The Sun. — London, England, 1849-05-09 00:00:00

't.ourti)':: 'baton! SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS DAY.) HOUSIi OF COMMONS. The SPZAZEN took the Chair at Twelve o'clock. TURNELNE TRUSTS. Mr. WILSON P.ATTEIS Moved that Mr. Cornewall Lewis be added to the Committee to which all turnpike Bills in England and Wales have hzien referred, and that the Committee have power to consider the unopposed Bills which have been referred to them.--..4greed to. PETITIONS. Sir H. HALFORD presented petitions from places in the county of Leicester praying for the establishment Of county financial boards. Mr. WILSON PATTEN presented petitions from places in Lancashire to the same effect. Lord DUDLEY STUART presented petitions to the same effect. Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from the Health of Towns Committee against intramural burials. Sir GEORGE GREY presented two petitions, one against the Marriage Bill and the other in favour of the Scotch Marriage Bill. Mr. W. BROWN presented petitions from places in Lancashire in favour of the County Rates Bill. Mr. S. WORTLEY presented a large number of peti tions, all in favour of the Bill for legalising marriages with a deceased wife's sister. LAND IMPOVEMENT (IRELAND) BILL. This Bill was brought in and read a first time. DROPPED NOTICES OF MOTION. The dropped notices of motion and orders of the day were re-appointed. MARRIAGE BILL. Mr. STUART WORTLEY fixed to-morrow for the adjourned debate on the Bill for legalising marriages with a deceased's wife sister, and stated his intention to bring forward the discussion at any hour. Sir R. H. INGLIS did not think it would be fair to take the discussion at any hour, and appealed to the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary far the Home De partment to interpose his authority to prevent so im portant a question coming on at a late hour. Sir G. GREY could assure the Hon. Baronet that it would not be gone into at a late hour. Sir R. H. INGLIS—Not after 10 o'clock. Sir G. GREY could not. give such a promise. The debate on the Bill was then adjourned till to morrow. CROWN PROSECUTIONS IN IRELAND. Mr. KEOGH asked the indulgence of the House while, in a few words, he entered into an explanation of a per sonal character. Last week he brought the subject of Crown prosecutions in Ireland under the consideration of the House, and it had since appeared that some of his remarks had given offence to many gentlemen in Ireland, particularly Mr. George Bennett, the Crown prosecutor of the county of Meath, 'and be wished now to disclaim all intention ;of throwing blame or censure upon any ore. All that he did was to attack a system, and he carefully abstained from saying anything of the individuals engaged in it.--(Hear, hear.) CHICORY. Mr. MOFFATT wished to ask the Right Honourable Baronet the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether Go ♦ernmeat intended to impose any duty on chicory or , to revise the Excise law? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, if on inquiry it were found that the use of chicory inter fered with the consumption of dety-paid coffee, it would be advisable to impose a small duty on chicory used for adulterating coffee. It was not the intention of Govern ment, however, to reappoint the Excise survey. Mr. HENLEY asked if Government also intended to impose a duty on burnt bread, which was some time used for adulterating coffee. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied certainly not. _ ADVERTISING VANS. Lord DUDLEY STUART wished to ask the Right Honourable Baronet the Secretary for the Home De partment a question of some interest to the metropolis. It was this—in the event of its being ne ceseary to introduce any Bill for amending the Metropo litan Police Act, would any clause be introduced into it to put a stop to the practice of perambulating the streets of London with huge advertising vans, which had recently become a most intolerable nuisance? Sir G. GREY replied that, in the event of the Metro politan Police Act being altered, the nuisance referred to by the Noble Lord would be a very proper subject for the consideration of the Legislature, with a view to its abatement.—(Hear, hear.) DETENTION OF STEAM-VESSELS IN BOMBAY. Mr. URQUHART said he had given notice of his intention to ask the First Lord of the Treasury a ques tion respecting the detention of the Bombay steam vessels, but not seeing the Noble Lord in his place, he wished to know if any other member of the Government was prepared to answer it? Sir G. GREY said his Noble Friend at the head of the Government would be prepared to give an explana tion of the circumstance to-morrow. EMPLOYMENT OF LABOUR (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. P. SCROPE moved the second reading of this , Bill, and in doing so he took occasion to point out to the House the evils which had resulted in Ireland from not providing employment for the able-bodied poor at a small s.ipend, instead of providing them with out door relief. It could not be said that the able-bodied poor of Ireland were averse to work, fur experiments had been tried in some parts of Ireland, and it was found that the poor worked very hard when employment was given to them, and that they preferred it to out-door relief.—(Elear, hear.) Without having re course to the reclamation of the large tracts of waste lands in Ireland, there were ample means and fields at the disposal of the guardians for providing work for their able bodied poor, if the law only permitted them to do so —(Hear, hear.) The present system imposed the responsibility of supporting the zesident poor upon the landlord.--(Hear.) It, therefore held out a premium to the landlord to get rid of his poor by clearance, and thus absolve himself from em ploying them in the improvement of his estate.—(Hear, hear.) Something must be done, then, to remedy that evil. How it could be.doue he could not at that moment say, but certainly the system of settlement proposed by Government would never accomplish the object.—(Hear, hear.) His own measure, however, would, to some ex tent mitigate the evil ; it made no alteration in the pre sent area, but it simply exempted those who found employment for a certain portion of the poor from being liable to contribute to the rate for supporting the able bodied poor.—(Hear, hear.) It was admitted by the most practical men in Ireland, that if this principle were carried out it would set most of the able-bodied poor to work at once, instead of keeping them idle in workhouses. The measures:of:improveissent at pre sent propounded for the relief of the landed in terest of Ireland would be of no avail, for while landlords had to pay such heavy poor -rates as were im posed upon .hem at present they could not pay interest on borrowed money, and he hoped; therefore, this Bill would meet with the serious attention of the House before it were rejected. —(Hear.) The SPEAKER then put the question, and declared the Ayes had it, when Sir W. SOMERVILLE rose, and said, amidst some laughter, he should oppose the Bill. He fully appre ciated the motives of the Honourable Gentleman for introducing this Bill, and he thought every Irish Member owed him a deep debt of gratitude for the constant endeavours he had made to remove some of the miseries of the Irish people.—(Hear, hear.) He could assure his Hon. Friend that the Bill would meet with no contemptible reception from him, but at this period of the session it was not possible to go fully into the consideration of the subject, even though the Bill were referred to a Select Committee, as his Hon. Friend had suggested.—(Hear, hear.) That system could not but lead to a direct demoralisation of the country, for the labourer would naturally give as little as possible of his labour because he was not working for profit, which is the legitimate object of all labour,:but for relief, which he might possibly conceive he was entitled to without the necessary exertion.—(Hear, hear.) Beside these objections there was still another, which was, that if the Bill worked well in some parts of Ireland •it would be sure to work ill in others, and tend in a greater or less degree to demoralize the labouring po pulation. He would not at present enter into details, but he might simply refer to the 6th clause to exemplify its injurious character. Had his Hon. Friend invited him to a discussion of its several provisions, he should have been ready to have gone with him, but as he had taken the coarse of persisting in appointing a fixed day far the committal of the Bill, he must most decidedly oppose him, and move that it be committed this day six months. The motion having- been put, Mr. P. SCROPE said that he was willing to refer the Bill to the Poor-law Commissioners.—(Order, order.) Mr. F. FRENCH said that he must protest against the course which his Hon. Friend behind him (Mr. P. Sorope) had taken. It the circumstances of England and Ireland had been the' same there might have been some reason for such a proposition. If they would only adopt a reasonable view of the case of Ireland, and listen to the opinions of the residents of Ire land, they would know that if the people of that country were permitted to apply their Means for the employment of labour, they would save the whole expense of the staff of the workhouses from one end of the country. to the other. But instead of thus judiciously applying the funds derived from the poor law, they were paying nearly two millions to soldiers every year, for the purpose of collecting a rate from persons who were themselves almost in a state of star vation, and whose condition, bad as it was at present, was likely to be still worse. Nearly one-third of the land in the west of Ireland was now lying in a state of waste. In Mayo the grass lands, which had always been considered one of the strong holds of the wealth of Ireland, were now lying waste. In Tipperary and Connaught the land was al. meat altogether unoccupied. He had lately met with a NebleLord, whose brother had extensive estates in the south and west of Ireland, and he had told him that he had just come from his brother's agent, and he had told • him that out of an estate of 8,000 acres he had only been able to let to the_ amount of 35/. In other districts the matter was, if possible, stilt worse, and unless some means of relief were adopted, such as this Bill pointed out, that the evils of famine and destitution would be very largely increased. Mr. SLANEY begged to caution the House against too hastily adopting a measure which had eminently failed when adopted in this country.—(Hear, hear.) All present would remember the terrible state of distress whicti had been experienced is the southern counties of England some years ago.—(Hear, hear.) He had been chairman of a committee appointed to examine into the causes of that distress and the means of relieving it. It s d tri m n o g s e t n arduous had it w di a s s oc. f n o t u en n t d , nec n e n s ( s i ary a to ‘ a .e t ry once repres t s th lQ e w evil wr o s f pa-sed to enforce a labour-rate, dee l an employment in a particular district proved for all who had to .w.tiftohr 800 it. plefrtehoenrsewwheans must of necessity fail in their object b for there were a thousand who required subsistence, t e h n e y y . to if he ° would so adapt it permanent Scrape) e w lie o f o . ld l e. f ol. a th rr e an T o n n . i b e ee ß m ill e a r s t e Sh n tir a no le gu le dii i k T e to meet a temporal evil; inensition, and enable t . he peo u p t rove of great, nay of im that it might enable its administrators i a fr s o t m ate on o e f st a te :o another, the h n e it would mlg therefore recommend him y t o m Pa e s t s mouse tlervn:.ne an d , . (Sir W. Somerville), and to to accept the prop, (the Secretary for beim.- ~w Commission for Eng sition. of the Right Hop. q entleroart submit the Bill to the Poor-lee land.—(Cheers.) Mr. FOX said that the Hon. Member for Stroud ban already proposed to submit it to that tribunal, but he trusted, that such a proposition would not be adopted, for he believed that the state of Ireland was quite mils on,:erstood, and the sooner some such test as this was ap lied to elendthehette r. 'The samevagnenessof expres pioon which hae 4 distinguished the poor-lawcommissioners s of Ireland had alw:'r 3 marked their di,patchee, and if which occurred in the unions the lavish expenditure there were repressed the rate= would meet the expenses. Mr. SHARMAN CRAW r ORD asked the House whether it was not necessary that FitZmething should be done to encourage the employment of ;sbour in Ire land.—(Hear, hear.) He did not pretend to say that the Bill was not liable to objection, but under the present circumstances it was feepoisible to frame any measure which would be less objectionable. One of the evil effects of the poor-law was that those who gave employment to a reasonable number of labourers could not exempt themselves from the overwhelming taxation which pressed upon them for the relief of the able-bodied poor. The object of the Bill was an application to the gu ardians to exempt a person who exployed an average number of labourers on his land from the rate for the able-bodied poor. The preeent system of the poor-law in Ireland was :he cause of ma4h demoralization, and he trusted, that as this measure would amend one of its most glaring defects, aed was calculated to do much good, the House would not reject it on the present occasion. Mr. E. DENISON said that thousands of able-bodied labourers were standing idle in Ireland, while thousands of acres of land remained uncultivated, and if the House did not take advantage of that opportunity to promote the employment of labour, and to prevent the cultivation of the land for another year, he thought that the conse quences would be universal ruin and fumine.—(Hear.) Sir G. GREY said it was owing to a mistake that the Bill had been read a second time, and the House would, therefore, have to give expression to its opinion with re gard to it upon the question of the committal of the Bill. The principle of the measure, which he thought would reduce wages to a minimum, had been tried in England some years ago, and the most convincing teeitimony was then produced, which satisfied the House and the public that it was a vicious one, and would defeat the object which they all had in view—viz., the application of capital to the employment of laboute—(Hear.) The remedy for the existing evil he thought was be 'found in land being placed in the hands of persons of capital, who had both skill and enterprise to apply labour in a beneficial manner.—(Hear, hear.) From the recent accounts received from Ireland it appestred that there were great hopes of an improved state of thins in those parts which were considered to be in a most destitute condition. He had received a letter from a gentlem,:n who had acquired a competence in an English manufac turing town, and who had taken a lease of some pre perty in Ireland with a determination to settle upon it, stating that there was nothing dispiriting or discouraging in the prospects of that country, and that the people cheerfully gave their labour for Bd. a day. He (Sir G. Grey) believed that in the efforts of an enterprising gen tleman like that was to be found the real cure for the condition of some parts of Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) The Bill would not effect the object which its supporters had in view, and although it was only In be of a tempo rary nature, he trusted that the House would be careful in sanctioning a principle which was so destructive to honest industry and to a sound system for the proper cul tivation of the land.—(Heer, hear.) He hoped that it would not consent to the Bill being referred to a Com mittee up stairs. Mr. STAFFORD attributed much of the existing evils of Ireland to the extended area of taxation. In the county to which the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Tamworth, was connected—the county of Clare—in that county the Right Hon. Baronet stated there had been upwards of 15,000 evictions. That might be all very true; but if any Hon. Member would inquire, he would find that the greatest number of evic tions had taken place in those electoral areas which were the largest; and it would appear that the numbers were just in proportion to the extent of the area.—(Hear, hear.) One witness before their Committee bad declared that in some instances the areas ex tended to as many as 12,000 acres, in others to more, and in one instance to as many as 17,000 acres.— (Hear, hear.) After all, the question would still aed still revive—What was an able-bodied labourer ? Here was a great practical difficulty in giving a proper answer to that question. In order to carry out the full principle of the Bill, they must give a ratio of wages on which all persons should be bound to act ; and without some such provision as this, they would be adopting a principle ~ which, obnoxio us i n E ng l an d, wuld be perfectly impracticable in Ireland. The Honourable Gentle man who had so strongly put to the House the idea of so many labourers in Ireland standing idle on so many thousand acres, had said, let this arrangement be lett to the board of guardians. With this sugges tion he quite agreed, for every Bill that had lately been laid on the table of the House had had the effect of in creasing more and more the power in the hands of the central commissioners in Dublin.—(Hear, hear.) This, to say the least of it, was an unwholesome doctrine, and he conceived that the greater the check given to such a system, th e better. Wherel er the guardians did their duty, he should say leave the arrangements of all their local affairs to local management. Feeling that this Bill could not possibly be amended to any efficient purpose in Ireland, he should vote against its going into Committee.—(Hear.) Colonel DUNNE said that, as the Honourable Mem ber for Stroud had expressed a willingness to have the details of the Bill altered in Committee, he should differ with the Honourable Member for Northamptonshire. The Hon. and Gallant Member then went into a series of details to show that the number of labourers employed in the cultivation of the soil in England was greatly inferior in proportional numbers to those employed in the cultiva tion of the soil in Ireland, anu said that this Bill was divided into two parts—one, which provided that those unions which were loaded with the relief of the entirely destitute' were to be absolved from the suppor of the able- bodied paupers; and the other, that where i was necessary to support the able bodied poor, th e rate payers should be relieved from the support of the desti tute. The Bill evidently recognised the fact which none could gainsay, and that was, that they must support both those classes of poor, either with work or without work. He preferred the latter, and approving of the principle of the Bill, although objecting to several of its details, he should certainly vote for its being carried into Com- mittee.—(Cheers ) Lord BERNARD said that the principle of this Bill was one which reduced itself to an absurdity. It was ❑either more nor less than saying to a machine that the machine shall work whether its work would be service- able or not—just saying that a shoemaker should be compelled to make shoes whether he could sell them or itot.—(Laughter.) Whether the late Govern ment liked to hear it or not, the Honour- able Member for Northamptonshire had spoken neither more nor less than the truth—that the whole source of the evils consisted in the extent of the elec- toral areas. In the district of Bandon which herepre sented there was abundant opportunity for gathering evidence upon the subject. It was wated from one end to another:that if the v areas were reduced, they would cake the whole of the inmates out of the workhouses.— (Hear, hear.) Thinking that the principle of the Bill was bad, he should vote against its committal. Mr. REYNOLDS said that nothing, he conceived, could be more erroneous than the supposition that the evils of Ireland were owing to the mischiefs of ex tended areas of taxation.—(Hear, hear.) The abject of this Bill was to give employment to the able-bodied poor, but the question arose as to who the able-bodied really were, for it would appear that at the present time there werereally very few able-bodied poor left in the country, at least in the west and south. In- deed, how could it be so, when they recollected that the whole amount of out-door relief given to an able-bodied labourer was one pound of prepared Indian meal during the twenty-four hours ? And under that system, while the iron-hearted political ec,,no mists of that House were day by day putting forth their theories, the people were becoming day by day neither more nor less than inanimate skele• tons.—(Hear, bear.) It was with an infinitude of plea sure that he had the other day heard his Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer read a letter from Mr. Rourke, the Poor-law Commissioner in Ire land, in which he stated that distress was subsiding in Ireland, but he had a very different account to give, and he would only read one extract from the Freeman's Jour nal of yesterday ; and it was to the effect, that at a meeting of the guardians of the Lnion of Killekeen, Mr. Daly, a guardian, had reported that a farmer in the neighbourhood having had _ a mare die 'rom fever, in less than two hours, such was the wane in the district, the skin was off, and the people were feeding upon the head and entrails of the animal.— (Hear, hear.) Instances were abundantly cited of the impoverishment of the inhabitants to such a degree that it was only necessary to allude to one. In Ballinasloe, genrrally considered one of the best towns in Ireland, and under one of the best landlords, Lord Clontarf—Aid though he differed from him in politics he must give him that credit—in Ballinasloe it was a fact that the inmates of the workhouse were absolutely more numerous than the inhabitants of the town - -(Hear, hear.) In another case a man was carrying a coffin to bury the body of his brother, and when he had got about within two miles of the hovel where the dead man lay, he sunk down in a state of exhaustion and died upon the road ; and they were both buried together the next day in the same grave.—(Hear, hear.) He was in- 1 duced to name this, the more especially because it was notorious that throughout the whole of the distressed districts the bodies of the dead were lying in a state of nakedness, and the country was too poor to procure coffins in which to bury them. The object of the Bill was to exempt from the poor•rate those districts which gave employment to labDurers, and to lay a charge upon grass lands which were not, but might be cultivated in other districts, and thus while the measure forced persons to employ the able-bodied poor, it would also increase the amount of agricultural pro duce in Ireland. lie looked, therefore, upon the second reading as a fortunate, and not unfortunate mistake, and hoped that the House would consent to the measure. FRANCE. The following propositi on , emana ting from' M. Victor Considerant, and signed by sixty representa tives, has been laid upon the table of the National Assembly : " The National Assembly, considering Article 4 of the Constitution, which says:—• The French Republic respects foreign nationalities, as it desires that its own should be respected, and will undertake no war with a view to conquest, nor employ its forces against the liberty of any people;' considering that the Executive power, having obtained from the National Assembly authority to send an expedition to Italy to protect liberty, has directed this expedition against a Repub lic which is the result of universal suffrage, and has employed the forces of France against the liberty of the Rowan people; considering that this odious Act consti tutes a flagrant violation of the letter and spirit of the Constitution, and a flagrant treason against the interests of the French Republic and European democracy, de trees—Citiz,n Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, President of the French it'public, and Citizsns Odilon Barrot, Buffet, Lacrosse, Rulh:eces de Tracy, Passy, Drouin de Limy', Falloux, and Faucher, his Ministers, are accused of hav ing violated the Constitution." The Peuple says that the Prefect of the Seine has struck off the list of electors 45,000 Paris workmen, on the ground that they lodge en garni, or have no fixed domicile. The Peuple says that this is in violation of the law, which fixes no other condition than six months' residence in the commune where the elector has to vote. Yesterday the Central Committee of the Electoral Union completed the scrutiny of the ballots in the fourteen arrondissements of the department of the Seine for the preparatory elections of Repre sentatives in the Legislative Assembly. It will be recollected that a list of fifty candidates was submitted by the Committee to the electors, recommending them to add such names as might appear to them more eligible, or suppress those which were objectionable. Not only has no one candidate not found in the list been named by the electors themselves, but out of the 28 first names on the provi sional list, 27 are found on the final list. The number of voters was 55,097. The following are the names cf the 28 final candidates, according to the number of votes given in their favour :- 1. Dulaure, late minister, representative. 2. Hippolyte Passy, Minister of Finances. 3. Ge - nerta Bedeati, representative. 4. General Lamoriciere, representative. 5. Odilon Barrot, Minister of Justice, representative. 6. F. de Lasteyrie, formerly deputy, representative. 7. Le )n Faucher, minister, representative. 8. Marshal Bugeaud, representative. 9. Moreau, late mayor of 7th arrondissement, represen. tative. 10. Tillers, late minister, representative. 11. General Cavaignac, representative. 12. Vavin, late deputy, representative. 13. Gamin, late deputy, representative. 14. De Falloux, minister, representative. 15. Wolowaki, professor at the Conservatoire, represen tative. 16. Mole, late minister, representative. j 17. Peupin, journeyman watchmaker. 18. Roger (du Nord) ex-deputy. 19. Achille Fould, representative. 20. De bl,ntaleinhert, ex peer, representative. 21. Cuquerel, Protestant minister, representative. 22. Rapatel, general of division, colonel of the 2d legion of National Guards. 23. Victor Hugo, representative. 24. Bixio, ex-minister, representative. 25. Chambulle, representative. 26. Boilsel, representative. 27. Marie, ex member of the Provisional Government, representative. 28. Lucien Murat, colonel of the 3cilegion,representative. PRUSSIA. We learn from the Kolner Zeitung that a meet ing of the Landwehr of the district of Eberlehi took place on the 3d instant, at which a num ber of resolutions were passed, according to which the Landwehr declared that they submitted to the authority of the Frankfurt Parliament, and that the Landwehr would not obey the orders of the Man teuffel-Brandenburg Cabinet. These resolutions were on the Gth Of May adopted by the Landwehr of the districts of Sehwelm, Hagen, itonsdvrf, LiPtring hausen, Lennep, Huekeswagen, Solingen, Neuss, Dortmund, Essen, and Miilheim, formerly the most loyal parts of the Prussian dotninions. SCHLESVVIG-HOLSTEIN. The Danes h ave obtained the advantage over the German troops, in a, shirmish at Taulor, one mile from Frederizif,.—./4044,urei Borsenhalle. ITALY — . The following proclamati o .7.1 has been add resse d to the French army by tote Roman people : "Frenchmen!—l Lie land y ou tread on still preserves the traces of your glorious ancestors; but these brought us liberty, and you bring us slavery. In destroying the Roman Republic you will destroy your own, and you will be fratricides at the same time that you injure 3-ourselves. Oh, shame! you stood by, and regarded with a laugh of mockery the misfor tunes oi Lombardy. You had not a single word of consolation tor the fall of Piedmont. Your venal writers utter blasphemies and calumnies on the heroic Worts of Hungary. On this very day, with an impu dent mockery, you come to destroy Roman liberty. r your implacabl e G overnment subjects you ' can l al l4 g 4 7::test of . all infamies, bi n d s you to t h e train of despothm and of injustice, and obliges you to follow in the wake of the Croat and the Cossack. Are you indeed soldiers? If you are, choose a foe worthy of your courage. Do not come to defy the rising strength of a petty state. If you wish to combatagainst Republican arms, cease to be Republicans yourselves, or confess that you are the satellites of tyranny and hypocrisy. French citizens! tear aside the veil of policy, and answer, Whom do you wish to restore to power? Are they the priests? this heriditary race who have caused so much blood to flow and occa sioned so many woes to France herself. Study your own history, and you will see what a fatal present you are about to make to us. Know it, once for all; from our earliest infancy even to our old age, we have cherished an implacable hatred of sacerdotal domination. You wish to reimpose it on us by f orce. You are about to place us on a level with the Chinese. You will force us to curse the soil which has given you birth, We are unfortunate, be cause we are the sport of the violence of powerful men; unfortunate, because we are despised and trampled uncler foot by the very nation which was always the illusion to our mind, and the source of our hopes, Frenchmen before undertaking a detestable wor k, ask of the .blue. heaven that is above y ou , an d i t will answer that it has been polluted by sacerdotal iniquities, and by their horrors in all ages. Ask our t our w a o e , a n d you will learn from them an youth uninterrupted a nd seductions, of debauch e ry, an d o f venality. Ask of our farmers for whom they have laboured? they will answer, for the priests! Ask to whom belongs the fifth part of the state? to the priests! Ask to whom belongs the most luxurious abodes, for whom are the inest eXquisite delicacies, and who are those obeyed by thousands of menials? The reply will still be—the priests! the priests! Frenchmen! your mis sion is the Work of hell. It will bring down upon your heads an universal malediction, for which your past glory Kill not prove a recompense. OA this very day you lose the pride and glory of warriors. The chil dren of the concverors of Arcola and I),larengo have, alas, become the janissaries of the sacristy, and the champions of the accused mitre!' It is said that several of the French soldiers have refused to fight in the cause of Austria and Naples, and have joined the Romans in defence of liberty and republioanism STATE OF TRADE. (From the Manchester Guardian of this day.) MANCHESTER, MAY 4.—The present upward tendency in Cotten, and the expectation that shipments would now find their way into Hamburg!), gave rise, in the early part of th e d ay , t o an anticipation of improv ement in this market, which, however, has not been realised. Rather higher prices were at first demanded for yarns, and for such cloths as are in current request; but it was soon perceived that the continental merchants were discouraged, and 'rendered indisposed for the slightest upward movement, by the gloomy tenor of their actvices, received last night ; from which it appears that the German States were rapidly verging towards confusion and anarchy. It was also found that the report of i n j ury from " frost," susta i ne d by the growing cotton, is looked upon as a repetition of one of those old stories which are supposed to be stereotyped on the other side of the Atlantic, for seasonable use in the manufacturing districts. In the course of the day, therefore, the sellers have gradually modified their demands, and become willing to accept the rates of last week for most articles. However, on the whole, the market is charac terised by much firmness, at previous rates. In yarns for the conti n e n t t h e business has been very limited. Qualities suitabl e f or India, in Nos. 20 to 40 , have been purchased in a q u i e t way, and only to a moderate extent. The buyers for home manufacture have operated more sparingly than they had intended doing. In goods there is no striking change. 7-8 printing cloths, ex cept of the finer descriptions, continue in good demand; and 40-inch shirtings, adapted to the Eastern trade, are so exceedingly scarce, that a o}errand, not equal to that which lately existed, is insufficiently supplied. Light goods are still the only ones that are wanted. Long cloths, T's, and domestics, particularly the heavier sorts, are certainly not becoming more easy of sale. ROCUDALE, MAY 7.—The flannel market continues very much depressed, and business is nearly at a stand. In wool, also, there is very little doing, and prices may be quoted a shade lower. Iit!DDERSFIELD, MAY B.—Tl.ere is very little anima tion in our market to-day; but still a steady trade is doing. Our fancy trade is suffering a little from the continued dislurbance on the continent. The woollen manufacturers are all anxiously looking to the sales; and as they are fast approaching, noshing particular is going nu nu that ilopartineut of our trade. HALIFAX, MAY s.—Althougn L6cro tun rail. cr better attendance iu the Piece Hall to-day, there bas been no improvement in the demand for goods, and prices are slightly depressed. In yarns we have no al teration to report, and wools remain inactive, with a downward tendency. _ and, a good many orders being still out, h LEEDS, MAY B . — There was a f a i r mar k et h ere on S ; mills are very wel l employed. To-day t[heetild woollenrerbY a s . n l o s t t been much business, done. Indeed, so fur as the Halls are c , mcerned, the Tuesday's market is now of less importance than the Saturday's. FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE OF TUESDAY. DIVIDENDS, At the Court, Basinghall.street. R. Kimpton, Crescent, Jewin-street, Cripplegate, jew eller,at one—U. W. llenasworth, Primrose agate-street, w i ne merchant, May 31, at twelve.at r e , M B a L y s h 3 o p, In the Country. J. Perry, Exeter, cheese and bacon dealer, June 7, at on, at the Court, Exeter —W, Menadue, Liskeard and Cumborne, Cornwall, watchmaker and ironmonger, June 7, at one, at the Court, Exeter—F. Davis, Weymouth and Melcombe Regis, Dorsetshire, wine and spirit mer chant, May 31, at one, at the C our t, E xe t er —H. W arr , Bridport, Dorsetshire, currier, May 31, at one, at the Court, Exeter—R. Martin, Tavistock, Devonshire, tan ner, June 7, at one, at the Court, Exeter—R. Moyle, Penryn and Redruth, Cornwall, ironmonger, May 31, at one, at the Court, Exeter. PAYMENT OF DIVIDENDS. R. K. Mann, Kingston-upon-Hull, wine merchant, first dividend of 6s. 8d , and final of ls. 4d., any Tuesday, between the hours of eleven and two, at the office of Mr. Hope, Leeds. E. Jennings, Elorsforth, Yorkshire, corn miller, 9d., any Tuesday, between the hours of eleven and two, at the office of Mr. Hope, Leeds. W. Cameron, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, confectioner, 2d., any Saturday, between the hours of ten and three, at the office of Mr. Baker, Newcastle-upon -Type. NOTICES OF CERTIFICATES. At the Court, B3singball-street. JuGne. 6, C e P n— ro j sp . Prospect - place , ü ß n a . l , l' u s- x p b o r n i d d , ge b , r a ic n k d la i y ve e r r : Buckinghamshire, common carrier and farmer, May 29, at twelve—W.. Pithy, Philpot-lane, Fenchurch-street, Brooch icy, Kent, farmer and cattle dealer, May 31, at one—W. merchant, May 31, at eleven—W. Waterman, Simmons, Piccadilly, tobacconist, May 30, at one—G. Cannon, n e o le n ; Rait, Moorgate street, City, tailor, May 30, at eleven— C. Sneezuw, Woodbridge, Suffolk, grocer and provision merchant, May 30, at half-past eleven—J. Robinson, Slough, Buckinghamshire, grocer and cheesemonger, May 29, at eleven. E. Burnell, jun., Blitntet n h! G C o l o n u n c t e r s y t ershire, cattle dealer, May 31, at eleven, at the Court, Bristol—E. Brooker, Cheltenham, carver and gilder, May 31, at twelve, at the Court, , Bristol—T. B. Jones, Brecon, maltster and brewer, May 29, at eleven, at the Court, Bristol—W. L. Adams, Selby, Yorkshire, clock and watchmaker, May 29, at eleven, at the Court, Leeds—J. Cooper, Newcastle-und er -LYme, small ware dealer and haber dasher, June 12, at ten, at the Court, Birmingham. At the Court of Review, May 29. J. Thotnpsoi, Leeds, tea dealer and grocer—R. Ash forth, Birmingham, hardwareman—T. Nesbitt and R. C. Nesbitt, Sunderland, brewers and spirit merchants—C. J. Spence, Stockton-upon-Tees, Durham, timber mer chant—J. R. Price, Aberdare Iron works, Glamorgan shire, druggist and stationer — W. T hornle y , Derbyshire, grocer—T. Wilcock, Leeds, cutler—A. J. Crowther. Church Garfortb, Yorkshire, draper and grocer—J. Holley, Norton Saint Philip, Somersetshire, miller—J. Frayne, North Molton. Devonshire, draper. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. H. Barnes, C. Barnes, and E. Barnes, Liverpool and Melbourne, Port Philip, merchants (as far as regards E. Barnes)—A. Ogg and T. Howard, Northampton, iron and brass founders—W. Douglass, T. Cairncross, and G. Cowley, Sunderland, ironfounders (so far as regards W. Douglass)—M. Wallis and G. Holman, Mayfield, Sus sex, surgeons—J. Leishman and E. Price, Dollar and Uttoxeter, railway contractors—S. Meldola and A. Bar laudina, Camomile.street, City, printers—W. Barlow, S. W. Sexton, and F. Wilde, Openshaw, Lancashire, wool len, silk, and cotton dyers (so far as regards W. Barlow) —J. Hutchinson and T. B. Stone, Little Waltham. Essex, surgeons—J. Gaunt, J. Wardle, J. Alsop, and J. Wain, Leek, Staffordshire, silk manufacturers—J. Whi taker, and J. Milos, Spotland-bridge, Lancashire, dyers —Jane S. Thomas and 11. G. Thomas, Penwith, Cornwall, grocers and general merchants S. natal!, and J. Hill, Bolton-le Moors, and Man chester, toilet and quilting manufacturers W. Burdett and J. F. Wood, York-terrace, Commercial.. road, linendrapers—J. Chadwick, sen., and T. Chad wick, Manchester, estate agents—W. Copp and J. H. Poynter. Exeter, linendrapers—T. Shepherd, 11. J. Evans, and W. Meredith, rairadyrodog, Glamorganabire, coal mer chants (so far as regards W. Meredith)—J. Graetzer, H. Hermann, and J. A. Hofmann, Huin-lane, Wood street, Cheapside, commission agents (so far as regards J. A. Hofmann)—D. Rose and D. Rose, M xley Forge and Darlaston, Staffordshire, iromnavers—J. and H. J. Stevens, Mark-lane, City, corn factors—J. W. Dali and C. Dalt, Samlisbiary, Lancashire, cotton spinners —T. Palin and T. Woolley, Liverpool, painters —G. B. Hetherington and T. 11. Grimsdale, Uxbridge, Middlesex, brewers —S. Myers and P. Mann, Leeds, maltsters —J. Shaw and G. Manes, Scarborough, clothiers—Jane Elizabeth Hunter and Elizabeth Caro• line Hunter, Barking, Essex, laundresses—T. Jarvis and J. W. Marsh, Rotherham, Yorkshire, slate merchants. INSOLVENT PETITIONERS. James Anstey, Birmingham, greengrocer. Benjamin Baduain, Walton, Somersetshire, teazle dealer. John Lawrence Hinton, East Stonehouse, Devonshire. James Law, Kettering, Northamptonshire, builder. Daniel Smith, Neen Savage, Shropshire, miner. Thomas Davies, Bedwillty. Monmouthshire, mason. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATION. W. Wilson, New Scone, wool spinner, to meet within the Salutation Hotel, in Perth, May 14 and June 4, at one. IMPERIAL PARLIAIIIENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 8. JOINT-STOCK BANKS. (Continued from our Fourth Edition of ;ast night.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said his Hon. and Learned Friend had, in the course of his speech, gone into variou-, details of the measure which he proposed to submit to the House ; but into those de tails he would not follow him, as he was opposed alto gether to the principle of limited responsibility in banks, which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman contended for. He thought it was but fair to him to state at once his opposition to the principle of the Bill, and his determi nation to take the decision of the House on the principle of limited or unlimited responsibility as applied to banks, and, therefore, it would be uocessary for him to go into details. Last year he had certainly received ihree or four representations from parties in favour of the views held by the Honourable and Learned Gentle. man, but all of them came from the town of Newcastle, where this notion of limited liability had taken hold of the public mind. From no other part of the country had he received a single representa tion in favour of the principle of limited liability. His Hon. and Learned Friend had stated correctly that the 7th and Bth of Victoria prohibited limited responsi bility; but he had referred to an advertisement of a bank about to be established in London, in which limited liability" was put forward. This advertise. ment was extracted from the Newcastle Chronicle, where it had been inserted no doubt to meet the views of the people with whom the advertisers had to deal. It had been inserted probably by the agent of the proposed bank in Newcastle, and it contained in large letters the words "responsibility to be limited."—(A laugh.) Any one, however, who read the advertisement would discover how far the liability would be limited, and there would not be found in any paper but the Newcastle Chronicle the words " responsibility limited."—(A laugh.) It was, in fact, a quack advertisement, meant tor the people by whom it was to be read.—(Hear, hear.) His lion. and Learned Friend, however, rightly stated thet the 7th and Sth of Victoria enacted that the partners of a bank were responsible for the liabilities of the bank. The ques tion was whether a limited liability or an unlimited liability tended most effectually to the ultimate solvency and good management of a bank. Attaching as he did no inconsiderable importance to the ultimate solvency of a bank, he agreed with his Hon. and Learned Friend in thinking, that the immediate solvency and good ma nagement of a bank was of still more importance. He did nut think it necessary to enter into the history •ot the various attempts to alter tho law on this subject. He had at all times found public opinion to be against limited liabilities. In 1838, on the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for the Tower Hamlets (Sir Wm. Clay), a Committee on: Joint -Stock Banks was ap pointed. That Committee sat : for thr ee success i ve ses sions. His Hon. Friend examined several witnesses, and had the opportunity of ascertaining the opinions of practice' men, and of expressing his own opinion on the subject of limited and unlimited responsibility, but not one single word was said in the report of that Com mittee on that subject. That was rather a strong prcof that his Hon. Friend could not prevail on the Committee to express an opinion one way or the other. Gen. Austin was examined before the Committee, and he said,—" There is a great difference of opinion as to unlimited liability and limited liability. I think that a middle course may be steered." Mr. Stuckey was also examined, and he gave it as bis opinion that " Persons of wealth and respectability would join with limited liability. I every day hear of persons of property taking shares." Mr. James was of opinion that "Unlimited responsibility affords better security. Un limited responsibility does not prevent persons from em barking in joint-stock banks, properly conducted." Mr. Gibbing stated that " A charter of limited liability might induce respectable persons to purchase shares, It might make the directors more negligent in looking atter the concern. I think there might be danger to the public in limiting the liability." Then came Mr. Robertson, who said—" Where there are small stock banks, with small proprietaries, I think the security which they would give to the public would not be of that unquestion able description which it ought to be." Then there was an Irish Member, Mr. Callaghan, who stated—. I think the condition of unlimited liability is the better of the two; it is a security to the public. In the in • stance of the late bank that stopped we have full proof of that." There were only two other witnesses examined upon that subject ; the one was Me. Samuel Martin, who said—" I du not see myself any public ad vantage or security to be derived from limited responsi bility," The last witness was a gentleman whose was often menti one d i n that House as one of the hiname ;e,hest authority upon all co mmerc i a l affairs—Mr. Samuel Gurney. Ile was asked—" In reference to the system of joint-stock banks, do you conceive it would be an improvement or a disadvantage to the present system if jeiei se et, keens e-see t dulisllt'd with a limited liability? I think it would bo a very serloue addition to the evils of the case." What he had thus read must leave a decided impression on the House that the weight of evidence of the majority of those who were most competent to give an opinion on the subject was distinctly against the principle of limited liability. His Honourable and Learned Friend had said there were two points that would be obtained by limited liability coupled with the publicity of the accounts. Now, as to the publicity of the accounts, his Honourable and Learned Friend appeared to place inure reliance on that circumstance than experience induced him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) to do. Then his Hon. and Learned Friend was ot opinion that limited liability would command greater confidence than unlimited ; but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not think there was much in that argument. He did not believe that a bank founded on limited liability would, in the case of a panic —which it was said generally occurred every ten years —prove to have obtained less credit —at least,. credit sufficient to get everybody into a scrape— than a bank founded upon the principle of an unlimited responsibility. Upon the whole, he must say, from what they had seen of late days—that as to a restricted confidence being placed upon a limited responsibility— the extraordinary sums which had been vested in rail, ways completely refuted that supposition, while the utter falsification of accounts and the utter mismanage ment of those concerns must convince every impartial mind that neither in the case of restricted confidence nor in the accuracy of accounts was the argument in fa vour of limited liability. Upon the question of insole vency, no man could entertain the slightest doubt that a bank, where all the partners were liable to the full ex tent of their property must afford a better security than where the partners were only liable to a limited extent. In the case of a bank of limited liability no one would think et vesting hi s w h o l e property in it; but in the case of a bank of unlimited liability the whole property of the person holding a share in it would be responsible. Now, unless his Hon. and Learned Friend could prove that a part was greater than the whole, an unlimited re sponsibility must be better than a limited responsibility. That was capable of mathematical proof. Then came the question of good management. What was the best security for good management? Surely it was the con. sequences that would fall upon the shareholders it they did not watch vigilantly over the affairs of the bank, It was true when banks of unlimited responsibility got into discredit they found themselves obliged to do extraordi nary things for the sake of maintaining their credit, but banks of limited responsibility did much the same. They paid interest on moneys borrowed and dividends on their shares out of their capital. In the case of railroads those establishments were founded on the principle of limited responsibility—they paid interest on sums borrowed, and dividends on their shares, but how? Out of their capital. Within the last six or eight months these railroad companies—with a limited responsibility—had taken steps quite as extraordinary and quite as dishonest as any body founded on unlimited responsibility ever did in this world. It was alleged that there had been great mismanagement on the part of joint-stock banks. He admitted the fact, but it had not often arisen from their having invested not only their deposits, but their paid up capital in securities which rendered it not immediately available when wanted? Neither a limited liability, nor the publication of accounts, could protect under those circumstances against failure. What was the best se curity for good management? The degree of interest which the parties felt in seeing that their concern was so conducted as to protect them from loss. If, then, a party was liable to the amount of 10,0001. he would feel a greater interest in looking after the ma nagement of the concern than if he were liable only to the extent of 100/. But the principle advocated by his Hon. and Learned Friend was quite the re verse of this ; and it was one which appeared to him to be contrary to mathematical truth, to all the prin ciples that regulated human action, and to the dictates of common sense. In the United States the principle of limited responsibility was acted upon; but had there been no failures there? Now, in Scotland, where the principle of unlimited liability prevailed, the failures were remarkably few, while in the United States he found it stated in a book written by Mr. Gilbert —a most eminent practical banker —that no less than 165 char tered banks had failed in America. In his History of Banking in America, that gentleman said—" Unlimited liability gives greater security to the public." . . . . " Unlimited liability is to a certain extent .e guarantee for prudent management." cases even this has been found to fail, are there no failures on the other side? Has not limited liability been also tried and failed? Are the 165 chartered banks that have failed in America to go for nothing?" The Right lion. Gentleman concluded by say ing that he thought he had shown that the principle of limited liability was no se curity whatever against mismanagement. lie did not at this time consider it necessary to go at greater length into the question. He agreed with his Hon. and Learned Friend that the two main points were to secure imme diate solvency, but still more good management; but he did UPI COACeiVe that these two objects were so likely to Sir A. BROOKE entirely approved of the principle of the measure, ai.d also of the plan in which the Hon. Member for Stroud proposed to carry it out. He thought that a tax mhtht, with great justice, be placed upon ab sentees who did not reside six months in the country. After a few remarks from Mr. O'FLAHERTY, Sir H. W. BARRON entirely approved of the object of the Bill, for every one would agree that any plan that would give additional employment, or an additional incentive to employment, was the great thing that was required for Ireland. But he was afraid that that object would not be accomplished by the details of the Bill. All legislation on the subject of the poor-law, for the purpose of stimulating the employment ' and the investment of n--'• " Ja0011! - p • . - ',ats( m Ireland, ou be - fectly nugatory as l ong as the electoral divisions ld remained in their present state.—(Hear, hear.) The crying in justice of the poor-law was the area of taxation, and while that remaimed as it was, all tinkering and 'med dling with that law would be perfectly useless.—(Hear.) Mr. P. SCROPE said he had no objection to have the Pill l'Pfrrred to a Committee up stairs, and he hoped that the House would not summarily dispose of it, as the principle bai l been approved of by th e ma j or i ty of the Irish fenibers who hhd spoken, and those who bad not supported it had sotne project of their own, After a few words froth Sir W. SOMERVILLE in explanation, Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared—. For the amendment „. 41 Against it 166 Majority „ —125 The Bill was consequently thrown out. COUNTY RATES AND EXPENDITURE BILL. The second reading of this Bill was postponed until Wednesday next. BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS BILL. The House went into committee upon this Bill; Mr. BERNAL in the chair. Sir J. PAKINGTON intimated that it was not his intention to proceed with the Bill in Committee at pre sent; but although an adverse decision had been come to by the House upon those points of it to which he attached the most importance there was still a desire on the part of several lion, Members that the Bill, with its remain ing clauses, should be proceeded with, and he would give notice that he would bring it in again on some flitnre day. Colonel SIBTHORP wondered that such trash could be brought into the House, He would oppose the Bill in every lane through thick and thin, and would watch the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir J. Pakington) as a cat watched a mouse.—(Laughter.) Af4 -1. a desultory conversation, clauses 1,2, 4, and 5 were agreed 0; the Chairman reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again, ATTACHMENTS, COURT 01? RBCORD (IRE. LAND) BILL. The House went into CoUnnittee upon this Bill. The clauses were agreed to, with several additions, and the report ordered to be brought up on Friday next. GREENWICII MARKETS REGULATION BILL, This Bill went through Committee, tilld the report was ordered to be brought up to-morrow, SMITHFIELD MARKET COMMITTEE. Mr. STAFVORD moved that Mr. Eliot Yorke be dis charged from farther attendance on the Select Committee on Smithfield Market, and that bir Do Lacy gvans be added to the Committee. Mr. 14 AjKINNON opposed the motion, on the ground that the Committee, of which he was a member, was perfectly satisfied with its constitution, and had no desire to have Mr. Eliot Yorke discharged from further att - Relaance. Mr. OSBORNE said that as nearly seven millions of mon ey was turned over in Smithfield-market during the year, and that as great interests were involved in its maintenance, the subject should not be left to the deci sion of a one-aided Committee. Some one ought to be placed upon it to represent the interests of the graziers and others. _ . . _ Mr. OItMSBY GORE thought that the course taken by the Hon. Member was a very unusual one. Mr. Masterman, one of the metropolitan Members, was on the Committee, and, therefore, could represent the inte rests of the City. Mr. CHRISTOPHER did not think the course taken by the Hon. Gentleman who bad made the motion was most unjustifiable. : Sir G. GREY thought the motion could not be agreed to, without strong reasons for it. if the Hon. Gentle man to whom the motion related had allowed himself to be placed on the Committee thinking he should be able to attend it, and had since found that he could not, he ought to have applied to the Chairman on the subject. Mr. STAFFQRD thought the metropolis ought to be more strongly represented than it was in the Committee, and therefore, as the Hon. Member (Mr. E. Yorke) bad not attended a single sitting of the Committee, be felt that it afforded him an ex cellent opportunity of moving the appointment of the Honourable and Gallant Member for Westminster, in the absence of the Noble Lord the Member fur Mid dlesex. There were more classes than one is the me tropolis who bad an interest in the question, but who were not represented on the Committee. One of these was the butchers, who were unable to get a hearing on the Committee. Mr. 0. GORE denied that the butchers were not re presented. Mr. MACKINNON undertook to secure the appoint ment of another metropolitan Member should the Noble Lord the Member for Middlesex not return in time to attend. _ _ Upon this understanding the motion was withdrawn. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned. NEWMARKET RACES. (THIS DAY.) (BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH. (Continued from our Third Eclitinn.) Match.—Saddle beat Bishop of Romford'2 C!oh_ Handicap Plate fur 501. Lola Mon tes Wallflower ... ... The Champion Stakes. St. Rosalia Champion Sidney Swcepstukes of 50 sous. eacb. So tterley ... ... 2 walked over. 1849. be attained by the adoption of the principle of limited responsibility instead of unlimited responsibility, and therefore, as he wished to take issue upon the question as to which was the most advantageous mode, he should resist the introduction of the Bill of his Hoe. and Learned Friend, which was based on the principle of ,limited liability. Sir W. CLAY supported the motion for the intro duction of the Bill. Lord Liverpool, Mr. kluskisson, and Lord Ashburton were in favour of banks of limited liability, and it was solely in consequence of the opposi tion of the Bank of England in 1846 that the experi ment was prevented from being made. He had not a moment's hesitation in saying that if the present princi ple were to be maintained he would much rather go back to the old system that existed prior to 1826; for it was impossible to deny that the private hanks of that period were incalculably better than the joint-stock banks of the present day. Mr. CARDWELL considered this to be a very simple question—it was a question as to the application of the rules of ordinary common sense to the transactions of a very familiar business, the business of banking. The question was, how were they to obtain well-constituted and well. conducted banks ? Was it by requiring that every person interested in them should be under the serious responsibility of being liable to the whole extent of their fortunes, or would they allow persons to whom a few thousand pounds was a matter of comparative in • difference to place that money in an institution where they expected a high rate of interest, but who might be careless about its safety, and therefore not vigilant as to the mode in which that business was carried on? In re ference to this question, Mr. S. Gurney having said before the Committee appointed on the motion of the Hon. Ba ronet (Sir W. Clay), " I think we should retain all the evils of both systems and none of the advantages of either," the lion. Baronet asked this question, " Have the gooducss to state what are the evils we should retain of the system of private banking ?" He an swered, " We should have a security interior to that which most private banking establishments give, and, generally speaking, a less safe system of manage ment." That was the language of Mr. Gurney in 1836, and it was the language of experience and common sense in 1849. It was proposed that no additional bank should be established without the sanction of the Board of Trade. Considering the effect of such a provision on the com mercial interests of the country, he thought it needed very little observation to see its utter impracticability. Then it was proposed that a portion of the funds of the bank should be invested in public securities. The effect of this would be to enormously increase the price of the funds in good times, and proportionately depress the price in a period of pressure. As to the publication of accounts, he had received a letter from a gi ntletnan who was himself a conductor of a joint-stock bank in which he said that--" I do not believe that any mode of stating the accounts could be devised that could enable the public to judge of the state or unworthiness of any particular bank, or that any auditorship would be a satisfactory pledge for its real position." The writer went on to say—" I have a very strong opinion that if you limit the responsibility of shareholders in joint-stock banks you will take away from the public the only really valuable security that they possess; and that any law establishing joint stock banks with limited liability would be most objectionable as regards the safety of the community at large. Without the power and ability to scrutinize every bill and account of a bank the publication of its assets. &c., would only be like to deceive. By carrying forward as good securities that cannot be realised, bills overdue and unpaid. and debts owing by parties who have not met them with re gularity, it is obvious that accounts may be made to as sume any aspect that may best suit the views of those who have the management of a bank or any other large concern." Was that not consonant with every clay's experience? He had had a document sent to him which was not altogether dull or unassuming; he had received it from a gentleman of the highest respectability. It purported to be the prospectus of a joint-stock bank, but he did not guarantee its accuracy, therefore he would not mention names, but give it as an imaginary case. Suppose the bonds of a certain township near Liverpool, amounting to 70,0001., on which no interest was paid: "The revenue of the township barely meets its current ex penses; there are bonds amounting to about a quarter of a million which have a prior claim both for princilp and interest before anything can be paid towards this debt either in interest or principal. The value of these bonds, amounting to 70,000.0001., is nil. Collieries and mines, 40,0001.; value 9,0001.; bank-house, 21,3751.; value, 10,000/.; loss on bills and accoun s, 30,0001; value nil; loss on bills and current accounts at branches, 52,5001.; value nil. Total, 213,8751., from which deduct 19,0001. as estimated value of property, leaving 194,875/. The capital as per last report is 149,473/.; the esti mated loss beyond capital is 45,4011." Nuw, just ima gine a bank in that condition.—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable Baronet (Sir W. Clay) would no doubt argue that with a bank of limited liability such losses would never have occurred; but ho asked the Hon. Baronet to give proof of that, and not be content with assuming, that becatue there had been failures with banks of unlimited liability, there would be no failures if the liabilities were limited. He (Mr. Card well) would venture to express his belief; that if there was any business more than another in which they should abstain from limited responsibility, and in which they should render gambling impossible, it was that of banking. Banks were the great reservoirs to which the streams of commerce flowed, and from which; in times of pressure, came the supplies which commerce required.—(Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances the calamity in a district on the failure of a bank was in deed fearful. He would repeat the early part of the speech of his Hon. Friend (Mr. Headlarn), sentence for sentence, and word for word, in which he had pressed upon the House the sufferings and calamities which had occurred, and he would say that if, notwithstanding all the vigilance of private banks, and all the wide resources of joint-stock banks, those sufferings and misfortunes had occurred, they should be careful not to aggravate those calamities by establishing that kind of bank which, in the expressive language of Mr. Gurney, " will unite all the evils which both possess, with none of die aae-entages of either."—(Hear, hear.) Mr. W. BRU iv N saw, that the reference isailch had been made to the American banks was most unfortunate, considering that in 1837 nearly 700 banks of limited liability had tailed in that country.—(Hear, hear.) In consequence of having resided nine or ten years in America, it was within his own knowledge that many of these banks were complete jobs from the commencement to the end, and had led to great abuses in the banking system of America. With this experience, he did not feel disposed to allow the establishment of banks of limited liability in this country. He opposed the mea sure of his Hon. Friend, therefore, because he considered it would be injurious to the general interest of England, both at home and abroad.—(Hear. hear.) Mr. MACGREGOR also opposed the measure, on the ground that the establishment of joint-stock banks with limits d responsibility R ould be a great misfortune to the country. With reference to the question of security, he begged to remark that the people of England did not consider that the three chartered banks there gave any greaser security to the shareholders than the other banks which existed. He was glad that the Bill of 1844 pro vided that in future no joint- snick bank should be estab lished in this country except upon the principle of extended security to the public. Mr. HEADLAM having intimated that he would not trouble the House by dividing, The motion was, by leave, withdrawn. REMUNERATIVE EMPLOYMENT IN IRE LAND. Major BLACKALL then rose to move the following resolution :—" That the peculiar circumstances of Ireland, consequent upon four successiveyears of distress, require the immediate adoption of such measures as may assist and encourage the individual exertion of the owners and occupiers of Irish property, and promote indnstry by giv ing remunerative employment; and that all grants or loans of money to particular districts should be applied, as far as possible, to such purposes as may conduce to the eventual improvement of those districts, and enable them to support themselves from their ordinary resources." He begged to say that since this resolution had first ap peared on the books of the House several measures had been brought forward by the Government relative to Ire land, of which he did not underrate the importance. He was also anxious to take this opportunity of saying, that so far as he was personally concerned, he had always found on the part of the Chancellor of the Exchequer every wish to forward those reasonable and rational applications for loans and grants which had been made by Irish Members, and that he had been guided in his refusal more by the tone and temper of the House than by any wishes of his own.—([fear, hear.) The Hon. and Gallant Member was proceeding to notice the va rious measures which had been adopted for the pur pose of meeting the recent famine in Ireland, and to point out the errors which had been committed, when An Hon. MEmnER moved that the House be counted; and, forty Members not having been found to be present the House adjourned at Eight o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS, May 8. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat upon the Wool sack at Five O'clock. EXCHEQUER-BILLS BILL. This Bill passed through Committee. NAVIGATION -LAWS. Petitions against the repeal of the navigation•laws were presented by the Duke of Northumb er l an d the Earl of Harr ow by, an d E arl T albot. , AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. At the request of Earl GREY, The Duke or RICHMOND postponed his motion on the subject of agricultural distress from Friday to Mon day next, as the second reading of the Rate in Aid Bill was fixed for Friday. • NAVIGATION LAWS—ADJOURNED DEBATE. The Earl of CARLISLE then ruse to resume the ad journed debate on the Bill for the repeal of the naviga tion-laws. He felt that he was labouring under great disadvantage in having to follow the eloquent speech of the Noble and Learned Lord last evening, which was so calculated to excite those prejudices by which their Lordships were supposed to be actuated. He could not suppose that their Lordships were actuated by per sonal motiver, and ha granted to his opponents that which he claimed for his friends and himself; viz., the being actuated solely by what they considered would be for the benefit of the country. It he believed the mea sure would be prejudicial to the maritime or naval in terests of the country, he should say that he ought to encounter, not only defeat, but ignominy for supporting it. He believed such an idea to be utterly groundless. He supported it btcause he believed it would promote the progress of the commerce of the country. That commerce was the principal support of the mercantile marine, and that marine was the main support of the naval supremacy of the country. He agreed with the Noble Earl in denouncing those who would sacrifice everything for wealth, but the wealth which they sought to promote was only the proper reward of honest in dustry, and would tend to promote the peaceful inter course of nations.—(Hear, hear.) He would not go into the history of the navigation-laws, nor into that which was more properly the affair of his Noble Friend the 'et re try for the Colonies—the Lean eg of the" lee s !Ton the colonial interests of i'he country He could not look upon a navigation code w ith the reve rential awe which had been professed by rainy. At first it had been fruitful only in disasters. Its enactment had been dictated by jealousy of the Dutch, and ie l e , first fruits were two sanguinary wars with Jan' land. What had been its effect ? Restriction had necessitated restriction, until those restriction s had been extended to Ireland and the colonies, and had goaded Ireland into discontent, and America into a re' volt and war, which ended in our being forced to acknowledge h er i n d epen d ence. This code bill thus founded our great rival, and these ought to be set down as off-sets when any panygeric w as ma d e upon our navigation CO e• He was, however, inclined to let bygones be bygon es ' and to consider whether, in the circumstances of tb!, present times, in our p resen t matur i ty of wealth and power, it was worthy o f thi s country to maintain Oct!, restrictions which i n f ormer t i mes she bad thoug ht necessary. If the n av i gat i on co d e was the w i s est that the wit of man could have devise d s" , the time of the enactment, they should consid er whether it was profitable now to maintain at il t The battle of Trafalgar effectually cleared the ocean got our ships more than any maritime code could have done. It was long after the peace before continental nations could create a mari ne , b ut t h ere was a growing spi rit of resistance to monopoly of trade on th 3 part of Oil Power. That resistance had been met by the reciPr?; city treaties. That spirit was now reviving. It shone' be remembered that Russia and several other nations could, by giving tw e l ve mont h s ' notice, put an ens f to those treaties. Th e N o bl e E arl had said that , the affairs of this country were properly administere d ' there would be no fear of such improper threats. Would the Noble Earl consider that we should be justified treating such a motion as an improper threat ? was said last night that Russia had no mercantile trade' He had, ho wever , a statement of the tonnage of vessel ; belonging to Russia, Belgium, France, Spain, and PT tugal, which during the last three years had entered the ports of the United Kingdom from 1846 to 1848, excliri sive of vessels in b a ll ast ; an d i n those three years, of all the countries h e h a d enumerated, with the exception of France (and that on l y exceed i ng in one year), t he largest number of tons was to be set down to Russia. 11 : 1848, the tonnage of foreign vessels entering British ports was, Swedes, 51.000 tons ; D utch, 76,000 ; 139'‘ gians, 38,000 tons; Spanish, 14,000 tons; Portugues e ; 7,000 tons ; Rus s i an , 76,18 0 tons. The Noble E a r' said these matters could be arranged by preliminary treaties ; but he was calling the attention of their Lord; ships to the state of the country if foreign Powers refused to renew their treaties on the same favourable tersest and we lost our present direct trade with them' The Noble M arqu i s t h e P resident of the Council stated that if foreign Powers forbade us to engage i n their direct and carrying trade they could throw mor e than 200,000 tons of British shipping out of employ' went. He found that during the last year there entered foreign ports 233,000 tons of British shipping, and cleared out 230,000 tons. That was the trade carried on by 13ritish abipping from one foreign port to another. (Hear, hear.) The Noble and Learned Lord had made a very strong attack on the Noble Marquis (Lansdowne) fur saying that the whole of this trade was liable to b; cut off; ho bad stated th at i t was a gross calumny, an d attempted to account for the number of tons of British shipping engaged in foreign trade by saying that sou)°, of the vessels made thi r ty- two voyages in the course 0' the year. He had, however, made a mistake in his Cll' culations, and mixed up the trade of steam-vessels tween Belgium, Holland, and France. Of the 200, 0 7, tons of shipping to w hi c h t h e N o bl e Marquis alluded "° being employed in foreign trade, 12,000 tons belonged _ A t° Hamburgh, and he h a d a re t urn b y which it appeared that instead of these 12,e00 including steamers, they W longed to 62 ships, every name of which he had set dovah and he could tell the Noble and Learned Lord that steamers which passed directly to and fro between 01 foreign ports were scarcely ever employed in their di' rect trade.—(Hear, hear.) If by a continuance of re strictive policy we were to forfeit our present indirect trade, he telt persuaded that the importunities and cone plaints of our traders and merchants, our forgers.of and our smelters of copper, would be pitched to a hat worse note of distress than they were now from the supposition that they should be prejudicially affected by the present proposal. He had called the attention of their Lordships to the risk we should run by continuing .th e present state of things. The evils and inconvenience s had been abundantly illustrated in the most conclusive and powerful manner by the daily recurring experienc e of those who were most concerned in those matters He had gleaned a few matters of fact as they were con' sternly taking place und er th e operat i on of the prese nt navigation-laws, and he thought they would be found .t. t° be of a most conclu s i ve c h aracter. H e would begin w i th the article of cotton:— " That cotton which was brought to Havre on Englis h ,' account in a foreign ship, which could not be dispose of in France at any price, and which could have been sold at Liverpo o l to a d vantage, might not be conveye d from Havre to Live r p oo l i n a British ship, but might 71 reconveyed to the U n it e d S tates i n in a foreign ship, 001' thence brought to Liverpool in an American ship, thus depriving the British ship of employment, and depriving the English market of cotton .when there was a distress' ing deficiency in the supply. " That sugar could only be sent from Guiana an d other colonies to England at a freight of 31. 10s. or 4L ton, while slave-grown sugar (which we are accused .of unduly encouraging) could be sent from St. Croix 1 ° Danish ships at 2/. 103. a ton, thus discouraging al° supply of colonial and free-labour sugar; that no British ships could be procured to export free-labour Batavia. A °vowing hat copper is now produced in great and ap -- - abundance in Australia and cannot find a sufficient num ber of British chips to convey it to this country, and the high freights, which are the necessary consequence, diminish the profits of what is sent, which has led to the project of establishing smelting works in Australia instead of employing, first, the shipping, and, nest , the manufactures of England for that purpose: tbs t i sugar from ag"i", ac German ships which now carry out emigrants to Australia may not carry back co pper ore, or meat, or any or 'lie t o,,ouee austrana, as return cargoes to this country, or to their own country, with * view to exportation to this country; if the market $ 6 home should not be remunerative, therefore, at Ham" burgh they have also established smelting works in theft own defence, again creating a gratuitous competition with the manufacturers of this country. " That wrought hides may be imported into this country in any quantity from France or other countries, but it there was any superfluity of raw hides they might not, under the navigation-laws, be brought to ibis country for the artific?rs of this country to manufacturer unless they were sent all the way back to America. " That cochineal, another article of most rapid 1 0 ' crease from the Canaries, has its chief depot at Cadiz' whence it is taken in French ships to Marseilles, but it cannot be taken, under the navigation laws, even i!, l English ships t o E ng l an d, b ecause the Canaries are sal" fared to be geographically in Africa, and therefore the produce must be imported in English ships from the Canaries themselves, where there is no.; independent inducement for English ships to go, while at Cadiz there is always a multitude of British ships for the purpose of bringing wine, but which are not su ff er ed to bring this v a l ua bl e and much-wanted dye. " That Madeira wines may not be brought from Lis' bon even in English ships, where they would always b° in great abundance. Nor the gums of Senegal froth their chief depot at Marseilles. Nor the dye weeds or West Africa, from a large depot of them at Marseilles. There may be a surplus supply of all these articles is these ports; there may be a deficient supply at home; the ships loading with sherry and claret may be full of cone veident chasms absolutely yawning for these light assortments, but the prohibition is complete and lir exorable. " That nitrate of soda, more highly thought of as manure, has sold fur from 21. 6s. 6d. less at Hamburgh than here, but fur the same sum could not be brought even here. " That a parcel of Alpaca thread was actually the subject of this venerable transaction. It arrived in Haalburgh (a great depot fur merchandise: from South America), trom Peru, was purchased, sent to Hull, re fused admittance, shipped thence to New York, re exported to Liverpool, and sent into the manufacturing district-, where it arrived too late for the demands of the market. " That Java indigo, which was much wanted for some of the more delicate manufactures of this country, was purchased in Holland, but in order to secure its entry into this country, it was shipped in a Dutch vessel to the United States, and thence exported to this country. " That palm oil, Manilla hemp, logwood, have all bees waiting for shipment in the United States, and because no British vessels were to be had they all failed of being sent. " That it is stated by a Ilamburgh resident that the operation of the navigation-laws with respect to the supply of Peruvian wools to this country, such as are . brought to the continent of Europe first, is unquestion ably unfavourable to British manufacturers, because the German manufacturer is purchasing that article now at a less price than the manufacturers can purchase it in Lancashire and Yorkshire, and the consequence must be ; that the German manufacturer can afford to sell his cloth at a less price than the English. " That at Bombay and Calcutta though there is con , stant uncertainty whether there will be ships to carry produce to England, and the freight has been as high se eight guineas a ton, and though the same ports are filled with ships not only seaworthy, but efficiently cow' mended, and which would bring home that produce if they were suffered to do so, yet because of that prepos terous disability which attaches to ships manned by Lascar sailors, they are not suffered to du so. " That with respect to the noblest because the most useful article cf interchange, I mean the bread we live upon, it is stated by the Board of Trade at Toronto. September, 1846, that large quantities of produce were forwarded to Montreal from the interior, where it he" been produced during the preceding winter, at price` severely enhanced by the exa:.;gerated reports which reached Canada of the scarcity of bread-stuffs throughout Europe. On arrival it was found impossible to obtain shipment for it at less than 6s. a barrel, and the holders were threatened with insolvency alike from its shipment or retention, and perceiving most distinctly that the chief cause of their difficolties was to be found in the . present navigation-laws of your Majesty's kiagdorn, ti feeling of deep dissatisfaction therewith has arisen in the, minds of your Majesty's Canadian subjects." What did these numerous cases which were daily arisinit prove but that in countless ways—and we could 1101 ' track them through all their ramifications—our wigs" tiou-laws did impede, obstruct, or, if he might use the more homely epithet, bother all the operations of 131 1 : trade in ev er y part of the gl o b e ?—(Cheers.) seemed to be an ingenious attempt to make every efl% scription of good s p a y d ou bl e fre i g h t, an d to eng tier ill feelin g an d animosity between nations.—( l e ...., hear.) In our anxiety to secure the long voyage "