The Sun. — London, England, 1855-02-05 00:00:00

wi tnb , T 4I4I3 ERT SMITH'S MONT BLANC A ~ 1,,, h. ;-4,reGIIT at 8 o'clock, and Every Night (but Saturday). 'Place Bee ry 4 ' 23. ; Gallery, 1.. The Mornitus Representations Ptim jaap,. Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, at 3 o'clock. — L flecadill y. -....____ tTRnD T OLITAN Rhe Preliminary Deposit on Applications for being me at si essr klae t , the t.'• ne Y w ood,Kennard, and Company's, She , Dir h ect s o e r a s ThreadnerneS?erasrty Kemoal of that Firm to the South BY orderreet. ‘ ll 0 P r" -. T he ITAN RAIL VA Y.— , t or ecters, finding it necessary to afford further fact ori,e,c,pYlnent of the Deposit on Application for , Share,sa,thEavxe gt.b4,,`(; Ilrokers, Messrs. Ellis and Co., No. 2,3 , 'Matte tag.% and the Secretary of the Company, N 0 1 . 1 2 07, Great et, Westminster to receive the same. ItY order. W. MALINS, Chairman. J. HEUCHMAN, Secretary. IgEIIrN4TIONAL ASSOCIATION for PRO N„ip co ING is e ItEroßm in the BRITISH ARMY. dnUse paramount necessity for a reformation in efectivogrossingsu system bjec are to requested to communicate their all-en t GEORGE RUTHERFORD, Hon. See., Attendance daily from '', Tiftroin2grio-ecku.are. • • r A -------------_,__________,, ".NETIC TELEGRAPH. 1-.., 2, A LONDOV OFFICES ,quid Eroad-treet (sii do fom the Refal Eveliange.) , r " Co-r,,t!„nd-7, Ch ariag-eres o s n (op r posite the statue.) . 4 , - r ofth e Cigndicoation by underground wires with the principal tele k Twenty Words, including delivery, and address not br e ,.;, l at 'u e, ' , l ' "Ice 2 1 41 4 -ter, ' Ex change -buildings —..— irilt ~ Exc hange -arcade 2 6d. 4,4 4 11 1 harn V,• Etiglish-street (1-.4;48" ul, New -street . *** Ur ee g ' w, Office, 18, Exchange-square.. • • •• . • _.. *..1 1 i,,,, 1) 11 . e k. ~ Cathcart-square.. ...... •• • • 4s. Od. , 1 ...I,,,l3llianfhes, ~ High-street ~ ~,,, ss. Od. , Belfa s t ~ 23, College-green .. ...... •• • • :, Cork:. ', 1. Donegal-street qtleerio„ ~ Pembroke•street } 7s. 6d. - "`' .Bl l, ~ The Quay Itill st EDWARD B. BRIGHT, Secretary. lit, rs et tnce ry, t 0 an Order of the High Court of ,1 4 ,,,,°( bit,, i(i 'Ll,de In a cause, LYLE v. LE BRETON, the ay, 8 David Co oper Aylwin, of No. 5, Loraine-place, Iloilo -1, r i i; e ?nti (l a " ef Middlesex, merchant, who died in or about the I lar;' ' ,l ' taei r cir August, one thousand eight hundred and ftfty- f 44 -, 4 5 t Solicitors, on or before the twenty-fourth day o : , )p e rs .,_ °l the 1 ,9, 'erne in and prove their debts or claims at the iteuLlidinh"ee-Chancellor Sir Richard Torin Kindereley, No. ,414„,,...eper-,-, Li ncoln's-inn Middlesex, or, in default thereof, ' ' 44 ) LM IY exel d ' d f m the benefit of the said order. er _. tb e twent u e ro lieen o on, at th ' , eighth day of February, 1855, at 1 . 2 of the d ` w4 gll e geld Chambers, is appointed for hearing an `44 %1ei:414 claims, 'renteenth day of January, 1855. CHAS. PUGH, Chief Clerk. • W• and G. T. WOODROOFFE, Lincoln's-inn, Plaintiff's Solicitors. OtoNTRACT FOR, IRON TANKS. Tr D s e „._ lt,4`. un Services,e Comptroller for Tictualling and '.l)ort Somerset-place, 3d February, 1855. 0 0 • Lord 1111Thasioner s for Executing the Office of 4 4 4 1 k 14 . 1 4 11 „ 4 -8 -dtniral of the United Kingdom of Great Britain t 4 extot -,-lerebY Give Notice, that oa THURSDAY, the Is it r ttaly i'", One o'clock, they will be ready to treat with such 'aieets; e Willing to Contract for supplying and deliverin g •• 8 Victualling Stores at DEPTFORD, all such i kr 4 ~„' 4 n l Cl A IRON TANKS, is' ••141-,„, e - and Articles for Repairs, as shall' from time to ~ _4 ll lth'e'4 l under a contract for three years certain, and after. kt 'qe of th'lPiration of three months' warning. ertbqtforde ;Tanks and Articles may be seen at the Victualling , [l4, rn a and a form ef the tender and the conditions ot . 4, de r "be obtained at the said office, or on application to t.. Be v I ; et Liverpool, or the Callector of Customs at - 9d, , itl4Nrill b e Unless received after One o'clock on the day of treaty, nor 4. r , ''' Made on the Printed form provided for the pur histis'4tliatrnaUst be addressed to the Secretary of the Admiralty, the corner the words " Tender for Tanks," and ed at Somerset-place. loor4 CASINO, ARGYLL ROOMS. 11 ° A AY' rob 6th, 1855 .—During the course of . this week Tosut' te,,, etc will be played by Laurent's f)rchestra .70 _ I.l.„`"veri; Waltzes: Germania, Bernard ; ermah .A`,L, 11, L 'usil Sultane Bosisio ;Le Carnaval de Venice c,Vel!n eurent, With Vzriations for all the prinuadrilles cipal per- Ltel b leze ar t, l W o"en (flrst time) Strauss ; . I,rnott'e ; Austerlitz, Carbon; Le Roi du Patel, 4,aUte, inneY• Schot[ische, The Moldavian, Jullien• o l i o 4(1 ) , r se, Strauss; The Zouaves, 11. Laurent ; Warshauer, 414) J,• 11 A ' A711 :4 „T el " , Laurent. Principal Cornet-A-Piston, acs —ormation relative to music to be obtained at . at rY under the orchestra. Doors open at Eight , Dtst ' -- AiltaiSsion, One Shilling. Oy A „. l ' 4 'rß o N / ---, alai. PRINCE ALBERT. Co n ,,_ P(11- A - ' ll4 Qd itnhs"4-1 TECHNIC INSTITUTION. ‘NtAT '''.°Yellients, increased attractions, fresh decora- Ilo et I° / I E4 4t tio t P-,NGS by Miss GLYN. Thursday Evening, tttti ttt clock OT lIFLLO leq . ' S . " !2;::,__ ll , the sth lost., LECTURE to th r e , INDUS ft R,Z,tirth Lecture of a Course on PITY , lOLOGY, Ittfj*pa itt Li, by Or CASPENTEB, F.R.S., F.G.S., 34c. lky Lte'rtIAPIRATION. th It ta: h ' n at., at B,—Mrs. FuaLorra en "ORAL" th e , I , 4 l ,k%lAkli t TE, by Dr. BACHROFFNER, giving such itstowTel's Ti l 46‘ac public to detect Forged Notes. on Tra t ' C ONCERT by invisiWe perforrr fe s ssor 1 1107,? PEPPEX, Esq., illustrating ro v" th TRANSMISSION of SOUND. ' , lat *l A t tl ' '!(II'ti'VOLENeDID OPTICAL DIORAMA, from W ' 14 114 the VOYAGES of SINBAD and kt m Lao tir a—a ngedANTA.SMAGORII EFFECTS, 8, ' 4 -Pt. bY Ur. Wain). t 41 4. °L W, ' , thick now discharges 100 Balls per ...11 A ot her SEND sTA It l 'ket ?"I "te call ' e TS. - ;e t e sz :l at the p ier. h Oreenhithe and Purfleet Piers. no. I'M llta.e%l.;. l ,22 , terl G i itA d w E e s a i r t.T e D r . parm k 4 t I CU tl t 2 , "E! t, A Time 2 5 ti I . I Z 8 8% 2 )1 1 N rorZ 4 l'ec hurch-street Stat 1.41, wl °4 r* Li uLACK krALL Th '° the FenchU SUNDAY!. [on to 5 1 ~---j _- ll parts of London Nv,' -,____x__l,,, , on the :h•street arrival of the rot Station. L.; •S I O ?:: I • V C x .~ Fen church Street (DAYS. --......:_5_ 1 1 i i I `em ~,._ t trftl riv eaeti c i Fore Cabin. Saloon. gi. 74 5.. 11 and It" L 0nd0n........ lOC - A is ' 1 2 0 1' 't x i - ,,...eaend an -a y e korall or Woolwish itd.• - " s ' gd kOh?'4l.S. 'oterinediate Piers.. 6d. • • Os. . ~ . e l or I, 2/. Os Twelve Months, Si, Os.; Six Months, 34 ._ u.5... e , 1 3, IV kr. 4„ • „,_ l . O be had of the Collectors on board tn '54. go. Terrace Pier, Gravesend. 4, tibh.„-ET lon,. mad, A ric a 'aIITIES OF YOUTH IND MATURI f T or Y ;O tll 20., illustrated with cases ; free by post stimps, u g DEBILITY; Sym , tr ill ... v lth a_ °wink and Care.—An Essay on I, thZcide oraetical Observations on a safer and g m Pe or r e - Il loit r u l e „ cd b y t„etinent of the diseases of the G enerative end iill t e b . by t h ;„to use of the Microscope in dete ctin g '. a 'l °f c0.,,-arY, e xainination, the real cause and effect of titkieht. o''Plaint, whether arising from solitary habits, Its De o, r climate. followed by practical remarks, founded . Sid bilk, ,exPenenee in the treatment of Impuissance, l ' " , h: " ' "al weakness gpermatorrhosa, &c. To which 1 bl eti" "t aries on the ' physiology of Marriage, with pre .el c 'll th. empirical practice, ettn. eto__ evils emanating from en clieor7errietnedies advocated by various w riters 1 ' . II E h bl U ,L' S i k -F n RA VEL LA'MERT. M.D. . 1 4Zile.k o ; D-S QUA R E, LONDON. ilth lte - 71 4 ryAt' at riettla M em ber of the University of Edin ,Nettor Akiot-'holiabsr of the Londo n Hospital Medical Society, L t5.,.... 410 bja,...' t411 e0 Hall, London, &C., &c. ate. - utt o ., - z Of this treatise is to point out the fearful ezne excesses, Oki Th " Pro t ,' ir ora certain h a bits, Irregularities, and Lklet o ,... i 1t „.7 1 more misery in Youth, degradation in Man- Z sr li.. us lesaa - t. ds car at all stages of Life, than, perhaps, any kiNeeT" "'porn o modern pathologists. Its esal is 40111 bit:*sollihilded to t e rsons entertaining secret dou bts de ol , s ' 1 Plot o ° n, and who are conscious of ha ving haz hei ar is l aZ o ocli t t ot ' and Privileges to which every human cy ll t ini at e... 44 0_ b a t al eeSs „.__arY thatall men should know, that there are h annot be violated wiout t i l lk -„,;; T: — * ment when ll wi c sdom and res Tot succeed t*Aktilhkeit,°°o,larateandlf I dulgence, how thee. penalties t ‘tt °,,, 1: ‘ , 4 " 1 .. ;117,3W1....the sting e of n their bitterness may be removed, ati,lOtt e alll3. c onsequences may be avoided, and above all, ity or functional ..,411-'iacils4niltlir 't ! gree of physia l cannot apply a mi re ' ati ete ih et t i ot e o o timely aid of science in au extensive ree' Y hetlii‘t4tli" of years been engaged ' ts which have 4 th iP POl ne , t o , t of these delicate complain Ibipairpt..._"lets., tenerally confided to the car; of ignorant qiwtrB D EBT injury on those who era induced to place s ald ktlf, nt ' pCo Vp's• St e ,; 4 ".ek,': 2a, / ,. May be had, price 2s, of Messrs. Piper, ccer 8,- ..."%rnoster-row • Hannay, 63, Oxford - street; ii 34. ittj --..re; Mann, 39, Cornhill ;or free by post for fo p address from the Author's residence, 37, Bed krt,,,init. eci4"itatis3n ja il ,' fr om Eleven till Two, and from ' <l4, jet 41 %1 4 Lt. °N. NERYOUSNESS, DEBILITY, AND N.. D er . 4 I NDIGESTION. ,t4r... 1: ri, 'lgentents, Constipation, and Hemorrhoids, Is. n ....each, by post Is. 6d- Slil '- '' -titiT DRINK, AND AVOID. t 2. 41 ' e.. ' AbStent i ' k t ...e.', - Positi on a multi curantur morbi." vllthef th e of the principal causes (over and careless tit... y tot.,,,above harassing and distressing complaints, ' 1 40, - ° 10,,. f thrl ti glb , le and popular exposition of how we should LAllr " fall ~,, to which is added, diet tables for every meal `e. ° el er'"titotre. !Dons for the regimen and observance of Zan ' t wenty-four. Illustrated by numerous ~ 4 17(1, 8 I. Ilei * , i lih t?, l: ' s ilAtors OF MARRIED LIFE. 1.1 1 . - Dles, o , s ,tt bath no vrif , I hold him lost. ... 'kt - ‘ .. ii Btu? ~-„",,' CI desolat. 9 He that hath no child, ,t.kkt,,:ottrri;:. Winde.Chaucer. `tis 4 ,l 4 ' , --1,,' I tt L e aPeetations and Necessities—Develepment : 4 tibi l ial /iv.. . latc hes—Precipitate, impelled, and retarded `t 'l ..7 kid * . % -xmi g r uitles—Mutual Unsuitableness—Mental It s , heo,„. .--hysleal Defectiveness—Advantages of m Izt e er o f 41%-'4 .. "ift l i tn r 2 Cl ey e ! tati on—Hereditary Rfeesemel:lance— d all MIAS' -'uteB-.....Zaw ,? I , l )l l v n o f r e c li: , ir c us,Ln . In fertil e , CPr , -- "...5.pr, a. Ig , ''L ADD ITS INFRINGEMENTS. w het A Lecture to Young Men. le i 1 41. 1 pa ssions h improve. liLife,s as urt the body — w hat ti oh.. s ii„ ren ned as Athens ever heard. e7lle - ' Ch - `,.., sl „aite, from infancy to old ago. The advent otii,,.. kid ,i - "Kr and its infringement. The casualties of ''ove. losipation, with illustrations, graphic, narrative, ,44rio ~ civocacy of early marriagdo, &c. ~„'e r st 1, 'to ko-.,,bt gijoitaaeo. their Sif ement and Cure. tin' line - "'''.--A. co rnpr e ehe n ns a iv n e ag and popular exposition ceelen y orr diseases —their nature and treatment, cone- . ill ho Ni tere o Pri m te, o . r . y . and secondary symptoms , . all forms or krproseriptinanine cture and sperinatorrhcea with .. 250 en '> D. L ER .7-,,, 6. • bs_ - Nog „le' URETHRA, and RECTUM.—Coraprising ' t 4 )4 ° l:. 6 ItB',,CmistlPation, and Ilitmorrhdids. JoyAkdx• co mpanions to the pteceding. T or LIFE. HOW TO BE HAPPY. tarw o " ~,,,.4 9 " Jucunde Yivere." ea , 23, ~, rds to fair faith."—Shakespere. h.. _. ~Jraternoster-row; Maim, 39, Cornhill ;or of utilcolaco,o4-urt% EICFIARD CULVF.RWELT„ , L Oy h.' . °I. th e :,,,.and Twenty Years Censul'ing Colleague of the 1114-1,7141.."1"'ve, 10, Ar gy l l - place , '' Regent-street , London , m i the w ith on the above mttersdaily, from Ten till `voniig, front E l even till Nina. No. 19,455.] PUBLICATIONS. On Wednesday, Feb. 7, in 3 vols., post Svo., T HE MOSLEM and the CHRISTIAN ; or, Adventures in the East. By SAD YE PASHA. Revised, with Original Notes, by Colonel Szyrma, Editor of Reysla tons of Siberia. Hurst and Blackett, Publishers, successors to Henry Coltman. Royal 4t0., price 215., THE POETICAL WORKS of the late CATHERINE GRACE GODWIN. Edited, with Memoir, by A. C. WzoaN. With Forty Illustrations by Biniur FosTrz, JOHN GILBERT, &C. Faom Tun LirEaaav GAZETTE.—" There are many striking and plessing pieces in Mrs. Godwin's collection of poetry, and we think Mr. Wordsworth expressed a fair and candid opinion of the writer's general merit when he said—' I have read your volume (the Wan derer's Legacy, &c.) through with much pleasure. Wherever it Is read such poetry cannot but do you honour. It ix neither wanting in feeling, nor in that much rarer gift which is the soul of poetry— imagination. There is a great command of language and tine ver sification.' " London : Chapman and Hall, 193, Piccadilly. "Butner, the first novelist SIR EDWARD Bi NOVELS AND Price Is. I of his time."—Blackwood. ULIVER LYTTON'S RONIANCES. Gd. each. Rienzi. Godolphin. Night and Morning. Ernest Maltravers. Alice. Pelham. Disowned. Last Days of Pompeii. Paul Clifford. Eugene Aram. Pilgrims of the Rhine. is. I Last of the Barons. 2s, When it came to the public car that the novels of Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton had been purchased at a fabulous price, for a cheap reprint, there can be little doubt that this great test of the groat writer's popularity gave, in almost every mind, a certain stability and permanence to his fame."—Blackwood for February. London: George R.outledge and Co., 2, Farringdon-Stroet. PARLOUR LIBRARY-FEBRUARY. 1111 E STEP -MOTHER. By G. P. R. JAMES, Esc. Price is. Id. A * • lir. James's great popularity as a writer Is owing to the fact, of why he justly boasts, that he never wrote a line that woeil cause a blush upon the purest face—hence his works are universally read by all classes. By the same Author, in this popular Series:— King's Highway, Is. 6d. One in a Thousand, Is. Mary of Burgundy, Is. Morley Ernstein, Is. 6d. Whim and its Consequences, Is. Gd. Gentleman of the Old School, Is. Gd. Philip Augustus, Is 6d. Henry Masterton, Is. 6d. John Marston Hall, Is. 6d. Huguenot, Is. 6d. Arrah Neil, Is. Gd. Forgery, Is. 6d. Arabella Stuart, is. 6d. Beauchamp; or, The Error, 15.6 d. Russell, Is. Gd. m, 13, Paternoster-row. Forest Days, Is. 6d. Darnley, Is. 6d. Heidelberg, ►s. 6d. Robber. Is. Jacquerie, Is. 6d. Gov, rie, Is. 6d. Gipsy, Is. 6d. Convict, Is. 6d. Brigand, ►s. 6d. Agincourt, Is. 6d. Smuggler, is 6d. Castelneau, Is. Sir Theodore Broughton, Is. Gd. Attila, Is. 6d. False Heir, Is. 6.1. Heiry of Guise, Is. Gd. Charles Tyrrell, is. London : Thomas Hodg,9 Ready, in small ato., 2s. 6c1., bound in richly coloured Comic Cover, SOMETHING TO LAUGH AT. With nearly 200 Humorous Engravings, and Articles by ths best Comic Writers, forming a Book for all Circles and all Seasons. Piper, Stephenson, and Spence, Paternoster-row. THE HYGEIST ; or, 3,ledical Reformer and Defender of the Bight of Conscience and Private Judgment, for FEBRUARY, contains : Cholera and the New Bills before Parliament. Alleged Lunatics -. Case of Mr. Greenwo3d. Adulteration of Food. Another Letter from Captain Lamb. Captain Lamb and Punch. Small Pox. Cures effe?ted by Morison's Pills. Report of Miss Watson, of B,,th. „ Mr. Macbeth, of Stockport. „ Mr. Otty, of Norwich. PP Mr. Havill, of Exeter Ilygelan Dispensary. Mr. Nicholls, of Barbadoes, Remarks on the llvgeian System, by S. J. May be had at the British College of Health, New-road, London, on forwarding a postage stamp: at the ilygeist Office, 262, Strand ; and of all the duly authorised agents for Mr. Morlson's Vegetable Universal ➢ledicine. GENERAL EV ANS. - COLNAGRI'S AUTHENTIC SERIES.—PORTRAIT of Lieutenant-General Sir DE LACY EVANS, K.C.8., M.P., Lithographed by permission of Lady Evans, by J. S. LYNCH. Price 35., proofs is. Paul and Dominic Colnaghi and Co., Pall-mall Publishers to her Majesty. THE SEAT OF WAR. COLNAGHI'S AUTHENTIC SERIES. Now ready, dedicated by permission to her Majesty, the first part of NI r. WILLIAM SIMP9ON'9 Work, from Drawings taken in the Crimea (where ho is now residing) by permission of the Com mander-in-Chief. Price 125., or coloured 20s. Executed in the best style of Tinted Lithography. Contents :—1 he Cavalry Affair of the Heights of Bnlganak, 19th September, 1'154; Balaklava, looking towards the Sea; The Qale off the rort of Balaklava, 14th November, 1654—the Loss of "The Prince ;" Sebastopol from the Rear of the English Batteries. Contents of Part If.— fhe ilelvy Cavalry Charge, 25th October, 1854 ; TA Second Charge of the Guards at the Battle of hiker man ; Lord Raglan's Quarters at Khator Karagatch ; A General View of the Country betore Sebastopol. Paul anti Dominic Colnaglil and Co., 12 and 14, Pall-mall East, Publishers to her Majesty. QUACKS UNMASKED. The Third Edition.—Just published, price 55., by post, free. ss. 6d. ON TRUE & FALSE SPERMATORREICEA, with the View of distinguishing the Imaginary from the Real Sufferers under this disease, and Correcting of wide-spread Errors in relation to their Treatment and Cure. From the German of Dr. PICKP'ORD. With an Introduction by the Editor, containing a complete exposure of the system of terrorism and extortion pursued by the advertising quacks of the metropolis towards those who are credulous enough to seek their aid. " Dr. Pickford is known to English readers by his frequent practi cal contributions to German medical literature. This is the first time, he informs as, that he has addressed himself to the not-medi cal reader. We trust this may not be the last, if he shall detect any other equally flagrant evil which it may be in his sower to cor rect."---London Medical Gazette. " The tribe of Quiet Sympathisers.' and 'Medical Friends,' are mercilessly exposed; and if this book could find its way into the hands of thoso who stiffer from the com plaint of which it treats, we are satisfied that many hundreds would be saved much needless suffering of leody and mind, and what is •f less importance, though it is that which the quacks molt prize— much money ......This volume is well qualified to put an end to the empirical system of treating Spermatorrhosa, and to place the treat meet upon a more rational and physiological basis. It is, therefore, Likely to do much good." London: H. 'tallier's, 219, Regent-street. TRIESEMAR, protected by Royal Letters Patent of England, and secured by the Seals of the Ecole de Pharmacia de Paris, and the Imperial College of Medicine, Vienna. TRIESEMAR, No. 1, Is a remedy for Relaxation. Spermatorrhcea, and Exhaustion of the System, whether arising from excesses, accident, or climate. To those persons who are prevented entering the married state by the consequences of early errors it is invaluable. TRIESEMAR, No. 2, effectually, in the short space of three days, completely and entirely ercdicates all traces of those Disorders which Capivi and Cubebs have so long been thought an antidote for, to the rain of the health of a vast portion of the population. TRIESEMAR, No. 3, is the great Continental Remedy for that class of Disorders, which unfortunately the English physician treats with Mercury, to the in evitable destruction of the patient's constitution, and which all the sarsaparilla in the world cannot remove. TRIESEMAII, No. I, 2, and 3, are alike devoid of taste or smell, and of all nauseating qualities. They may lie on the toilet table without their use being suspected. Sold in tin cases at I Is. each, free by post, 2s. extra, divided into separate doses, as administered by Valpeau, Lallemani, Roux, &;.c., &c.—To be had Wholesale and Retail in London of Johnston, 65, Corahill; Hannay and Co., 63, Oxford-street; and Sanger, 150, Ox ford-street ; R. 11. Ingham, druggist, 48, Market-street, Manchester ; 11. Bradbury, bookseller, Deansgate, Bolton ; J. Priestly, chemist, 52, Lord-street, Liverpool; Powell, bookseller, 15, Westmoreland-street, Dublin ; Winnall. bookseller, High-street, Birmingham. CALCULATIONS ON THE MINISTRY.- lJ statesman can best guiele the affairs of the nation, and minister to the exigencies of the times, is a question ♦ery justly can vassed. Comfort is ministered to everybody by the seasonable clothing manufactured by E. MOJE3 and SON. . - That every one in the City, in the country, and in all parts of the world may have the ministry of the newest and most appropriate articles of dress, E. Moses and Sox have recently improved the styles and quality, and reduced the price of all goods they oubinit to the inspection of the public. At E. Moses and Sow?. The ...sr..* coat, Hosiery, anti Hoot And Shot departments, are connected with the most comprehensive Wholesale business in the world. This offers better investments for Merchants, Captains, and Emigrants than any other merchandise can secure. SPECIAL NOTICE.—UntiI March 1,1155, E. MOSES and BON'S ESTABLISHMENTS will be CLOSED at EIGHT O'CLOCK ETERT EVENING, except Saturday, when they will be open till 11 o'clock. CAUTION.—E. MOSES and SON regret havin4 to guard the public against imposition, having learned that the untraclesman-like falsehood of " Belng connected with their Establishment," or " It's the same concern," has been resorted to in many instances, an for obvious reasons, they be to state that they hay. No CSNNEXION W.ITE ANY OTEIEE 1101731 TX 01 OIIT OF LONDON, except their own Establishments, as fellows : London City Establishment, 154, 155. 158, and 157, Mlnories, 84, 65, and Bf, Aldgate, opposite the Church, all communicating. London West-end Branch, 504, 507, 508, New Oxford-street, 1,2, and 3, Hart-street, all communicating. Bradtord (Yorkshire) Branch, 19 and 20, Bridge-street. Sheffield Branch, 3f, careate. Colonial Wholesale Branch, Melbourne, Australia. Merchant Tailor, Clothiers, Hatters, Hosiers, Furriers, Boot an shoe Makers, and General Outfitters for Ladies and Gentlemen. IMPORTANT.—ShouId any article not give satisfaction, it will be exchanged If desired, or, if preferred, the money will be returned witkout hesitation. All goods are marked in plain figures, the lowest price, from which no abatement can be made. The Establishments are closed from sunset on Fridays to sunset en Saturdays. when business is resumed till 11 o'clock. A new Book for Autumn anil Winter. " The Commercial Cornu copia," containing full lists of prices, our system et self-measure ment, Lc., Ike., may be had on applicatiost, or post-free. Tel l'on Inuits Francais. Qui si parla Italisno. Hier sprieht man Deutsch Aqua sa habla Esparto. An Illustrated Almanac for 1855 pratison application ,or post free. So many erroneous statements regarding the augmen tation of the cavalry have appeared that it way be well to mention the arrangements made. The Ist, 2d, 3d, 4th, sth, 6th, and 7th Dragoon Guards, the Ist Royal Dragoons, Scots Greys, 3d and 4th Light Dragoons, 6th (Enniskillen) Dragoons, 7th, Bth, and 11th Hussars, 13th Light Dragoons, 15th Hussars, and 16th and 17th Lancers, will be each augmented to eight troops of 75 rank and file each, or, including staff, 640 par regiment. Six of these troops will be despatched for service in the Crimea, while the remaining two will constitute a depot to train recruits and horses, se as to keep up the strength of the six troops on active service. [ADVIRTISEMZNT.I—HoIIoway's Pills for the Cure of Indigestion and General Debility.—Copy of a letter from Miss Isabella Bows., of King Edward-street, Grimsby, dated July 27, 1854. To Professor Holloway. Sir, With gratitude I am enabled to testify to the wonderful virtues your pills possess, having derived considerable benefit from using them. For twelve months I was a severe sufferer from general debility, indigestion, loss of appetite, and altogether a very deranged system. I re sorted to various medicines without deriving any benefit. At last I was recommended to try your pills, and after taking them for a short period I was perfectly cured. (Signed) Isabella Bowse.—Sold by all Vendors of Medi cine, and at Professor Holloway's Establishments, 244, Strand, London, and 80, Maiden-lane, New York. ) . . //// .„--...... i ................ i 1 . ,:k• Ai','4" — i4 ~,,, ~..,, , • -: 11011114,' 7 • ~',.s. '. ~ . oa • - • . ~ l' '. ‘311,11' , '4ll l N' •111 : 1 ‘ l:4 t" ''''', 4--- 4 74' tv , I , tr'n. • . lift l,ik i ~ ci e (:,... /, ' , 4 i ~ ' • ' '' * 4 .- ~F ...t.A. fr*,, - --,,: , elit 1 # . . ... 4 ,... - •.. t A ` ' t ,„...,,,,„„„,,, . _,..,.........., t. 4„ ~ , t , ..,". ----it., % ,..t u --0 , -- -- - It, ,-_, ~,44 4, 4 i : 0 ~.N -. ''''e , ", , ,?,.:' , XV".;; -- 7. : )'.. *--._ 7' -,A , T ,. , -"Na ' j...‘ • f 4 , • , i .... i..-' , vv. 1 4!.. , . . ~ . W" . "'".:„, , .. ~,,. _ .: 4 /... /1 . ,.... - ', ~ •.. :••• - • 4?...: - 4',. _ ~,,..,--- N_ l 7' <iv_ ,43„,./435(.1 , ,.. i j `-'...k.„ ..,..,- T •z• 7, 6 ,4 - vi i ' l - . ,•` . ... 1 \ . I ,i ' o l. ,— '''' .:'''..:. ~• _ +,. ,•,--,. - , ,#._ - .) — , I It v 417,44 ~i4...,' 'l , ' '%. 4 r . '' ' ''"'" A ' '' $ Rola '.4, , ' ,' - ''''' " - ' ; - I \' ' - ,' ,/' - ''.•4 . 1 1t 4 . LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 5, 1855. A LETTER ON THE NETVSPAPER POSTAL STAMP. while I remain poor, you will impoverish me yet further." newspaper below a certain size and value. This prohibition the advocates of free discussion, the unsparing critics of public men and measures, the members of the "fourth estate," desire to maintain, on ethical and social grounds ; asserting that though the most unlimited liberty of the press is good down to a certain point, yet that for a small capitalist to get up a journal, and for labouring men to take it in, is dangerous to the public morality. It is un charitable to assume that fear of competition, threatened interference with their existing monopoly, and some lingering love of " protection," in their own busi ness, may have somewhat clouded their perceptions of right ? In truth, the arguments by which you sup port tie present law are in direct contradiction to one another. For you affirm, first, "that the press does not possess any legislative f avour , pro t ec ti on, or monopo l y whatever ; ' and, next, "that the witidrawal of the stamp duty - will supersede it by substituting a totally different and inferior class of papers." Therefore (according to you) English journalism is to be ruined by the withdrawal of privileges which (also according to you) English journalism does not enjoy. To reconcile these discrepancies is no affair of mine. Secondly, you rely on the parallel case of the letter postage, where one uniform rate of charge is imposed for all distances. In this presumed ana l ogy, as i s n atural, yo u triumph greatly. You say, " th e un if orm penny postage on letters imposes the same postage on a letter going across the street as on one going across the kingdom, rendering all Ireland and the Highlan s of Scotland a great loss to the Post-office, while the populous districts of the country re turn a groat profit ; yet nobody thinks of denouncing this system as unequal or oppressive." Perhaps not ; for there is no class of persons whom these regulations absolutely cut off from a profitable and credit able employment as the writers and proprietors of low priced journals are cut off by the stamp duty. There may be inequality—there is not injustice—at least, in any prac tical and palpable form. I will giant you that the estab lishment of a post-effico in some small and remote High land village, where the service must be carried on at a loss, is an undue favour thus accommodated—a sacrifice made partly to practical convenience, partly to unity of system. But the penny-post system was established en a principle of which, while citing its practical application, you do not seem aware—one which may be shortly embodied in the following proposition : "That in countries where the average density of popu lation exceeds a certain limit the cost of transmitting let ters is affected only in an infi n it es i ma ll y small degree b y the distance to which they are transmitted." Or, in more popular, th oug h i n less precise terms, the chieeexpense of the Post-office, when dealing with great masses of letters, consists in sor ti ng an d arrang i ng them— not in the actual conveyance of them by railroad, coach, or mail-coach, insomuch that where the letter-writing population is very dense, and the amount of correspon dence to be dealt with consequently very considerable, the latter item of expense (the cost of conveyance), when com pared with the former (the cost of arranging and sorting), becomes indefinitely small, and, a s b e t ng i na pp rec i a bl e , may be struck out of the calc u l at i on. It is thus approxi mately, though not perfectly, t rue t h at thef expense to Government of sending a letter across the street is the same as that of sending it across the country; and the precedent or parallel, which you attempt to find for the unequal in cidence of the newspaper stamp charge, disappears ac cordingly. BY LORD STANLEY. [The subjoined letter was written by me in reply to a pamphlet, entitled " The Newspaper Postal Stamp," to which my attention was called by its author. The ques tion therein discussed being now again brought before the House of Commons, I avail myself of this opportunity to make it public.—S.] London, January, 1855. Sir,—The subject on which you have addressed me may be looked at in two lights—first, as regards the financial justice of the change proposed, or rather the financial in justice of the law as it stands; secondly, in relation to the effect which will probably ensue from that change--I say " probably," for on this point we can arrive at 110 certain conclusion—on the general nature and character of the British press. Of these two questions, the first appeerslto me by far the most important. I might go farther, and say it is the only one which in strict justice ought to be con sidered ; for, whether it be or be not true that the news papers of this country are, as you affirm', " incomparably the best in the world," it is certain that a financial measure having for its object either to give to the proprietors of those newspapers a special and exeeptional privilege, or to take from them one which they share with other members of the community similarly circumstanced, would cutstep the limits of equity. The Minister who lays on an income tax does not relieve one class of men from their share of that impost because, as a class, they arena the habit of spending their incomes judiciously, nor does he tax another class doubly because they are habitually wasteful or imprudent. Finance arbitrarily exercised becomes mere confiscation by a legal process, and to turn it to a political use, for the ar tificial enrichment of one set of men and impoverishment of another, is tyranny in its most naked form. For instance, if a tax were laid on incomes, according to an ascending scale of ten, twenty, thirty, forty per cent., so that no in. come of more than 1,0001. a-year Gould exist, or contrary. wise, if, as in France before the revolution, the estates of the nobility were exempted from all taxation, with a view to the permanence and power of their order every rational man would say, Here is an *brae of the fiscal power—a violation of the elementary laws by which finan cial operations are guided." You probably admit as much. If so, I say act upon your own rule. Strike out as surplu sage all these declamations about the impending ruin of respectable journals, and the establishment in their place of an inferior and dangerous class of literature. Argue this question fairly. Consider not whether the present law is necessary to the support of existing journals, but whether it is strictly and abstractly equitable. If you are compelled to concede this point—if you allow that there is a real inequality, a real injustice, and yet contend that to avoid certain political results it must be maintained on its present footing—we shall at least know on what ground we stand. A fallacy plainly stated is half refuted ; and, in the opinion of all thinking men, it is a fallacy, and a grave one, to affirm that what is financially inequitable can be politically advisable, that the exigencies of the com munity require, or can in any case sanction, the denial of right to the individual. I assert, therefore, that the second question raised by you, that of the effect upon the press of the proposed re peal of the stamp duty, is one really beside the matter in. haled. Either the duty as now levied is fair, or it is un fair. Iff air, cadit quastio, the case for the prosecution breaks down, and further defence becomes superfluous. If unfair, the law stands already condemned ; and argu ments drawn from the alleged success of its working can be pleaded only in palliation of its past, not in defence of its continued existence. Into that second topic, therefore, I shall only go so far as is needful to dispel some prejudices and exaggerated apprehensions. The real battle must be fought on other ground—viz., en the two questions—(l.) Is the stamp law just? (2.) If not, can it be replaced by one that shall be so ? To the consideration of these moot points I proceed. The existing duty, as everyone knows, consists of a uni form charge of one penny, levied on all publications con. tainiug "news," and appearing oftener than once in 26 days. This duty, as I believe all persons will allow, is not, in the strict sense of the word, a tax. In that respect, I admit, the name popularly given to it involves an erro neous idea. For a tax, being defined, signifies a charge imposed on persons or property for the purposes of admin istration generally—excluding thus the idea of any special service, save and except that general one of Government, being performed in return. Now, in the case of the stamp duty, there is a specific and definite equivalent—vie., the transmission of the stamped journal through the post office without further charge. The impost, is, in fact (though originally devised with a very different intention), a postal charge, and is usually spoken of and defended as such. This fact, I think, materially simplifies the question at issue. It is not easy—some hold that it is not possible— to adjust with mathematical accuracy the incidence of taxation, so that each man shall contribute to the hitate chest just as much relatively to his means as his neigh bour, neither snore nor less. But about .the rules which should govern the imposition of a postal charge there can be no twe opinions. Government undertakes to do that which would otherwise be done by private enterprise ; for the general convenience, it claims and asserts a monopoly; the public, in return, demands that its service should be efficient, its charges moderate and equal. It is a bargain— an exchange- between the State on ono side and individual citizens on the other; it is, moreover, a bargain in which, by the authority of one of the contracting parties, the ether is forbidden to go into the open market and accept auy offer from other parties. In making such a compact, therefore, Government should be doubly cautious that all the eezd.i tions of equity are fal fille d . It is bound, alai its defenders are bound to show that, bating such trivial irrnularities as ne nicety of human law' oan wholly remedy, the price paid is is each else proportionate to the value of the service rendered ; the service being, moreover, efficient and the price moderate. Here, then, the issue narrows to one of fact. I do not apprehend that any previous step of my reasoning will be objected to. It will be allowed (1) tha t the justice of the law is the ono thing material to b e proved or disproved ; (2) that the newspaper stamp is a postal charge ; (3) that a postal charge ought to be regu lated according to the definition just laid down. Does the uniform penny stamp comply with the three conditions therein stated? (1.) Is the postal service, as regards newspaper transmission, efficient ? (2.) IsitcheaP ? (3.) Is " the price paid in each case proportionate to the value of the service rendered ?" On the first and second of these queries I raise no cavil. I have heard a complaint that newspapers are not safely and speedily delivered ; and, as regards the other requisite, I do not dispute your statement that the Pest-office loses rather than gains by undertaking their carriage. As between the Post-office and the press, so far is the latter interest frern having any thing to complain of, that it receives some advantage by the transmission of its publications under the cost price of such transmission. The inequality, the wrong, which I complain of, lies elsewhere. It consists in an unfair ad vantage given to one class of journals over another by the Post-otlice arrangements. It falls under the third head of inquiry—the price in each case is not proportionate to the service given in return ; therefore, the enforced bargain is vo n charge of unfair. There are several modes of meetingslv g only a ia this kind. It may be denied, if that bo possible ; th e f ac t may be defended, or rather excused, as slight wrong, which is compensated by manifest expe diency ; or it may be regretted, but represented as inevit able. Let us examine these defences one by one. Denial of the fact will, I presume, not bo attempted. I have by me a smell advertising sheet which appears in a neighbouring town (to save the law) monthly ; and which, but for the operation of the law, would probably appear fortnightly, if not weekly. Its weight, to judge by the quantity of paper which it contains, does not exceed one twentieth that of the Times when the latter appears with its full sixteen pages of print. But it needs no reference to special instances to prove that a journal which is the organ of a small community, whether rural or urban, will bo very un equal in bulk to the great metropolitan journals which circu late throughout England. Yet the two are charged equally for conveyance, though twenty numbers of the one only occupy in the mail-bag tho space of ono number of the other. At this point I may fitly consider a rather startling as sertion which appears prominently iu your pamphlet. You say "the penny stamp on newspapers, entitling to transmission and retransmission by post, does not com prise in its nature the slightest infusion of the principle of protection ;" a proposition which you explain thus : " Protection is giving one class of producers or dealers an advantage over any other class producing or dealing in the same commodity." Therefore, if your view is to be ac cepted as correct, a postal charge se arranged as absolutely to prevent any one from producing a newspaper at less than a certain price, does not give any advantage to the larger and wealthier establishments producing the same article. I do not, I confess, see how such an assertion is capable of proof. Suppose the principle of the stamp law applied to any other branch of trade. Suppose, for instance, that Govern ment, impressed with an idea that small retail shops sup plied inferior articles at exorbitant prices, and that it was the duty of the State to check this evil by putting them down, were to lay on every shop of whatever size an an nual tax of equal amount, such amount being not less than 100 per cent. on the gross receipts of the smallest establish ments ; and, to make the parallel complete, suppose that in return for this charge it undertook to transport gratui tonsly all goads bought and sold by the taxpayers ;—what would be the effect ? Of course, to throw all business into the hands of large dealers, and to increase the profits of trade in proportion as it was conducted on a larger scale. Small traders would disappear altogether. Illke whole supply of the market would be vested in a limited number of great capitalists, residing probably . in the metropolis, and carrying on their business by agents in all the smaller towns. And when men had become used to the system, and vested interests had grown up under it, I do not doubt but that some one of these capitalists would be found—not merely to declaim against the immorality of small traders, which would become the habitual language of the protected class—but to affirm, as gravely, as con scientiously, and as mistakenly as you do now, that in the law as it stood there was not the slightestinfusion of the principle of protection." It is, I apprehend, wholly indisputable that the effect of the stamp duty is to establish a financial censorship— one conducted on truly British principles. In foreign and despotic countries a journalist becomes suspected by rea son of his opinions ; in constitutional England he is re strained from periodical publication on the ground of po verty. The law is at least impartial. The most anarchical and the most conservative of journals are treated alike, if they fall below a certain price. They are written for labouring men—they are circulated within a small area— their intelligence is defective and tardy—therefore, says the British Government, they shall not app e a r . I s this an English or a Russian policy ? But, after all, is there so much danger of our press becoming " parochial"—or, what is meant by this vague throat ? As matters stand, the existence of local journalism in small communities is the exception rather than the rule. It is only the large town, or the populous district, which can support a high-priced stamped journal. Local affairs (call them " parochial " if you will) receive comparatively little notice from the public prints. I do not see why this is to be considered an advantage. If it is meant that a press dealing exclusively with such small matters will, by the operation of the proposed change, be substituted for one which, as at present, discusses imperial questions, I deny the probability—indeed the possibility —of any such result. In journalism, as elsewhere, the demand creates the supply. There is in England a large number of educated and intelligent persons who take an interest in the political affairs of their own and other countries. Of such persons it has not been shown that the number is likely to diminish, or the taste to alter. The alternative, then, is apparent. Either (which is most unlik e ly) th e unstamped press will rival the stamped in the value of its information and the merit of its writing—and in that ease it matters not whether one or the other is most extensively patronised ; or it -will not —the high-priced journal will still maintain its superiority —and the cheap local prints will net drive it out of the market, but attract another class of customers, those who at the present moment neither purchased nor read any paper, and thus flourish by its side without doing it injury. Take an illustration of the state of the case. Suppose the same legislative sagacity which dictates the retention of the stamp duty to have prevented all cheap travelling on rail , ways—to have prohibited the railroad companies from taking second or third class passengers—is it likely that the number of first class travellers would have been in creased by the number of those who now travel in the lower priced carriages ? Is it not clear that on the restriction being removed a vast multitude of persons would begin for the first time to use the railways who never used them in the So will ii h e w ith th e p ress . Th ose w h o now t a k e Tcntee A - ews, Herald, or Advertis er, are ne t likely to substitute for thee. SI-et-chum journals, With their early intelligence and superior writing, the cheap penny print which will circulate among ineehanics and labourers. I have no doubt that a dinner may be had in various Lon don Taverns at a very much lower rate than is charged by the clubs; yet the clubs are not deserted in consequence ? No ; as in all other branches of business, so in journalism, the customer who is willing to pay the highest price can always command the best article. Ido not quarrel with his taste, nor seek to limit its indulgence ; quite the con trary. But I protest against his measuring other inea's purses and inclinations by his own. Ido not see that be ing wealthy and of refined ideas, he is on that account en titled to say to his poorer neighbour, " If you cannot afford a newspaper at sixpence you shall buy none, for cheap newspapers are worthless." But — siain—your analogy, even were it accepted as good up to this point, breaks down where you need it most. Yon justify the unjust stamp duty by what you (I think mistakenly) assume to be the not less unjust letter duty. But remember that the very point for which wo are con tending is, and always has been, concedes' in the case of letters. Ne person, so far as I know, has ever proposed a uniform letter stamp for all weights as well as all distances. Yet this is the boasted uniformity of the newspaper-stamp system. When a half-ounce letter and an eight-ounce parcel shall be charged alike, then, and not till then, may the one abuse be pleaded as excusing th e o th er. B ut i s this likely to happen ? Nay, even the absurdity which I have h ere ca ll e d i n t o i w m h a ith n i a s ry th e e x c is a t u e s n e ce of fu /Ty i selivreig. s tinenly half a p ara ll e l t o t h at For even thus, a per son who did not send any letter by post, but communi cated with his friend solely through notes sent by private hand, might escape untaxed. But the stamp law, while charging one newspaper proprietor ten times as highly as another in proportion to the amount of postal service re quired by each, forbids any to escape from the burden, however willing such person might be to forego the advan tages of the post office on condition of being released from its charges. Thirdly, you appeal to the precedent of the stamp on receipts imposed last year. A plea which, as addressed to Mr s Gladstone may be a powerful arguntenturn ad hantinem, hat with me, on that score, little weight. If the law, which you are calling on the Chancellor of the Exchequer to maintain be contrary to right, as between man and man, it is no vindication that the Minister to whom you appeal has perpetrated another wrong of the eernekind. Where a demonstrable certainty exists, no authority, no precedent, no force of public opinion, avail to make it untrue. The united voice of the whole newspaper press of England can not make five and fire anything else than ten, nor falsify a problem in Euclid. Bat it is not necessary, in order to reply to you, to censure Mr. Gladstone. A tax, as I b e f ore said, is ono thing ; a postal charge another. A tax, taken by itself, may be inequitable in the loghest degree ; yet, as forming a part of a general system of taxation, it may be perfectly fair. Its injurious incidence on one class may be balanced by a corresponding exemption of that class in some other respect ; and thus the general account, as be- , tween tax-pay er and tax-gatherer, be squared. But in the case of a postal charge no such oompensation exists ; and ' the case whicle you defend is that cf an etnequal postal u charge. Can you show that the small journals, crushed tenfold weight of taxation , receive any compeue sating advantages from other sources? If not, what is your parallel worth ? I affirm, therefore, with a confidence unshaken, and un shakeable by any plea to the contrary which I have either heard or read, (1) that ler equal service rendered by the Post-office in different cases, unequal sums are charged, while the injured party, being restrained by the postal monopoly, is forbidden to make a better bargain else where; (2) that in point of justice no defence of this enor mous inequality can lie set up; (3) that this question, like every other in which financial interests are involved, is to be decided on equitelelo grounds alone, without reference to possible political results. " Truth has nothing to do with consequences" was the noble reply of a philosopher when warned that an opinion which he had logically worked out might be held to endanger orthodox faith ; "justice has nothing to do with consequences," should be rtuhleerubleecoineofas merely financier a licensederwh unlepsslutdreeeacr of the public.tsonsomesuch But, having first watered the above protest, I am willing to consider dispassion ately the probable results of a modi fication of the law. And here, as is natural, I find the greatest amount of opposition on the part of those averse to a change—i% being easier to speculate on prospective and uncertain effects than to vindicate a system such as that which we have been considering. The first objection raised is reasonable enough. It takes the form of a ques tion. " You complain. of the stamp law as unjust—how do you propose to mend it ? You have exposed the unfair ness of the existing postal scheme—now substitute one of your own." This, no doubt, it is incumbent on a would be reformer to attempt. He who pulls down is pledged to build up again; though, be it said in passing, that if the working of a law be manifestly and indisputably un just, any citizen living under it has a right to expose that injustice, withoutlieing necessarily bound by such protest to suggest the fitting remedy. Otherwise would all men's tongues be tied on the subject of their grievances, save only those of professional statesmen. Yet, as more com plaint is always easy, remedial legislation often diffioult, I allow that the former without the latter becomes of little value; and I readily accept the challenge thrown out by adopting iu part the proposition of the Committee of 1851, in part that which yem yourself suggest. The evils demonst rated to exist are mainly three : 1. Undue favouritism towards the large or metropolitan journals by the priviledge of gratuitous retransmission. 2. Undue favouritism towards the large journals by the uniform charge for all weights. 3. Injury to the local journalist, by compelling him to p a y for the past-Offie which he does not use. Of these grievances you propose to remove, or at least greatly to alleviate, the second b y th e simple plan of in creasingit for lighter weights. Hero we entirely con cur. Some addit i onal la the charge for heavier, and reducing poofseaon the Post-office and fraud afforded. But your , p b o o s u s r ib w ly ou so h i l u n e o ol do )o nt un b i ? je n: proposal is merely 35 carrying out of the principle already partially io" rrneliinegve hfriocinii adopted' in the case of letters, and its obvious fairness en e titles it to adoption. It involves no insuperable, nor in deed any oonsidereble mechanical difficulty. I cannot, however, acquiesce in the farther snegestion that papers whether they contaun "news" in the legal souse of the questionable possible difference can it make to Government in its capa city of a public carrier —and it is only in this capacity that Government can deal with the t it he is stamp. What question of postal conveyance —whether the printed contents of the sheet which it for he wards be politics, literature, local now; or advertisements? term,lik like should l tt''e) b yff I am not aware that any one of these, in a physical sense, is n we i g htier aitiele than any other. In truth, the question of e xemptions lately raised shows iu a stronger light than anything else the perfectly illogical and arbitrary theory of the law as it stands.;But therm exemptions are, in truth, mere attempts to prevent the law from breaking down, by relaxing it whenever the opp os i tion provoked threatens -to bmoruno formidable. The third cause of complaint—namely, the prohibition of any unstampod journal whatever—i s one with which you do not deal, or rather which you do not allow to be in grievance. This fact, however, I - any way a wooer, assume as pie the remedy viously proved ; and being obvious, viz., to allow the existence of unstamped journals without postal privileges, it remaius only to consider what obstacles can be pleaded against the eetablishineet o f such a system. It is argues!, first, that it will render necessary a large increase in the staff of the Post-office, with a view to pre vent the fraudulent transmission of unstamped journals. This inconvenience seems to ine much exaggerated ; for those who urge it assume that no paper needs to be exa mined at the Post-office under the present system, all being alike entitled to the privilege of transmission. But is this the fact? So far from it, two classes of fraud at once present themselves, against which the vigilance of the postal authorities is required to guard. First, the privi lege of the stamp expires after seven days ; so that not merely must the easily-ascertained fact of the stamp being duly affixed be attested by official inspe c ti on, but the date of that stamp must also be examined, a process requiring much miauter examination. But next, it is no uncommon trick for persons of an economical and not over-scrupulous dispositiou, to correspond by means of old newspapers, writing within the cover or on the margins, 'whereby the postal penny is evaded. Either these two frauds are gunrded against or they are not. It they are, every news paper posted must now undergo inspection, in whi • sh case the change suggested imposes npa(ldition al labou r on any one. If they are not, the liability of the Post-office to suffer from fraud exists already, and will not be materi ally increased. Taking either alternative, the objection fails equally. But secondly (and this is by far the graver objection), it is contended that an unstamped press is in itself an evil "You will assimilate the journalism of England to that o the th-United States," cry out alarmist; thereby ascribing all e merits of that press which they extol as incompar able to the existence of a penny-stamp duty. " You will make journalism local, petty, parochial ; you will deprive it of its present weight and influence in the State." Yet what is it proposed to do? To limit the right of publioa lion ? To interfere with the organisation of the great me tropolitan journals ? No ; but simply to allow that which the existing law virtually prohibits—the app earance o f cheap local prints. Am I exaggerating when I say that these are prohibited? What is the rate at which they are charged for the postal privilege : A 9,1." paper pays, ad valorem, 124 per cent. 6 d- PP PP " 20 4d. „ 33 4 „ 3d. „ '' 2cl. „ 100 which is manifestly a prohibitory deity ; and, accordingly, we find that threepence is the lowest price at which a newspaper can be published with any chance of repayment. Here, then, wo come to a dilemma. The Legislature, by no indirect result of its measures, but by the simple pro ceas ui crushing imposi ! forbids any luau to publish a The apprehension, then, that journals of the most expen sive class will not be able, to held their own seems wholly groundless. Each rank of society will find its own organ, the exponent of its opinions and ideas ; and this is desirable. But early intelligence—familiarity with the political ques tions of the day—eloquence and argumentative power— are not to be had without paying for them ; and in these, though stripped of the artificial and unfair privileges which they now enjoy, the superiority of the large and lone-esta blished journals will continue to consist. Nay, as it seems to me, the power and influence of such journals over the public mind will be not diminished, but augmented ; for though there is no political question on which an immea surable amount of nonsense and verbiage may not be poured forth, yet the real arguments on which all such questions turn are comparatively feW. A single night's de bate in Parliament suffices to exhaust them; at the utmost three or four nights do so. These arguments will in all probability be most pointedly stated and most thoroughly investigated in the metropolitan press. Their articles— their comments—are now very generally copied by that of the provinces. They will be so still. Thoindirect circulation of the leading London journals will become enormously mul tiplied, while the direct circulation is only in a slight degree affected. They will lose little, if anything, in money, and gain much in power. Their opposition, therefore, to the abolitioc of the stamp, and thus to the calling into exist ence of a cheap press, seems as ;contrary to their own in terests as to those of the public. But here a fresh objection is taken. We are met by a cry of piracy, and a demand for copyright in news. I admit that in this question there are difficulties enough to furnish material for a debate and to perplex a Parliament. It is hard enough to define copyright iu becks, to say what ie original and what borrowed, to fix the limit where the mere literary offence of plagiaris it ends, and the legal crime of copyright-breach begins. No doubt the intricacy of the problem is increased when dealing with matter of such ephemeral interest as news. The principle, however, that he who has gene to expense In oniaining information from air exclusive source snoaid have an exclusive benefit in its sale, is too manifestly just to admit of dispute ; and its legal assertion i s expedient also, because without such protection it may be doubted whether the same efforts will continuo to be made, as at present, to obtain priority of in telligence.* I readily concede that to deduo piracy in the case of newspapers will be no easy matter. Probably, lot Parliament do the best it can, any act likely to pass will leave large room for legal sophisti ins anti conflictingjudg mute. But the difficulty, be it groat or small, is none of our making. It exists already. If it be contended that the necessity for a copyright law will become more pressing as the number of cheap newspapers increases, in conse quence of the repeal stamp law, I answer, the same result will follow when the number of newspapers increases, from whatever cause. In fact, the question must be settled, the difficulty faced, before long. At the worst, all that the repeal of the stamp duty can do in regard of it is a little to hasten the time of Parliamentary inter ference. Ido not sot see in what way this result can be regarded as a formidable evil. One more argument remains to be dealt with. It is contended by the advocates of the present system that the privilege of retransmission e., of sending the same newspapers backwards and forwards through the Post-office during seven days) is inseparably con ,neeted with that part of the law which requires every newspaper to be stamped. The connection, however, is not obvious, except so far as that the boon ac corded to the public on the one hand is pleaded as a set-off for the injustice done to a section of the public on the other. As a matter of justice, I perceive no claim that nowevenders can set up to send comparatively bulky, packets seven times through the post at the cost of a penny each, while a letter, for the same sum, travels but once. But if, as a matter of convenience, the public desires t to o have it so, no grave objection can exist, seeing tax-paying community and the newspaper -reading com munity are now pretty nearly, and will, in ing out still more nearly, co-extensive. They are oihy is p t y . same. of one pocket instead of the other; theresuretransinission But there is no reason why the gratuitous nthe is made of newspapers should be stopped ' The two regulations no optional instead of compulsory. It is true that, as the way interfere with one another. would probably borrow much of local journals (which n the metropolitan journals their political matter . latter i n number,woulthath for retransmission of diminish.t But this is a remote and doubtful con h e most demand likely of the day before) inetrrhoesasseed But this is not the whole case ; nor yet the wort part of it. This little local journal to which I have referred does not want the Post-office at all. If, living in a town, I wish to send out 1,000 copies of a circular, I should certainly find it cheaper and more convenient to hire a messenger to distribute them than to pay Si. 32.4 d. for their circulation by the local post-oince. In this case Government anew, me the option. But if I issue a weekly or fortnightly cir cular, in the shape of a newspaper, I have no similar free dom of choice. Whether I use the postal arrangements which Government has provided, or dispense with them, is immaterial to the State ; but in either case I must pay equally. As a fact, I believe they are comparatively little used, copies of newspapers taken in in the town where they are published passing almost exclusively through private hands. But to sum up the statement of fact ; we have here two manifest breaches of the rule laid down. In the first place, equal charges are imposed for unequal service ; in the second, these charges are enforced even where no corresponding service is performed. New, how are those provisions of the law defended ? I have read with care your two pamphlets, and also, I be lieve, most of the speeches and writings that have appeared on this subject. Apart from the question of political results on which the greatest stress is laid, the main arguments relied on seem to be the following : First, that the power of repeated transmission, without extra charge, compensates for the overcharge in some in stances; and that, on the whole, Government loses instead of gaining on the transaction. This plea seems easily to be disposed of. No doubt, if every newspaper proprietor were in partnership with every other—if the whole fraternity of journalism had but one common purse—it might be fair enough for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to say, "You publish collectively so many copies of newspapers —of this total number a certain fixed proportion may be assumed as likely to pass through the post—l assess you, therefore, at such and such a sum ; and you must settle it among yourselves in what propor tion you shall pay." But the injustice complained of is not between Government and lthe newspaper press as a body ; it lies between various conflicting interests in that body, some of which are nudely fostered by the operation of the law, others as unduly depressed. Refer once more to the case of the small local journal I have mentioned. One half of its impression, to take the moderate estimate, never goes near the post-office. On the other half therefore which does go by post its proprietor may be said to pay twice over. Further, on that half, weight for weight, he pays eight or ten times as much (I am again understating the possible case) as the proprietor of the Times. " T wen t y f o ld my share of the postal charge !" he exclaims. " What then?' answers the Government—" you have your compensation ; you may send every copy of your journal, if you like, four, five, six times through our Post-office, up to the ex piration of the assigned seven days; it is true that you don't want this privilege—that, so far as you are concerned, it is a dead letter—that no one reads, or is ever likely to read, your publication in any place except the town whose local affairs it discusses—but that is no business of ours. You should deal less in local news ; you should ge t the forei gn correspondence; compete with the London journals • and then you would find the advantage of our regulations. 'Why, we actually lose by every copy of the large metropolifya journals which we transmit." " Thank you," re P il :es - the now enlightened complainant; " the coreforl; , comes to this— that if I can succeed you give me . sing my fortune, your system of charges Will 1 ;4 me to enlarge it ; but Electric telegraphs have, however, done much to equalise the advantages of London and the provinces in this ropect. Probably if a law of limited copyright in news were passed, the leading journals would agree to an exchange of intelli gence by mutual consent, and thus accommodate the public while protecting themselves against unauthorised copyists. It is not an unnatural feeling that leads most people, even of the poorest, to prefer food purchased and prepared for themselves, rather than the broken scraps and leavings of the most luxurious feast. It is quite possible that many would prefer purchased cheap newspaper to an eleemosynary d ear one. * The Spectator, and I belie:`: ogle or two other weekly papers, appear at this price. s • e - ~. ~~~~~ r PRICE SD. Cogency (for the prestige of the metropolitan press is great and would remain), and in any case a simple result of free competition with which the law has no right to interfere. To the vague and angry declamation of those who cry— " You want to pull down English journalism, and substi tute an American press in its place, I namely hold it worth while to reply. The plain answer is—like people like press. The American press (which, by the way, does not by any means universally deserve the bad character given to it in this country) reflects, faithfully enough, the prevailing sen timent of American citizens. It is democratic—so are they. If it is often vulgar, violent, abusive, addicted to bragga docio, and credulous of marvels—these are exactly the faults, a little exaggeratad in the copying, of a young and growing nation, in which material prosperity has advanced faster than the arts and refinements of life. If in the English mind there be a corresponding state of feeling, by all means let it be exposes rather than concealed. An evil fully brought to light is half remedied. But, in truth, the English character differs widely from the American ; and a popular press, though ultimately it may help in forming, must follow, and be suited to, the bias of the popular mind. But (I repeat it once again) all these considerations of the result of enfranchising the press are apart fret& the main point in dispute. The real questions on which the support or rejection of the stamp law must turn are two fold. First, is the law just from a fiscal paint of view ? Secondly (if that query be answered in the negative), ad mitting it to be unjust, are you prepared to maintain this injustice for the sake of a political result ; in other words, to affirm the principle of a censotship.—l remain, your obedient servant, STANLEY. THE GRHAT EXPOSURE. (From, the Examiner.) The key to the whole question between Lord John Russell and Lord Aberdeen lies in the fact stated by the former that the Premier " did not take any active part in the direction of the war." This is certainly at variance with Lord Aberdeen's repeated protestations, that though no member of the Government had been mote anxious to preserve peace, yet no one was more devoted to the vigorous prosecution of the war ; but the truth now revealed certainly goes far to explain the late Premier's treatment of Lord John Russell's proposals for the better conduct of the war. Had Lord Aberdeen's heart been in the war, and his sympathies with our suf fering army, how insignificant would have been those personal considerations which, as we have seen, alone weighed with him. A profound indifference was obvi ously at the bottom of his replies to Lord John Russell's suggestions —an indifference not extending, however, to the Duke of Newcastle, nor beyond the fate of some thousands of brave men, and the fortunes and honour of the country in this great struggle.. Lord John Russell's first letter should be very care fully conned, for every word in it has import. "In order to carry on that war with efficiency, Dither the Prime Minister must be constantly urging, hastening, completing the military preparations, or the Minister of War must be strong enough to control other departments. Every objection of other Ministers—tke plea of foreign interests to be attended to, of naval preparations not yet complete, and a thousand others, justifiable in the separate heads of departments, must be forced to yield to the paramount necessity of carrying ou the war with efficiency of each service, and completeness of means to the end in view. . . If, therefore, the first consider ations here presented lead to the conclusion that the Secretary of State for the War Department must be in the house of Commons, the latter considerations points to the necessity of having in that office a man who, from experience of military details, from inherent rigour of mind, and from weight with the House of Commons, can be expected to guide the great operations of war with authority and success. There is only one person belonging to the Government who combines these advantages,—my conclusion is that before Parliament meets Lord Palmer ston should be intrusted with the seals of the 'War Department.* The alternative stated in the first instance, is thus either that the Prime Minister must himself conduct the business of the war, or that a Minister of War having the requisite qualifications and weight of authority, must be appointed in lieu of the acting Minister. As the latter branch of the alternative is at once adopted and urged by Lord John Russell, it is necessarily implied that the first was wholly out of the question ; and in this Lord Aberdeen seems tacitly to have acquiesced, for he does not pretend to say that his own supervising attention to the conduct of the war would dispense with the substitution of Lord Palmerston for the Duke of Newcastle. Mark well the reply : " Your proposal being founded on the supposed impro priety of Herbert moving the Estimates, and the cones quoit necessity of the Secretary of State for War being in the House of Commons, renders the removal of the Duke of Newcastle from his present office unavoidable. But, although you would regard this as the inevitable result of as official arrangement, it is not to be supposed that it would be considered in this light by the public, or, indeed, by any impartial person. The dislocation of the Govern ment would be so great, and the reason assigned for it ap parently so inadequate, that it could only be considered as a made of substituting one man for another. Although you may be far from entertaining any such desire, the transaction could receive no other interpretation. In jus tice to the Dnke, I do not think that his colleagues, with out very strong grounds, would wish to place his in such a position." The reason pronounced "so inadequate " fer the change was, forsooth, nothing more or less than the efficiency of the military service, and the complete ness of the count r y' s means for th e vigorous prosecution of the war. But what was this object, merely national, compared with the position of the Duke of Newcastle, and a dislocation of the Ministry ? Justice to the country, justice to the brave fellows suffering in the Crimea, these were as dust in the balance, or rather not of the weight of dust in the balance, compared with justice to the Duke of Newcastle. _ _ _ Lord John Russell rejoins, and more plainly tells the Premier that the duty he does not perform himself is not discharged by the Minister to whom it is delegated ; and he again urges the remedy. " I come, therefore, having cleared the ground of all these obstructions, to the real question, what are the re quirements of the great war in which we are engaged I Setting aside all historical references, both on your part and mine, I think it is clear either that the Prime Minis ter must be himself the active and moving spirit of the whole machine, or the Minister of War must have dele gated authority to control departments. Neither is the case under the present arrang,ement. " The Cabinet has, it is true, in its recent meetings, deco much to repair omissions ; but a Cabinet is a cum brous and unwieldy instrument for carrying on war. It can furnish suggestions, or make a decison upon a measure submitted to it, but it cannot administer. What you want, therefore, I repeat, is a Minister of War of vigour and au thority. As the welfare of the empire and the success of our present conflict are concerned, I have ne scruple in saying so. Keep up, if you think right, as a temporary arrangement, a Secretary at War. Make it clear that it is temporary—that is to say, only to last till more complete consolidation can take place ; but lot Parliament and the country be assured that you have placed the conduct of the war in the hands of the fittest man who can be found for that duty." _ _ To this Lord Aberdeen made this astounding reply, treating the whole question as personal, which Lord John Russell bad proposed for the interests of the ser vice and the successful conduct of the war : " After all, I think your letter plainly reduces the question to the simple issue of a personal preference, and the substitution of one man for another. In answer to my suggestion that some consideration was due to the Duke on the part of his colleagues, you say that you under stood the Administration was founded on the principle of doing what was best for the public service, without re gard to the self-love or even the acquired position of indi viduals. Undoubtedly this was the case; and I fully agree in thinking that the Duke of Newcastle would be th e l as t ,„„ ee 41,•;.. at. .avour. But I must observe that at tho formation of the Govern ment no such office as the War Department was con templated ; and when, subsequently, the Colonial office was divided, no objection whatever was mails to the choice of the War department by the Duke ; nor, as far as I am aware up to this moment, to his management of the otfice. Now, I think that you will admit that, althos4i another person might perhaps have boon proferrod on the first con stitution of an office, it is a very different thing to displace a man who has discharged its duties ably and honourably, merely in the belief that another might be found still more efficient. Undoubtedly, the public service must be the first object ; but, in the absence of any proved defect or alleged incapacity, I can see no sufficient reason for such a change, which, indeed, I think is forbidden by a octal° of justice and good faith. . . . On the whole, then, be lieving that any change like that proposed would be of doubtful advantage to the public, feeling very strongly that it would bo au act of unfairness and injustice towards a colleague, and thinking, also, that all such changes, un less absolutely necessary, only tend to weaken a Govern. cou ld not honestly reco na _ m mend e o t, mustto the repeat Que e It is here distinctly asserted that the most efficient man should not be preferred to the post of conducting and ndhonour circum stances of this great country a nd the interests of the w h o l e ci v is e d the rule of Lord l world depend. For orrdeienary cases sjust, th a t a man who competently discharges his duties should not be snpei •s edod by another of superior a bili ty ; but this war i s no ordinary case, and the application of a rule to it a pplied to ordinary circumstances; shows how little Lord Aberdeen understands the exigency and the duties be longing to it. The country wants the best man, the fittest in qualifications, at the head of the War Depart ment, and should not be satisfied with any one in that all-important post, while a better for the office can pos sibly be found. Lord Aberdeen is not however, solitary in regarding personal considerations as paramount to national objects. Mark how Sir George Grey treats the question— " The proposal (Lord John's) was made almost en the last day of November, and it was not communicated to me till after the notice appeared in the Ga:ette for the meetieg of Parliament, and I confess that I considered deeply what would be the effect if I concurred in a step by which one of my colleagues would bo summarily ejected from an office which ho hold, merely on the notion that an im provement would thereby be made in the administration of the army." "Merely on the notion that an improvement would thereby be made in the administration of the army." What words are these '! Merely that a main cause of such disasters and disgraces as have occurred at Bala klava, should not hereafter occur. Merely that thou sands of lives should be saved. Merely that the country's character should be maintained in the eyes of the world. But what arc these merely humane and national objects weighed against the susceptibilities of a ducal colleague. And that there should be no mistake, Sir George Grey • ~ 7,,a1 r - 4 1 : 4 A,'4lrepeated his preference in other words, exceptlngothe 4 ,:, r mere, the reiteration of which was assential to the o,,ifitg4q;.. - " of his opinion : Is I speak my own mind, but I certainly do feel thaoK there would have been the appearance of a want of gene- t""'• rosity to have turned round on a colleague who was acting most ably and laboriously in the office which he filled, and ejected him from that office to carry out a mere arrange ment for greater unity of action." That is to ray, in plainer words, a mere arrangement to supply almost everything that is now wanted, or at least for the sine qua non of the efficiency of the military administration ! But presently afterwards, remembering that there is such a thing as a public, and that though a Duke stands before all other considerations, yet that a Duke is not the all in all o f E ng l an d , h e throws ir i t the salvo : " Do not suppose that I think any consideration for a colleague ought to stand in the way of the public interests." Why is not Sir George's favourite word here? Why is it not the mere public interests I Why are the public interests treated with more respect than the arrangement merely conducing to them ; the word most aptly ex presses the animus, the spirit of subordinating public to personal considerations ; and such from beginning to end has been the character of this affair, which has over thrown a Government, placed the Crown in difficulty, disturbed all the external relations of the country, and jeopardised its domestie interests. LORD RAGLAN. In the second of our own letters from the Crimea which we published on Saturday an explanation was offered of a circumstance whioh had been noticed in our previous com munications from the camp, and which had been made the subjectiof some remarks at home, It had beezl observed that the Commander-in -Chief rarely showed himself to the troops, except in time of action, and that the soldiers re mained without that personal acquaintance with their General which they naturally desire. Our correspondent. in recurring to the fact, represented thi s p ract i ce at head quarterspursuedConstlitP:tilion an , principle,dand as b e i ng d e f en d e d usages of the British by th e es system, ser vice. The officers in immediate attendance on Lord Rag. lan—that is to say his personal staff—are said to maintain that this species of treatment is most suitable to the cha racter of English soldiers, and that the discipline of the army is best preserved when the General is invested with the attributes of unapproachable superiority. We do not stop to remark upon the incidental confirma. tion here given to the fact itself, which in one or two quer. ters there appeared some disposition to question, but we must express our opinion that such views, if really enter tained, proceed upon principles entirely mistaken. We do not deny that the usages of the military service, as main tained in peace, providing as they do so strong a line of demarcation between the officer and the soldier, might naturally suggest the idea of an immeasurable distance be. tween the soldier and the General ; but 'these usages, as we already learn, are not applicable to the realities of war. If the question fell within the scope of such kind of argu ment we might reasonably inquire what peonliaritios could render the British soldier so different a Jelling from those of all other times and countries ; but we ere per fectly convinced that no such difference exists, and the simple proof of th e f act is to be found in the P circum stance, that when this system has been pursued as at present in the Crimea, and in the last war under Welling ton, it was always recorded BR matter of complaint. In this respect the Duke of Wellington's practice supplies rather a werning than an example. It is one of the few drawbacks on the military character of that great com mander that he failed in conciliating the affection of his troops, nor could anything short of that unbounded con fidence with which he inspired them have stood him suffi ciently in stead. We may go, however, a step further, and observe that, if there is a single officer in the army who could afford, without risk of depreciating his dignity, to maintain this species of personal communication with his troops, that man is Lord Raglan. His known steadiness of feeling, his perfect self-possession and control, his long habituation to command, and even his official tendency to reserve, all combine to produce a character entirely beyond the reach of impertinent familiarity or disrespectful ur gency. We recollect, indeed, that during the stay of the army in Bulgaria anecdotes were related for public edification of the easy tact with which his Lordshrp re pelled or eluded any intrusive attempt to acquire his con fidence; nor can wo think it credible that by any frequ enc y or directness of intercourse with the various branches of the .trmy he could have exposed himself to the slightest loss of influence or position. And, even if this case were less clear than it is, it may surely be thought that the ex traordinary sufferings of the army and the emergency of the conjuncture were enough fo justify any broach of tra ditional punctilio. For the rest, notwithstanding the information afforded by the correspondence now arriving more frequently than formerly from the scene of war, we look in vain for any adequate explanation of the misfortunes which have oc curred, nor cen there now, we should think, be any ques tion about the necessity of the inquiry which has been resolved upon. Those who charge upon the system rather than upon individuals the miscarriage of our efforts may certainly gather some justification of their opinions from the very universality of the evil.—Times. TILE DOCK COMPANIES OF LONDON. The river Thames is called in legal documents "Her Majesty's Port of London." It is, therefore, a national property. The Qu een i s i n th e pos i t i on of the collective nation. An attempt is being made which, if successful, will have the effect of snaking the Thames " The Dock Companies' Port of London." It is this which elevates the opposition made by the wharves to the movement in contemplation by the Docks out of the position of a mere private squabble between contending inteseete. It is really a national question. The Docks made a bar gain with the nation. Give us permission to use a por tion of your greab water-way, and we will recompense you by arrangements which wiil greatly facilitate com mercial operations. The nation gave the permission, but at the same time made express stipulation that sot one single privilege which they possessed as the real owners of the great water-way should be given up. The portion of the river in the Docks was still to be consi dered as a part of " her Majesty's Port," and, as such subject to all the rules and regulations to which the remainder of the river is submitted. Have the Docks made a bad bargain Certainly not, as we shall presently show. The Deck shares are con sidered at the present moment one of the best invest ments for mosey. East and West India Dock stock was in January, 1841, at 964 ; in 1853 the same stock was sold at 170. London Dock shares rose in the same period from 67 to 1281. St. Katharine's Dock shares experienced a rise from 95i to 100. In the same period the dividends of the East and West India Dock Com pany experienced a rise of 11 per cent., those of the London Docks a rise of 2 per cent. The business of the St. Katharine's Dock Company had increased 23 per cent, during the ten years ending in 1853. The Dock Companies, then, have made a good bar gain. They have created colossal fortunes for the shareholders, by means of the privileges granted them. If they could show that they had made a miscal culation, that the great expense of the works which they have erected for the accommodation of the public has diminished their dividends, and that, therefore, some modifications of the conditions to which they agreed is necessary, something might be urged in their favour. But he the full blush of their prosperity they come forward and say,, we must have not only the use of the river Thames, but a property in it. We consented, when we obtained our deeds of incorpora tion, that the water in our docks should be considered a part of the port of London, but we desire to be freed from that stipulation. We have made a great deal of money ; we want to make more. And to do this, we want to levy a tax which neither the Government nor the Corporation of London have over thought of levy ing. We must have the right of imposing a tax upon all lightermen who float their lighters upon that portion of the Thames inside our docks, although the great con dition upon which our deeds of incorporation were granted was that we should not impose such a tax. Al though lightermen, presuming on the privilege so jea lously precervod to them in all Acts of Parliament rela tive to this subject, have, ever since the construction of the docks, removed the goods of their cuetoiners from vessels in dock, without charge, to wharves chosen by the consignees of goods themselves, we wish this privilege to be abolished. We want, in fact, to fine merchants for lauding goods on any other wharves than eaeioeieu eve aumiL teat the only way to get to our wharves is by the means of that public highway which we have pledged ourselves to respect. It becomes, then, as we have said, a question of na tienal interest to decide whether the Docks shall be per mitted to rescind the solemn agreement they formerly made. The Dock Companies are great wharfingers. Their object is to bo the only wharfingers. If they suc ceed in their object every merchant wanting to use a private wharf will have to pay the Dock Companies a toll, if the vessel, of the cargo of which he has a frac tional share, happens tc lie in the docks. Let it be re membered whichbere dt era 1 Vessel a s beinghas already necessaryp:t all opa those rey doek dues the company for its pecuniary investment. A consignee having only a fractional interest in a cargo can, of course, make no terms as to where the vessel containing it shall' discharge. The vessel is met on its entrance into the Thames by touters on steam tugs belonging to the Dock Companies, who offer the skipper all kinds of advantages, if he will make use of the docks ; or, perhaps, a large porties of the cargo may be consigned to a merchant who has a share in one of the docks. and has made a stipulation that the goods shall be landed from the dock in which he has an interest. In this ease all the other consignees, or at least such portion of them as wished to have their goods landed elsewhere, will have to pay the company for permission to do so. They can only avoid the tax by using the dock wharves. It is quite clear that such a procoes will confine the monopoly to the docks, and give their the exclusive use of the Thames, The rights of the Crown and the Corporation will thus be practically infringed upon, and the trade of the port e will be extinguished under the blighting inflvence of monopoly.—Deily Nam , 0 It appears th a t th e t o t a l num b er o f merc h ant vass al of all clas ses t a k en up b y th e G overnment f or war pur poses h as b een 206 , o f an aggregate b ur d en o f 205,338 tons, their average c a p ac ity b e i ng a l m ost exactly 1 ,000 tons. In thi s t o t a l th e num b er o f r ailing ships is 105, the Herefo r d s hi re , o f 1,676 tons, and the small es t th e of an aggreg a t e b ur d en o f 91,026 tons, the largest being Comelza of 521 tons. Of s team „ hips thenumber ni ise s 101, t of an aggre ga t e b ur den of 11 4 , 362 tons, 66 having been furnished m b a y i l c p o r n i v tr a a t c e t 4n a d n i v d i d 3 u s a b l y s I. o u r b b si 1 eomp a ised c om p an i es . Among the former the largest was the Prince, of 2,691 tons ; but the largest now are the Jason and the Golden Fleece, of 2,500 tons each. The smallest is the Esk, of 359 tons. The ships furnished by eno subsidised com panies are 10 by the Peninsular and Oriental, of an ag gregate burden of 17,020 ton s • 6 by the Royal Mail , Steam, of 12,348 tons ; 4 by the African Steam, of 4,008 tons ; 12 by the Cunard Company, of 13,185 tons; and 3 by the Liverpool South American Company, of 5,007 tons. The la rges othe se m ail t f Himalaya, of 3,550 t ons, now a Q ueen ' s s hip ; an d t h e smallest is the Rajah of NO tons.