the last Court, presented a calculation, showing the quantity of reservoir in the old water course, and that of the reservoir that %yid be gained by taking the land proposed to be taken from Mr. White, avid placing the proposed flood-gates at a distance from the Thames, viz.:—Calculation of the space ti,aa will be lost as a reservoir at the south end of the King's Scho 1 tr-poed Sewer ; supposing the flood=gates to be fried 293 feet up the sewer from the river Thames, the quantity would be 41,738 cubical feet. Celeulation of space given up by Mr. White be ts eca the bridge and the propose.l situ • Con of the flood-gates as a reservoir in lieu of that 1 beteeen the river - Thames and the ilosri-gates, the quantity of reservoir here obtained would be 42,283 cubical feet. Mr. Leslie here pointedly called the atteition of the Court that the Spne lost to the public and given up by the Commissioner ras in the wrong dheetion, for the Re port of the Surveyors showing the great defecti in the sewer prior to any alterstion was the want of a free outlet to the river Thanes, and an increasing capacity as the sewer advances. He then resumed the minute. The expense of excavation of Mr White's ground as proposed to be givea up by him would be about 701. or 801. The ground excavated as above would be worth to the Commissioners, in my opinion, more than the excavation and brick work would be saved by the straight line to the amount of 80/. or 90/. It being represented to the Court that the proposition of the Special Committee of Works, for ex cavating the ground within the sewer, for admitting barges next to Mr. White's premises, had originated from the circumstance of the Committee having consi dered that the great additional quantity of water in down the sewer by the alteration, for the flood-gates therein would prevent Mr. White's barges lying in safety alongside his wharf next the river— " Resolved unanimously—That in consequence of the arrangement agreed upon betweea Mr. White, and the Committee appointed for the improvement of the sewer, whereby he hag agreed to relinquish a very considerable portion of his freehold land for the widening of the sewer, as a reservoir, above the situation of the intended gates, he be allowed to widen the creek or sewer at the outlet below the gates, by cutting away part Of his land to a sufficient width on his own side of the said creek or sewer, so that the water of the server may not be interrupted in the entrance to the River ; and to be also allowed to fix a floating boom to the opposite side, to prevent any annoyances en tering the same; the expense incurred for the walls on the sides of the sewer, between the intended flood gates and the Thames, which shall exceed the proportion able expense of the wall between the said flood-gates and Mr. White's bridge, already built, to be borne by Mr. White, together with other extra expenses. The Com missioners erecting a bridge across the sewer at Mil bank at their own expense, the whole to be formed according to a plan produced to the Court this day." The Hon Commmhosioner then called for the minutes of the next Court, by which it appeared that the word unanimously in the preceding_ reso lution was struck out by order .of the Court ; and he deemed this another very suspicious circum sta Ice in the transaction. In January, 1809, this Special Committee was suspended by order of the Court, and a Committee of . Inquiry was appointed. 'File Investigating Committee met on the 27th of January, 1809, and ordered the surveyor to report in writing what orders had been given, what had been the proceedings, what works had originated with the Spe cial Committee, and whether any land had been taken for widening the sewer without notice to the owners. On the 10th Pebruary they again met, and received the Report of the Surveyors. Upon which it was moved—" That it is the opinion of this Committee that the information concerning the proceedings of the Spe• ciel Committee appointed 19th August 1808, can be sufficiently obtained from the minutes of that Commit tee." Whereupon an amendment was put, " That the Members of this Committee do proceed to examine the Officers of this Commission as to the objects contained in . the notice." This amendment was lost, the Com mittee adjourned s i ne di e , and thus ended the in quiryat that period, and the original Special Com mittee resumed their proceedings. Mr. Leslie then reminded th e C ourt t h a t h e had shown that, on the 5,128 f ee t o f t hi s sewer, w hi c h cost the rate-payers 20,756/., 3,0004 of that sum was expended on that portion of the sewer at the outlet into th . ; Thames ; and the proportion of this expense contri buted by the Commissioner was in cash 421. 7s. and an allowance to him, for old materials pulled does n, of 210/., making together 2521. 7s. 41. The consequence of this alteration thus male, had been, that the parishes of Marylebone and St. George Hanover-square, had been damnified to an immense ex tent, the houses in Bond -street, Bruton-street, dui Marquis of Lansdowne's, and all the lower part of those parishes having been frequently flooded in con sequence of the obstruction occasioned in the sewers, by one of the Commissioners being permitted to moor his boats in the sewer, which before this expenditure of 21,0001. had never been navigable. The land in ques tion, at ihe outlet of this sewer, was sold " by an agree ment, dated 22d November, 1832, for 11,2501., for two acres, to the Equitable Gas Company, together with the free liberty of ingress, egress, and regress, to and for the said Company, their executors, adminis trators, and assigns, their servants, agents, and work men, with lighte rs , b a rges, an d b oa t s , o r otherwise, up and down the sewer, to the ground thereby agreed to be sold, for the purpose of landing and unloading all such goods, coals,or articles as they might require." The consequence of this agreement was the unfortunate question they had been called on to discuss that day. Why should any of the Commissioners be permitted to sell free ingress and egress to one of the public sewers? Before the Gas Conyany entered into the agreement, notice had been given that certain parts of the premises would be wanted for the public benefit. A Bill in Chancery was filed by the Equitable Gas Company against Mr. Saunders, the Chairman—the last person against whom it ought to have been filed, as he had never presided over the meetings of the Special Committee, but had washed his hands of the proceedings—and Mr. Pritchard and Mr. Hoof, the contractors, for interfering with the property, and they obtained an ex parte injunc• tion to prevent the Commissioners from proceeding with their works. The Chancery proceedings cost the ihsm mission 300/., and the injunction was dissolved with costs. Having obtained this triumphant position in Chancery, in Medley against Saunders, Pritchard, and Hoof, how came this Court to be involved in Medley against Pritchard, and why was this tender of 1,696/., which is upon the business-paper to-day, when it ap peirei that actually at that time there had been no such action brought? One of the Commissioners had objet ted to pay this money, because the notice of action required by the statute on sewers, had been waived.. Now, how had it been waved ? The solicitor had stated that the opposite party wished notice of action to be waved, and they having applied to the late Chair man, who stated very properly that he thought he had nothing to do with it, would not waive the notice, while the Commissioner's name was in it, but agreed to waive the notice for the contractors, and thus they got into the cause of Medley and Pritchard. The present Chairman not liking to take upon himself the responsibility which the late Chair man had done, had a Law Committee to assist him. The worthy Commissioner then detailed at great length the different stigcs of the law proceedings. On the procee lings on which the injunction had been dis-' solved, it had been sworn that the obstruction oc casioned by the mooring of the barges was so great n 7 to occasion the overflowing of the marsh lands of St. George's, Hanover-square. Thus he had shown that, in 1608, the cewer was not navigable, that it had been made oat igable contrary to hue, and that, in consequence, the rate-payers of 111ar)lehone and St. George's, Hanover-square, were now called upon to pay 1,6961., because one of the Commissioners had sold the free navigation of the Commissioners' sower to the Equitable Gas Company. It was their duty, according to their oaths., to remove obstructions, cool not to suffer one of their own body to create obstructions in the public sewers. He hoped no Commissioner would so far forget his duty, as to sign the ordsr for the payment on the pre sent rate-payers. The Corornis!ioner whose property had been benefited, should be called upon to pay the trooriet in question, and net the rate-payers. Mr. ADEY asked if the Chairman could put that which was a direct libel from the Chair? 1 The CitarnMalc said he could not put any motion or amendment, unless it were seconded. Mr. FULLER thought it was very undesirable that such a etatemeat should remain unanswered ; and yet he knew not how far he should be justified in seconding that which some Hon. and Learned Commissioner stated to be a libel. He would not second the motion because the name of one of the Commissioners had been intro- duced. The CHAIRMAN could not put it unless it was se conded. Mr. FULLER said that a more disgraceful thing tbaer the suffering such a thing to drop, he had never known. On the original motion beieg put, Mr. ADEY moved as an arnendrneat that the money be net paid, because it was illegal to pay it out of the Severs'-rate. They had a good defence to the action, and they ought to have made use of it. He would not rip up old trausactious, and cast a slur upon the cha ff of individuals, but he thought it highly indreo rous that papers should go forth to the public, bringing such indecent charges against any Commissioner or Commmissioners, when they had hal no opportunity to defend themselves. Mr. MULLING seconded the amendment. Mr. LESLIE thought the character of the Court was involved in this payment. He was glad that two mem bers of the legal profession had come forward to move that they could not legally pay this sum. They were at the bar of public opinion. He had not brought forward the matter as a charge against an individual Commissioner ; he had found among the records of the Court that the transaction had been one in which the private benefit of an individual had been consulted, and he had brought it forward. Mr. FULLER thought some answer should have been given to Mr. Leslie's statement. Mr. WHITE thought the present a favourable oppor tunity for answering that statement ; the state of the sewer had been complained of as far back as the time of Sir Christopher Wren, who had devised a plan for its im pravement. It was evident that the gentleman who had brought forward the question was ignorant of the transaction and of the laws of !ewers generally. That there bad been the greatest improvement in consequence of that outlet having been made he was convinced ; and it was stated on the bizbest authority, that there ought to be no gates at the mouth of any sewer, and that the reservoir drainage was bad and impolitic. Tic Commissioners had taken away the landing place of the wharfs, and the balance of account was in favour of the Commisioners, and not of tle possessors of the property. His belief was that no money could Le so well expendel as that spent in obtaining increased depth and increased current. After the sewer had been embanked the height it ought to have been, the Commissioners put up flood-gates, and he believed that all those who put up the flood gates would be assessed in the ear ease. It was not the individual to whom allusion had been made that had • put up the flood-gates, but the Commis sioners, and thus the obstruction had been caused.. win le previous transaction hid been a matter of corm pact in 1808, and the sale to the Equitable Gas Company of free ingress or egress ha I been made, with a reser %a' icu of the rights of the Commissioners of Salvers, which the Hoe. Commisiioner had omit'el to state. The original hargain between the Commissioners of Sowers and the individual alluded to, he had no hesita tion in saying, was ore of the most beneficial ever made for the public. He should not vote on the mo tion at all. Mr. Leslie rose, but was not allowed to explain ; but Mr. THISELTONER, at his request, stated, on re ferring to the document, that the agreemett for the s ►le of the property between the Commissioner and the Equitable Gas Company, from a record of the Court—viz., the affidavit in Chancery of the soli citor to the Equitable Company, the sale in cluded the free liberty of ingress, egress, and re gress to and for the said Company, their executors, administrators, and assigns, their servants, agents, and workmen, with lighters, barges, and boat•, or otherwise, up and down the sewer, to the ground, thereby agreed to be sold for the purpose of landing and unloading all such goods, coals, or articles, as they might require. But nothing in the document in question showed anything about the reservation of the rights of the Commissioners of Sewe)s. Mr. GUNTER came prepared to ask for the payment of the money, but as Mr. Arley had stated there was a good defence to the claim, his mind had been consi derably changed. SOLICITOR stated that if they did not pay the 1,6961., they could not put those pleas upon the record that would be a bar to the action. Mr. ADEY said that, situated as they now were, he wou!d advise the payment of the money. The CHAIRMAN next addressed the meeting, There could be no doubt that the most expedient course would be to make the tender, and recommended the meeting to abide by the solemn decision of the Court of Com mon Pleas. A show of hands was then taken, when there ap peared— _ For the motion For the amendrneLt lO Majority for the payment of the money —. 6 Several Commissioners would not vote. A COMMISSIONER moved that the names be taken down, which was done accordingly. Tha CHAIRMAN having put the question that a warrant do issue for payment of the same, Mr. THISELTON DYER inquired on what district it was intended to issue the warrant ? The CHAIRMAN replied, the western district. Mr. THISELTON DYER then inquired whether there was a sufficient suns in the hands of the bankers stand ing to the credit of that district, to meet that payment, because if there was not, and they had to levy a rate to make up the amount, the legality of such rate might be disputed. The CLERK replied there was. Several quosfons were then put t' the Clerk, the answers to which were not considered satisfactory by some of the Commissioners, and the following amend- paid ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS. Mr. HAWES wished to ask the Noble Lord whether it W 29 the intention of the Government to in troduce any measure with reference to the Ecclesiasti cal Courts, and if so, whether it was intended to make such measure applicable to the questions at present in litigation before those Courts. It was exceedingly de sirable that the jurisdiction of those Courts should be defined, and that some measure for the regulation of the proceedings should be adopted. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that it was the in tention of the Lord Chancellor to introduce some mea sure for the regulation of Ecclesiastical Courts into the House of Lords, whether it might also be nece;sary to introduce some measure of a similar nature in that House he could not at present say. MUNICIPAL REGISTRATION. INir. BARING wished to know whether it was the intention of the Noble Lord to introduce any measure to remove the difficulties that had been found in the registration of voters in municipal corporations. In Liverpool and Leeds such had been the difficulties in the registration, that they had been obliged to proceed upon the registration of the former year. Lord J. RUSSELL said, that from what had oc curred in two or three towns, he believed it would be found necessary to bring in a meaFure upon the subject. The other Orders of the Day were then read, for the purpose of postponing them:_ LORD KEANE. PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS. PRIVATE BUSINESS, FOR MONDAY, FED. 22. Second Readings. 1. Southorpe Inclosure. 2. Collywcston Inclnsure. 3. \Vic)hornc and Piddlctown Road. 4. Sint!) Western Railway (so. 1). 5. Eastern Counties Railway. 6. Manchester and Salford Waterworks. 7. Liverpcol Gas. ' S. York and London Assonance Company. NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE BILL OFFICE. FRIDAY, FEB. 19. 1. Southwark Improvement (No. t),—Second Reading, Feb. 23. 2. Ardrossan Ilarbour,—Committee on Petition, March t. 3. Scrabster Harbour,—Committee on Petition, March 2. l:.;; 8 COMMITTEES ON PETITII FOR THE EN Mo N V, 1. Nuffield, Wallingford, Want ay., and Farriugdon Iload. ' 2. Kentish Town Paving. 3. Southampton Trust (Sr. Pan. cras) Paving. 4. Bourn Drainage. 5. Stoke upcn-Trent, &c , Small Mbts 6. Banstaple and Braunton Rds l 7. Slough and Colubrook Road. S. Christchurch and Lyndhurst Roads. 9. London and Tower Hamlets: Cemetery. WEDNESD& I. Abingdon Inclosure. 2. Whitmore Inclosure. 3. Mcdburn Inclosure. 4. Eising Inclnsure (No. 2). b. Lincoln Roads. 6. Liverpool Docks (for add tlonal Prov Mon). 7. Steads' Patent Wooden Pal lug Company. THURSDAY I. Gourdon Harbour (No. I). 2. Tinsley and Doncaster Road. 3. Gravesend Pier. 4. South Metropolitan Gas. 5. Guarantee Society. 6. Patent Rolling and Corn. pressing Iron Company. Fnitur, 1. Wells and Highbridge R gad. 2. Dovcnby and Papcastle In. closure. 3. Portishead Pier. Fen. 23. 7. Great Level of the Wash Inclosure. S. Youghal Harbour. 9. Dewsbury and Leeds Road. 10. Yeovil Roads. 11. Bradford (York) Waterworks 12. North Midland Railway. FEB. 26. 4. Liverpool and Crosby Road. 5. Deptford Pier. 6. Merthyr Tydvil Stipendiary Magistrate. NOTICES OF MOTIONS, AND ORDERS OF THE DAY, FOR MONDAY, FEB. 2:2. ORDERS OF THE DAY. Poor.law Amendment 13i11,—Committee. Parliamentary Voters (Ireland) Eill,—Second Reading. East Indi.t Rum Bill,—Committee. Supply,--Committee. Ways and Means,—Committee. Lord John Russell,—To move Parliamentary Voters (Ireland: Bill, before the other Orders. NOTICES OF MOTIONS. 1. Mr. E. J. Stanley,—Bill to empower the Commissioners of Woods and Forests to make a new Street from Coventry-street to Leng.acre, and to advance money in aid of further itn provernent in Clerkenwell, Westminster, and Southwark. 2. Sir Edward Knatchbull,—lteturn, showing the sums paid for Law Expenses in each of the years 1833, 1836, 1837, 1838, 1839, and 1840, by order of the Poor.law Commissioners, for any Suits or Law Proceedings in which they have been engaged in the discharge of their duties ; specifying the amonnt paid in each case, the nature of each suit, and the result of the proceeding. THE IRON DUKE.—The arrival of an iron s.ra-going vessel in our river, is an incident ct so much in terest from its novelty, that we have Lean tempted to pay it a vi it, and to gather such particulars as might be de sirable to possess. The Courier had previously given us AR article on the subject, but it is too meagre and unsais fitctory to be of much use to our merchants. The Iron Duke was built at Glasgow, for the employ of Messr2. George Hetiek and Co., of Waterford; and left that port with a general cargo on the 6th July. He: outward pass.ge was not marked with any peculiar difference from tat of others which left at or about the same time, Alto gether the success of the first iron ship to this port must be highly gr, tifying to those concerned in her, but we un derstand it is doubtful if even the Duke, with his iron sides, will at any period equal the well tied wooden walls of old England.—Friend of India. All the instruments formerly employed for re lieving deafness are now far superseded by the Voice Conductors, invented by It. Solomons and Co., No. 36, Old B ond.strect, and No. 1, Old Jewry, City. From their ingenious and minute eon struc.tion (being only a quarter of an inch in diamet er ) they cannot be perceived by the nearest bystander ; and while they enable deaf persons to distinguish mixed and confused sounds, or the voice of a distant speaker, they afford the most effectual relief to subjects com plaining of singing noises in the ear, and are altogether pro ductive of the most desirable results. Their Patent Spectacles extend great relief to the visual organs, and from a combination of properties which they possess, are vastly superior to those hitherto employed. To such persons who closely apply their sight to read. ing or any minute employment, but particularly by candle or lamp light, they will be found of incalculable advantage. The hi ghest testimony to their superior merit is conveyed in the fact, that the principal medical authorities in Europe use them, and strongly re_ commend their adoption to all persons who may require optical aid. —N.B. In consequence of the various attempts to impose base imitations on the public, and the Patentees being entirely uncon. nected with persons advertising under the same name, their sub joined address should be cautiously noted, No. 36, Old Bond. street, and No, 1, Old Jewry. Mr. HUME wished to know whether t':e Noble Lord would have any chjection to his moving for a re turn of the services of Lord Keane ? Lerd J. RUSSELL said the motion stns rather an unusual one, but he should have no objection to its being made in the manner pointed out by the Hon. Member. Sir J. HOBHOUSE said the return had no con nection with the pension to Lord Keane, as that was a pension for serviee3 agreeably to the Queen's Message. After a few words from Sir DE LACY EVANS, Mr. HUME moved for a statement of the military aervicesofLord Keaue„—Agreed to. Mr. W YSE moved for returns relative to education. —Agreed to. The House adjourned at a Qllarter past Seven o'Clock to Monday. ONS FOR PRIVATE BILLS r3UING WEEK. FEB. 22. 10. North American Colonial Association of Ireland. 11. Sunderknd Borough Courts. 12. London and Blackwall (Coin mercial) Railway. 13. Roxburgh and Dumfries • Roads. 114. Aniian Fisheries. 15. Hatfield Court of Requests. 16. imperial Life Insurance Company. 17. Ithym!.ey Iron Company. 18. Henley and Dorchester Road. 19. Commercial Gas. TUESDAY, FEB. 23. 1. Monkland Canal. 13. Pill (Somerset) Dock. 2. Lincoln Sma!l Debts. 14. Newark Court of Requests. 3. Selby and Leeds Road. 15. Wakefield Waterworks. 4. Stamford Improvement. 16. Northern and Eastern Rail. 5. Sedgiey Road. way. 6. Bristol and Exeter Railway. 17. Northern and Eastern Rail_ 7. Clifcan Bridge. way (Hertford and Ware S. Gamlingay Inclosure (No. 1). Eranch). 9. Blackburn Improvement, 18. Dliddlcsex Sessions. Market, Re. 19. Whittlesca Inclosure. 10. Neptune Marine Insurance 29. Birmiugharnand llagley Road Company. 31. Whaddon Chase Inclosure. 11. London Bridge Approaches 22. Mersey Conservancy. and Royal Eirchange A venues. 23. Woodside and Iloylake Road, 12. Portbury Pier and Ap- '24. Liverpool Local Acts. preaches. 125. Brimington Inclosure. FED. 24. mer.t was therefore moved itt the suggestion of Mr. THISTLETON DYER: " That the said sum of 1,6961. 13s. Id. be not paid, it not appearing to the Court that there is a sufficient sum in the hands of the hankers, received from the Western District, to ply that sum." The question was then put, wen there rppeared— For the issuing of the warrant For the amendment Majority against the amendment 7 Several Commissioners again refusing to vote. The warrant for payment was then ordered to issue. MARQUIS OF NORMANBY'S DRAINAGE BILL. The CHAIRMAN felt it to be his duty to stlte that a drainage Bill had been brought into the House of Lords, and it was necessary it should he looked into, as it affected the powers and rights of that Court. He thought the Bill would prove highly advan tageous to the public interests, but at the same time the Commissioners ought to look into it and ascertain the position in which they stood with respect to the measure. He thought it would be desirable that a Committee should be appointed to con sider it and report thereon. He would therefore move that a Committee for that purpose be appointed. Mr. ADEY thought it would bo better that a special day should be appointed for the discussion of the sub ject in open Court. A show of hands was then taken, when there appeared a majority in favour of the appointment of the Com mittee, but as the Chairman could not get six Com missioners to serve on it, although there were upwards of 24 present, the resolution fell to the ground. It was there fore agreed that a special Court should he summoned for the consideration of the subject one day next rack. Petitions and memorials were then received (it being five o'clock). Many of those petitioners and me morialists were respectable tradespeop'e, and had been kept in Court the whole of the day, to their great in convenience and the neglect of their business. It would be as well if the Commissioners, in future, would hear the :petitions. &c , before they enter upon ques tions that are likely to create discussion, and thus enable the parties to occupy their time more profitably by pur suing their respective avocations. THE KIRK AND THE VETO. It appears from a statement made by Mr. Black, in the Edinburgh Town Council, on Tuesday, that in the Old Church, which is now vacant, up to the end of De cember, there were only 38 seats taken. This church is situate in the heart of the Old Town, and consequently in the midst of a large population, yet Chalmers and his party call out for more churches, while they cannot fill those already built. Tho Old Church has now been vacant nearly six months ; a further delay was agreed to at the last meeting, and it is not at all impossible, therefore, that the right of presenting may fall into the hands of the Presbytery. The valuable living of North Leith has also been vacant about six months. Some. three or tour candidates have withdrawn, oi:e after the other : four more arc a2ain in the field, and tne vete ists and non-vetoists seem as unlikely as ever to come to an agreement. According to an Edinburgh paper, long and warm discussioes took place on Monday, at a motley meeting held in the parish church, each party squabbling for his favourite candidate, amidst ebeer, laughter, and hisses, and one speaker (Mr. Cooper) seemed as determined to fight and conquer as lilt.: had been with Napier on the Syrian coast. 't We have got a Tested right," said he, " in the presentation. We wilt stand by that right, and nail our colours to the mast.—(Laughter, cheers, and hisses.") And all this takes place under the blessed system of the men, who while they talk of peace, and harmonious calls, and Gos pel ordinances, not only set the law at defiance, but stir up the worst passions among the people committed to their charge. This veto, as we have often said, will be the death of the Kirk. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, FEB. 19. (Sittings in Guildhall, at Nisi Prins, before Lord DEN. MAN and a Common Jury.) TOWN V. STORY. This was an action brought for a malicious slander, uttered against the plaintiff by the defendant, who pleaded the general i-sue. Mr. PLATT, Q. C., stated the case. Both parties resided in Whit chapel. The subject of the plaintiff's complaint was a malicious slender, published against him by the defendant, whereby it would be seen certain damage had arisen to the plaintiff in the way of his trade. It could not but he well understood how mischievous in its corsequences would be any slander, uttered against a tradesman's solvency. It would he shown in evi dence that the defendant claimed certain rent due by the plaintiff on the premises which he occupied, but which he refused to pay the defendant, as he conceived he had no right to it, unless the defendant would indem nify him (the pltintitl. This circumstance formed part of the foundation on which the slander complained of was raised. The plaintiff was a manufacturer of chocolate and cocoa, and was employed by grocers to prepare these articles—they sending him the raw material. One of the grocers who so employed the plaintiff was a Mr.. Walton, to whom the slander for which the present action was brought, was uttered, and wha in conse quence had ceated to send his goods for reanufa tare to the plaintiff's establishment. The plaintiff was thereby much injured in his business. The Learned Counsel procceled at some length to state the substance -of the evidence which he meant to adduce in support of his case, and then called the following witnesses : Thomas William Clarke examined.—ls in the em ployment of Mr. James Walton, who carries on the business of a grocer. Hs business is extensive. He usually employed Mr. Town to manufactut'e choco late and cocoa for him. The amount manulacturool for Mr. Welton was about 4001. yearly. On the 24th of August lest Mr. Story, the defendant, ended at Mr. Walton's shop, at about eleven o'clock in the morning, and made some inquiries about cocoa. He called a se cond time and asked witness if it was Mr. Town who manufactured cocoa and chocolate for him. Wit ness replied in the affirmative, when Mr. Story said that be had that morning distrainA Mr. Town for rent, to the amount of 391. 15s.e due by him (Town) on the premises which fie occup ed from Story, the defendant, in the present action. The wit ness here proceeded to detail a conversation which took piece in his presence between Mr. Story and Mr. Walton, tire substance of which was that, in reply to , some questions from Story, Mr. Walton stated that Torso manufactorel coffee, cocoa, and chocolate for him—that he rent him the raw material, and that at that vere time he (Toen) had got a great quantity of bath cocoa and coffee belonging to him (Walton) en his premises ; upon which Story observed that he had seen at Town's place nothing but a few bags of cocoa, a little coffee, and a large quantity of coffee flight (which witness described as the chaff, that comes from coffee, when being screened), when Mr. Walton observe 1, that Mr. Town stated his willingness to pay the rent demandel of hint by Story, if the latter would indemnify him. Story replied that that was all d—d humbug, and only said for the purpose of de ceiving. Mr. Walton then remarked that he had had much dealing with Town, and always found him an upright, straightforward sort of man, hut poor. The defendant replied, " I cannot say so—l've found aim a d—d swindling thief." The witness also stated that Mr. Walton had in consequence of what the defendant stated, withdrawn his employment from Mr. Town. The witness was cross-exansined at some length but nothing material was elicited. Jam - es Walton—Was in the habit of paying from 1001. to 150/. a year for chocolate. Mr. Story called upon ny, and in consequence of the statement he made to me I was very angry with Town, and said I would never employ him again. In my conversation with Story, he said he considered Town anything but an honest man. I have never employed him since. He asked me where Messrs. Travers live,l—(they are the largest persona in the trade in England, I think, and they employed the plaintiff). I said I did not know exactly, but I hoped he would not state to them what he had stated to me, as I was sure they would take their business from him, and they were his main depen dence. He also said something about there being a great deal of hypocrisy and humbug about Mr. Town. I discontinued giving work to Town because I did not think my property would be safe with him in copse_ sequence of these seizures. I did not consider him a dishonest man. Sir F. PoLLocx addressed the Jury for the defem dant, and Lord DENMAN having summed up, The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff— damages, 7,5/. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MANSION-HOUSE. A young man, of respectable appearance, named ill'earthy, was brought before the Lord Mayor on Wedoesday, charged by Mr. Lutge, of No. 80, Lud gate-street, furrier, with having been concerned, with several other persons, in cheating tradesmen in the City. Mr. Lutge re 'nested that the Lord Mayor would remand the young man until the officers should have an opportunity of finding the prisoner's father, whom the complement described as deeply implicated in the plot, and his Lordship acquiesced. Next day M`Carthy, senior, was brought before his Lordship, he having been picked up in the street in a state of drunkenness, and lodged in the station-house, where, upon his recovering, it was ascertained that be was just the person the police wanted. It appeared that while the father was tasting wines at the Docks, the son was apprehended and charged at the justice room, so that the -state of sobriety brought a very dis agreeable state of things to the view of the former. Mr. Lutge stated that several persons were involved in the schemes by which tradesmen were now suffering in the City, and that a person called at the shop and or do two muffs to be sent to his office, at No. 14, Queenhithe, stating that if they were approved of the money should be paid there. 'Witness sent a messenger with the muffs, which the man imprudently left e% office upon being told that he must call again• lie,ge cull again, but he got neither muffs nor money. '". younger prisoner subsequently called and ordered 0'; shawls to be sent to the same address, mentionieg ld when the shawls were sent both muffs and shawls eheush be paid for. Witness accordingly s ent a messenger w.lbe the order, but desired him on no accou nt to lee" 1 0 goods without the money. The porter, however, persuaded to disobey the instructions, and the e' s° quence was as might be expected. o f T th h e e p p r o i s t o t e n r e r s s a , i d h a t v h i n n t g h o receivedtoo kt h ep shawlsarticular fo from Mr. Lutge, not to leave them without reeeivieg the mon. Th 11 . fatherwas out, and that all was right, and t h e many more goods would be required, The son, however, having told him thi s : h e though t m r ., might venture, particularly as the place was one dy e . 1 , an d go tea r respectable appearance, to leave the sbavele, off the receipt of the invoice.the Mrs. Lutge, wife of the complainant, said that i - a „. • elder prisoner called at the shop and saw her, au dtbirecootif;i dared the muffs to be sent down to No. the Quen-ld hithe, and said that he would see whether y"- answer. Jed .„p Mrs. Lutge declared that she never intended to hare given credit to the man, and th at she '- pected something of the kind when he c alled. Mr. Thomas Cox, of No. 14, Queenhithe, statei that fro: the elder prisoner took one floor of the premises i m petigo him, and stated at the time that he was an wine, and an exporter of hardware and other g oods , : d gave a respectable reference. Witness, however, f° that numbers of tradesmen were calling with bille,diaere, believing that he had got a regular nest of og i° The determined to get rid of them as soon as possible, .. d e prisoner left the premises the other day There ^- a he was sure several persons connected wi th thee, :all he was sure that if their apprehension w ere gee,er known, crowds of defrauded tradesmen would be ' ll tendance. sad Mr. Dawson, jun., of the house of Poo° „est, Son, stationers and newsvenders, Carme n -s. ia January,tkistatednooti,evryt h t te h o a afit t orhmde theo amountf ordered i y , o c u a n or g pit younger e. prisoner s gad. o n n cd ; jor. other a ca n‘ v m doi e mrt to jacc t d i see s b d. el . :f dhus in ; pr e g in the neighhourhood, but could ' not bear and the about them. He then made out the bill, Pm gee to th. - si a order to the address, with strict injunctions senger not to leave the stationery without bei n g e P o r the amount, under any circumstances. Tlr, rn „:pcst" ger, however, calculating upon the respeettw e rCsrO a ance of the place, left the goods on hie 011° sibility. eg et The messcrger said lie was induced by the P. a it prisoner, who said that the money should be 01 the aft 3rnoon, to leave the goods at the pre mise 6. e keri Mr. Smallwood, of No. 108, Strand, trunk r il e t he said that the elder prisoner called at his eb ° P,,rg t ° Ist of February, and said that his son was e., - 0 1 - 0 0 college, and required a portmanteau. The 0 0) , ° , -- a rea' 3 . I. 105., and witness sent the portmanteau in the OP mg to the premises. The messenger was pu t 0: C o 16c an i. excuse, and no money had been received o c tit of tae article. It was left at Queenhithe 0 0 licet)u the respectability of the house. e t oe The elder prisoner said that he never b 0 1 charged with an offence, and that be had ahc a Y i i,:vite with integrity. The whole business , arose from the dietivc feelings of the landlord, whom' he bad re ` u paid. lia r s Mr. Cox declared that he had no vindictive le,' ea r He certainly felt very much that his house sOtilloond taro a nest of swindlers, and he resolved , %ben l'eneedill that such was the case, to get rid of them es h as possible. A a y es t ' The prisoners were then remanded till T eo — n MORTALITY in the METIt°I3-14 The following are the results of " A Table of ° ere is the Metropolis, showing the Number of Deal3-illb,A6 all Closes Registered, in tile week e nding SaturiePv 13th Fehr Lissy, 1841." The Table is ilsued from ki of the Registrar-General Wee t h . Melo% CAUSES OF DEATH. TOP. ' I ,vreCt..g" ni"2o4 Epidemic, Endemic, and Contagious Diseases. 111°., D:scases of the Brain, Nerves, and Senses Diseases of the Lungs, and other Organs a ; 66 37 6 1 8 Respiration Diseases of the Hea-t and Bloodvessels ......... D: - If t 1 41, id ether 6° iiseases of the 3 tomacti, dyer, am_ 64 4 Organs of Digestion... 6 9 K• Diseases of the idnoys, &c. ........ ...... (I Childbed, Diseases of the Uterus, & c.......... 6 1 Diseases of the Joints, Bones, and Muscles 0 10 3 Diseases of the Skin, &c 7 l Diseases of Uncertain Seat ................... r 4 Old Age, or Natural Decay ........................ 8 Deaths by Violence, Privation, or Intemperance 1 Causes not specified ,. ..................... Deaths from all causes... ......................... .• Average Weekly Deaths .. .Averag e ' 53 3, , Deaths in the 0.0, no Week. me a Ia „ Western Districts ... 162 ...." 16' North Districts CentraLDistriets 253 ••••• 211 East Districts South Districts ... ...... 90 te Total 1137 ...... lig A re, t o It is stated that under the term Metrope inclusieol prised the 32 districts herein mentioned, whic ll l oo Cif , ' O. City of London within and without the walls, 0004. 5t Liberties of Westminster, the out parieblarylebSe; 00 0 bills of mortality—and the parishes of St. nicrs go w't , St. Pancras ; Kensington ; Fulham ; 6 1 . Ic, (Chapelry) ; St. Luke, Chelsea; padding tOn d t . marl . Stoke Newington • St. Leonard, BromleY i i, las au 0 0. bow ; Camberwell% Greenwich ; St. N ie l 01 1111 for Paul, Deptford; and Woolwich. The poll l ai ereg ja =rated in 1831 was 1,594,890. The wee l l s doo' 1838, 1839, 1840, was obtained by dividi n g - the three years by 156. General Register-office, Feb. 18, 1 841 ' il ..,cte _ .._.----...--.,—,--,,-------- In noticing cot c l t by any matter at this anon ) t os it st either with the East or West Indic., it is Istbosc des!. there should be no leaning towards either °l n iali t n i ; at interests, and that no facts should be kept r k ut - a oest it :def' culaLid to assist a correct judgment on tu e ,,,,gy sP., B • ica issue. The argument lately used to show ,-,, ' o roull. t ot• ence has ben given in the West Indies to t''; E posi'" or of rum rather than sugar, is impugned by a C arr o lss 6° % 01 Ho contends that rum is only made from di° 11 , 3 0 jact i re• "skimming of sugar," and that therefore the P' TO 4 'Sr sugar is necessarily involved in its ma nufdet are ' o yer scr 'c' ~ distilling. k skimmings m min ference for making rum, rather than seutti l/ g• tile i litl ho would not therefore attribute the decreaso i g she sca r r d. tation, but would rather find the cause i n " orec ti. .lll of labour, and its uncertainty• even wil e % ' oc i t u- a l Valuable Cf web, he asserts ' with c' n o e ;she'“,, s t %. ready for cutting,—canes equal to 25 0 'cost t ',ire' E ft; U er g a a: pease , no a lf n etr d vre ; ey l v e en c oa u nn l ,i t , u ni culture of which has already x ' °P' o o4 al f° p u r r i l the requitite labour, that the canes may h" Pd - ih , t • 1 11 6 rotting i i the ground. ' It th)uld be observe,cce pt/ staternent , ; arc not so much made in " (cr.. ert ic- O. Western possessions gener ec a ec l n ly t , oin a °i s li t int o yb G s b T iciahl : Wc:: : e rg e: el g' frost r ecell° a rna tt iii but look 1 7 )0 , k it u i p s o i n ai t d h , , th a c t t n i e l g w ro o e r s k i n t o: only at any P r , lc , c ,il i at a 'l r e ' 0 ; d o w, . o.- 0; great favour. The is, ( f cour g se, ne of pr t t' , of labour must bring with it a scariitY , iope r 'eeto and in accounting f,r a diminution ef t. 6 40-, o r should be taken into account .' As fur fo r rata r o ved sugar, aga'nst the protabilty of a preference ." be f r :f, in th e el° that molasses was the only ingredient u sed , le d in r io it might be conclusive could it tus °- L e o Lure of rum ; and furthe , , that the material ca, s oh o , o really contained only a certain quantity the a gog ( t he Tatter, and was not surchared with it f , ,P,1; t" r bec 49 , 00 House of Lords on East India produce w hich I ; roes' di,tinct articles, are employed in the ma" a- of th e -- e c'' gs T o h f e su e g v a id r, e , n , ce taken by the v or bo - vis ' b r a e - to so that the question is st a i s ll v1 1; 1 : w as h e rn t °hears:co g m ; :t :h re e s c h i: Fb s i i c e b ; rial that might have come into the nie'dt e : t ~,t ne t frog° il sugar does not firm part of there " skiinini°o- rum is di >tilled. —rinses. ..., M es a REGISTER STOVES, 3 It. ifid'lr g •ste; i t t a i r v e c h Poles for Window Curtains, Is. 3d. per foot. J: o , i s ter Bd. per elliptic stoves, 4d. per inch ; o rol' ur ",tert with bright fronts, bright and black - bars, ho n f e c b Or v et 6 100 s. ; brass poles for window curtains, ni „%le 3 19 0 ' Is. 3d. per foot • 2 inches, Is. ;a 2 in" l e - te io inches long, with ends rings, and , brackets, (2° f l l r f Catalogues gratis containing the price u A k W ironmonger) 0 % f0r.... -- RIPPON and BURTON, Wells-street, the BIRTHS. south toles, On the 10th of October at Sydney, l' , e' v f lady of Mr. P. W. Flower, cf a daughter. la dy o , On the 18th inst., in Grotycner - s treet, th' D a"- vidson, Esq., of a son. On the 16th inst., at Putney, the wife of M r ' 11. son, of a son. 11. On the 17th _in . , at M St A .ll ll la ß r:' S s,t e ! tenli t a rS tell P ehil:PAilly Gascoyne, of Mickleton, Gloucestershire, B. O. vl. , Howe, third daughter of the late Colonel Tifnin*', pay, ni l , On the 18th inst., at Finkenholt, Hants, Air. 0. to oi of Cowes, Isle of Wight, to Mary Anne, eldest daub Rev. Robert Cole, incumbent of -Tidcombe. lafte o ß n etehteorlostf theof September last, Kalil', pat FA , of South Wales, Hodson, p oldest son a Henry u w . b°'..t: Hyde. Isle of Wight, and grandson of the Re v " .. 1 , the -" On Hamilton, the sth relict in s o t f ' Li n e u G t e r i e l ' a a- n t' t parishes of St. Andrew -4 er 3c s l robe and St. Ann, Blackfriars an-ed 24. t qrs. p o i Da:t 11Ielbournet rode L, On the 16th inst., at Balham, Veteran Battalion, aged 77. 111,LarnLiiint°2s-aYst,re°f '6 7 9ti c Ati o , r oltrt e f Stari' Ca v e ctor ° youngest daughter of the Rcv. W. Armstrong, .. .W. l a te ford-le-Hope, Essex. Widow of th e On the 15th inst., at Rochester, Eliza', _ . 1. • Stokes, Esq., Assistant Commissary-General. „.1.0y..5tn'66. On the 1711 inst., in Southampton-street, F"`,1 13 . 0 ., ag, e - b ios , Surrey , Chitty, E?,q., of the Middle Temple, street, V ,13. On the 11th of September last, at Youg-t °°- n d of her i det C. E. Hodgkinson, Mate, R. N., late in c0n0n3„,.. o, e f t-' e r t v 11 0,— iesty's schooner Young Hebe, t the taking ° t •--- e son of T. Hodgkinson, Esq., o f Wimpole-stree , eta , V a cs , ' e t square. 11. F* Cel e° On the 12th of October last, at Chusan, ~,,ant Lieutenant 18th Royal Irish, eldest son of Lien,' Vavasour, Royal Engineers. ------22m,,.•••■."'0,..•PJee1e London -----°f Printed . No. 112, Strand tec : onnt SO, ce, o. nn le • y of Middlesex.—SaturdFYl retintail '''' Strand, Pihbelisshuend obi 11----111111002Y,0:041 ip EVENING EDITION ~.. ~.. f ' u. s 'Nkt ,:~. ~, i. f 3 .~