The Sun. — London, England, 1841-06-11 00:00:00

IVIORNING EDITION • Mr. WARBURTON did not regretsthat the aid of the lion. and Learned Solicitor-General had been called I in, but it would not induce him to vary the vote he had given oil a former erecasien.e--(Hear, hear.) He thought it had been established to the satisfaction of the House that those were reprisals, and not captures, and that the parties were entitled to compensation. He need not refer to the case of the Spanish vessels which had been seized at the breaking up-of the war in Spain, and in which compensation was granted to the owners. On the 2.2 d of July an embargiawas laid on all the Danish vessels in the English ports, and an armament was sent out to seize all vessels on the high seas belonging to that Go vernment. The armament ascended to the mouth of the Baltic, which every body knew was a close sea, jind he thought it only reasonable, fair, and just, that where the British Government derived so large a sum of money from the captiire of the fleet and stores and the condem-. nation of vessels seized in British ports, it was only rea sonable and just that compensation should be afibrded out.of that large sum. It was nothing for him to hear that the funds had been misapplied; it was no answer to say that thirty years had elapsed since the occurrence; .that was only a stronger reason why the- parties should immediately receive the small pittance of compensation to be 'awarded to them. lie relied upon the want of notice to the British svho were sending their vessels to the Baltic, and upon the withdrawal of the British fleet, thereby rendering capture certain. , That was enough to justify him in departing ft-cm the ' usual rules in voting for compensation. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL did not wish for a lament to take credit to himself for any thing he was not entitled to, therefore, he must disclaim the credit given him by his Learned Friend, that his statements of .last night were merely the arguments used in former:de bates and put in a clearer form; he supposed the superior intelligence of his Learned Friend had enabled him to find it out. Sir James Mackintosh had - distinctly laid it down that book debts and goods seized ought to be com pensated, bemuse they were seized against the usages of war, and the laW of nations; in such a case, he laid it down that it was the duty of the Government to enforce compensation by arms, or to make compensation out of their own funds. The application of the principle, how ever, he limited to seizures made against the law of . nations and against the usages of war. That was an authority upon the present occasion. When he addressed the House yesterday he had refrained from reading the documents, contenting himself with stating them, and waiting until he heard whether they were contradicted. He would then read them.t The first was a clear declara tion of war upon the part of Denmark against England ; and he said distinctly that that declaration was made on the 16th August. He would now state the facts—he would recapitulate them to the House. His Hon. and Learned Friend had stated that there had been an em bargo previnies.to the 27th of July. Now he could dis cover no such thing, and he should be glad if his Hon. and Learned Friend would refer him to the authority on which he made such statement. Mr. CRESSIVE'LL—It was so stated on bringing for ward the motion in 1831. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL would refer his Hon. and Learned Friend to the orders of the Admiralty for laying on the embargo, which were dated the 25th of At xust. He had inquired at the Admiralty, and there w as n j document there to show that any embargo had been laid o..\_ before the 25th of August, nor could he find at the Ada, isisalty any trace of any application having been made there, as s.."'" by one of the persons interested in supporting these claims, by any pers?ns for informae tad been given by any per tion, or that any information . ef August, the orders .sons on the subject. On the 25th e , noon of vessels .of the Admiralty authorising the. doe. ete until the were issued, and affairs continued in that sa. ' end ex -2d September, when those orders were confirmeu , es tended by an Order in Council. On the 3d of :- gust the British . fleet arrived off the coast of Den mark, and cut off all communication between the island of Zealand and the Continent of Eu rope. Now what e effect on the mind of any man of ordinary intelligence must the appearance of a British fleet off the coast .of Denmark have produced? If it were unexpected, the more likely was it to excite alarm; and he contended that the appearance of that fleet, ac companied as it was by a large body of troops. was abun dant intimation to the .merchants that they could not remain safely in the proximity of such a fleet, and that if they did so remain they. must do so at their own ex pense and risk, .and not at the expense and risk of the nation. From the sth of August until the 13th nego tiations were going on between Mr. Jackson, the repre sentative of the British Government at Copenhagen, and the Danish Government, relative to the surrender of the Danish fleet bet the care of Great Britain. On the 16th of August the Danish Government issued the following proclamation, which would be found in the nine teenth volume of the " Annual Register," page 173. (The Hon. and Learned Gentleman here read the de claration of Christian VI., in which, after reciting the demands made by the British Resident Jackson, he stated that the Resident, on the refusal of the Danish Government to comply with those demands, had de manded passports for himself, and his suite, and that consequently the war between England and Denmark might be considered as actually broken out, and he called upon all his faithful subjects to arm to repel the Eng lish aggression. further ordered that all Englis ship and property wherever found, should be seized, aad that all English should, until they could be sent out of the country e be placed under arrest; and the declaration finished by stating, that, as a matter of course, all Eng lish ships and boats found upon the coast should be con sidered as hostile, and that all correspondence with English subjects . should cease until further orders.) When the King of Denmark issued a proclamation on the 16th August, that war was actually broken out, could any man say that he was justified in remaining in the Baltic to prosecute commercial speculations, on the belief that pacific relations would not be interrupted? No relations of peace and amity subsisted between the nations after that proclamation; and on that day Ad miral Gambier and Lord Cathcart issued an address, in which they stated that they were ordered there by com mand of his Majesty, to obtain by pacific negotiation, if possible, the surrender of the Danish fleet. That sur render was refused; and, on the 24th August, the Danish Government issued a further proclamation, in very hos tile terms. On the 2d September the bombardment of Copenhagen commenced. From that time there was no pretence for the statement that anything like a cessation of hostilities had taken place. On the 9th September, the decree was issued which gave rise to the claims for .compensation—namely, that respecting the confiscation, On the 23d of September a British manifesto was issued, . showing the two nations distinctly to be at war. Now, when were these vessels seized ? On the 6th of August, and on the seh of September; but the great majority late in Octoaer, thiough November, and down to the 23d of December. On the 4th of November Great Britain, never having entertained hostile feelings towards Denmark, but having acted on the principle of great State necessity, a necessity founded on the most absolute jussice—if self protection be consistent with justice—the. Government of the day was restrained from presenting a perfect de fence, because we know that at certain times private in- . formation which the Government may procure may not be disclosed with safety to the individual who furnished that information, nor consistently with the means of ob taining further information which it might be desirable that they should possess. But afterwards they discovered that France and Russia had determined to seize the Danish fleet, and use it hostilely against Great Britain , and when the British navy arrived at Copenhagen, that . place was in a state absolutely defenceless, so as to give every facilitt 'tithe 'obje c t s o f R uss i a an d France. It was complained - that the English had taken the fleet when the Danes were not in a situation for defence. But that was their justification, for it became the imperative duty of the Government of the day to take wise, prompt, and decisive measures, that that fleet should not be used for the invasion of Great - Britain, and the British Government would have deserved impeachment if, on the information they possessed, they had not wrested from the power of Russia such powerful means aa the Danish fleet afforded. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman denied that they were at war. His acute and intelligent Friend behind him (Mr. Warbur ton) had looked too, closely into the question to make such an assertion ; he had retired from that position. What constituted war? One nation appeared with a pow- erfel armament on the shores of another nation, demand 'sag of that other to surrende r its fleet ; that demand was resisted, and the Government so required published to its subjects that the two nations were at war, and imme diately directed the commencement of hostile acts. Did not that conststttte war? Were the Danes to say whether they were at war or his Hon. and Learned Friend?— (Hear, hear.) In their proclamations they stated that she war was begun. • It was not a paper war ; a procla mation was issuer:l,l)v the Danish Government that the two nations were at war. What was the. foundation for the statement that the two nations were not at war? There was not the slightest, unless his Honourable Friend could erase from the records this declaration - of war on the part of Denmark. It was a most • material fact for the House to bear in mind, and to adopt a distinct conclusion upon, were the two nations - at war pri o r to the seizure of these vesse ls ? His Hon. Friend seemed to think that he had imput ed to him a - want of accuracy' in reference to the books. He had read the speech of his Hon. and Learned Friend atten tively, and, after reading it, he was astonished at the result. Nothing but his happy manner of delivering what he had to say could have made that speech effec tual to convince the House. His Hon. and Learned Friend teemed to think that he (the Solicitor-General) . was mistaken in supposing that he had drawn an incor rect inference. His Hon. and Learned Friend had not , made any quotation from Grotius. He (the Solicitor- General) would refer the House to . the authority of Vaud on the subject of reprisals. Reprisals were those things which were taken by nations which had a com plaint against other countries, prior to the breaking out of a war, and with a view to obtain justice, upon a matter of complaint. (Hear, hear.) (The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then referred to the authority of Vattel with respect to reprisals, in justifica tion of the course the Government had pursued.) Now, what was the date of the seizure of the vessels in ques tion, what were the dates as compared with the declara tion he hail heard that the. two nations were at war? A few in the month of August, still fewer in September, and fewer still in October and November. The two na tions were at war after the 4th of November. Apologies were made for the act done, but stating that it was ab solately necessary for the preservation of the country, by reason of the coalition of France and Russia. If his Learned Friend called that an apology he was at perfect liberty to do so; but, in his (the Solicitor-General's) opi nion, it was 'ustice to the n a ti on . Th ese se i zures , there fore, he said, were all of them after war, and there was no ground for calling into the subject an recognised Principle, for the case of goods and debts stood uPen different * • der stand the ggu6n"ds. Now, he wished to un w Was. e!lst of oiv a i e sh d u tu yo rethi n twl. w a shtitochheb epeculiar this th e ggr ound was ocui rnedu p ut. in might be and ; that every case had its peculiar circumstances two cases could be identical ; was to be put cin th around of Peculiarity of cir- cumstances, it should be put upon some great and intel ligible ground, such as could not be mistaken on future occasions. Now what was the pecularity here ? His friend's said that they were taken by stirprise—that no notice had been given of hostility to enable them to escape—was that the peculiarity ? How often would it happen? He hoped never to see such days as that, but if the experience of the past was mat ter of caution for the future, looking at the course of events what answer, he would ask, could they give to the numerous claims which stood upon the same foundation ? He denied that they had not sufficient notice, and even if they had - not, if it was said that the abSence of notice furnished a ground for compensa tion, then he said that the present case was peculiar for absence of any such ground. But he asserted that the parties had as much notice as was necessary. It was stated in the course of the debate that an individual of the name of Harrison had applied to Admiral Gam bier to know if he might safely go to the Baltic. It was said that the Admiral told him he might go. This might be the case, but the supposed conversation was given thirty years after the period referred to. But let them mark what followed. That individual wrote home to England to obtain an insurance. What did that writing home for an insurance show ? Did it show that he might remain there without fear of war ? Certainly not. The merchants who traded to the Baltic were a very adventurous set of men—they chose to speculate — they stayed to load their cargoes, but they stayed too long. The British fleet was detained for a time to put the Danish fleet in a state to come to England. Why did not the vessels come away with the fleet ? It was argued that the British fleet did not leave sufficient pro tection for the vessels in the Sound. That would be no groinuf for compensation. A large fleet such as that was must have been some time preparing to sail. Could those in the Balticbe ignorant that such a fleet was about to depart or had already departed ? Decidedly not. If they chose to remain they did so at their own risk, as they did for their own profit. That, then, would form no ground on which to sustain these claims. Something had been said about a conversation which took place at the Admiralty. Would that House say that on the ground of a conversation said to be held at the Admi ralty, about which nothing certain existed, they should vote away a large sum of money ? That was certainly too futile a ground to be upheld. No application on the subject existed in writing. It was asked if they had thought it fit to take the fleet, why did they give any compensation at all ? Compensation was given in the former cases, because it was intended at the time the fleet was taken to return it in perfect safety. When the Danes refused to surrender their fleet, and assumed a hostile attitude, we were obliged to consider them as enemies, and the ships were therefore taken in state of of warfare. It was to the Danish captains that compen sation was given for their private expenses and freightage. It could not for a moment be contended that the property seized by the British Government from its enemies should be applied to the payments of the losses of pri vate individuals. He regretted the loss these parties had sustained in the pursuit of their commercial specu lations ; but there must be some broad and intelligible ' ground on which such an application should be made. The Spanish case had been referred to as forminc , a pre cedent, but lie denied that there was any analogy be tween these cases. Before the House granted the pre sent application they would do well to consider what was the precedent which they were about to lay down; and he was satisfied that on every principle of justice and ho nesty the parties now before the House had no claim whatever upon the public funds.—(Cries of " Hear.") Mr. A. CHAPMAN contended that the Government was bound to remunerate these parties for the losses they had sustained, because, when application was made to them, they stated that there need be no appre hension whatever, and, acting upon that advice, one of his constituents, with his family, had been entirely 4 • He eoutended that these claims stood upon pre -gine footing as the book debts and the goods He himself had sent out a ship which - ‘enhagen, but it had been after -ved up to him by Admiral e 4 overnment would see - withholding the mine— cisely the ;, seized on shore. had been seized at Co, wards re-taken and Gambier. He trusted that the the justice and expediency of no longe. settlement of these claims. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, at House divided, when there appeared— For bringing up the Report Against it Majority SUPPLY. 64 -11 The Report on the Committee of Supply was brought up, and the resolutions agreed to. BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said the Committee on the Bribery at Elections Bill stood upon the Orders of the Day, and he wished to state what his feelings were with regard to that Bill. If he could expect to obtain the attention of the House, the present was a period at which it would be most important to carry it. He owned he very much feared that having to go through the whole of the clauses, they would not be able to give it that attention at the present advanced period of the Session which it required. These were his feelings ; but if it was the wish of the House he should have no objection to proceed with it. Sir ROBERT PEEL had voted for tho second read ing of the Bill, because he was most anxious that the law with regard to bribery and treating should be pro perly defined. Many parties innocently offended against the law because they did not know what bribery and treating was. On the whole, however important as the Bill was at the present moment, he thought it would be a great misfortune to pass it in a hurried manner. On the whole he was inclined to think that, considering but a few days would elapse before the House was dissoved, tFe Noble Lord had exercised a sound discretion in not attempting to pass ity and he had no objection to share in the responsibility. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL. On the question that the Municipal Corporations Bill be read a third time, Mr. CRESSWEII opposed the Bill. After a few words from Mr. MACKINNON and Sir J. Y. BULLER, The House divided, when there appeared— For the third reading 54 Against it 9 Majority On the motion that the House go into Committee on the THE BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS BILL, Lord J. RUSSELL said that he proposed to proceed with the Committe on the Bill to-morrow (this day). Mr. WYNN said that it would be well if the measure were carried into a law this Session. It would be ad vantageous at the commencement of the next Session of of Parliament to have the Bill in operation. The 6th, 7th, Bth, and 9th clauses of the Bill, which referred to the protection of witnesses in the case of giving evi dence, were particularly valuable. He thought that these clauses ought to be passed in the form of a separate Bill. Mr. S. O'BRIEN said that the passing of the mea sure would be of the utmost value on the eve of a ge neral election. Lord JOHN RUSSELL proposed to go into Com mittee on the present occasion, to consider the sug gestions of the Right Hon. Member for Montgomery shire (Mr. Wynn), and to go on with the Bill to-morrow. Sir ROBERT H. INGLIS said that the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, had left the House under the impression that the Bill should not be pro ceeded with. Mr. WAKLEY did not understand the Noble Lord to withdraw his Bill. He (Mr. Wakley) thought that the Noble Lord's remarks were merely thrown out to ascertain the opinion of the House on the subject. Mr. W. WYNN hoped that he should not be under stood as objecting to the principle of the clauses ; what he feared was the difficulty of carrying them into exe cution. Mr. FRESHFIELD said all clauses upon which any question could arise might be postponed, and the House would proceed with the others. The House then went into Committee. Lord J. RUSSELL said it was his intention to aban don the first clause ; but if Hon. Gentlemen wished it, he would not ob j ect to postpone it. After a few words from Mr. A. CHAPMAN, the clause, with the four following clauses, were struck out. Clause 6 was agreed to with an amendment. Clauses 7 and 8 were agreed to. On clause 9 being proposed, Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN asked if the clause would en able an Election Committee to proceed with the in quiry as to alleg ed bribery a ft er th e p et i t i oner s h ou ld havewithdrawn his petition ? Mr WYNN said that additional machinery 'Would be required in order to do so. Mr. WARBURTON thought the clause was an ex ceedingly proper one. Lord JOHN RUSSELL agreed that the object of the lion. Gentleman was an exceedingly important one, but it would be necessary that in such cases as those al luded to, the Committee should report the circumstances of the case, and that some public officer should be ap pointed to prosecute the inquiry before the Committee. Mr. S. O'BRIEN suggested that the inquiry should be conducted at the public expense. Lord J. RUSSELL thought that the matter had better be made the subject of a separate Bill. The clause was then agreed to. Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN then rose to propose a clause for the purpose of enacting that the same declaration to shou ld with regard be taken b to y M bribery. embers as was now t a k en b y elec- Lord JOHN RUSSELL hoped the Hon. Member would defer his motion until the Report should be brought up. Mr. WYNN hoped the Hon. Member would not press his motion during the absence of the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, who took a great interest in the subject. r. Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN must press his motion, and he would briefly state the reasons which had induced him to propose the clause. The :Umber bribing an elector was much more guilty than the poor elector re ceiving the bribe. He was surprised that the Hon. Member for Bridport was opposed to the declarati on . ' and the ground that he assumed that such a declaration would be useless, would: apply equally to every oath and declaration taken. He proposed that a person taking such declaration falsely, should be liable to all the penalties of perjury ; and he believed that in nineteen cases out of twenty such a declaration would be effec tual. To be consistent the Hon. Member should pro pose to repeal all enactments requiring such a, declara tion from electors. The Hon. Member then proposed the following clauses :—" And be it enacted, that every Member returned to serve in Parliament shall, after tak ing the oaths prescribed to be taken at the table of the House of Commons, before he becomes entitled to sit and vote, also make and subscribe the following declaration : —‘ I do solemnly affirm and declare that I have not, directly or indirectly, made use of any bribery for the purpose of being elected at the late election as a Mem ber of this House for the county of (or county of a. city, town, or borough, as thOcase marbe.)'• And be it enacted, that if any person shall make and subscribe such declaration falsely, every such person, being duly convicted thereof, shall incur and suffer such pains, Pe- sTrIE - StN, • - - - nalties, and disabilities, as persons convicted of wilful and corrupt perjury are by law liable to, and may be prosecuted for the same at any period within five years after he shall have made such declaration." Mr. W.ARBURTON simply asked himself whether such a clause would be effectual in preventing bribery or not.—(Hear, hear.) It would have the effect of making the public believe that electors were purer than they really were. As to the effect of such a declaration, he would merely allude to the declaration taken by officers of regiments when their commissions were bought or sold. On such occasions both the buyor and seller de clared on their honour that they had neither given nor taken directly or indirectly a greater sum than the regu lation price, and the colonel of the regiment certified that he verily believed that the regulations with regard to price had been strictly complied with. Yet every one who knew officers, knew that these regulations were never complied with, but were absolutely considered a (lead letter, and this took place among a class of men who were considered as the very pink of honour, and who were bound to sacrifice every thing rather than that honour. Yet it was among these gentlemen that this asseveration was violated. A solemn aseveration was made that certain things were done, and yet the declaration made had not the slightest foundation. There was another in stance in which the oath was prescribed, but equally dis regarded. By the 28th of Henry VIII., c. 15, sec. 9, all Bishops and Archbishops, upon ordaining clergy men, were required to put to them a corporal oath that they would learn the English language and teach it, and support a school for that purpose, and also that they would assume the English garb and fashion. Every one knew that that oath was-constantly violated. The oaths to obey the statutes at the Universities af forded another instance of the manner in which such asseverations were. evaded ; nor was any discredit attached to these parties. Under these circumstances, how could it be imagined that the pro posed declaration would have the effect of preventing bribery ? His opinion was, that the only effect would be to cause the agents to conceal what had occurred till a considerable period had elapsed. He wished to see Members elected, net for their money but for their merits, and believing that this Bill would not promote that end, he could not give to it his support. Colonel SIBTHORP said the effect of the Bill would be to prevent the rich from benefiting the poor even by giving a few shillings in charity, and it should have his strenuous opposition. Sir DENHAM NORREYS was in favour of making the oath as stringent as possible. He considered bribery by an agent no less deserving of punishment than bri bery by the party himself. Mr. E. TURNER and Mr. W. ROCHE supported the clause. Colonel PERCIVAL opposed the clause. Mr. T. B. HOBHOUSE said that no declaration could be made that would not be evaded. Sir R. HARDINGE wished to know by what tribu nal any Member of that House was to be tried when he had been guilty of bribery. Mr. O'BRIEN apprehended that he would be- tried in the usual manner, and by the Common Law Courts. Mr. BROTHERTON apprehended if it was the wish of the House to put an end to bribery, there could not be any objection in a Member declaring that he had not been guilty of bribery. He was for adopting any course that would put an end to bribery. Mr. WAKLEY said that he believed the House was not sincere in its wish to get rid of bribery— if it was, the cure was easy, and that cure was to enlarge the constituency.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped the Noble Lord, from what he had experienced, would put aside his views of finality ; and, if he did, he (Mr. W.) did not despair of seeing him come forward shortly as the Radical Doctor to cure all the evils that at pre sent existed in the representation of the country. He did not believe that any declaration would prevent Mem bers from bribing. He believed if the clause was car ried, it would have no good effect. He trusted, there fore, the Hon. Member for Limerick would withdraw the clause. Lord J. RUSSELL thought if the declaration was not productive of good, it was calculated to do a great deal of harm. He could not conceive that any good ef fect would be produced by a declaration. He believed that after a short time a declaration would become a dead letter. He did not wish to make any final declaration on I-. subject, but, as at present advised, he could not agree - 4 . the clause. -- LTNEY said they had for some long nights to adop. Mr. COLi ;n which much sympathy was shown had a long debate, in had sugar debates, - !,,ht they which sympathy ; but why for the negroes ; last n. FY which dogs were talkeS should not some of their lin- - nam t ?e would envy the;life r i be shown to them selves ? If the clause became 1a. 7 of the toad under the harrow to itiat of a Member of Parliament, living perhaps under w:.'ak nerves for five years at the mercy of any disreputable informer. The Legislation they were now engaged in was useless, and therefore mischievous. He trusted the Hon. Mem ber for Limerick would not forte them to a division, for the motives of those who conscientiously voted against the motion would be sure to be misregesented out of doors. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, the House divided, when there appeared— For the clause 22 Against it 5l Majority against the clause —29. • On our return to the gallery, we found— Mr. S. O'BRiEN calling the attention of the House to the expenses to which candidates were put to bring ing up voters. It ww.: most desirable that, in Ireland at least, such expense should be brought as low as possible, and that such payment of allowance should not be deemed bribery. He would co:'fine the allowances to ss, for the expenses of attending at the poll, and 6d. per mile for travelling—to that extent it ought not to be con sidered bribery.lNHe brought up a C 4143,80 to that effect. Sir R. BAIESON agreed with the Hon, Member, but the greatest blessing that could be conferred on Iratind in election matters would be to extend to her the English system of voting' at various places in the . county. It would save much of drunkenness and loss of life. He was certain that if they did away with treatinc , in Ireland they would disfranchise more than one-half of the county electors, for they could not travel 30, 40 pr 50 miles to the county town, and remain there five d ays his own cost. After a few words from -Sir G. GREY and Colonel SIBTHORP, the clause was withdrawn. . The House resumed, the Report to be received to morrow. The Report of the Committee on the Banks of Issue Bill was brought up. The Metropolitan Improvement Bill went through Committee. The County Bridges Bill was read a second time. The Highway Rates Bill was also read a second time. The School Sites Bill was reported, with amendments. THE EASTERN QUESTION. ,The following is a transcript of a noie from the Representa tivts of the Four Power-, in reply to a communication to them from the Ottoman Government : " The undersigned have the honour of acknowledging the receipt of the note, dated April 27, by which his Excellency Chekib Effendi, Ambas,ador of the Sublime Porte, in commu nicating to them the instructions he has la'ely received. has been pleased to appeal to the Conference of the Foreign Powers, to adjust certain difficulties, which have arisen re specting the interpretation of some of the clauses contained in the firmans issued On the 13th of February last, with regard to the definitive arrangement of the affairs of Egypt. The clauses, respecting which the Sublime Porte desires to know the opinion of the four Allied Courts, are confined to the three following points:— " 1. The question of heredite ; "2. The fixing of the tribute ; and "3. The military promotions. " The general regulations which serve to solve these three questions have been determined, in principle, by the Conven tion which the Sublime Porte concluded on the 16th of July, 1840, with the Courts of Austria, Great Britain, Prussia, and Russia. It is accordingly to the principles laid down in that Convention that the undersigned telt bound to refer, in the va rious communications which they bad the honour of address ing to the Ottoman Ambassackr, and especially in their notes of the 30th January and of March 13. Resta'' , on the same basis, the undersigned, in compliance with the desire expressed by his Excellency Chekib Efff ndi, hasten to offer him the flllow ing explanations:— " QUESTION OF THE HEREDITE. " The Sultan, in realizing the intention which his High ness had manifested from the beginning of the Eastern crisis, has formally announced his determination to leave the heredit ary administration of the 1 3 ..chalic of Egypt to the family of Mehemet Ali, so long as he and his descendants should conti nue to render themselves worthy of that favour, by fulfilling faithfully the conditions thereunto attach e d. The principle once legally admitted by the Sovereign authority of the Sul tan, there only remains to be regulated the mode in which the post of Governor of Egypt shalt be transmitted from one mem ber of the family of Mehemet Ali to another. Now, it has been agreed that that transmission should take place by means of the investiture which the Sultan will grant to the new titu lar. It is in accordance with that Principle that his Highness, in reinstating Mehemet Ali in the functions of Governor of Egypt, has deigned to address to him the firman of the 13th of February. " Moreover, by a special provision which the Sultan has thought proper to communicate to his Allies, that Sovereign has dispensed Mehemet Ali from repairing to Constantinople, in order to receive in that capital the investiture of his Pa chalic. At the same time his Highness deigned to declare that he would oispense, likewise, Ibrahim Pacha front proceeding to Constantinople when he in turn should be called to succeed Mehemet Ali in the functions d Pacha, and that the firman of investiture should then be sent to him in Egypt. In adapt ing this clause, such as it was communicated to the Allied Courts, the Sublime Porte has itself indicated the mode agree ably to which his Highness proposes to provide for the here ditary admini,tration of the Pachalic of Egypt in the family of Mehemet Ali. " According to this mode, and conformably with the usages established in the Ottoman empire, it is consequently Ibrahim Pacha who, as the senior descendant of the family, shall even tually be called ui on to succeed Mehemet ' Ali in the• post of Governor of Egypt. "In virtue of the same rule, the senior member of the family after Ibrahim Pacha shall be considered as the presump tive successor of lorahim in the post of Governor of the Pachalic of Egypt. Such is the general rule which the Pleni potentiaries of the Allied Courts consider as belt adapted to the interests of the Sublime Porte, and most in conformity with the usages established in the Ottoman empire. Ia replying thus to the appeal which the Ottoman Ambassador has just ad dressed to them, in consequence of an order of his Govern ment, they have thought proper to declare that the appoint ment to the post of Governor of Egypt belongs exclusively to his Highness; that this right is exercised, arid manifests itself each time by the investiture conferred on the new titular; and, finally, that the investiture granted by the sovereign authority constitutes the title in virtue of which each new Governor ,shall be called to rule over Egypt, in the name ofhis Highness, as a province forming part of the Ottoman empire. FIXING OF THE AMOUNT OF TRIBUTE. " The separate act annexed to the Convention of the 15th of July had not settled the amount of tribute to be paid. It only laid down as a principle that a tribute should be paid annually to the Porte, and that it should be proportioned to the extent of territory the administration of which should be entrusted to Mehemet Ali, and that the Pacha of Egypt, on condition that he pay a regular tribute, should collect the taxes and imposi tions legally established in the Dame of the Sultan, and should provide for all the expenses of the civil and military establish ments in the Pachalic. In referring in this place to the position laid down as a principle by the Convention of the 15th of July, the Plenipo tentiaries of the Powers who signed that Treaty would consider that they had exceeded the limits of their mission were they to pronounce an opinion on the amount of tribute to be. paid, and which they consider as a financial measure relative to the in ternal administration of the Ottoman empire, which the under signed (as they already expressed in their note of the 13th of March), do not regard as coming within their province. " Moreover, not possessing the necessary statistical infor mation to serve as a base for a correct judgment on the finan cial resources of Egypt, they could not express any opinion upon the amount of annual revenue which the Sublime Porte might draw from this province. " Nevertheless, in order to satisfy, as far as they can, the wish expressed by Chekib Effendi, in the name of the Sub lime Porte, they think they ought to suggest that instead of fixing the tribute at a proportional part of the gross revenue cf Egypt, it would be more to the interest of the Porte to de termine the amount by a fixed sum, which would insure his Highness the receipt of a certain income. Such sum might be varied according to circumstances, for which reason it might be better that the fixed sum be declared subject to revision at certain epochs. • " MILITARY PROMOTIONS. " The separate Act annexed to the Treaty of July contains an article stating that the land and sea forces to be main tained by the Paella of Egypt shall be always considered as forming part of the forces of the empire, and maintained for the service of the State.' " According to this principle the military forces employed in Egypt being those of his Highness the Sultan, the officers giljniarive promotion in virtue of the Sovereign will alone, to whom grmy and the fleet belong. " Setting pot from this principle, which is to he generally applied, the undersigned can only attach a secondary import ance to the difficulty which has arisen relative to the question of military promotions in Egypt. It is for the Sultan to de legate what authority he pleases to the Governots of Egypt., roserving to himself the power to extend or restrain those powers according as experience and the necessities of the ser•• vice may demonstrate the propri« ty of so doing. " If, in the present nate, the undersigned have thought pro per to confine their observations to the three above-mentioned points, it is because that they have, by their collective notes of the 30th of January, lath March, and by the P4Socol of the March, already made known their opinion specting the other awndiljons contained in the separate act annexed to the C•onvention of the pth of July , 184 0. - ,:s. t7 severing in thteheviutanwdsearspigdneodpidm i opinions which expedient hichth to referemani- f to ge sa'd y ile ni ts u ' st consider the submissio n f orma lly ma d e mani fested in . the by Mehoutt Ali as absolute, and consequently regard the Turco-Egyptian q uestion as terminated. "Accordingly the Mftdersigned cannot admit the supposi tion that the ache, wife (Night to by grateful for the pardon which the Sultan has deigned to want him and the favours conferred by his Highness on himself and his family, should not keep within the bounds of the obedience and submission which sue that conditions of that pardon and those favours. 0` Thel s leuipaontiaries of the Allied Courts, in communi cating these observations to his Excellency Chekib Effendi, invite him to be pleased to make Illem known to his Court, these observationi being intended to serve gs the comple ment of the contents of heir collective note dated tha lath of Marsh last. . . They seize this opportunity of renCwing, Ro. "ESTERHAZ'Y " NEUMANN." " PALMERSTON. " BULOW. " BRUNOW. " London, May 10, 1841." SPAIN. FINANCIAL DECREES. (From the Madrid Gazette of June 1.) DECREE OF THE REGENT OF SPAIN ADDRESSED TO THE MINISTER OF FINANCE. "Having taken into consideration the utility of forming a commission charged with the examining and proposing to me of such measures as shall be judged suitable to .an effectual and speedy execution of the plan of taxation to be presented to the Cortes, with the probable amount of the expenses for the en suing year, 1842, In my quality of Regent of the realm during the minority of her Majesty Queen Donna Isabella the Second, and conformably to the advice of the Council of Ministers, I have decreed as follows: " Art. I. There shall be formed a commission composed of persons of distinction, of experience and zeal, which shall be charged to examine, in the shortest possible space of time, and to propose to me those measures most adapted to the plan of taxation to be brought before the Cortes with the budget of 1842. " Art. 2. Are appointed members of said commission, Don Pio Pita Pizarro, lieputy, President ; the Director:General of the Funds and of the Sinking Funds, the Cashier-General of Stock and Dividends ; Don Pascal Madoz, Assessor to the Su perintendence of the Public Treasury; Don. Andre Aubiano, Member of the Upper Court of Accounts; Don Pablo Pcbrer, Don Jose Maria ()reuse; and Don Eusebio Rodolfo, Chief of the Budget DepartMent and the Ministry of Finance, who will 'al the functions of Secretary. " Art. 3. The commission to assemble in the hall set apart for the meeting of the Funds Department, on the days and at the hours to be fixed upon by the President, for the completion of the formalities, conformably to Art. 72 of the constitution. " Art. 4. All the Ministers, the corps, and the authorities will aid the Commission in its researches, and furnish all the information it may require, for the interests of the undertak ing with which it is specially charged. You will consider as heard, and will enforce the execution of the vresent decree. " The Duke de la VITORIA. " The Palace, May 28, 1841. " To Don Pedro Surra y Rull, Minister of Finance." A second decree of the 28th, upon the Report of the Mini ster of Finance, orders the formation of a Commission similar to the above, for the speedy examination of the measures best adapted to determine the private budget of each depart ment of the :Ministry, and to estimate the general expendi ture of the State, to be annually presented to the Cortes. The following to be members of said Commission :—Don Augustin Fernandez Gamboa, Deputy for Naxarre, Presi dent ; Don Cesar Maria Saenz ; Don Miguel Alejo Burrill. Don Raman Maria Temprodo, Deputy Don Mateo de Aillon, Member of the Upper Court of Accounts"; Don Antonio Larrua, Intendant of the Army; Don Jose Maria Morente, Chief of the Department of the Interior; Don Francisco de la Have, Chief of the Marine Department of Commerce and of the Government of the Colonies ; Don Alexandro de Contillo, Chief of the Department of Foreign Affairs ; Don Joaquinus Morcus de la' Penat, Chief of the Department of the War office ; and Don Joaquin Mario Perez, Chief of the Department of the Budget at the Ministry of Finance, to be Secretary. All facility to be given to expedite their business. SIR ROBERT PEEL AND MR. ASHWORTH. (From the M,lnchescr Guardian.) TO THE EPITOK OF THE MAN:MP:STEIL G U ROLA V. Turton, tith mo., 6, 16:11. ri ICSPECTED /Jaye to request your insert/ in of the following ctrrespondence, winch ha- I,assed between Sir R. Peel and myself, in reference to certain statements, made in his speech on the sugar du, ies, on the 18th ult. I have prefixed to it an extract from that speech, and also a letter, previously addressed by me to Sir Robert Peel, through the medium of The Sun newspaper. This letter has already appeared in the Guardian, but I think it desirable now to re peat it, with the view of rendering the subsequent correspon dence more intelligible. As a week has elapsed without a reply to my letter of the Ist instant, I presume the correspondence is now terminated. I am, respectfuly your friend, HENftY ASHWORTH. [We emit the letter and the extract, as not necessary to make our readers acquainted with the facts of the case.] Turton, Bolton, 5 mo. 29, 1841. Respected Friend, Sir Robert Peel, Bart.—l find that thou bast stated, in reply to an inquiry of Mark Phillips, Esq., that thou hcdst not received any direct communication from any of the deputation wha waited upon titre, from the Man chester Chamber of Commerce, concerning thy statements to the House as to their opinions of Sir. Greg's pamphlet; and that, if "any such were now seat, that thou would frankly state the result." It would also appear, that thou bast demurred to nptice my published letters to thee,—probably upon a point of etiquette, because I had not previously submitted then' personally to thyself. I should regret, if I had inconsiderately disregarded the usual courtesies of life ; but be pleased to reflect for a mo ment :—After thou had assailed my constituency, time, and nut etiquette, became my first duty to consider in the removal of so foul an imputation; and my determination to publish at ince, was hastened by the recollection, that thy reply to the note of the deputation had kept them waiting seven days. If I have fail. d in respect in not forwarding a copy of my published letters on the day of publication, I regret it. The subject which requires thy explanation is thy assertion that the deputation, and especially myself, had advocated opinions in favour of protecting duties to our colonies. Thou wilt bear in mind that, at our interview, the deputa tion handed thee a copy of the resolutions passed at the Cham ber ; also a copy of their " Report on the injurious effects of restrictions on trade ;" these thou promised to read, and upon them we rested our case. As the documents deprecate the discriminating duties on British colonial sugar, and as the deputation most fully con curred in stating that they repudiated the principle of " pro tection and monopoly" as a system of legalised robbery, it is due to them, as well as to myself, that thou should explain how thou happened to misrepresent our views and opinions. I am, resl•ectfully, thy friend, lItNRY ASH WORTH. Whitehall, May 31, 1841. Sir,—l have this day received y our letter of the 29th instant, and hasten to give that reply to it which I would readily have given to other letters which professed to be addressed to me by you, if I bad received them.. I make no complaint of discourtesy on your part ; but I took for granted that you did not expect an answer to letters respect ing which you made no communication whatever to me. It is true, as you observe, that some days elapsed before I made an appointment for receiving the deputation of which you were a member. I made ir, however, previously to the discussion to which the interview referred, and 1 would have made it at an earlier period had it been in my power. It is no easy matter, I assure you, to attend Committees in the morning, debates in the evening, trans act all the other business that is connected with Parliamentary life, and to make immediate appointments with parties who wish for interviews on public matters. You observe, that " the subject which requires my explanation is my assertion that the deputation, and especially yourself, had advocated opinions in favour of protecting ditties to our colonies." Now. 1 beg leave to say, that I made no such assertion. Since I received your letter, 1 have looked at the report of that which I did say, as given in the Morning Chronicle (I select that paper on account of its political bias) ; and it appears to me that the report is a fair and correct one. I beg leave to refer you to that report, and I will state in addition the facts of the case according to my recollection of them. I received a depu tation from the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester. That deputation urged very strongly the doctrines of free trade, and the universal application of them, and placed in my hands a document chiefly founded on the evidence taken by the Import Duties' Committee, enforcing similar principles. I remarked, that however trite the doctrines of free trade might be in the abstract, there were occasionally considerations in the practical application of them, which could not be safely disregarded. I urged encouragement of slavery and the slave-trade as a consideration of this nature, and one which might fairly be urged against a strict application of the principles of free trade to the produce of slave labour. Upon this 1 was asked by one of the deputation whether I had seen a pamphlet of Mr. Greg on the subject of the extinction of the African slave trade; and if I had not, whether I would under take to read it. It was described as a very able work, and cal culated to make a great impression by its force of reasoning. I answered that I had not seen the pamphlet—that I would certainly read it ; and on my inquiring where 1 could procure a copy, I was told that one would be sent to me. That copy was sent to me by you with a note, which I read in the House of Commons, in which " you commend the pamphlet to my attentive perusal," and remark, " that you had not heard that either Sir Powell Buxton or any of his adherents had even at tempted an answer." When I read the pamphlet, in fulfil ment of my promise, I found an able and powerful argu ment in favour of the continuance, for the present, of a high discriminating duty on foreign sugar ; an argument not urged slightly and incidentally, but urged at the con clusion of the pamplet, after a full review of the question of the sugar duties, and in anticipation of many of the arguments used subsequently in the debate in the House of Commons. I ascertained that this pamphlet was writ ten by a gentleman who is the brother of one of the Members for Manchester; it was commended to my perusal at an interview which 1 had with a deputation from the Chamber of Commerce of that town. It was sent to me by the member of that deputation who took the leading part at the conference which I had with them, and was described by him as a pamphlet to which no answer had been given. Finding in this pamphlet, coming into my possession under such circumstances, an elaborate and successful argument in favour of my views as to the policy of continuing for the pre sent a high protective duty on foreign sugar, I considered then. and I consider now, that I was fully justified in the use which I made of it. I think Mr. Brotherton, the Member for Salford, who, before I could mention the pamphlet, exclaimed in the House, Now it is coming," must have laboured under impressions very similar to mine. You are perfectly at liberty to make whatever use you please of this letter. I have the honour to be. Sir, your obedient servant, To Henry Ashworth, Esq. ROBERT PEEL. Turton, Bolton, 6th mo. Ist, 1841. Respected Friend, Sir R. Peel, Bart.—On reading thy let ter of yesterday, and the report in the Morning Chronicle, to which thou refers me, 1 am by no means convinced that the statement made in my letter of the 29th is incorrect, namely, that thou had in substance asserted, that the deputa ion, and especially myself, had advocated opinions in favour of protect ing duties to our colones. I find, in the report to which thou refers me, the following passage in relation to Mr. Greg's pamphlet :—" That the members of the Chamber of Commerce at Manchester were the advocates of free trade, and were the men who were now agitating the country against the Corn-laws ; and they it was who asked him ('ir R. Peel) to read this pamphlet ; they told him they , would abide by the decision he came t o up on this pamphlet. —( Morning Chronicle, May 19.) Thou must be aware that this statement, so made by thee, was incorrect; that the deputation did not, as on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester, ask thee to read this pamphlet; that it was myself who directed thy attention to it, from con siderations arising incidentally out of the previous conversa tion; that this took place after the business of our inter view had been concluded; that this (Mr. Greg's) pamphlet was not given thee by the deputation, but was sent to thee some hours afterwards, in my own name, companied by a note, having a reference to Sir Fowel flux tou's scheiilfs, and not to any advocacy of protective duti e s ; and that nothing WO id to thee, from which thou could draw the conclusion that KB ha 1 140 en deputed by the Chamber of Commerce to lay that pamphlet b, fore thee ; and thou must also be aware, as 1 have before reminded thee, that it was not this pamphlet which tiw Deputation left thee, but the " Re port of the Chamber of COrtialefee tin the IlljufiPhs Enkiets of Restrictions on Trade," and the 't resolutions "ef the Charo., ber, founded thereon ; these thou promised to read, and upon them we rested our case ; and that neither m) self, nor either of my aolleagiuis, over said that we should abide the decision thou came to ppm) Mr: cirS's pimpht ? or any thing to the like effect. _ . It was with considerable surprise that I found, by thy letter, the following defence of the course thou hast taken. Thou sayest, Finding, in this pamphlet, coming into my posses sion under such circumstances, an elaborate and Succei4ful argument in favour of my own views, as to the policy of con tinuing, fer the present, a high protective duty on foreign sugar, I considered then, and I ccnsider now, that I was fully justified in the use which made of it," I conceive, therefore, that I, the gentlemen with whom acted, and the body by which we were deputed, have all a right to complain of the colouring which is given in thy speech to the conversation which took place at thy house. The Chamber of Commerce of Manchester was responsible only for the acts of myself and my colleagues as a deputation ; and, though it may be considered fair by an astute politician to catch at an expression of private opinion by an individual on an incidental point, and to try to fasten it upon the body by which he was deputed, I do not think that such a course is calculated to promote that frank and unreserved communication with pub lic men, from which I am sure they, and the community, may frequently derive considerable advantage. I am, respectfully, thy friend, HENRY ASHWORTH. SIR ROBERT PEEL AND THE DEPUTATION OF THE MANCHESTER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. Chamber of Commerce, Manehester, June 7, 1641. TO THE EDITOR OF THE MANCHESTER GUARDIAN. Sir,—That the public may judge of the misrepresentations which have been made in Parliament, and in the public jour nals, respecting the interview of the deputation of the Chamber of Commerce at Manchester with Sir Robert Peel, we beg to hand you the correspilndence which has passed between that gentleman and ourselves, which we shall be obliged by your inserting in your next publication. We are, Sir, yours respectfully, J. B. SMITH, HOLLAND HOOLE. Chamber of , Commerce Manchester, June 1, 1842. SlR—The statement made by you in the House of Corn. mons on the 18th ultimo, with reference to your interview with the deputation of the Manchester Chamber of Com. merce, led Mr. Ashworth, one of the deputation, to address a letter to you, through the public journals; but, having left London, we were not aware, until we saw by your ri ply to a question from Mr. Al. Philip, in the House of Con - mons, that you had received no direct communication on the subjtct from Mr. Ashworth. So many misreiresmtations have appeared in the news papers arising out of your reported statement in Parliament of what passed between vou and the deputation, that you will not be surprised ewe feel called upon, in our own justification, and that of our colleague, to repeat the facts as they oc curred, for the purpose of giving you an opportunity of cor recting the mis-statenn nts which are contained in the re po' ted'aceount of your speech. You are reported to have said, " That it was not the first time you had been indebted for arguments to the Cham ber of Co. amerce of Manchester—you had had the benefit of the arguments of the Honourable Gentleman the late Pre sident of that Chamber (Mr. G. W. Woo(l); you had to re turn the same acknowledgments to that Honourable Gentle man's successor." Now, you did not in your speech (as reported) think proper, on this occasion, to make use of a single arg ument a dduced by thk Chamb e r i n its " report," or inits resolutions," or through it s d e but, instead thereof, you have chosen to select from a pamphlet Written by Mr. w. R. Greg (re commended to your perusal by Mr, Ashworth with reference solely to Sir Fowell Buxton's scheme) certain passages, nevi dF adverted to by Mr. Ashworth, and representi n g to the House the opinions expressed in that pamphlet, as those of the deputa tiod, and on which they rested tkeir case. I You ate reported to have ,aid. " tiers. was a man corenetted ! with the inanuf esturing intesests—a membsr of the Cie mber of Gemmel ee at Manchester--det,eted by ti:ens to conic to Londoil to rep, sent their iseeresjs, prep ered to see an en larged and liberal view of this questant, with r. ter, nce a the interests both of the manufacturer and the cons:en:cr. And what ware the conclusions to which this gentleman came ? He said few things coul , i he more cert tin than that the situa tion of the sugar cultivaeor would be ruiee t, that r apital would be destroyed, that it would lead to the abandonment of the land by the present white population, and that not only would the great measure c f emancipation have signally failed, as far as negro slavery was concerned, but the moral effect on other countries would he wholly lost."—Morning Chronick, May 19. Not one syllable of the above, attributed to the deputation, was uttered by any one of them. You are further reported to have said, " The Honnurable Member who laughed might not be a member of the Chamber of Commerce at Manchester, but he should recollect that the numbers of the Chamber of Commerce at Manchester were the advocates of free trade, and were the men who were now agitating the country against the Corn.laws ; and they it was who asked him ( Sir It. Peel) to read this pamphlet ; they told him they would abide by the decision he Caine to upon this pamphlet."—Morning Chronicle, May 19. Now, what the deputation invited you to read, and on which they were satisfied to rest their case, was not Mr. Greg's pamphlet, but the Report of the direetot e to a special general meeting of the Chamber of Commerce and Manufacturers at Manchester, on the injurious effects of restriction on trade, and the necessity of immediate changes inour commercial pol•ce, held I ltb March ; mid also the " resolutions" adopted at another special general meeting of the Chamber, held on the 22d Apt il, both of which documents were handed to you by the deputa tion, and which you promised to read. Not one word will be found in these documents in favour of the "temporary continuance of the present discriminating duties on sugar." On the contrary, the report of the Direc tors before referred to, states that—" The tax imposed on the consumers, by being obliged to give above double the prices for sugar and coifs° to our colonies that these articles can he purchased at from other countries, amounts to upwards of 6,000,000/. per annum, levied for the exclusive benefit of the colonies, to whom, a few years ago, the British people paid 20,000,000/. for the abolition of slavery. " The total value of British and Irish produce and manu factures exported to the British West Indies, in 1839, amounted to 3,986.598/. ; of which about one-fourth is re-exported to the South American and neighbouring States ; so that, at the present time, including the interest on the slave-compensation money, the British people are paying 7,000,000/. per annum to our West India Colonies for the privilege of Bering their products of the value of 3,000,000/. a year." The second " resolution" unanimously adopted at the spe cial general meeting of the Chamber, held on the 22d of April last, is as follows : " 't hat it is inconsistent with just government to impere taxation for any other than purposes of revenue ; that all pro tecting or discriminating duties, imposed for the purpose of raising artificially the prices of home or colonial productions above their natural prices in the markets of the world, are an unjust tax upon the great body of the consumers, for the ex clusive benefit of a privileged class." It was furthermore expres•ly stated to you by the deputation that they conside. ed monopolies as unwise and unjust, and, stripped of their disguise, they could view them in no other light than as legalised robbery. The propriety of admitting slave-grown sugar for consump tion was a point introduced into discussion by yourself. You intimated your dissent from placing it in competition with that of free labour, and thus indirectly encouraging slavery; whilst the deputation contended, that the only possible or rational mode of abolishing slavery throughout the world was to show the superiority of free over slave labour. But that you did not mistake their opinions on the subject of free trade is evident from the following questions which you put to them, viz.:— Do you advocate universal free trade? They replied, certainly. Then, have not the West Indians a right to demand free trade? Certainly. Then I, as a West Indian, might say, Give ire a free trade in slaves. To which they replied, that human beings were not considered to be a legitimate mercantile com modity. When the business of the deputation had closed, and the Members had left their seats to depart, Mr. Ashworth asked, in reference to the question of free and slave labour, whether you had seen some observations upon Sir Fowell Buxton's schemes, in a pamphlet published by W. R. Greg. On your stating that you had not, Mr. Ashworth promised to send you the pamphlet. 'this simple and true recital of the circumstances of our in terview calls upon us to declare, both in justification of our selves and in defence of the body which sent us, that the le pressntations which you are reported to have made in Parlia ment do not convey a correct account of that which actually occurred ; and we respectfully request that you will do us the justice to correct, before the House of Commons, the mis statements which, we trust, hove been unintentionally made, or incorrectly reported.—We have the honour to be, Sir, yaur obedient servants, 3. B. SMITH, HOLLAND HOOLE. Sir Robert Peel, Bart., M.P., London. hitvhall, June 2, 1841. Gentlemen,—l beg leave to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of yesterday, referring to the debate which took place in the House of Commons on the ISth of May, now nearly a fortnight since. On Monday last (the 31st of May), I had a letter from Mr. Ashworth, being the first communication which had reached me on the subject of that debate. I replied to Mr. Ashworth's letter on the day on which I received it ; and, as he was a member of the deputation, and as I have stated to him my re col►ection of the conversation which passel, so far as concerns the pamphlet of Mr. Greg, and the circumstances under which it was recommended to my notice, I beg leave to refer you to that letter, of which 1 have authorised Mr. Ashworth to make whatever use he pleases. In that letter, I observe that I had referred to the report of my speech in the 'limning Chronicle, and that it appeared to me a fair and correct report. There certainly however, a material error which is no ticed in the second page of your letter. It would appear from the Report, that I had ascribed to a member of the deputa tion the statements "that the situation of the sugar cultivator would be ruined—that . capital would be destroyed— that it would lead to the abandonment of the land by the present white population—and that not only would the great measure of emancipation have signally failed, as far as negro slavery was concerned, but the moral effect on other countries would be lost." In reference to this passage ycu observe, " that not one syllable of the above, attributed to the deputation, was uttered by any one of them." This is perfectly true. Those state ments are in the pamphlet of Mr. Greg, and I so described them to be, and read from the pamphlet the particular passages f which the above report gives only the general summary. I am sorry to say that my recollection is at variance with yours on some parts of your statement. For instance, as to the claim of the West Indian proprietor to be allowed a free trade in slaves. My observation clearly pointed not to a re newal of the slave-trade for the benefit of West India pro prietors, but to the unequal footing on which a British colony would be placed by the strict application of the principles of free trade, if that colony had to compete on equal terms in the home•market with the produce of Cuba; when in the one case slavery and the slave trade were effectually abolished, and were not so in the other. Then as to the circumstances under which Mr. Greg's pamphlet was recommended to me. It is true that, when the conference was over, and the members Gf the deputation had left their seats and were about to depart, I inquired where I could procure the pamphlet of Mr. Greg, and was informed that it should be sent to me ; but there had been a p rev i ous conversation as to that pamplet, and it had been strongly re commended to my perusal towards the close of my conference with the deputation, and in consequence of my remarks as to slavery and the slave trade. If I am asked any question in the House of Commons on the subject. adverted to in this letter, I shall be prepared to state my recollection of what passed at the interview which I had with you, in conformity with the communications which 1 have made to you and to Mr. Ashworth. I have the honour to be, Gentlemen, your obedient servant, J. B. Smith, Esq. ROBLIIT PEEL. Holland boole, Esq. Chamber of Commerce, Manchester, June 3, 1641. Sir—We have received your favour of yesterday, in which you acknowledge that a portion of the report of your speech to which we called your attention, as reported in the Morning Chronicle, which attributes certain statements to the deputa tion, is incorrect ; and that those statements were described by Z ou in your speech as extracts from Mr. W. Greg's pamphlet. Dere is another point, however, which you have not noticed, btit which we deem of more importance, as brtween us and the Chamber of Commerce, by whom we were deputed; as we are made by the report of your speech in the Morning Chro. nick to have put in AL . Greg's pamphlet as our ca-e, and to have expressed ourselves willing to abide by your decision on that. We hog, therefore, aga . n to call your attention to the report of your speech as tollows .—" '1 hat the members of the Cham ber of Commerce at. Manchester were advocates of free trade, and were the men who were now agi ating.the country against the Corn-laws; and they it was who ask, d him ( Sir R. Peel) to read this pamphlet, They told him they wou±d abide by the decision he came to upon this pamphlet."—Morning Chro nicle, May 19. We have again to reiterate, that this is totally at variance with what really took place at our interview ; and it will afford us pleasure to be honoured by another communication from you, stating that this part of the report of your speech is also Incorrect. We have the honour to be &c., J. B. SMITH, HOLLAND HOOLE. Sir R. Peel, Bart., M.P. Whitehall, June 5, 1841. Gentlemen,-1 am not aware of any error in that part of the newspaper report to which you refer in your letter of the 3d instant. If there had been, I would as willingly have admitted it, as I did admit the errcr noticed in my former letter. I have stated to Mr. Ashworth my recollection of the cir cumstances under which the pamphlet of Mr. Greg was strongly recommended to my notice, at an interview which I had with the deputation of which 3ou were members. Mr. Ashworth took the leading part at that interview. If it were intended by Mr. Ashworth to recommend to me parts only of the pamphlet of Mr. Greg, the reservation ought to have been made at the time. If, again, Mr. Ashworth was speaking sometimes in his individual capacity, and at others as a member of the deputation, or if he offered to me suggestions from which you dissented, I cannot but think that an intimation to that effect ought to have been conveyed to me during our interview. I have the honour to be, Gentlemen, your obedient servant, J. B. Smith, Esq. • ROBERT PEEL. Holland Boole, Esq. IVMIt'NT I:NG IM" - - 71 NAVAL I.NITELI.;GENCL ( From thii‘ Brifihton Gazette..) • • PoilTsmouTH, JUNE 9.—The hen, Austen, sod Natriles. 16, Lieut. Bet.utb‘, hove been pui cut ot commission, and tyith kill be doclied The schooner Fair R o s a mond, commanded by Lieut. Bulw illb will go o u t o f th e h ar b our on F r id a y ; de s ined the Afrieslb sea , ion. The name of the Captain appointed to succeed Sir Charter Napier in the command of the Powerful, 84, has not yet tee n. spired. The Rapid, tender-brig, Lieut. Tryon, is still off the Sneed coast, affording protection to the fishery. The steamer Alban, Mr. King, master, has procee ded ti Dublin with the depot of the 82eRegiment, and thence wil l to Sheerness. Rumour sends the Edinburgh, "2, Captain Hen 3 erson , ! it !. Implacable, 72, Captain Ha rve y, t o Lisbon, to be stationed' the Tagus. The Dublin, 50, flag-ship of Rear Admiral Thomas, it on in dock, and will shortly be masted. Seamen et:ter ' rat t y freely for thi; ship, for the South American statimi. The Sapphire, troop-ship, Mr. Cole, master, is on bet :17 home front the Leeward Island s , an d may b e shortly exPec' The steamer Spitfire, commanded by Lieutenant Tringbasion; having despatches for Vic e -Ad m i ra l Si r Thornea arve,v , . supernumeraries for the West India Squadron, bag left- Bari.adocA, to touch at Plymouth and Falmouth. The Pique, 36, Captain Boxer, it daily expected from sheo' ness. Captain Alexa n d e r Elli ce , 11. P., for Harwich, it 1414 : ported, is to have the Pique, vice 'Boxer, appointed Corn dare at Jamaica. The Electra, 16, Commander Mainwarinz, may be ex in England with sp ec i e f rom th e B rai d s a t t h e end of . “ "j. The Orestes, 16, has left the station for China. AT SPITES a A D.—lndus, 84; Monarch, 84; and Verneutt Ix linanoca..—Queen, Victory, Excellent, Biqa' Ge t r e, l9- yacht, Dublin, Bittern, Fair Rosamond, Echo, and flag tea'."--- THAMES EMBANKMENT. Sir F. TRENCH moved the re-appointment of the Select Committee on Thames Embankment, for the pur pose of considering evidence in support of a plan to form, upon the embankment, a quay of communication from Blackfriars-bridge to;Hungerford-market ; the whole of which could be provided for by a railroad between the same termini, without any demand for the public money, or any reference to the value of the land recovered from the river. Mr. HAWES objected to the motion. He begged the House to consider the great amount of property that would be affected by the formation of the embank ment proposed ; and he believed it would not benefit navigation, but, on the contrary, would impede it. Mr. KEMBLE trusted that, under all the circum stances, his Hon. Friend would not press the motion to a division. Mr. PRYME supported the motion. The CHANCELOR of the EXCHEQUER trusted that at this period of the Session the Hon. and Gallant Member would not press his motion. _ _ Sir F. TRENCH consented to withdraw the motion. The House then adjourned at a Quarter past Eleven. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION. (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House af Commons.) WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9. ADMINISTRATION VF JUSTICE (No. I.) BILL. Further Proceeding on Report resumed : —Clause (That the Act shall commence and have effect on, from, and after the 10th day of October next, and not before, except where a day is hereinbefore fixed) brought up, and read a first time ; Illotion made, and Question put, "'That the sa d Clause be now read a second time :"—The House divided : MAJOR' T Y—AYES, A•Court, Captain l Filmer, Sir E. Adare, Lord Forester, Hon. G. Ali sander, N. Gaskell, J. N. Antrobus, Edmund Gore, 0. W. Arbuthnot, Hon. H. Goulburn, H. Archdall, General Graham, Sir J. Ashley, Lord Geimsoit ch, I'. 13agot, Hon. W. Grimston, Lord Bailey, J. Hamilton, Lord C. Bateson, Sir Robert Ilardinge, Sir H. Blackburn, John 1. Hawkes, T. Bl a ckstone, W. S. Herren* G. W. Bramston, T. W. Hermiker, Lord Broadley, Henry Hepburn, Sir T. B. Buck, Lewis W. Herries, J. C. Buller, Sir J. B. Y. Hodgson, R. Burrell, Sir C. M. Hope, Charles Calcratt, J. H. Hotham, Lord Canning, Sir S. Ingestre, Lord Chapman, A. highs, Sir R. H. Clerk, Sir G. Jones, John Cochrane, sir T. Jones, T. Corry, H. L. Knatchbuil, Sir E. Cresswell C. Lascelles, W. S. Darby, G, eorge Law, Hon. C. E. Dick, Quentin Lefroy, Dr. T. Douglas, Sir C. E. Lincoln, Earl of Drummond, IL H. Lindsay. H. Dugdale, %V. S. Lowther, Viscount Duncombe, W. Lowther, J. H. Duncombe, A. Mackenzie, Thomas Eaton, Richard J. Maclean, D. Egerton, Sir P. G. Mahon, Lord Eliot, Lord Neeld, Joseph Estcouit, T. G. B. Neeld, John 101. Nicholl, J Norreya, Lord Parke, C. W. Pakington, John S. Palmer, G. Parker, it. T. Peel, Sir R. Pemberton, T. Plumptre, J. P. Pringle, A. Rae, Sir William Reid, Sir J. tt. ltif:hards Richard Round, J . Rushbrooke,:Colontl Rushour ' B ow l es Sheppard, Thomas Shirley, E. J. Sibthorp, Colonel Somerset, Lora G. Sotheron, T. E. Stanley, Lord Stunt, H. C. Sugslen, Sir Edward Thesiger, F. Thompson, Ald. Vere, Sir C. B. Waddington, H. S. Walsh, Sir . Wiibraham, R. B. Wynn, C. W. TELLERS. Holmes, W. Fremantle, Sir T. All. (dam, Admiral Sir C Archbold, It. Bannerman, A. Baring, F. T. Barry, G. S. Berkeley, C. lluu in, J. J. Ilriseo e' J. Brocklehurst, J. Brotherton, J. Buller, E. Bustield, W. Campbell, Sir John Chiluers J. W. Clay, W. Chug, W. Gibson Dalmeny, Lord D'Eyncourt, C. T. Ellis, Wynii Evans, Sir G. De Lacy Evans, William Fazakerley, J. N. Ferguson, Sir Ii A. Fitzpatrick, John Grey, Sir C E. arey, Sir G. Guest, J. J. Hawes, B. Halter, W. G. NORITY—NOES, Heathcoat, John Hector, C. J. Hindley, Charles Hotirouse, T . B. Howard, P. H. Hume. Joseph Labouchere, H. Lambton, H. Listowel, Earl of Ludiington, S. Lynch, H. A. Macaulay, T. B. Marshall, W. Maule, Hon Fox Marpeth, Viscount Morris, David Muntz, G. f*, Noel, C. G. O'Brien, C. O'terrall, More Paget, Frederick Parnell, Sir H. Pechell, Captain Pendarves, E.'W. l'iEct, D. B. Power, James Price, Sir B Ince, E. B. Roche, W. Rundle, John Russell, Lord John Rutherruid, A. Shell, R. L. Smith, VernoP Stansfield, W. R. Stewart, James Strutt, Edwai d Stuart, Lord J. Stuart, W. Viliers Thornely, Thomas Troubridge, Sir T. Villiers, Charles t. Wakley, 'Emma' Warburton. H. Ward, H. G. Wilbraham, G. Wilde, Sir,7f. Williams, W. Winnington, Sir 1 Wood, C. Wood, G.W. Wood, Benjamin Wyse, 3 homes Yates, John A. TELLERS. Stanley, 8.. 1 . Parker, John --- BRUSSELS, JUNE 7.—Among the foreigners of distinction who have lately arrived at Brebse:s, are Prime Galitzin from St. Petershurgh,Baron Iran Zuylen, the Marquis de Mosteinal t, sod the Prince of Satin Saint. T UR - ii. IS I-1 FRONTIERS. MAY 22.---The northern provinces of Turkey seem to be now restored to a state of tranquillity. News have been re received at Widdin from Constantinople that Cemmissioners are to be appointed; but the Sultan is to examine into the grievances of the rayabs of Bulgaria, the conduct of the Turkish local authorities, before and after the breaking out of the disturbances, and the causes of the latter. It is said that the two Pachas of. Nissa arid Widdin are deeply implicated, and it is feared that the family of a Christian Prince has disre garded the supreme authority of the Porte immediately after the breaking out of the Bulgarian revolt. The Porte was on the point of sending] Tewfik Bey, the Sultan's Secretary, to Nissa, with unlimited full powers to quell the disturbances. Something intervened to preven t the departure of the Bey; and a report o f Hussein, the Pasha of Widdin, which was very artfully drawn up, made so favourable an impression on the Divan, that it gave him full power and directions to take such measures as he judged the most advisable to restore order. Tewfik Bey is to be President of the Committee of In _quiry. If the investigation is well conducted, unexpected re salts .will probably be obtained. • SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE• (LLOYD'S). br LONDON, JUNk 10.—Wind this day a t no on, lig—t hee ° from the N. to N.E., fine clear weather. DEAL, JUNE 9.—Wind N., fresh.—Arrived fro tlr s o River and sailed, the Alligator, for Singapore; 313r Y I.l.ellah Jane, Swan River; Foam, H ong K ong; J o h n 3 is , Bombay; Horatio tran s p or t, S t . H e l ena; Ell e n Gillo o6 Newfoundland; Miner va , B os t on; F ame, Madeira. Rem,..lL the Florentia, for Sydn e y, i n consequence of t h e cr ew rel" . 7 to do their duty. Ar SHEERNESS, JUNE 9.—Th e G eorge Cl ar k, Cl ar k, from Pk zic to London, got on the Maplin Sand yesterday morning' was got off after discharging her deck load. fte r i FALMOUTH, J UNE B.—Wi n d N . N .E. to N.E.o„cti.l breezes.—Sailed her Majesty' s s ki p P etre l , with stlaw „ a the homeward-bound. P LIVERPOOL, JUN E 9.—Wi n d N.E. light breetlf." -A _,,, r s rived the Forth, from M on t e Vid eo. Sailed the Sir 0 70 , Peel, for Ca cutta ; Ann, Maranham ; ginia ; Lady Milton, St. John's, New Brunswie.: • pr e ; Grey, Quebec. Arriv e d o ff, th e J o h n Scott, from Nl , Jrite Britannia, Boston, 16th u l t ., an d Halifax, ISth, pat bank T 7 day, having been aground, and sailed again on The 49th' Cowes, JUNE S.—Arrived the Innocence, 114 1 0 ‘"-- from Bahia. GUERNSEY, JUNE 7.—Arrived the Alarm, Stew:wt.: l°i . Buenos Ayres, rather leaky. 14 04 BRISTOL, Juaz 9,—Sailed the Freed om , f or Africa; Malaga; Marina, Constantinople. CORE, JUNE 7.—Arrived off, the Gulielmo, Ater, tO Monte Video. YARMOUTH,—Arrived off, the Thomas and Martha , loss of both anchors a n d c h a i ns , arr i ved i n the Roads; 111, and Alargaret, of Sunderland, w ith l oss of anchor and chs u- • SHIELDS, JUNE 7.—Th e Eli za b eth (steamer), i n re f vessel out to sea, clove o n th e H er d Sand, and h as beef, wreck. PENZANCE, MAY 7.—A boat nearly new, with a bilek tor /SO streak, and marked F anny o f Greenock, C. T. , picked up, the 20th ni t . c#„ HARTLEPOOL, MAY 6.—The Tynemouth ft ,,tr Sunderland to St. Pet ers b urg h , has been towed in heit se b t loss of topmast. The Mary and Jane Kinnerly, of Wis is being towed in dismasted. „„ s Oak OSTEND, MAY B.—A bark of about 300 or ton doned, with Connecine von Lambert on her stern, o as u P :s i tio tti on the sth instant, south of the lloggerbank, by the '" fishing smack, arrived here. bollv TREBIZOND, MAY I2.—The Austrian steamer, Stsoo4, Anthione, ran on shore on the Ist inst. near Sinore, and All her cargo is damaged, crew saved. CORN AVERAGES. tiENERAL AVERAGE PRICES OF BRITISH COr r t i gt i , For the Week ended June 4, 1841. ma d e up from t h e be So' the Inspeetorsui the different Cities and Towns in Eng it ' Wales, per imperial Quarter. Jo' 01. Wheat 6:2s 4d Oats B..r!ey 29s. 7d. I Rye ..... 355. 4r , I Pea5e.......••-7, AVERAGES OF THE LAST SUL WEEKS. Week ending WREAT. BARLEY.I OATS. 1 RYE. BEANS. •,--- I April3o r 6IB 31 823035 P 38 .. f/ ' M 34 ay 7 63 2 31 7 22 5 :3 10 2e, , 1 1 4 ..... 21 29 6l 6 .0 14 22 4 :1 7 3i 3 . . 35 '' June 4 IMPERIAL AGGREGATE AVERAGES OF THE SIX W — PP Wheat 62s. 51 1 Oats Harley, 303. 11(1.1 Rye DUTIES ON FORE r3 I S GX . •r e 111 Wheat ..... .... 21s. Bd. I Oats Barley lbs. 10(1.1 Rye .1:(110.. 11NP8.eeanne5..................i.7.i.," 1,0, - --------- • • THE MARKETS. = YEs TERRA- v " TALLOW MARKET. Russian Tallow was firm, and a fair demand existed feL f,j; parcels on the spot and for delivery ; prices were 4&• the former, and 475. 64. for the latter purpose. TEA MARKET. bid The Market was quiet, and at the p u bli c sa l es the rite/. were languid, but holders were firm, and obtained flu! , Company's Conga 2s. Id. cash. THE FUNDS. COLONIAL MARKET. The business was extremely limited both for home w• - ftif export ; in prices, however, little variation took place. public sales went off flatly. The imports light. COUNTRY CORN .MARKETS. Wheat. ' Barley. 1 O ats. i iseans' l ,'_.......- •••••••- --___..- --__....!..--_-.... to I Per Quarter. 5. to a. a , to v. a. to s. a. to a. .. s " r e Boston „.. 55 64 22 38 18 22 35 38 ''',, 11 " 13rainti cc 55 65 28 34 93 29 35 40 „ a '' 0 11 ighton 57 64 27 32 23 s 7 139 44 •,' , Uanibridge — t 0 28 20 37 r, ' 4. „ • Chiche.ter 55 65 23 3. 24 ~6 40 42 0,.„" ' 40 Dunmow Grantham Grimsby 56 f 4 29 33 lb 21 36 40 ;;I: 0" Hailsham 56 63 26 30 . ‘:3 25 35 4 0 "" 1 Hitchin 53 64 30 37 22 30 34 4 5 •-; i• Ipswich 5O 66 29 :. , 5 21 26 37 . 44 2 94 f 9 Lewes 5B 66 26 29 22 23 54 .7, s • Linn 5l 03 54 :Ail 21 24 34 3 '" - • ii Maidstone 59 60 30 39 26 32 38 40 :,', . Norwich - •f. 42 Petworth Rumford 5B 69 30 24 21 50 34 34 45 ~, 33 46 Sandwich 62 71 30 34 56 30 35 '.;; 0 0 si Thetford 5B 62 30 32 24 27 39 1 ,',, 34 43 Wishech ,56 62 28 34 20 23 35 'I 99 sy Witham 52 62 28 33 28 Si) 35 'I A ; 136 Yarmouth ,62 66 31 32 24 30 40 4 1 .. L. V ERPOOL CORN M 9RXET.—June 8. 10I WHEAT, English, White, p er 701 b.... Red - ---- Scotch, Welch, and Manx . i v Irish, White 7 2 0 ......... Red Foreign OATS, English, Wel s h, an d Scotch, per 45Th 2lO 3 , Irish 2, ll 0 .• •• P ,' Foreign !PARLEY, English, Maltin g , p er I mp . quarter ..... .- 34 11 4 Scotch and Irish, per 60Ihs. ---- Feeding 3 5 44 7 7 BEANS, English, per Imperial quarter 42 0 40 Irish, &c. v En 0 Foreign PEASE, glish, per Imperial quarter 4 a $1 0 Foreign Elms, English, per 28016. a 2 40 . • —• Irish OATMEAL, English and Irish, per 24(11bs .. 95 6 37 P ,. INDIAN CORN, ptr 4601 b. RYE, per Imperial quarter MALT, per Imperial quarter 10 seq 0 THE LORD LIEUTENANT.—In CO" oft A of letters received last night from Castle Hia, elino u l d 11; dangerous state of the venerable Earl Fortescue. _ v i n f...... Lieutenant took his departure at ten o'clock this 1 21 °',7,010r; the Shamrock steamer, for Bristol, Vols. His Excellency was accompanied by his son, the . Fortescue.—Dublin Evening Post of Tuesday. .. ..d , on his way to Ver.' jow --- -.-0 1 ,1 1 4 1°- PLATE.—A. B. SAVORY and SONS' , .tats factoring Silversmiths, No. 14, Cornhill, London, 0,1 3 ,00 1 ' 1 , Bank of England. The best wrought SILVER sil o and FORKS, Fiddle Pattern, 7s. 2d. per ounce. ." oeir,, Pattern, 7s. 4d. per ounce. The following are to e beael"" recommended, but the articles may be had lighter ee at the same price per ounce : Fiddle Pattern. oz. s. d. £s. a es. s' 4,.. 1 , 4 s NI 12 Table Spoons 30 at 7 2...10 15 0 12 Table Spoons 40 at 'i 4 ,„ v 1 . 1 4 12 Dessert ditto 20 7 2... 7 34 12 Dessert ditti,26 ~ 4 ...1 4 10 14 12 Table Forks. 3J 7 2.-10 15 012 Tab c Forks4o .. 7 4. .. 9le 12 Des.set t ditto2o 72.. 7 34 12 Dessertditto 26 7 4..1 i King's Pattel i 0 4.4 1 2 Gravy Spoons 10 '. 2... 311 ks 2 Gravy Spoons 12 7 4,„ .0 . I Soup Ladle...lo 7 '2... 311 8 1 Soup Ladle. 12 1 iy,,, : 0 4 Sauce ditto...lo 7 8... 316 9 4 &nice ditto... 1 2 ~ilt). i); 4 Salt Spoons (gilt strong) 1 0 0 4 Salt Spoons (etrOag *.. . 0 , i • 9., I Fish Slice '2 10 0 1 Fish slice ................. 9, 0 ; 12 Tea Spoons. 10 7831 C 8 12 Tea Sowing. Is .. .1, 1 Pair Sugar Tongs 0 15 0 1 pair Ungar Tongs lijusplog N.B. A Price Current, stamped as a N ews paper by drawings, and containing every information few; a pri; e t purchase of silver or She ffi eld plate, may be had °i o $l l5 tion, or will be sent into the country, f re e of postage , to a paid letter. Si TABLE CANDLESTICKS, superior"Laiettl ii ii for durability, equal in appear ance . Tabls ea 0 : 1 500. 4. inches high, 7s. per pair; 9 inches high, tes. 1 1° higb',4' per pair , ditto, with rieh shell mountings , 9 inoM i ch okjii per pair; snu ff er trays, with sh e ll mountings- 1 11 d the 7 4 0 tre, 4s. each. The particular me t a l o f which' ',elk"' great variety of other articles are made, can oolY. be . . silver by reference to the stamp. C a t a l og ues gratitt , ro s, • RIPPON and BURTON, W e ll s - s t ree t, 0.1i 4 r 4 " •••••szer____---- ' BIRTHS. 51 W. On the 30th ult., the lady of T. Collins, Esq'' ; Oa Somerset, of a son. , 00 Ott the the 2d inst., at Brussels, the lady of Sir ' OEL V At f Seymour, her Maet's Minister, of a sou. t, On the sth ins j t. s y , at Tulse-hill, Brixton, t-e lefli as' Cotter, Esq. , _ of a daughter. Sri' ileor On the 7th inst.,: in Fetter-lane, Fleet-street , •- of a son Chamber of Commerce, Manchester, June 7, 1841. Sir,—We have received your letter of the sth inst., in which you state that you are " not aware of any error" in that part of the newspaper report to which we referred you in ours of the 3d in , t. We are the more surprised at this reply, becattee we have since received a copy of your speech of the 18th May, published by Murray ( which we take for granted is corrected by your telt), in which we perceive that you have omitted that portion of your reported speech of which we then comp'ained as being a misrepresentation, viz., that we tvotild abide by the decision you came to upon Mr. Greg's 1 amphlet. We were further surprised to find, that all the nets-statements in every part of your speech of the ltith May, as reported in the Morning Chro nicle (called by you " a fair and correct report,") which first led us, in our own justification, and that of our colleague, to call your attention to, are also, in your said authorized speech, either altog, ther omitted or corrected. Why you still declare that you are " not aware of any error" . , in certain passages in your speech, as reported in the Morn- Car o. ing Chronicle, misrepresenting our interview with you, and DIED. -- On the 30th tilt , at Wycomb Deanery- C o tt ` ' or yet in your speech, as corrected by yourself, you have either wife of J. Malcolm ' head master, aged 26. wi' l° 6oth ° , omitted or altered these passages, is best known to yourself.R Re bec a, We deem it unnecessary to make a single comment on this On the 2d inst ~ a t Teignmouth, Ann il op.paY , , conduct. The public will make its own. We cannot, how- John Penton Passley, ' Fsq., late a Captain, h' le ever, close this correspondence without deeply regretting that Royal Rifles. t .stree I a statesman, aspir:ng to the first office in the Government, On the 3d inst., John Ffeiler, Esq., of George's tau should, even by implication, have justified the suspicion of stead-road, aged 74. Ju On g n e t a. l n ie d 3 ..A d i.a i L n .i s s t t . r , at a e t .in l3a t y i2 g d ee,', basing sought to procure a temporary triumph of party in teieste, not only at the expense of the character and reputa tion of the Deputation of the Chamber of Commerce at Man- the otn inst., in Portland-place, ClaVr eo - t ,plac e. relict of the late Edward Chanoler, Esq„ of a chester, but also at that of te uth and justice. elria' ' I We have t 4 honour to be, Sir, your obedient servants, ezee sAlratcerZen:fyeoift 13e 'i n f g a al ra, r 'sgwi" i ii7r l4. J. J. smTii. • 1 lApip,r t : • Primed„ and Published by AItIRDO Strad 11OLLA.D HOOLE. ( sg, 112, Strand, at The Sun Office, No. 1 ., 12 .11. Sir Robert Peel, Bart., M.P., London. thia county of Niddlesex..—Friday, June II) 17 ' . . MARRIED. he 14 r — i o' i 0 011 the 31st ult., at Westb ur y- upon-Trytv. „,1 , Pakenham espard, son of the l a t e Li eu tanant-CW:, jag D spard, ‘f the Rot al Fusil eers , t o E m ily, young° of the late 'William Coffin, Esq., of Bath. re i lir iter On the sth inst., at St. M ar k' s, My e l t ielton-sq u _VdSot Small, Captain of th e b r i g T hun d er, to M ar ia, se ey prl of the late David Morley, Esq. ,ngions fthe On the sth in3t., at St. Mark's Church, ger l°l „b 111 of Liam Papineau, o f K enn i ngton, to H arr i e t Cane e p, same place. bel 4e .0 On the Bth inst., at. St. George's Church , Cal b Crei it et B. C. e l k e , E sq. , R . N ., second son of the late IV jog Esq., of R ane liff e Hall, Yorkshire, to tliza , suc° of the late J. J. Iselin, Esq., of Basle. Ash f.. , ',t , V.1 4 "'"" I ( ST Co Sp te r , Cef I RFT To