The Sun. — London, England, 1841-12-23 00:00:00

EVENING SUN EAST IM)IA HOUSE. A General Court of the Proprietors of East India Stock was held at their house in Leadenhall-street, yes terday morning. G. Lyme, Esq., M.P., and most of the Directors entered the Court at twelve o'clock, when the minutes of the last Court were read end confirmed. The documents relating to the Portuguese Catholic priests at Goa, which were laid before the House of Lords, were laid on the table of the Court. Mr. MONTGOMERY MARTIN said he had been entrusted with a memorial to present to the Court, signed by every mercantile firm_ in the metropolis trading to the East Indies, representing several millions of property, and the statements it contained were so forcible and so true, that he trusted they would induce the Legislature to give them that attention which their importance deserved, and that, not in justice to India alone, but in justice also to England, The memorialists expressed their gratification at the prospect that justice will be done to India; they pray that means may be taken to obtain a reduction upon the piece-goods of India, particularly those of cotton manufacture and on shawls. They showed that the importation of silk handkerchiefs had very greatly increased, hut not for use in this country, they being prohibited nearly by the high duty of twenty per cent.; they were imported for the pur pose of being printed and afterwards exported. The details of the memori a l w ere we ll wor thy o f the consi deration of the Court of Proprietors, and he trusted they would make it a question for the consideration of Par liament at a very early date in the ensuing session o . f Parliament. Tw o y ears ago th e y h a d p resen t e d a peti tion to both Houses of Parliament, nearly in the same terms as the memorial ; but it bad lain almost as dead during that period, and unless the Executive of the Council persevered in demanding that justice to which the people of India were entitled, pro bably other two years might be as unprofitably spent. The memorial indicated one most important thing—it showed Omit the Merchant Princes of England consi dered that Company as responsible for the good government of India. That was indeed not only a most important, but a most gratifying thing. The trade and manufactures of India had been utterly ruined by the competition of this country, and it had been proved before the Committee of the House of Lords that a piece of bandannas cost at Madras 205., while a piece of the same cost only Bs. at Glasgow. Now, how could India stand against such competition ?—why, therefore, tie her further down by high protecting duties. A witness who appeared before the Committee stated that the manufac turers in India paid nothing for their labour, and that all they eat and drank was untaxed. Now, considering that they had several friends in the Committee, it was astonishing that a fallacy so gross should have been allowed to go before the manufacturers and labourers of this country, because it was one which would most naturally alarm them, and prejudice them against the claims of the people of India. It was well known to every gentleman present, that the very reverse was t h e case—that Ind i a was the highest taxed eatery in the world considering her means, and that through the medium of the land lax, the salt mono and others, the price of food, &c., was raised - , e'eorrnously upon the people, and it was right and just That the people of this country should be aware of the fact. The cotton manufacture had been almost utterly destroyed by oar competition and high duties. Sir G. Larpent, in his evidence, gave its history as follows. lie quoted a paper given to him by a gentleman who had resided thirty-five years in India in the civil service, who states that, at one time, 200,000 persons *ere em ployed in the manufacture of the fine cotton fabrics of Dacca; in that city and its environs. "It is supposed that a much less numb e r th an 10,000 in the district now practise the art. They have all disappeared. The city is reduced from 300,000 inhabitants, to about 30,000.'--Q. 2,776.) The statistical re turns fully bear out this testimony. Those documents show that the quantity of cotton piece -goods imported into Great Britain from the East Indies had fallen off from—in 1814, 1,266,608 pieces, to, in 1837, 414,450 pieces. The average value of all piece-goods annually imported into this country from India, during the five years ending with 1814, was 1,400,0001, the value of cotton goods brought to England, and entered for borne consumption during the five last years, has averaged only 2,5261, and of silk goods 92,2851 per annum.—(Qs. 554 and 610) In 1815 the cotton goods exported from India were 13,000,000 rupees (1,300,0000 ; in 1332 they were less than 1,000,000 (100,0001.) ,In the year 1800, Calcutta exported piece-goods alone to the amount of 3,908,810 in number, and in value 1,795,887/ ; while in 1835 the total number of cotton, silk, and em broidered piece goods received in Calcutta from the inte rior, was only 348,727 pieces, value 150,0001. The cotton piece -goods received at Calcutta from the. interior in 1812, were 4,000,000 of pieces ; in 1835-36 they were only 250,000."—(Q. 3,877.) We now imported only 2,000 pieces per annum, and that not for our own con • sumption, but for the purpose of sending out to Maga dore. Indeed, the people of this country would not use Indian cotton now. .A gentleman told him a few days ago that he had sold a piece for 10s., which, only a few years ago, should have brought 50s. It was doubted by many whether a reduction of duty would at all revive that branch of the manufacture of India, but he was of opinion that it would ; but, at all events, in justice to India it ought to be done. Our export to India of cotton increased most wonderfully; even within the last four years it had more than doubled. From 1814, when we exported to India 818,208 yards, it had risen gradually, till, in 1837, it was 64,213,633 yards, about a yard for every man, woman, and child in British India. Even this, however, is not all. We are not sa tisfied with displacing the complete native manufactures to this enormous extent. In .1825, we began to return to India her own cotton in a state ready for weaving. In that year, the value of twist and yarn sent to India was 16,0001. In 1836, it had increased to 602,0001 In the Report of the Lords' Committee—a Report which he had good reason to believe was drawn up by .the Noble Lord, whom be was happy to say was now Governor-General of India—it was a document which did him much credit as a statesman, and the position which he now filled he viewed as an augury of good to India, fur there was a prospect of the views he expressed being carried into effect. That document says . — "It appears to the Committee that the general prin ciple upon which commercial regulations affecting the in tercourse between the United Kingdom and the Colonial dependencies, and the mutual intercourse of those depen dencies with each other should rest, should be that of perfect equality, subject to exception only when the per menant interests of the whole empire, or the temporary circumstances of any part of our fo reign possessions, may seem t o ren der such exception necessary or expedient ; that no partial favour should grant to one colony any advantage over another, either in the colonial ports, or in those o f the United Kingdom; still less that Parliament should partially secure fur the produce and manufactures of the United Kingdom any advantage in any colonial port over the competing pro duce and manufactures of its own dependencies; for it is the firm conviction of the Committee that Colonial pos sessions scattered over the four quarters of the globe, and legislatively dependant on the acts of a distant Government, can only be maintained . in peacef u l and willing obedieisce, by making strict justice and impartiality the sole guides of every: legislative proceeding by which they may be effected." These were noble sentiments, and were worthy of being printed in letters of gold. It was much to be regrotted that the Committee of the Commons had not followed so worthy an example. Some'good had already been done ; the duties upon rum and upon sugar, had been assimi lated with those paid upon those articles the produce of the West Indies. S o f ar, well; b ut t h ey h a d even got more. Formerly the produce of the East Indies, on being imported into Australia, a nd our o th er p ossess i on s in th a t q uarter, were subject_ to the same duties as if they had come from a , foreig n and i ndependent nat i on. By an Ord ier n Council of May last, that unjust system was abrogated, and now the produce of India was admitted OD the same terms as go o d s from the mother country, and that was onlyjustice; , but m uc h remained yet to be done. For instance, inhabitants, could not gro w enoug h o f r i ce t o supply the without taking up the whole of the soil, yet. we imposed a d uty 0120 per cent. upon all r i ce imported there, and thereby prevented a very con siderable traffic, which tinder . a sma l l duty would in stantly arise between that an d i ts neighbours and the continent of India. Then, agai n , l et them leek at the absurdity of our regulation resper "H Z t h e trade in tobacco. Mr. Melville, then Secretary, had laid it so we ll before the Committee that he coul d not improve , upon his statement ; he would therefore read i t e T o b acco , t h e p ro duce of, and imported from, any British possession in the West Indies, America, or t i e being the sam e Mauritius, pays a duty of 2s. 9d. per lb.; if he prod uce of British India, it pays a duty of 3e, that is levied upon all foreign tobacco, principally th e produce of slave labour. With this aggravation, to thpresent,at at of that as, the tobacco of India is very inferior of the United States and Manilla, the duty bears, of course, a much higher relation to its value than it does to the produce of those is, that other of foreign countries. The general result 22,000,0001h5. cleared for home consumpteee, but 45,0001b5. are imported from British India. Mr. Melville , quotes the opinion of parties conversant with the trade , ' that that if the duty were reduced to 2s. 9d., a very considerable consumption of E as t I n di a n tobacco would ensue. Although,' says his informants, the ship ments of East Indian tobacco have hitherto been very limited to this country, we have obtained sufficient knowledge of the quality that might be produced ; and we have no hesitation in stating, that if more care were taken in the cultivation, and the sorts of to bacco cultivated, a very superior description might be grown, and to an extent quite sufficient, even in the finer descriptions calculated for cigars, to supersede the use of Colombian tobacco and second-rate qualities of Havannahs ; of which sorts the number of pounds clear ed for home consumption generally averages 36,0001b5. per month, with a gradual increase' (425); and there is little doubt that, as in the case of coffee, the redu ct i on of duty would result in such an increase of consumption as would effectually pro tect the revenue from loss, it not improve it."— :Why should we receive our tobacco from the slave-hold ing States of Virginia or Maryland, yet impose such a heavy duty up on i t when it came from our own country, where it was- the produce of free labour? Surely that statement was so explicit as to convince every one of the a bsurdity of the course we had pursued, and must force attention to its injustice. But it was not alone in the to bacco trade that the same course was pursued. The spices drugs, and other art i cles, varied from 6 9 i per cent. up to 4.0 . 00 per cent., as shown by the evidence of Mr. Melvand these d ut i es, enormous as they were, were not only injurious, but th ey i mpoverished the articles by preventing their improvement. They had an example of the working of the system in the article of indigo. No sooner was the duty upon it reduced, than we were s upplied with a much better ar ti c l e t h an any we had before. It was painful to compare the state of India with that of any other country. The small Island of Java was far outstripping India. In sugar , ' from 1830 to 1839, the increase in exports from Java was 110,000,0001b5., while the increase from British India during the same period was 45,000,000. Indigo exported by Java had increased 1,000,000 lbs., while from British India the export had decreased one million and a half ; and in coffee the difference was still more enormous. Java had in that period increased her export by 63,000,0001b5., while British India and Ceylon had increased only 2,000,000. Were not such statements very alarming, and did it not lead one to inquire how it was that India did not increase in a ratio with a small petty island like this? In the petition the Directors had pre sented to the Legislature, they had very justly said that they were responsible for the good government of India. Now, surely, it was not the policy of England to terri tories comprising 450,000 square miles, with 47 millions inhabitants, and a revenue of upwards of 12,500,0001.—the Governors of which countries were in fact our subjects, and tributary to us—surely it was not our policy to take the whole of their sea coast, and then treat them as foreign and independent states ? The whole area of the subsidiary, dependent, and tri butary States of British India (exclusive of Scinde, Be loochistan, Affghanistan, or any of the territories west ward of the river Indus) is estimated by Colonel Suther land at 450,000 square miles, which, at the rate of 100 mouths to the square mile, would give 45,000,000 inhabit ants. The revenue of these States is estimated by Capt. Sutherland at 12,500,0001. sterling per annum ; and the force which they could bring into the field, at 120,000 cavalry, and 48,000 infantry. Some of these States pay large subsidies annually for the maintenance of the British supremacy in India, others have commuted these annual payments by cessions of extensive and fertile tracts of country, which yield considerable profits to our Govern ment, and others 'are under strict engagement to furnish heavy quotas of troops, both cavalry and infantry, when ever required by the British rulers. They are all pro hibtted from entering into foreign alliances—from form ing commercial treaties with other nations, and from entertaining foreign Europeans at their Courts. Their territories are surrounded by the Bri9sh dominions, — we have taken possession of their sea-ports, and isolated them from each other, with a view to their political sub jugation. Mysore pays an annual subsidy of 280,0001., and maintains a contingent force, of which 4,000 is cavalry. The revenues and government of this State are now actually administered by Bri tish officers, under the superintendence of the Madras Government; and yet the coffee, and other products of Mysore are treated, on their attempted im portation into England, as if they were the products of a foreign and independent country. Oude, in the year 1801 commuted its subsidy to the British Govern ment of 760,0001. per annum, by ceding the districts of Allahabad, Goruckpoor, &c., which yielded a yearly re venue of 1,352,3471. Troops paid for by the King of Oude are placed in his capital, and his Ma jesty has advanced several millions sterling to the English Government. Hyderabad, in 1800, agreed to cede territories yielding 803,641/. per annum to the British Government, in order to pro vide payment for 8,000 infantry, two regiments of cavalry, with a requisite portion of artillery, European gunners, stores, &c. The Nizam (which is the title of the ruler of Hyderabad), agreed further to grant a subsidy of 300,000 L per annum, to provide payment for a con tingent of 9,000 cavalry, and • 6,000 infantry ; and fur ther, he is bound, on the demand of the British Govern ment, to bring into the field the whole of the forces which he may be able to supply from his dominions, with a view to the speedy, and effectual termination of any war in which the East India Com pany may be engaged. From this state (Hyderabad), we have taken its sea-ports and coast line, and for several years we took upon ourselves the Civil Government of the country. Berar—the Maha Rajah of this State (from whom we have taken its coast line of Cuttack Sea) is bound to pay 80,0001 a-year to the East India Com pany, to furnish a contingent of 3,000 cavalry and 2,000 infantry, with the necessary equipment of guns and warlike stores, ht all times fit for active service; the Rajah is also bound to keep as large an army as the East India Company may deem necessary, and to be ready at all times to assist the East India Company with the whole of his Highness's forces, and with all the re source of his State whenever required. These examples will fully show the position of subsidiary and dependent States of British India ; they are all entirely at our mercy, devoid of political power or commercial freedom; their whole resources, military and financial, at our control ; no alliance permitted between them and foreign Powers, or even between each other; and the British Resident at each native Court is virtually the Sovereign of the country. Yet the raw produce and manufactures of all these States are denied admission into the United Kingdom and its dependencies, except as foreign products. That was unjust not only to India but also to England, and demanded immediate alteration. Why should we take our cotke from the slaves of Brazil while we treated these, our own people, with such injustice ? It would surely be for our benefit to show such a vast population that our relations with them were not wholly political, and for our own advantage, but also commercial and for their improvement. It was quite impossible that the present system could go on, they were wholly impove rishing the country. By returns which had been fur nished to the Proprietors, it was proved that the exports of India exceeded her imports by upwards of 27,000,000 of rupees; they were, in fact, destroying the very life blood of her existence. During the last 20 years the whole flow had been from the East, and it was only par tially supplied by the importation of some silver from China. Surely it was not for the interest of this country that such a ruinous system should continue. In Mount stewart Elphinstone's valuable work on India what a picture was drawn of the former state of India. He says— " The condition of the people in ordinary times does not ' appear to have borne the marks of oppression. The his ' torian of Firuz Shah (1351 to 1394) expatiates on the happy state of the Ryots (peasantry), the goodness of their houses and furniture, and the general use of gold and silver ornaments by their women. Nicoli di Conti, who travelled about A.D. 142 Q, speaks highly of what he saw of Guzerat, and found the banks of the Ganges (or, perhaps, the Megna) covered with towns amidst beautiful gardens and orchards, and passed four famous cities before he reached Mazeria, which he describes as a powerful city, filled with gold, silver, and precious stones. Barbosa and Bartema, who travelled in the first years of the 16th century, corroborate these accounts. The former in particular describes Cambay as a remarkably well-built city in a beautiful and fertile country, filled with merchants of all nations, and with artisans and manufacturers like those of Flanders."—Elphinstone's India, vol. 11. p. 240. Ibn Batuta (A.D. 1440 to 1450) enumerates many large and populous towns and gives a high impression of the state of that country. The Emperor Baber, in the beginning of the 16th century, although he disliked India, declared that it is a rich and noble country, abounding in gold and silver, and ex presses his astonishment at the swarming population, and the innumerable workmen in every trade and pro fession. Abdurizak, Ambassador from the grandson of Tamerlane, visited the south of India, when under the Government of the Hindoos), A.D. 1442, and gives his impression of a prosperous country. Bijayanager, ex cited, by the extent and grandeur, and the wealth of the inhabitants, the admiration of all who visited it. Bartemi states it at seven miles in circumference, and that it was like Milan. Madura, at the extremity of the Peninsula of Hin doostan, is described by Ibn Batuta as a city like Delhi. The same authority says, that through the whole of Weber, for two months' journey, there was not a span free from cultivation ; everybody had a garden, with his house placed in the middle of it, and a wooden fence round the whole. The roads were excellent ; shaded by trees, with resting-houses and wells at regular inter vals along a great part of the coast of Malabar. But, adds Mr. Elphinstone, " the sea-ports, above all, seem to have attracted admiration." Those on both coasts are described as large cities, the resort and habi tation of merchants from every part of the world, and carrying on trade with Africa, Arabia, Persia, and China. A great home trade was likewise car ried on along the coast, and into the interior." Why was it that such a state of things had entirely passed away ? He hoped that document would make some impression on the people of this country, and rouse in them a desire for justice being done to the people of - f lndia, for we ought to be ashamed of ourselves, as Christians, to have permitted such spoliation. When the discussions respecting the Charter were on, Directors evidently participated in the feelings of alarm, for they said it was impossible that they could continue to draw from four to five millions annually from India, without taking some means for promoting her trade. Such a course us was now in operation must undoubtedly prove most injurious to both countries. He had a most alarming document before him, to which he would have been afraid to refer had the Deputy Chairman not said that public discussion was to the benefit of the good Government of India. By that do cument he saw that in September last the Government in India was on the point of suspending cash payments — the public works suspended, &c. Why, at the present moment the expenses of the Government exceeded by ar rme a se tint:3r times the revenue of the country. We had military force in possession of the Bu la t r rrritories, of course greatly increasing the expendi ture. When was this to cease ? The people o f this country had of late been often peti tioning for free trade with France and other countries, but they seemed altogether to forget British India—a place te t country which, i n of the Exchequ er, taking millions anything into out The motion he intended omfany propose b was as follows: ' That petitions be presented to Parlia ment, in conformity with the othll Houses of by this Court on the 16thof resolutions adopted . June, 1839, and with the petition of the East India Company to the Legis lature in February , 1840 , praying th a t Parliament, in the exercise of justice and sound policy, will au thorise the admission of the produce and manufac tures of British India into the ports of the United Kingdom on reciprocal terms with the produce and 'manufactures of the United Kingdom, when imported into British India ; that ships built and registered in British India, and na vigated by our East India fellow-subjects, be entitled to equal rights and privileges with British shipping ; that the produce and manufactures of the subsidiary States of India, whose seaports and frontiers are occupied by the British Government, and who are prohibited from entering into foreign commercial intercourse, b e admitted as the produce and manufactures of British India into every part of the British empire ; and that such other measures may be adopted as will give perfect freedom of commerce between British India and every dependency of the Um led kin d He was only asking them to follow up what the g y do h ad already begun. He thought the time most opportune, and he trusted that the East India Company would ap pear as the first petitioners at the bar in the ensuing ses sion. They might not be successful ; but every concession that was made must only be con sidered as the herald of another till full jus tice was done. First, they asked for the introduction of a system of low duties on the importation of East India produce ; secondly, that the ships managed by natives might b permitted to trade in our ports in the same manner as others, and that the absurd regulation of requiring that there must be so many En;fish sailors in every ship should be done away with. The Lascar seamen manned the cruisers of the Government in thelndian eas, yet they were not permitted to come into our ports as seamen; and our system led other nations to act in the same manner. It was an absurdity, and acted as a pro hibition to the general use of Lascars as seamen. With respect to the third part, that relating to the sub sidary States, there were goods the produce of Mysore at that moment rotting at the Custom-house, in con sequence of the existing state of the law. How could they expect prosperity to attend these subsidiary States? If they kept them growing food and nothing else, that would effectually prevent their ever rising in the scale of prosperity or civilization but if they gave an impetus to the productions and manufacture of other articles that would most essentially contribute to raise them in the scale of civilization. The last point was, that such other measures should be adopted as would tend to increase the commercial interceurse be tween India and the United Kingdom. He would not then go into details ' but he would merely allude to one point of that most extensive and most important subject. He thought the wheat of India ought to be permitted to be entered at a nominal rate of duty.—(Cheers.) There was at the pre sent time a loud cry for a free trade in corn, and he thought that British India certainly had the first claim to be permitted to supply that article. Its claim was cer• tainly greater than that of either Poland or Dantzic, to be permitted to supply wheat to the British market. Large quantities of wheat flour had been imported from India into Liverpool, and had been extensively used in the manufacture of chintzes ' for the purpose of stiffening, for which it was better adapted than any other sort of flour ; it was also, he believed, capable of being most advantageously used in the manufacture of starch. He felt assured that India was capable of supplying by far the greater portion of the wheat ex ported for the consumption of England. He trusted the Directors would accede to the motion, and would present a petition to Parliament, couched iu such terms as in their wisdom they might devise. He thought he might take upon himself to state that the pre sent enlightened Premier, Sir Robert Peel, took the warmest interest in the welfare of India. That great man, he had every reason to believe, had long entertained the opinion that India and England ought to be united by the closest ties, and he was satisfied that he would, as a great and enlightened statesman, see the necessity of adopting measures so essential to the pros perity both of England and India.—(Cheers.) The motion having been seconded, and read by the Secretary, The CHAIRMAN said the Court of Directors fully con curred with the memorialists in almost all the great objects they had in view, and therefore he should not object to the reception of the memorial. He thought the Directors could not be charged with want of attention to the subject, inasmuch as they had last Session presented petitions to both Houses of Par- liament, from the consideration of which great advan tages had already been derived. With regard to the subsidiary States, the Court had been most anxious to adopt the views of the Hon. Gentleman, which he consi dered to be founded on justice, but the Attorney and Solicitor-Generals and the law-officers of the Court of the East India Company had given it as their opinions that no relaxations could be made in favour of Mysore and the other subsidiary States, without foreign coun tries, with which we had reciprocity treaties, having a claim to be put on the same footing. Concurring generally in the views expressed by the Honourable Gentleman, he put it to him whether it would not be a more effectual way of carrying out those views to withdraw his motion for a petition, and leave the question entirely in the hands of the Court of Di rectors at present, more especially as he (Mr. M. Mar tin) had expressed his confidence in the desire of the pre sent Premier to do justice to India, an expression in which he (the Chairman) entirely concurred—(Cheers)—while, at the same time, he felt it was only an act of justice to Sir John Hobhouse to state that he (the Chairman) had always found on the part of that Right Hon. Baro net every disposition to do ample justice to the claims of India.—(Cheers.) He trusted the motion would not be persevered in. Sir JAMES LAW LUSBINGTON thought it would be more respectful to wait and see what the Government would do before again presenting a petition. He, there fore, hoped the motion would be withdrawn. Mr. WEEDING would, if the motion were not with drawn, meet it by an amendment that the petition was, in the present state of affairs, uncalled for and unnecessary. With every disposition to do justice to India, he could not concur in what had been proposed relating to the Lascar seamen. He thought it essentially necessary to the naval superiority of this country that the nursery for seamen afforded by the East India trade should be kept up, Mr. MAnnioTT seconded the amendment, as he thought the motion was a tacit reflection on the Court of Directors. Mr. SALOMONS recommended the withdrawal both of the motion and of the amendment. Mr._ BROWN said the duty of 50 per cent. on the im portation of rice into Ceylon was merely a countervail ing duty. With regard to tobacco, which in the province of Malabar was a necessary of life to the labourer, it should be recollected that in that province it was a grievous monopoly, which the Court of Directors could do away with at any time they chose. The produce of Tanjore was admitted to England as the produce of a British de pendency, and so also was the produce imported from Singapore. Why then, could not the produce of the other subsidiary States be put upon the same footing as the produce of Tanjore ? The 'Hon. Proprie tor then related various facts to prove the former prospe rity of India, and concluded by vindicating the character of the Lascar seamen. Mr. OLIPHANT thought it time to rescue the the native States from their present anomalous condition. It was a farce to treat them as independent States. After a few words from Mr. Twining and Mr. Fielder, Mr. M. MARTIN consented to withdraw his motion. which, howe►er, he could assure the Court, he had never intended as a tacit reflection on the Court of Directors, as one Honourable Proprietor had thought fit to assume. The motion was then withdrawn. SIR HENRY WILCOCK. Mr. SALOMONS wished, before the Court broke up, to allude to a certain paper, purporting to be a letter from Sir H. Wilcock, one of the Court of Directors, to the Earl of Aberdeen, one of the Secretaries of State, which letter had been lithographed, and afterwards published in the newspapers, and made matter of discussion by the Press; and as the document would doubtless become matter of discussion in Parliament, he thought it best that it should previously be discussed in that Court. Before going into the House of Commons he wished to ask, first, whe- ther there existed any declaration of opinion of the Court of Directors on the subject of the war in Affghanistan ? 2d. Whether there existed any protest by any Directors on the subject? and ,idly, Whether the war had been made a matter of discussion in the Court of Directors ? Mr. ST. GEORGE TUCKER had not made any protest, but he had in a letter, addressed to the Court of Directors, dated June 29, 1839, given his opinion fully on the subject Mr. SALOMONS would move for that document. With regard to the communication of Sir Henry Wilcock, he thought that every communication from a Di rector to a member of her Majesty's Government ought to be considered in the light of an official document, and as such he hoped the Hon. Director would have no objection to laying it before the Court of Pro prietors. The CHAIRMAN, not having been in the Direction at the time, was unaware of the contents of the letter of Mr. Tucker, and could not therefore reply to the Hon. Proprietor until he had seen and considered it. Sir H. LINDSAY said the Honourable Proprietor was asking for information which he must be aware could not be afforded him, as the mouths of the members of the Committee of Secr.?sy were hermetically seated by Act of Parliament. He did not think that members behind that bar were at all justified in promulgating anything that passed in that Committee. After a few words from Mr. WEEDING, Sir H. WILCOCK said that he had thought it right, as an old servant of the Crown, to act in the manner he had done. From having long resided in Persia he had had great opportunities of judging of the policy or impolicy of the war in Affghanistan, and he thought he should have been wanting in his duty if he had not communicated the results of that knowledge to the Go vernment. Therefore he thought he was justified in expressing his opinion to Lord Palmerston as to what was about to take place. With regard to the letter being lithographed, that did not make it the less a private communication. He had no secretary, and persons as frequently employed a confidential lithogra pher as they did a confidential copier. When a change of administration had taken place, he thought it was his duty to address Lord Aberdeen on the subject of the war in Affghanistan as he had be fore done Lord Palmerston ; he had done so, and at the same time had communicated a copy of the letter to the Chairman of the Court of Directors. He regretted his object had been defeated by the pro mulgation of that letter to the Earl of Aberdeen. He had never intended it should have been published, Still less had he ever intended it should have been an imple ment for party purposes. The CHAIRMAN acknowledged having received from Sir H. Wilcock a copy of the letter alluded to ; which, however, he had, as yet, had no opportunity of perusing. —(Cries of " Oh, oh.") Mr. MONTGOMERY MARTINI was the person who had given publicity to the letter, and he did not regTet having done so, because he considered the document to be a most important one. A mutual friend of himself and Sir 11. Wilcock had met him (Mr. Martin) in the Straid, and had put into his hands four lithographic copies of letters, three to Lord Palmerston, and one to the Earl of Aberdeen. He had published that, and he rejoiced that he had done so. Sir H. WiLcocK thought that Mr. Martin had no right to publish the letters ; even if he had picked them up in the street, without having consulted him (Sir H. W.) on the subject. Mr. WEEDING disapproved of the conduct of Sir Henry Wilcock in communicating with the Government; he should have written to the Court of Directors. Mr. SHEPHERD defended Sir H. Wilcock. Mr. BROWN thought Sir H. Wilcock entitled to the thanks of the Court for his conduct. After mutual explanations from Sir H. Wilcock, Sir H. Lindsay, and Mr. Weeding, the motion was with drawn. Mr. MAn niorr SUTTEE. gave notice that on the next Court clay he sho u ld bring forward a , motion on the subject ?f the Suttee which had recently taken place in the terri tories of the Nizam. Mr. WEEDING and Mr. SALOMONS both urged the Direc tors to interfere with the native Powers for the abolition of Suttee. RAJA OF EATTARA. Mr. • FIELDER gave notice that next Court day he should move for the additional documents which had been transmitted to the Court of Directors by Mr. Wil loughby and Col: fjvans relative to the affairs of the late Raja of Sattara. Those documents he understood fully exculpated the members of the Sattara Commission from the charges which :had been so freely brought against them.—Tho Court then adjourned. LATEST MANCHESTER BETTING MANCHESTER, TUESDAY EVENING.—The attendance for the period of the year was certainly good this fore noon. TIIE CHESTER TRADESMEN'S ;PLATE.—The entry closes on New Years' day. Offers were made to lay 20 to 1 on the field, or take 8 to 1 Mr. Scott's stable wins. Several horses were offered against ; but we did not see any thing backed. THE DERBY.—The Premier was backed for 501. at 8 to 1 ; three points more, to a little money, was of fered against Chatham, 12 to 1 was wanted ; 400 to 100 against the two might easily have been had. 25 to 1, bar the two, was offered. Parties being open to take 30 to 1 about either the Lord of Holderness, Balankeele, or Robert de Gorham-200 to 7 was, at the close, laid against the first-named horse ; 40 to 1 was offered against William de Fortibus; 500 to 15 against either Meteor or the Dirce colt was freely offered ; 500 to 10 against M oss T roo p er was offered ; 12 to 1 in ponies against Balankeele and the Lord of Holderness was offered; also 200 to 6 against Honest John and Lord George. We thought 1,000 to 20 was offered against Master Thomas. THE OARS.-500 to 100 was offered against Passion; takers of 200 to 10 on the Duke of Richmond's filly. THE ST. LEGER.—Offers to take 20 to 1 agst Chatham. STATE OF TRADE. (From the Manchester Guardian.) MANCHESTER.—Owing partly to the season, and partly to other causes, there was almost a suspension of demand yesterday, and little or no business was done, except in very small parcels, to supply immediate wants, or forced sales to meet still more pressing pecu niary necessities. In the latter case, of course, low prices were submitted to. Some excitement has been caused here by the announcement of th e f a il ure o f th e house of Taylor, Boggs, and Co., of London (Gardner, Boggs, and Co., at Liverpool), who were largely engaged in the trade to the East Indies. We understand that the engagements of this firm amount to upwards of 150,0001. (reports varying from 160,0001. to 190,0001.), of which a considerable proportion is owing to parties in this town: The failure is ascribed to the very unprofit able state of the trade with the East, and the great loss on produce imported, especially East India cotton, of which the house were holders to the extent of 20,000 bales. The stoppage of this firm has caused one failure in Manchester, namely, that of Messrs. James Hobday and Co., muslin manufacturers, who are creditors of Messrs. Taylor, Boggs, and Co., to the ex tent of 6,000/. ; and whose engagements, we learn, amount to about 24,0001. We are happy to hear, how ever, that their assets are considerable, and that there is not likely to be much eventual loss from their failure. ROCHDALE FLANNEL MARKET, DEC. 20.—The demand for flannels still continues steady, and prices are very much the same as they have been during this last month. There is no change in the wool market, either as regards prices or quantity sold. _ HUDDERSFIELD MARKET, DECEMBER 21.—The state of business remains much the same as for several weeks past : at any rate it is not worse. As a market, there was very little done in sales, all parties evidently looking for the new year, when hopes of a revival are entertained. In fact, stocks generally are very small in saleable goods, and are likely to remain so, as long as the manufacturer pursues the prudent course of making to order. Prices, consequently, are firm. Warehouse business is flat ; but this is usual for the reason of taking stock, and preparing for the spring trade. Bad as things are, there is no cause for despair in this district. LAW INTELLIGENCE. VICE CHANCELLORS' COURT, Dec. 22. (Before Vice-Chancellor WIGRAN.) NONTRIOU V. CARVICK. The VICE-CHANCELLOR gave judgment in this case, which was on Monday heard in his private room, at the request of Mr. Wakefield, on behalf of the plaintiff Mon triou, who is an attorney. The Learned Counsel having stated that the answer of the defendant contained serious charges against the character of the plaintiff as a soli citor, the case came before the Court upon exceptions to the Master's report, the Master having found that certain statements in the answer were scandalous. HisNourt gave judgment in public, observing it was not necessary he should mention the subject matter of the supposed scandal, as the parties themselves knew what the matters were, and he had only to give the rea sons upon which he felt compelled to differ from the Master. The bill was filed by Mr. Montriou, stating himself to have been the professional ad viser of Mr. Carvick, and that he had rendered him professional services, for which he had received no remuneration ; that he had advanced to him large sums of money ; that Mr. Carvick had from time to time made payments to him ; and the result was, that there was an account current between the two parties. The bill prayed an account, alleging that there was a balance in favour of the plaintiff. The bill then interro gated whether Mr. Carvick did not under various, and some, and what unjust pretences, refuse to comply with the application or request of the plaintiff. One of the grounds on which Mr. Carvick stated that he resisted complying with the demand of the plaintiff, was because the account was not correct ; and in answer to the ques tion under various, and some, and what unjust pretences he set up two items, one of 3,5001., connected with a transaction of the Norwich Assurance Company, and an other sum of 72/. 15s, Bd. costs, paid by him in respect of a transaction which he traced home to Mr.Montriou. That was simply the way in which the case stood. The defendant had, in very strong language, complained of the conduct of Mr. Montriou with respect to those two items, and it was with respect to those two items that the question whether there was scandal in the answer or not, arose. The Master bad found tie answer was scandalous in respect of all the matters objected to, and the exception taken to the Master's report was, that the answer was not scandalous in respect of all the matters objected to. If, therefore, there was anything in the answer not scandalous, and which was included in those exceptions, then the Master's report would be erroneous. His Honour's opinion was, that the whole of the matter was not scandalous. His Honour, having referred to several cases, and noticed the points which had been made in argument, allowed the exceptions. COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Dec. 22. IN RE ALEXANDER L. NEWTON. The adjourned examination of the bankrupt was re sumed at two o'clock this day by Mr. Clarkson, who ex amined him at great length respecting the alleged debts which his sister and other relatives sought to prove against his estate. Mr. KEANE, who appeared for the bankrupt, cross examined him, and then applied to have the case ad journed for a short period. Mr. CLARKSON, on the part of the assignees, said the low" examination which the bankrupt underwent. justi fied'him in saying that his accounts were fabricated for the purpose of cheating his creditors. He stated that he sold a diamond brooch for only 801., when he re leased it from a pawnbroker's where it had been de posited for 1001., a fact which no man in his senses could credit. He need go no further in the enumeration of these facts, but as he said before, reiterate that the bank rupt, and all those acting for him (with the exception of Mr. Keane), had manufactured many of those accounts tbr the purpose of defrauding the creditors of the estate. Mr. KNIGHT (the bankrupt's solicitor)--I emphatically pronounce Mr. Clarkson's assertion to be agross falsehood. Mr. CLARKSON—I don't mind the barking of a dog. Mr. KNIGHT—You dare not use such language as that to me outside the door of the Court. Mr. Commissioner ForameraluE--Such indecent ob servations as these must be stopped by some means or other. I shall adjourn this case sine die, and that there may be no misapprehension;l shall give my reasons. The bankrupt endeavours to establish a debt due to his sister against his estate for 1,7771. This Ido not believe. The statement about the diamonds is too ridiculous for any roan of common sense to believe. Throughout the whole examination I have observed a disposition to deceive the Court, and suppress the truth until the last moment; and under such circumstances, I shall adjourn the case sine die, at the same time allowing the bankrupt the protec tion of the Court for two months, and I shall not be dis posed Co hear any further examination until the debts al leged to be due to his sister shall be proved, and some more satisfactory explanation rendered of the disposal of the diamonds. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Dec. 22. IN RE JOHN EDWARD CAREW. At the sitting of the Court this morning the case of this insolvent was continued. The first witness called was Mr. Murray, who stated that he was agent to Messrs. Rhymer and Murray, solicitors, of Petworth, who were solicitors to the executors o f thei late Lord, Egremont. The total sum which Mr. Carew admitted in his balance sheet, since 1833, was 9,760/, and the total sum he ad mitted, in answer to the bill in Chancery, was 6,0401., received since 1833, and he admitted that he had received 3,718/. since the answer was filed; yet still he stated that he had a balance owing to him from the executors. In May, 1833, he received a cheque for one thousand pounds from Lord Egremont, and on the 16th of the same month, in 1835, he received another for 6001, and on the 9th of November, 1836, a further cheque for 2501., and the executors were prepared to prove this on the trial ; but they had no opportunity of doing so. In May, 1833, the insolvent admitted that he received 431., and a cheque for 1,000/..; but he only put in his schedule 1,0001. The witness was then cross-examined at great length by Mr. Cook ; but it is only necessary to give the prin cipal questions:— I believe you issued a writ of fieri facias upon the studio of the defendant, as agent to Rhymer and Murray?—l did." I believe you got judgment in that action ?—We ob tained a verdict, but we did not get judgment. I believe a motion has since been made that that ver dict should be set aside ?—lt has, and the Court has or dered a nonsuit to be entered, and we have paid the costs of the ac/ion. _ _ Have you received further instructions to issue pro ceedings again ?—No; we have received no instructions at present. Pray has a fiat of bankruptcy been issued against Mr. Carew ?—I am not aware of it. Has the docket been struck ?—I am not aware. _ I think, when Sir Wm, was addressing the Court at Lewes, he stated that your clients had under• taken to pay the costs of the action, and I believe Sir Wm. Follett's speech run thus :—" Mr. Carew said I have this claim against the estate of Lord Egremont. You say you will not pay me. You are rich and I am poor, and the costs will be ruinous to me. They, in an swer, said we want a full and fair investigation ; we will pay your costs and expenses, and permit you to bring t'lis action against us." Is that correct ?—Yes ; that is quite correct. Did the executors advance any sum to bring the me . don ?.L-No. Have they paid the plaintiff's costs ?—No. The next part of the speech of Sir William Follett that I call your attention to, is where he says the de fendant furnished the means to bring the action. Is ;hat correct ?—No ; but we have offered to pay the costs twenty times. Upon what condition was that ?—That Mr. Carew should release the executors from all claims, or submit to a verdict, or consent to a nonsuit being entered. I)id Mr. Carew refuse to do that ?—He did. Did he not say that he would never so far' disgrace himself as to say that his claim was unfounded ?—He did not say so to me, because I have never known Mr. Carew, or spoken to him in my life. By the proceedings in Chancery, you have obtained, by the answer of Mr. Carew, certain admissions ?—Yes. Have the defendants admitted anything ?—No. You say that the insolvent has claimed between 16,0001. and 17,0001. ; pray, Sir, do you include in that, or I should rather say, do you not exclude the statue in Chichester Cathedral ?—Certainly, Mr. Thesiger said so in his speech. You also exclude Haskisson's monument ?—Certainly. Now the charge for the altar-piece was 3,000/., and for Huskisson's monument 2,0001., which was reduced to 1,7601. by the subscription, and you refused to give him credit for them, together with 3601. for a statue of Wil liam the Fourth ?—We did not refuse to allow anything that he proved. When you say that Mr. Carew's claim was a certain sum, and the payments were a certain sum, do you in such amount exclude from his claim these three articles I have mentioned ?—Certainly. But if you give them, the balance will still be against him. Mr. CooKE—I will show that the balance will be in his favour if you will allow me. And Sir, if you allow me these three items I have spoken of, would not the total of his claim be 21,872/. ?—From the commence ment, certainly, it would be, if we allowed all these items. It would be more than that if you want the figures accurately. It would be 22,807/. 18s. Id. Well ; and, on the other side, you allege payment of 21,331/. 9s. sd. That would leave about 1,5001. due to him ?—Somewhere thereabouts. That is exclusive of time and attendance, &c. ? Certainly, exclusive of the 10,0001. which he claimed for compensation. Now, in the course of your inquiries respecting these other articles, had you any doubt that he bad executed the altar-piece at Brighton ?—Not the least doubt of that. Nobody ever attempted to deny it ?—No. In the course of your inquiries of the Earl of Egre mont did you not ascertain, if he did not order it, w else did ? We know, from papers in our possession, that he did not order it. But supposing that he did not, did not you find out who did ?—No, we did not. Will you venture to say, after all your anxious in quiries, if Mr. Carew ever received one shilling for those articles from any human being ?—I made no inquiries about it all. • Why did you not make any inquiries ?—I can't say. But can't you tell me what you did in the matter ?—I cannot tell you clearly what was said, but by the bill. But what I want to know is, who ordered this altar piece?—l believe it is alleged in the bill that it was ordered by some Roman Catholics. You do not know who they were ?,—No, I do not. Perhaps you thought that as he was a Roman Catholic he did it for the honour and glory of his religion?—l never thought about it ? Now, then, about the Protestant work with respect to Huskisson's monument in the Cathedral at Chichester; do you know who the munificent persons were there ? Certainly ; a Committee formed at Chichester ordered the work. Do you not know that that Committee intended the work to be a tabular monument ?—Yes. Do you know that that Committee raised by subscrip tion the sum of 350/. ?—I know no more than what Mr. Freeland's evidence said upon the trial. Do you not know that Sir Richard Westmacott valued that statue at 2,0004 ?—That will appear by his evidence. Do you not know that the marble would cost 3001., at least ?—No, I do not know. I)id you ever see that statue ?—I have never been in Chichester since it was erected. Did you ever learn from any member of this Commit tee —?--I never heard anything about it, except from Mr. Freeland's evidence. Well, now, with respect to the model of William the Fourth ; did you refuse to include that simply because Mr. Carew had no specific order from. Lord Egremont ? Certainly not. We made inquiries concerning every thing admitting of doubt, and, from those inquiries, we ascertained that this model was made for a gentleman of the name of l)'Egville, at Brighton, on speculation, and we had evidence at the trial to prove this. Do you reside in London ?—Yes. Do you know what has become of some papers which were handed by Lord Egremont to Mr. Carew ten days before his death ?—I do not know of any such papers being handed to him. You never heard of it ?—Certainly not, except what Mr. Carew has stated. Did you hear that any papers were destroyed after the Earl's death ?—I heard that some private documents were destroyed, but I had better not answer that, as there are other persons here who were present at the Earl's death. Re-examined by Mr. PLATT—You say that you offered to pay the costs of the action, and you were about to state the reason; what was it ?—After what has been said on both sides, I do not see that it would be a breach of con fidence to state what Mr. Thesiger said to me, when I met him in the Queen's Bench, when he asked why the costs were not paid; he had heard there was some difficulty about it. I told him the executors were perfectly ready to pay them, but they did not want any further claim made by Mr. Carew; if he would be satisfied with a ver dict being entered for the executors, that we would pay the costs, together with the taxation. Mr. Thesiger said if they consented to a nonsuit, it ought to be final; and certainly they ought to have one or the other ; and he said he would communicate the same thing to Mr. Carew's solicitor. Upon what ground did the Court direct a nonsuit to the action of ejectment?—On the ground that the pro viso in the lease was insensible, it was a clerical error, there was no verb in the sentence.—(A laugh.) I should just say that this was no blunder of Colonel Wyndham's present advisers.—(Laughter.) Now, you said that Mr. Freeland gave evidence at the trial?—He did. He was produced as a witness for Mr. Carew P—He was. I believe he said there was a subscription for the pur pose of paying for the monument by Mr. Carew ? He did. Mr. PLATT then read the following letter from the evi dence on the trial, dated March, 1831, and addressed to Mr. Carew, which was as follows :—" A subscription, amounting to 3501., having been raised for the purpose of erecting a monument in the Cathedral to the memory of the late Right Hon. William Huskisson, the Committee, anxious to carry the object of the subscription into effect, are desirous, on the recommendation of Lord Egremont, to avail themselves of your talents on this occasion, and lam deputed to communicate th e same to you. You will therefore be so good as to prepare suitable designs as soon as engagements will permit, and forward the same to Lord Egremont, it being the intention of the Committee that the designs whiel shall be adopted shall hare previously received the unqualified approbation of his Lordship. I much regret the amount of the subscrip tion will not allow all the scope we could desire for the exercise of those eminent talents which hare secured to you his Lordship's patronage." This letter was signed J. B. Freeland. Mr. PLATT—Was a copy of that letter read at the trial ?—lt was. Did Mr. Freeland state that Lord Egremont had subscribed 50/. ?-a-He did. Sir C. Burrell was then called into the box, and exa mined by Mr. PLATT. Sir CHARLES—I believe you are subpcenaed on behalf of the insolvent?—Yes. You are one of the executors to the late . Lord Egre ment ?—I am so appointed. Do you remember the day his Lordship died ?—Yes. Were you in the house at the time 2—No; I went over immediately on hearing he was ill. Did you arrive in time to see him alive ?—No ; I did not. Do you remember what time in the day it was ?—lt was late. A second message arrived, and we were at dinner at the time. The distance was about 15 miles. When you arrived at Petworth did you see Colonel Wyndham ?—Yes. Where did you see him when you first arrived ?—I can't exactly say ; but I remember that Mr. Murray came to me and said we were appointed his Lordship's executors. Do you recollect anything Mr. Murray said to you ? He said, as amen of business would say, that it was ad visable that I should seal up all the papers, &c., till the will was opened. Was that suggestion complied with 7—lt was. Did you do so 7—We did, everything. Do you know any particular place in which his Lord ship kept his papers ?—Yes, in closets in his room. In the room in which he died ?—Yes, he usually kept his papers in his bed-room. -- I believe that bed-room was on the ground floor, next the library ?—lt was. Now, his papers having been sealed up, when were they opened ?—Not till the will was read. How many clay's after the decease of his Lordship was the will read ?—Mr. Murray will perhaps answer that question. I do not recollect. It was on the day of the funeral Were the papers of his Lordship examined before the will was read ?—No, after the will was read, when we proceeded, on the recommendation of Mr. Murray, to examine all the papers. Did you find any other testamentary paper besides the one you proved ?—No, not one ; nothing of the kind. Did you find any bundle of papers in which Mr. Ca rew's name was mentioned ?—Not one. Were they examined carefully and minutely ?—Yes. Were any papers destroyed ?—Yes ; after we had ex amined the papers, those we thought worthless were thrown into a basket. What was the nature of those papers ?—Private cor respondence, &c., and letters to his Lordship when he was Lord Lieutenant of the county, relative to the Ma gistracy. There were various private correspondence of his Lordship, particularly with the late Lord Holland, Lord William Gordon, Lord John Townshend, and per sons of that description. Were there any destroyed in which the name of Mr. Carew was mentioned ?—I am perfectly sure my good will towards Mr. Carew at that time would have led me to preserve any paper I had found containing his name. Mr. Carew--I may say I believe so too, Sir Charles ; I believe that. Mr. PLATT—You were taken into his Lordship's con fidence ?—llwas honoured with his Lordship's confidence, j Do you know that Mr. Carew was paid by his Lord ship ?—I do not think he had any other mode of liveli hood.. Do you remember the altar-piece at Brighton being the subject of public conversation ?—I do. Do you remember seeing Mr. Carew when the altar piece was the subject of conversation ?—I remember having a conversation with him at his work; and I recol lect he told me. I do not know whether it was in an swer to a question or not ; but he said he was sorry to say he was not remunerated as he had reason to expect. Did he consider himself very ill-used by persons who had set him on the work ?—He did write to that effect. I asked him, to the best of my recollection, what steps he intended to take, and he said he did not intend to take any steps, as he supposed he should be obliged to make them a present of it. Did you learn from him in that conversation to whom he alluded as having given him the order ?—I under stood from some Roman Catholics, who were desirous to raise a subscription, and wanted Lord Western. to give the ground, who was not a Roman Catholic, but I am sure he never mentioned the Earl of Egremont. You were frequently at Petworth ?—I was. Did you see Mr. Carew there at work ?—I saw him occasionally. Have you seen him at the studio in Brighton ?—I have seen him there, but never saw him at work. Do you know of any other work but that of his profes sion that he was in the habit of doing for Lord Egre ment ?—I do not know. I have understood that he su perintended building a lodge at Brighton for his Lordship. What was the size of that ?—lt was but a small one, one-floor lodge. Was there any more than one room in it ?—I should suppose there was a bed-room and a sitting-room. Are you at all aware if the services he rendered to Lord Egremont would entitle him to demand 10,0001. at his death ?—I am not aware of it. Cross-examined by Mr. WOODROFFE—I am quite aware you will not suppose we have originated any sus picion about these papers ?—Certainly not. Perhaps you are aware, that between Colonel Wynd ham and his brother an angry quarrel took place in Brighton. Will you tell us the occasion of that ? Mr. PLATT objected. Mr. WOODROF FE —I am not going to put it in evidence. Sir Charles Burrell—l can answer, for I had nothing to do with it. Mr. WOODROFFE —After the death of the Earl of .Egremont, did Mr. Carew state that papers had been shown to him ten days before the Earl's death, in which he had made provision for him ?—He never spoke'to me of it. I heard it stated that he was to be provided for, but that was but hearsay. Did not Mr. Wyndham say it was very indiscreet to destroy those papers ?—Never. I never had a conversa tion with him on the 'subject. Have you not said that the money paid to Mr. Carew was not from his Lordship's bounty, but for work that Mr. Carew had done ?—No. I know that his Lordship's bounty was unbounded. I recollect going into his library, where Sir William Beechey was, and he said, with tears in his eyes, that his Lordship had rendered him one of the greatest services possible, for he had been in difficul ties, and his Lordship had written a cheque for 1,0001., and left it on the table for him. Now with the knowledge of this fact have you not reason to believe that some of these chequez produced were given to Mr.Carew, independently of work done ? I have no reason to think so. I should suppose they were in payment. What should you suppose would be a fair remuneration for the work of Sir Wm. Beechey?—.l should say that •he would have been satisfied with 2001. Why do you think then that the Earl should be so liberal to one gentleman who was not living with him, and should not be so to one who was ?—For that reason that Mr. Carew lived with him; that is the only con struction I can put upon it ? I am aware of his Lordship's bounty amounting to prodigality. Did he not usually on such occasions write the cheques to bearer?—l have no means of knowing. I have certainly received cheques from him to pay things for him in London, but whether they were to bearer or not I can't say. Have you not heard that when he has made presents, instead of putting the name of the party, he usually wrote to bearer?—l do not know. I know that some time previous to his death he destroyed a bundle of papers, consisting of acknowledgments of loans, saying that they should not be brought against the parties when he was gone, and by this means he cancelled the debt. When he made a gift, was he not in the habit of writing the cheque payable to bearer, without the name ? —I have no means of knowing that ; though liberal he was very secret in his acts of charity. He acted on the principle of never letting his right hand know what his left hand did. Now, Sir, when he paid money to Colonel Wyndham, was he not in the habit of writing" To bearer ?" I know nothing of Colonel Wyndham's transactions, ex cept so far as I tun trustee with him. You have been kind enough to remark that if you had found any papers bearing reference to Mr. Carew, your feelings would have prompted you to their preservation? —lt would have been my duty. But independently of your duty ?—I certainly should have had the inclination. Now, for many years before the Earl of Egremont's death, had not Mr. Carew been almost exclusively his companion ?—I am not aware of it ; I never heard it. Did he not frequently go out with him in his carriage? —I cannot speak to that ; but I should think not, as his Lordship generally went alone. Don't you know that Mr. Carew was employed in other ways besides in his profession by Lord Egremont ? —No ; Ido not. I never heard. But is it likely 7—lt is very possible. Now, from 1831, up to Lord Egremont's death, was any remuneration made to Mr. Carew for any services that he rendered his Lordship, independently of works in his possession ?—I know of nothing. Re-examined by Mr. PLATT—Many persons were pre sent at the reading the will, as, his Lordship being rich, they thought he might have left them something. I had known his Lordship, previous to his death, for forty years. He was always most punctual in• the payment of his demands ; indeed he was desirous of paying money as fast as he could. Mr. Murray said, in answer to the question, the cost of the action was 2,0001 . on the part o f the insolvent. Mr. Charles Murray, the solicitor, to the executors, corroborated the testimony of Sir Charles Burrell. He had never heard Lord Egremont mention Mr. Carew's name, nor had he seen any paper containing it. Mrs.G.H.Greenfield stated that she was formerly in the service of, the late Earl of Egremont, having been with him between 31 and 32 years, and was his nurse for 14 years. Remembered seeing Mr. Carew come to his Lord ship in tears. ,Remembered a knock coming to the door, and his Lordship said " Open the door, that's Carew." Witness replied that Sir Matthew Tierney had ordered that no one should see his Lordship. He said " Open the door, for it is Carew." I opened the door, and Mr. Carew came in. He appeared to be in distress. Witness left the room, but returned before 'Mr. Carew left. When he was gone Lord Egremont said, " He has been fool enough to be bound for some 'one, and unless I give him some money he will go to gaol." Mr. Carew was in tears when he came out, and told the witness to get his Lordship's writing-desk. Witness then described that his Lordship wrote a cheque and gave it to insolvent, remarking that if he went on in that way he would come to the dogs. His Lordship had given witness, in the course of her life, upwards of 10,0001. at different times. She had attended him night and day, and never left him. She was lady's-maid to Lady Munster, afterwards Mrs. King, his Lordship's daughter. Cross-examined by Mr. WOODROFFE— lES Lordship always laid the money out in Stock. He never gave it to witness. He never laid out for her less than 1,0001. She never received wages. She was a complete slave to his Lordship. She was with him night and day. Mr. Carew could not say that.— (A laugh.) Did not know any other servant his Lordship had given anything to but herself. Could not say how it was his Lordship knew it was Mr. Carew when he knocked at the door. Could not say if he had sent for him express down from London. His Lordship could not have written to him, or she should have seen the letter. He had not been able to write for a fortnight before. He said, rather hastily, "It is Carew; let him in." Never heard his Lordship say he v ished Mr. Carew to sell the house at Brighton, for he intended to give him New Grove House. Never heard Lord Egremont say to Mr. Carew, " I have been asking Lord Munster to buy your house in Brighton for his family." Recollects Mr. Carew bringing a newspaper to his Lord ship, but does not know whether it was relative to selling his house. She gave it to his Lordship, but he said, " Don't bring such rubbish to me." Never heard of Mr. Carew being employed • in anything but his profession. Does not know of his going with Lord Egremont to give a certain person twenty-seven 1,0001. notes. Re-examined by Mr. PLATT—Remembers his Lord ship's last directions to her, which were—" Now, Garland, I have done for every body all I intend to do, and re member, Garland, I told you so." His Lordship was not in a condition to write for several days before Mr. Carew came. He came about 7 in the evening, and she said to his Lordship, " My Lord, Mr. Carew has come back," and he said " What is that to me." The members of the family, since his Lordship's death, have subscribed, and pre. sented her with a silver salver. Mr. George Stephens deposed that he was a clerk in the house of Messrs. Gosling. In the month of No vember, 1836, he had received the sum of 3341. to the credit of Mr. Stephens. Mr. Murray identified certain cheques paid to the defendant, and signed by Lord Egrernont. Mr. Owen deposed that in the year 1828 the firm in which he was a clerk hadcashed for Mr. Carew, a cheque for 1,0001, signed " Egremont." Three letters from the insolvent were then read, from which it appeared that he had been served with a writ on the part of Mr. Stevens, for a debt of 2591., which he had incurred by an accommodation to Mr. Simpson. The insolvent had stated in his examination that no pro ceedings had been taken against him in consequence of the debt in question. A clerk of Mr. Stevens stated that that g entleman was so ill with , gout that he could not attend the Court that day. Two letters were then put in evidence ; the one from Colonel Wyndham to Mr. Banker, complaining of the unreasonable nature of the demand made by Mr. Carew, which rendered any compromise between them impossi ble, and the second from Air. Carew to Col. Wyndham, ex pressing regret that the Colonel had thought he had pressed his claims improperly, and containing an assur ance of his determination to proceed with the utmost fairness on the subject. Other letters were also put in relating to the claims of Mr. Carew. Wyndham was then sworn Major-General Henry and examined by Mr. COOKE.--1 am the brother of Col. Wyndham. I have known Mr. Carew for many years. I have frequently seen him at Petworth. Mr. Carew had a ppeared to be on an i nt i mate foot been much employed by th e l ate Earl of Egremont, with whom he ing. I remember having had Berne conversation THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, DECEMBER 23, 1841. EVENING SUN with my brother respecting Mr. Care' v,' after the death of my father. I had learned. at the time that Mr. Carew was in very embarrassed. circumstances; and as his creditors were becoming uneasy, I represented to Colonel Wyndham that it would be a great charity to 'advance him a sum of money out of any debt that might be owing► to him. Colonel Wyndham said he should be very ready to do so, and asked me what. sum I thought would do for the moment. I answered I thought that about 4,000/. or 5,0001 would be sufficient. Colonel Wyndham expressed his readiness to advance that sum, if Mr. Carew furnished some account, showing what was due to him. I took that as a message to Mr. Carew, who, I believe, acted on it. Mr. Carew expressed some delicacy at troubling Colonel Wyndham with an account, and asked me if I thought he might do it. I said, , 6 Cer tainly; the message I have brought requires that you should do so." I believe, as far as nay impression of the words of Mr. Carew goes, that he had never kept a regu lar account with Lord Egremont. Cross-examined by Mr. PLATT—I cannot state all business in which Mr. Carew was engaged with Lord Egremont, besides his professional employment ; but be was frequently with his Lordship. I did not know any— thing about the sums which Mr. Caren- received from my late father. Mr. Carew appeared to me ,to have been frequently pressed for money. Col.onel Wyndham seemed very desirous at the time of paying • off any claims which Mr. Carew might have on him. It being now after four o'clock, the further proceed ceedings in the case were adjourned until Saturday, the Bth of January. POLICE IN'rELLIGENCE. MANSION-HOUSE. A man named Edward Janiver v% , as brought 11 P" charged with having entered the shop of Mr. Stone, 11 baker, in Liverpool-street, with another man, who car tied a bludgeon, and with having stolen bread therein. Mr. Stone said it was the practice of many desperate, ruffians to go in small parties of two or three into bakers shops and take up bread from the counter, and to cover their retreat with cudgels, which they flourished, threa t " ening to knock down any one who opposed them. Thei took care to watch the opportunity when the police wer e not near the shop upon which they had a design to cart e their plan into execution. The prisoner walked into t h shop, together with a fellow who had a cudgel, which 1 11 handled in a very formidable manner when defendan t ! daughter was behind the counter. The man who h a ' s the cudgel whipped up several buns, swore most desPT rately, and terrified the young woman, while the pri soner took up a small loaf and began to eat it, and wen afterwards told complainant that he wanted to be s haved , and that he must have the money for that purpose. Sir C. MARSHALL—What ! He asked you for tnorl - • to get shaved with ? Mr. Stone—He did, and by no means like a begga r ' leaned across the counter, and actually demanded it. know several bakers who have been subjected to treat ment of this kind from vagabonds of this descrip tien ' The offenders are all able-bodied men, and as they r e e d y larly watch the policemen out of sight, they nain r ,, occasion a great deal of terror in the places they vis gis Sir C. MARSHALL—What do you say, prisoner, to outrageous conduct. The prisoner said that he had met the man with the cudgel cudgel the day before, and as they were both in nen sity, they agreed to go into a baker's shop and not ste d n e. ; but merely take a loaf to satisfy their hunger. He d id nied that he was a vagabond, and it was because he t not want to look like one that he asked the complain ° for money to pay a barber for shaving him. Sir C. MARSHALL—SO, not cont e nt w ith robbing the man of his bread, you require him to pay for the r e il ia a razor for you ? Prisoner—lf I was s h a ved, I,sf n — o s be able to go into the country and wor k. I "' u m - do.; mean to rob the gentleman ; that's a thi ng I'd scorn' s — d e g.! Sir C. MARSHALL—We must put a stop to thi ther perate way of taking people's property. I hope anY not bakers who have been treated in such a manner ru allow any repetition of such conduct. he did Mr. Stone said that scarcely a day passed that 7 0 0 not relieve four or five wretched objects. He should care to do all he could to secure himself against 5 " .. system of robbery. • The prisoner was remanded till Friday., CORN AVERAGES GENERAL AVERAGE PRICES OF BRITISII COR N ' 8 of For the Week ended Dec. 17, 1841, made up from the Ilet u ' d a nd the Inspectors in the different Cities and Towns in E n g ian Wales, per Imperial Quarter. 75 V4 ' Wheat 3 625. 6:: 5 9d d .. I Q u a y t e s ..... 2 39 15 . .. 5 5 1.1 B r e eas an e s : ................ cd, Barley s. AVERAGES OF THE LAST NI WEEKS. , 54. 15 , Week ending! WHEAT. BARLEY. OATS. RYE. I RICANS. :........./' ...'""--. '-'...'......... ••••••• Nov ' 4 1 12 6l 4 33 4 22 0 40 2( 40 , . 3 W 65 11 33 4 22 8 40 2 40 4 40 9 26 .l 64 9 32 4 22 6 44 7 I 41 • 39 Dec. 3 63 6 31 9 22 2 44 5 39 ! 39 4 10 62 7 31 9 t 2 2 44 8 30 ',, 30 0 17 62 9 30 5 21 5 39 51 37 "..,...rga IMPERIAL AGGREGATE AVERAGES OF THE FIX v• '" 0. • 421. 32.1 . 39 ' Wheat... ..... 61s. 40. 1 Oats ........ 225. 3d. Beans ... ....• J. Barley.. 32a. Od. 1 Rye DUTIES ON FOREIGN CORN. ... li , 3(1. Wheat....... 225. Bd. Oats Barley 133. 10d. I Rye Pease ........ • 404. THE M kRKETS. ARKET. last market day, 15. COAL M Ships arrived since. 8. 0 . 0 23 $ Walls End Haswell. ...... ''' 23 F. Walls End Helton ig F . Walls End Lambton ......... gl 1 1 Wabs End PelllbertOn ........ .2: 2 ", Wads E E E n n. d dd lsslthictiswnsecalilriirs,sH.....e..t ,9 :1 i nd W a a l l i l s s EEEndcWashsiotp . w .................... .. 23 Walls Walls End Caradec ........... . z 3 0 , Walls End Hartlepo ol . 2 g 9 Walls End Kelloe Ol 0 Tennant's Hartlepool .. . ... ,4 0 Walls En.l Harri ngton . Tees „,,'' 0 Walls Ei.d Bowburn r d , 6 Walls Endßrown's Deaner, j" 6 IS Walls Er d Evenwood si Walls El• 1 Seymour Tees ' o a 6 Walls;End South Durham ;e 0 , Wal sEi • d leek.. . ........... 0 Blythe ..... .. 0 ! Cowpen ........................•. %; 0 Hartley •... .• .• d. Adair's Bell, Hobson & Co. Hartley 15 6 Buddle's West Hartley l6 Cheater Main !do'melt Main lB C New Tantield Moor l4 6 Old Tanfield Ord's Itedheugh l5 t TantleldiAloor Townley ~ 15 6 West Hartley ....... .......... 18 6 West Wylain Walls End ClarkandCo. Walls End Hedlcy 20 Walls End Hilda l5 3 Walls End Hotspur Walls End Killingworth lq 3 Walls End Northumberland 19 3 Walls End Perkins lB 0 Walis End Ramsey Walls End S. Killingworth 15 6 Walls End Waiker :3O 0 Eden Main 2O 3 W. E. BraddylVelletton COUNTRY CORN MARKEI3:;.-- -- " ?Wei .------ Wheat. Barley. l Oats. BeaulL, .......--"; —....... 1 .---- —.----- s, to 4 1' Per Quarter. s. to e. s. to .. a. to s. 3. t O a ' 39 40 Boston 88 36 'draintiee 52 70 27 34 93 29 33 --. 30 ~,,, IS, ighton 63 74 31 40 26 27 37 7,', ... 7,, Cambridge — 6 3 21 .... 22 . 3 ,' 3'.; :0 Chichester 56 63 30 28 24 26 44 9 ,7 3, '" Dunmow 5B 62 30 3F) 20 26 00 7, .... _.'"" Grantham - Grimsby 56 74 28 33 15 21 36 ,"`" 33 "-__. Hailsham 66 572 33 35 22 23 33 "-,,, -.. 35 Ipswich 5O 73 27 35 20 30 34 ..", 3 t 84 Lewes 6O 67 28 : . :2 21 26 33 .' 33 "- 39 , 36 Lewes 62 64 32 36 21 22 34 ,6 3. Lynn 56 66 26 34 20 26 40 , ... " -- , 0 Maidstone 59 76 36 39 26 32 38 *" 36 '- Norwich Petworth 40 „„ 5 5 Rom ford 56 70 28 3.; 21 32 IS .1, Do 4 j Sandwich 6l 71 23 34 Y 5 30 33 ' 32 "8 44 „, 2 Thetford 57 66 32 36 24 28 40 42 1 - ; 4 0 Wisbech ..... 57 68 28 34 20 20 36 40 Witham 161 71 29 35 24 31 31 42 , 9 Yarmouth 6O .74 30 32 24 30 38 40 ' LIVERPOOL CORN MARKET.—Dec• 21 ,„ 10 3 61. WHEAT, English, White, per 701 h... Re , -- Scotch, Welch, and Manx —... Irish, White 7 9 9 6 -- Red ' 7 0 i f. ~.! Foreign ...... OATS, Baglish, Welsh, and Scotch, per 451 b 2 9 "3 1 ---- Iris'''..,. 6 a ---- Foreign Bani,Ey, English, Malting, per Imp. quarter ....... 3 4 9 Scotch and Irish, per 6011)1. Feeding 4 4 8 O BEANS, English, per Imperial quarter 44 0 0 42 0 Irish, &t • • - Foreign PEASE, English, per Imperial quarter 4l ~ u I 5 6 4i --- Foreign Foreign 44 u FLOUR, English, per 2001 b 46 0 54 .-- Irish OATMEAL, English and Irish, per 24mbs -,. 27 6 4g • INDIAN CORN, ptr 4801 b. .... ....... ......... ...... 3 3 I) 36 [lye, per Imperial quarter - 0 4b o MALT, per Imperial quarter ------ AI GOLD WATCHES.—E. J. DENT, bY sg e „;, o o appointment, Chronometer and Watchmaker to the 1-4" and his Royal Highness Prince Albert, offers an extresch. assortment of HORIZONTAL WATCHES at 101 1 0 s. - Fro their great advantages over th ose of the vertical doe. Pro tion in performance, appearance, and flatness, he reconulO n t them for Ladies' and Gentle men ' s wea r. T hey ha ve clega sr e eagraved or plain gold di a l s an d cas es, and the movements An jewelled in four hol es , an d t h e performance , guarante ed. abstract from Mr. Dent's Lectures on the Construction and Management of Chronometer Watches and Clocks maY be sp d. gratuitously by customers , or t o th e public price Is.— Str SILVER PLATED CORNER DISHES'r4, A. B. SAVORY and SONS, Manufacturing Silverselit i r; t he Cornhill, London, opposite the Bank of England, sublialso prices of the following patterns of strongly-plate d Gelds for g ati y. r i o l o a n ted Pa c t o te r rn. DISHES, with silver handles and edges, and silver shields engravinc , the crest or coat of arms :— Four T h s t e r o c'G n ner Dishes and Covers ...XlO 10 plated Corner ... x Four extra hitrongly.plat. d s ............... Four and Cover CoDishesa,idirovers 12 12 t hat nie ßN.. r The Covers are made with moveable bandies' 5° tted they form extra dishes. Drawings of the above a re forwer to any part of Great Britain or Ireland, postage free. _...5..,.. BIRTHS. On the 16th inat., at Fatkner-terrace, Liverpool. Warden, of a daughter. a son. On the 17th inst., at Hackney, Mrs. Charles S. SityPs°°' of On the 19th inst., at the Parsonage, Lambourne v ot ilaw b, the lady of the Rev. J. Bacon, of a son. lady of . On the 20th inst., at Latimer R ec t or y, Backs, th e the Rev. R. M. Wood, of a son. the It' d / On the 20th inst., at Gayfield-square, Edinburgh, of Captain Glegg, East India Company's Service, of a 23 "' t h e On the 21st lost., at the Vicarage, East flaw, Es 9es ' wife of the Rev. W. Streatfeild, of a MARRIED. theo;iathdera2sOcthiviolfsoercvtoiebee,rioatcGhaurnlotottoer,LGou.iSsa.,Feldest daught,t daughter ha f au t ig h l-h e ctoe l ur a r t ot e i ll D l Le aj on o nz r idio L En ake, of the Madras Eng in ee r , and g rai l daughter of Admiral Sir Willow Willoughby Lake, K. C. B. 0 , 0.- On the 15th inst . , at Great Burstead. J. R. Gibson, of ~,,,is t a ...... e .., Cle, so o l f ic ß it i o ll r e ' ric th ay, her Majesty's Justices of the Peace for the county of Essex- a- On the 21st inst., at Christchurch, Marylebone, W. iro,: . lius Pettigrew, Esq., M.D., to Frances Mary, daughter of i Moore, Esq., of Dorset-square. 11Elavriy, REleitoin..orat, ,e,..w......f DIED. On the 20th inst. at Harley-place , Bow -road, Mrs. OW beth Sack, aged 62. On the 21st inst., at the Rectory, Fulme r, the Rev. The Weldon Chimpnes aged 69. On the 21st inst. , , Maria, eldest daughter of R. H. Clarke, Esq., of Dulwich. On the 21st inst., at Glastonbury, T. W. Kemptio rn6 Esq., solicitor. On the 22d inst., at Camberwell, Mrs. H. Scarred, aged 8/ London: Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, at The Sue Office, No. 112, Strand, in the County of Middlesex, Thursday, December pf 1841. j !lot utze r h. 3, 4 fee, l lt ` 4o et e ue r f u tbl ed of I,t 6(; len,, Jost to; oti art,